Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 March 30

= March 30 =

Three similar submissions
Dear editors: Here are three similar articles:
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Paper Kites was declined and then substantially improved and not submitted again
 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Paper Kites (2) is an improved copy of the above which is in the queue.
 * The Paper Kites is a brand new article, copied from the above by the same user. I know that the edit history of these three pages should be combined, but I don't know how that's done.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 12:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * According to how I interpret the page histories, the author wrote a very short draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Paper Kites, wrote a better draft in his sandbox, submitted the sandbox and copied the content to the AfC page without submitting that one as well, and finally copied the content into the mainspace. They should have submitted the AfC draft instead of the sandbox. Since all drafts and the mainspace article were written by the same editor, there shouldn't be any licensing issues if we simply decline the ex-sandbox draft without bothering with page histories. I have done so. Huon (talk) 14:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

draft declined
My draft for submission was declined because of the lack of "reliable sources." Can you take a look and tell me what's missing? There are a number of sources cited.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caroline Ramersdorfer.

Jkeren7 (talk) 12:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually the sources as such look ok, but if those sources are available online please add links to the references. A bigger problem is the massive number of external links embedded in the text. Please remove them all and trim the list of links in the actual External links section down to only those that are directly about Ramersdorfer. Many of the entities you have linked externally actually have articles on Wikipedia so you should rather link to them. Roger (talk) 12:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem
Dear editors: I was reviewing this page: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Locating the Ancient History of Santal Parganas and I declined it as an essay.

However, it contains copied material from the author's own work at this web site: http://www.readbag.com/anusandhanika-in-social-sciences-vol-ix-no-i

It is not an exact duplicate of the essay, and I am having trouble finding out how much of it is the same. Duplication detector bugged out because the document was too long, but it did find some phrases the same at this URL http://amarpankajjha.blogspot.ca/

If someone has more experience or available tools, please check this and find out if only some sections should be deleted as copyright violations, or if the whole thing should go. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 13:29, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Given that the draft has numbered references that do not correspond to the numbered references in the pages you found, I strongly suspect the draft is copied from some source we cannot find via Google. Anyway, since there was no clean version to which we could revert, I've tagged the entire essay for speedy deletion. Huon (talk) 14:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/South African Legion of Military Veterans
Hi, I have been trying to put up my article on the South African Legion of Military Veterans for months now, only to be told it isn't "notable" enough, but similar articles on the Royal Canadian Legion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Legion and on the Returned and Services League of Australia or New Zealand are featured. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Returned_and_Services_League_of_Australia I have added a number of secondary references. I will add a list of former National Presidents (some very notable) as well as Patrons -- like Nelson Mandela -- (not enough?) but will also add the current one, who represents Africa on the World Veterans Federation Do please tell me, will this be enough. If so, I will submit in a few hours! vitéz 13:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavszabo (talk • contribs)


 * Those other articles are both tagged for problematic and insufficient references, hardly shining examples of what a Wikipedia article should be. I'm not all that impressed by the secondary references. I haven't checked them all, but those I looked at mentioned the Legion only in passing without providing any significant coverage. We'd need multiple articles with at least a paragraph each about the Legion. Since notability is not inherited, a list of notable National Presidents or Patrons on its own will not help. Huon (talk) 15:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

NOW you tell me... Okay, back to the slog. Sheesh, writing a doctorate is a piece of cake you guys! vitéz 18:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavszabo (talk • contribs)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joji Iida
Although this AfC was never submitted, the article Jōji Iida has already been created. The AfC should be deleted. Michitaro (talk) 14:31, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've declined the AfC draft because it already exists in the mainspace, but there's no need to delete it. Huon (talk) 15:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/South African Legion of Military Veterans
Sorry, won't be submitting tonight, but hopefully, tomorrow! vitéz 18:01, 30 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cavszabo (talk • contribs)

Internet of Things Virtual Networks
Dear editors: Sorry to be a pest; I really am reviewing some submissions on my own! Several people wrote an article together called Internet of Things Virtual Networks and presented it as a paper an an IEEE (prestigious organization) conference. An article has been submitted, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IoT-VN, not about the paper presentation, but about the term "Internet of Things Virtual Networks". I check the internet, and the only references I found were to the paper itself. I wasn't able to find anyone else using the term. Is the fact that the term was used at a prestigious conference enough to make it an acceptable topic, or must it be in general use? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 19:46, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd say a single source is not enough to satisfy the general notability guideline - I've declined it for that reason. There are also COI concerns; the paper was co-authored by Isam Ishaq, and the draft is by User:Isamishaq. That alone would not be a valid decline reason, but it certainly doesn't help. Huon (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Echo Orbin
[Draft removed.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Echoorbin123 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Your draft didn't cite any reliable sources such as newspapers or reputable music magazines. Huon (talk) 22:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Singing Street
I have just discovered an anomaly. An article I did some time ago, entitled "The Singing Street" seems also to exist as an Article for creation. I don't know how this came about, but I obviously botched the page's move in some way. In fact, I'm not sure if I'm looking at the same article in duplicate or two separate pages. The ideal would be to delete the Article for Creation page without affecting the live page - only I don't know how to achieve that. Kim Traynor | Talk 22:47, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You can nominate the draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Singing Street for speedy deletion by adding  to the very top of that page. That won't affect the live article. Huon (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)