Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 March 14

= March 14 =

Nations Great Britain
What is the nations siding in war with Great Britain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.98.199.183 (talk) 02:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try  for an article related to the topic you want to know more about.  I hope this helps. Besides, the answer would depend on the war - I don't think there's a nation that always sided with Great Britain, with the possible exception of Portugal. Huon (talk) 03:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Returning to Article Draft
I am using the Article Wizard and have pressed "Save page" at the bottom of the screen. I have closed my browser and now I am now looking for a way to get back to this article to continue working on the draft. Previously, I had left the page once already and lost my work. This second time I made sure to use the Save page button, but I cannot figure out how to get back to the article. Any help is much appreciated. Thank you.Is13ak (talk) 03:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Your draft is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Grain Damage. You can look up your past contributions via the "Contributions" link at the very top of every Wikipedia page, right next to the "Log out" link, or by typing "Special:MyContributions" into the search box. Huon (talk) 03:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

How did my help desk question end up in google?
I am in the process of getting an article entitled "Aubrey Tingle" accepted. Imagine my horror when, searching for more references (as suggested by Huon), I saw my first help desk question listed in Google (see "wikipedia Aubrey Tingle")

Please delete this immediately.

How did this happen? Please advise so that I can avoid it in future.

writerred

Writerred (talk) 03:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What exactly would you like us to do? While we can mark pages with nofollow to influence a page ranking, we have no control over what appears on external websites. Wikipedia is in the real world. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   05:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Almost everything you do on the web (not just Wikipedia) will end up on Google. There is nothing we or anyone else can do about it. The internet is the ultimate "public place". Roger (talk) 07:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brian Hanlon
I'm not sure why the page I created was not approved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brian_Hanlon Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brian Hanlon Brian is referenced as the creator of the statues in the articles I listed as a reference (i.e. http://www.texassports.com/genrel/100612aab.html paragraph 24)

HanlonSculpture (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)HanlonSculpture


 * To be considered notable by Wikipedia's standards, Hanlon himself must have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I've had a look at quite a few of your sources, and they all mentioned Hanlon in passing only, or not at all (for example this Inquirer article). Furthermore, while many of the statues are sourced, the biographical content isn't. For example, claims of "world renown" or of "advanced knowledge and skill" would definitely require independent sources to back them up.
 * You may also want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing about a topic you're closely associated with is discouraged. Huon (talk) 15:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I had a look what I considered to be the two best references here and here, and the phrase "Brian Hanlon" appears in neither. Therefore, we can't verify that Hanlon actually created these sculptures, or if he did, major news outlets were not interested in mentioning it. Either way, it makes passing the article difficult as the sources can't count towards notability of the subject in its current state. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   15:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Here is a good article for reference here, here, and here, here, here, and here. These are all independent news organizations and I will add these to the reference page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanlonSculpture (talk • contribs) 17:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rituparna Bhattacharjee
I do not understand till today why you show reluctance to accommodate the achievement of Rituparna Bhattacharjee about whom an article is published in Isahitya.com *1and on many other national dailies of India. you may visit the following links to check the information about this child prodigy whose Bhutiya won Jugal Srimal Excellence Award 1999 from jawaharlal Nehru Childrn Museum. Kindly visit the links and see how impartially it was reported ** 2 that Rituparna is a child prodigy.

see the links please to know about Rituparna Bhattacharjee http://isahitya.com/index.php/explore-more/more-indian-language-sahitya/132-bengali/337-rituparnas-bhutiya-a-child-prodigy-peeping-into-the-child-mind
 * 1.

The writer of this article is in no way related to the authoress and no question of promotion etc. arieses https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10151243948363976.553383.670553975&type=1
 * 2.

These newspaper reportings are cent per cent impartial. They also contain her writings publised in all the newspapers of India and review of her book Bhutiya.

Kindly allow her a recognition and space in Wikipaedia. Regards Ratan Bhattacharjee — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratanbhattacharjee (talk • contribs) 15:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * ANYONE can create a Facebook page, get all their friends to hit the "like" button and give off a false appearance of notability. Because of this, we almost always consider Facebook to be an unreliable source, except in some very fringe cases, say, relating to Mark Zuckerberg. Your other references are a classified advert, other wikipedia pages, or a Wikianswers page. Again, anyone can create these. We need references that are written by outlets having a solid reputation for editorial control and rigorous fact-checking, such as major national news outlets. Without these, you will have great difficulty in getting an article to pass. Sorry. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   16:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

MWW Article Declined
Hi, I recently tried posting a page (MWW) and it was declined. I have a few questions regarding the declining of this article. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/MWW)

1. It states the reasons the article was declined, however, I have reputable references. If these are not considered "reputable" enough, what can I do to improve my references?

2. MWW is the only PR firm in the top 10 PR firms to not have a wiki page. I am wondering what I did wrong with the article that it would be declined.

3. We even link to the founder of MWW's page.

All in all, I'm wondering if you can give tips or advice to get this MWW wiki page approved. I feel that the page had good enough references and content that it should not have been declined. Please let me know your thoughts. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZackDouglas (talk • contribs) 17:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia values reputable independent references, in particular to establish the notability of an article's subject. Your article has many references, but the few I checked were either not independent (the company's own web site) or nor sufficiently reputable (trade organisations that I suspect are little known outside the industry). Maybe there are acceptable references in among them; if there are, I suggest removing most of the others, so that the editors who decide on the fate of the article will find the good ones more easily. Maproom (talk) 18:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Since I'm the one who declined this, I'll go into more detail about why: Keep in mind that Wikipedia articles are intended for general readership and therefore should not be focused on things that are only of interest to MWW employees, clients, or prospective clients. When I see a list of clients, I ask, "Has whatever work MWW performed for, say 1-800-FLOWERS, been noticed by anyone who doesn't work for either MWW or 1-800-FLOWERS?" and see no evidence that it has. When I read that MWW is "Top Places to Work in PR" I ask if this award is something anyone other than the awarder and the awardee (like, say, a Wikipedia reader) would care about. Since Googling the name of the award turns up only press releases, I presume the answer to be "No", and read on to see what might make the company notable. The services section is an ad ("Yes, we have expertise in YOUR industry!") sourced to a directory entry. Not interested in the report you put on scribd (especially if the only thing the draft says about it is that it exists) or some ISO certification. Carbonfund's homepage doesn't say MWW is committed to anything (Why would it?), but that's a nice plug you gave them. For a PR firm, staying largely out of the public spotlight probably means they're good at their jobs and doing right by their clients, but it makes it hard to write a decent Wikipedia article about them. Kilopi (talk) 19:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the response. This helps a lot, I will work on getting more reliable sources/references and resubmit. Thanks again! ZackDouglas (talk) 00:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)ZackDouglas

Submitting my article
Hi there. I just added an article. How do I submit for approval? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastman747 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Add the code  to the top of the page. Or, alternatively, don't - I'm afraid your draft will be rejected outright, since it contains no sources at all and is filled with non-neutral language. You may want to consider a major rewrite before submitting, otherwise I'm sorry to say you'll be wasting your time. Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  20:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crescent Schools International
I just made my fist new wiki article and submitted for review. While the review is pending is there anyone who I can contact and ask their opinion whether I made the article correctly or any mistakes or shortcomings I need to correct? This is my first wiki article creation and I created this new page for my wife's old school. I know you guys are really busy but I'm a little anxious to know whether I made my first article correctly and my wife and her friends would like to have there school page before a class get-together that's coming soon.

After creating it and submitting it I got the message saying that "This may take several weeks. The Articles for creation process is severely backlogged. Please be patient. There are currently 2185 submissions waiting for review at this page." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aksamzarook (talk • contribs) 21:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If you want general guidance, you can find it here. You can also look at a few other school articles which have made it to feature article status - Amador Valley High School, The Avery Coonley School and Baltimore City College - of course we don't expect the same level for you or your school, but it could be something for you to aim for.  Kinkreet ~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 23:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Only part of listing published in review
Hi, I have submitted an article on Jamshid Arian Assl and it is only showing parts of the whole article submitting in the review. Could someone please let me know what I can do to fix this? Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Envirohelper (talk • contribs) 23:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. You had unclosed ref tags, so you had  Kinkreet ~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 02:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)