Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 October 9

= October 9 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Francisco Munoz Alvarez
I would like to know why my article submission was declined.

When declined it says:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

When:

1) this is a neutral position that is the public BIO of this Oracle celebrity. This is also the BIO used for his publisher and that authorized it to be shared. 2) It says that show refer to a range of independent reliable sources. I listed on references more than 10

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmunoz (talk • contribs) 00:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The article starts "Francisco Munoz Alvarez has over two decades of experience in consulting, analysis, support, implementation, and migration of Oracle products." Firstly, that's not cited to a reliable source, so nobody can independently prove that he really has that experience. Secondly, the experience is not at all important or significant, I have two decades of experience in software development, but I don't have a Wikipedia article. Of the sources provided, only the Computer World article is truly reliable, independent and detailed enough to count as an acceptable source, the rest are either blogs, other self-published sources, a YouTube link (which is more often than not both unreliable and a copyright violation, though not always). Finally, if you are Francisco Munoz Alvarez (and your username suggests you might be), you should avoid writing an article about yourself - you will be accused of having a conflict of interest and you may find it's not a great thing as other people can write negative things about you, and provided they are properly sourced, you cannot delete them. Is that really what you want? Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   10:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jewell Jackson McCabe
I dont see why my artcle was rejected can I get more detail? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steviepeterson (talk • contribs) 01:15, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The subject looks notable, but there are two key problems with your submission. Firstly, although there are book references supplied, because this is a biography of a living person, you need to use inline citations, especially for direct quotations from McCabe, to tie each reference up with a specific fact. Have a look at referencing for beginners to see how to do this. Ideally for a book or journal reference you should cite title, author, publisher, page number and ISBN (if it exists). Secondly, some of the language doesn't correlate with the formal tone we use in Wikipedia. The lead is okay, but the first sentence in "Early life" starts "Born to a family of trailblazers" - this doesn't mean anything. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   10:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MS luckyid
Hello to whomsoever it may concern, I would like to know the reasons why my article was decline in wikipedia, list all the guidelines so that I can follow and resubmit my article once again.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abluckyid (talk • contribs) 05:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * As was clearly pointed out on the submission, Wikipedia is not the place to advertise your own "official" page about anything. I have nominated the submission for speedy deletion as blatant advertising. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   09:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Khopadi
I have added two references. What Kind of resource needed do let me know...I did not understand this"Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. " Message, What does it mean to me.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahesh darade1 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It means you need to provide sources that confirm the village exists. A gazetteer or printed encyclopedia entry, or a newspaper article, would be suitable sources. You can read about how to add sources at Referencing for beginners. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The best thing to do is cite Google Maps. If it's on there, it really exists and can have an article. Here Maps, which you've cited, appears to now be a self-published source, so there's no guarantee that what's on the map is important. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   13:13, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of User:4MEPSinnFein/sandbox
Is it possible to delete the article I submitted in error called:   User:4MEPSinnFein/sandbox  ?? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4MEPSinnFein (talk • contribs)


 * ✅ - You can delete articles only you have edited by adding to the top of the page. I have done this for you.  Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   14:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Unnamed diamond
i can't seem to understand how to submit my urticle. it's ready i'm pressing save page, and it keep telling me it's not submited.

please help me

thank you! zemer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zemeroo (talk • contribs) 14:39, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Your references were completely malformed - see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources for more information. I have fixed these so the submit box should now be visible. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   14:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie333, thank you for your time. I fixed my refrences and added picture if you could allow me to submit my article I would really appreciate it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Unnamed_diamond zemer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zemeroo (talk • contribs) 17:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael DiNardo
How do I know if my article has been submitted for review? I'm not sure I've completed the process correctly... thank you!Mike DiNardo (talk) 17:22, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It is correctly submitted for review. The box at the top of the page is wrong (this is a bug), and the box at the bottom of the page is correct. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!!24.39.238.133 (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis Hoffmann
Can anyone tell me how to get my submission for Louis Hoffmann back Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Louis_Hoffmann which was deleted, so I can fix it: User_talk:Jpecore

Thanks Jpecore (talk) 20:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Jpecore, you can request here: Requests for undeletion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you MatthewVanitas. Is it standard procedure to delete articles for submissions without any notice or discussion? Jpecore (talk) 20:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Jpecore, according to the comment left on the deleted space:
 * "changes) a supprimé la page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Louis Hoffmann (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement)''"
 * Apparently the reviewer found your text to be an exact or very close match to text posted somewhere else on the internet, and to avoid entangling Wikipedia in copyright violations did a WP:Speedy deletion on the draft. If the draft is indeed a copyright violation, an admin will probably not restore the draft. If it's somehow a mistake and your draft was somehow mistaken for a copyright violation, an admin can fix that for you.
 * Not to put too fine a point on it, but was this draft just something you copy-pasted from elsewhere on the internet, or is that a misunderstanding? MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:54, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It was a misunderstanding. The reviewer told me how to possibly avoid in the future, if I ever care to.  98.204.5.139 (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC)