Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 October 17

= October 17 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Viking Cruises
Hello. I created an article for Viking Cruises, submitted it and waited; but I've just received a notice that it was not accepted. I do not understand why. I have updated the existing article about Viking River Cruises but need to submit this as a new article because the company name has been changed to Viking Cruises. As soon as this is published I will edit the Viking River Cruises down to a one-paragraph stub with a link to the new article for additional information. (I will also add the company's logo and a few updated photos.) Other than the updates I've mentioned, there is nothing very different from the existing Viking River Cruises article. Please help me understand how to proceed--the Viking River Cruises article is outdated information and I'm sure we would like to keep Wikipedia up to date. Thanks in advance for your help, the volunteer editors are awesome!

Julane (talk) 01:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * This is more a technical and procedural issue related to how article changes are handled. Although it may also be an indication that the existing article Viking River Cruises, on which your draft is largely based, is already too promotional!


 * The usual way to handle a situation like this is that the article Viking River Cruises would be moved to the new name Viking Cruises and then the additional information about the company name change and new ships etc would be added to the existing article at its new location; Viking River Cruises would also become a REDIRECT to Viking Cruises so that anyone visiting the old page would be brought seamlessly to the new page. This also has the benefit (a Wikipedia licensing requirement) that the attribution history of the original article (who wrote what) will be preserved and carried over to the new article name.


 * Your user account should be able to carry out this page name move. If the company name has indeed been changed, then it should be an uncontroversial move, so I suggest you go ahead and carry it out; see MOVE for details on how to do so. Let us know if you need more help with it. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * (Darn, 'Arthur' beat me by a few minutes.) Hello Julane, thank you for your kind comments, there are indeed awesome people on WP. But 'buttering' us up won't make passage of you page more likely though. ;-) I hope you won't mind me making a few comments as I have not strayed into this area of Wikipedia (WP) before. One thing you want to keep in mind if on WP we don't use ® ( or © symbols).


 * Are you sure that you cannot 'update' the current page to reflect the changes in the company? (complying with WP policies such as NPOV, COI, and Verifiability still naturally)
 * Please note that the current page can be moved to a new title such as Viking Cruises. 220  of  Borg 09:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bluemercury
How do I get the warning removed from this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gremlin700 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * From a brief look at the article, the problem is that it talks far too much about Malcolm Beck and Barry Jon Beck and not enough about Bluemercury. It should took more about what the company is, and what it does, and less about what the founders are up to. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   14:19, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the superfluous content. When will the warning come down? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gremlin700 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I have removed the warning template. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Bankstown Bites Food Festival
Hi, I have added some more coverage and refs for this event (like Australian Broadcasting Corporation, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Daily Telegraph, Parliament of New South Wales) is it enough to be considered notable?--203.25.149.10 (talk) 21:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Note - submission is currently awaiting review. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/X1 (dinghy)
HI,

I originally submitted this in March 2011, when it was rejected as the only references were websites. I recall discussing and magazine articles appeared to be good references if and when published.

I have now cited three printed magazines with articles about the X1. However this appears not to be adequate. I am not sure why? How many references do I need? What makes them good/bad references? The Google search suggested certainly brings up plenty of stuff. Some of the Magazine articles are available on-line - should I add links to these? - seems a bit OTT to me?

Second rejection reason - "The mix of X0 and X1 coverage and minimal talking leads me to not be inclined to accept". a)I have added XO a variant of the original X1 (exactly the same hull) - clearly worth mentioning I think, but not worth a whole new article at this time.  b) Sorry but I just don't know what "minimal talking" means? As far as I can see there isn't a talk page associated with the article until it is accepted, only then would people find it to discuss it?

Thanks in advance for any hints and advice for fixing my submission!

Martin Dixon (talk) 22:05, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I can't answer for the last decline, but it does read like an article aimed at boating enthusiasts rather than a general audience. It does read a bit like enthusiasts gossip rather than a formally presented neutral article. I assue PY is Portsmouth Yardstick (my boyhood days waiting in the Irish Sea for the rescue boat to take us out of the race not in vain)- I think that term should be in full with a wikilink to the article on that. Is there a database of dinghys and classifications- the entry could go in external links. Rankersbo (talk) 10:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)