Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 March 2

= March 2 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I-35 exit list
I don't know how to make a business interstate using this program: 71.145.142.158 (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I-35 exit list


 * I believe the corresponding parameter is either "BL" or "BS", depending on whether it's a loop or a spur. Our Interstate 35 in Texas article uses this code: It looks like this: . See Template:Jct/doc/type/USA for the full list of parameters.
 * Apparently we usually don't have stand-alone "exit lists"; they seem to redirect to the main Interstate article; compare for example Interstate 90 exit list. Or they're included in the "Interstate X in state Y" articles. Huon (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Any previously created stand-alone exit list articles were merged into their parent articles years ago. Where there are state-detail articles, for example, Interstate 35 in Texas, those have the exit list tables. The AfC submission was rejected on that basis.  Imzadi 1979  →   04:39, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong.

71.145.142.158 (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I-35 exit list


 * Could you please be a little more specific? What exactly is the problem? Your edits look fine to me. Huon (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It should have been . All of the route marker images (aka shields) for Texas Farm or Ranch to Market roads have been created.  If they don't show up, it's because the wrong type was used. –Fredddie™ 15:39, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * This is a Ranch to Market Road!!!


 * 71.145.142.158 (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/I-35 exit list


 * No, it isn't. Do not rely on Google Maps. https://www.txdot.gov/tpp/hwy/fm/fm0133.htm –Fredddie™ 16:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * As for the subject article, all of the content in it so far already exists, in MOS:RJL-compliant fashion in Interstate 35 in Texas. Other similar tables for the remaining states should appear in the appropriate articles. A stand-alone article for an exit list for an entire Interstate is not appropriate then.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

HAITI International Policy on Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances& HAITI Humanitarian Concerns Following Natural Disasters
PLEASE ANSWER THESE ABOUT HAITI: Humanitarian Concerns Following Natural Disasters AND THEIR International Policy on Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.233.197.69 (talk) 03:53, 2 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. Huon (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marvel War of Heroes
Top of page says Article not currently submitted for review but bottom of page says "Review waiting. This submission is waiting to be reviewed. This may take several weeks. The Articles for creation process is severely backlogged. Please be patient." Is it submitted or isn't it? :(
 * confused*


 * The draft is submitted for review; the old "not currently submitted" is an artefact that should soon be removed by a bot. It doesn't interfere with the review anyway. However, the draft's sources are currently insufficient. A wiki is not a reliable source; neither is a forum entry. VentureBeat doesn't even devote a single sentence to this game, hardly the significant coverage we need to establish its notability. Unless you add better sources and make sure the draft's content is based on what the sources actually say, the submission will be declined. Huon (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

L.A. Jay Notability
Hi,

Thanks again for your reply, Huon. I really do struggle to see your argument that a producer's contribution is only significant if an external sources says so. A producer brings all the elements of a song together, so to imply that a record could achieve the same success with another producer just doesn't follow. But, I appreciate that it is the site's position on the matter. I will persevere and try to find some sources that will further support the notability of L.A. Jay.

Thanks, Alice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlicePS (talk • contribs) 21:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Basically, that's what Wikipedia's notability guidelines say: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." So yes, we need secondary sources discussing LA Jay. If his efforts in producing the songs was significant, find a reliable source that says so - if no independent source says so, maybe it doesn't follow that his contribution was insignificant, but the opposite certainly doesn't follow. You're basically arguing that LA Jay is notable for something that no one ever took note of. Huon (talk) 22:49, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind that it is perfectly possible for a person's work to be notable while the person is not. The wheel is a very notable object but nobody has ever written a book or even a short article about the individual inventor(s) of the wheel. Roger (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Greg Broadmore
Hi there,

I'm trying to get my entry on Greg Broadmore happening, but I seem to be coming up against the same issues - that of verifying sources.

Greg has a filmography, published books (available on Amazon) as well as websites etc (I understand websites themselves are not acceptable). But are published books not a "reliable or verifiable source"? If not, what is? Do I have to provide third party reviews?

Any advice would be great, as I'm obviously not hitting the right target yet and am wasting a lot of time. Many thanks, Sarah Thorntoncomms (talk) 21:46, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Broadmore's own books obviously aren't independent. The only remotely independent source given in the draft is the Stephen Fry quote, and that has insufficient details to be verifiable. When did Fry say so, where can I read it? Furthermore, to be considered notable, Broadmore must have been the subject of significant coverage in such sources. I don't think Fry's one-sentence opinion is significant.