Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 January 6

= January 6 =

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Douglas Wilson (businessman)
Hi I submitted information about Doug Wilson, businessman and it was declined. Could you tell me why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thumper1001 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Douglas Wilson (businessman) was declined for the reasons given at the top of that page (both inside and outside the pink box). In addition, I couldn't find anything about Wilson on www.sony.ca, so even your existing references are not precise enough. You may find Referencing for beginners useful in seeing how to format your references. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Colorvision International
I am sure this is the number one question being asked. I am curious about the status of my article. I submitted it back on December 2nd, actually this was a revised submission as my first was rejected although the editor did say that I had established the subject was notable.

Can I expect it to be considered for submission in the next week?

If I make further edits to the article will that action send the article to the back of the queue?

Thank you so much for your help. --D Cocchiarella 02:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Making further improvements to the article will not send it to the back of the queue, so long as you don't delete the submission template at the top of the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul Assani
uh hello i need help on making a wiki page and i want it to show up on Google and i just wanted to know that does this mean==Speedy deletion nomination of Paul Assani==

A tag has been placed on Paul Assani requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Paul Assani (talk) 09:41, 6 January 2014 (UTC)?


 * Hello Paul. Unfortunately Wikipedia does not have articles about everyone. There is a guideline on which footballers are considered notable enough for Wikipedia to need a separate article about them, at NFOOTBALL. Alternatively, if you can add references to the article showing that multiple independent reliable sources (like newspapers, magazines or major news websites) have written about you in detail - see VRS - then that would also suffice. If neither of these can be met, the article is likely to be deleted. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prateek Jain (author)
want to make a page of an author, what shoul i do — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.227.174 (talk) 12:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * You should begin by reading VRS and then Referencing for beginners. "One of his students" is not a reliable (or independent) source.


 * You should also remove PEACOCK terms like "famous", "renowned", "universally known". Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Time James Llandudno Lifboatman, Charity Director, Consultant
--123bedofroses (talk) 17:22, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Hi, I have made a mistake with the title of the article - how do I edit this? Very many thanks


 * Hi, 123bedofroses (talk) I moved your draft to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tim James (Lifeboatman).   Instructions on how to retitle an article are here: Moving a page. Julie JSFarman (talk) 05:59, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Samuel Tudor
Hello, My submission was just rejected. I would definitely like to edit it to make it acceptable to Wikipedia.

The reviewer stated:

Are there any online references? Reads like a generic obituary than prose composed for Wikipedia.

In fact, all of the references were found on-line (google books etc)

Appreciate any more specific comments to help me make the article better.

Thanks

Seek4All (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * From what I've seen of your references, the references you provided did not originate online, even if that's where you found them. This is why the reviewer asked you if there are any online references. Lugia2453 (talk) 20:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not understand the relevance of that question to the acceptance of the submission. I have accepted the submission, and marked it as needing better references and also a copyedit. The existing references are not excellent; the first listed I would not consider independent, as histories of businesses of that size are generally commissioned by the business itself. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Azadeh N. Shahshahani
Hi, the last reviewer said that I have not cited to enough coverage of Shahshahani so I added cites to a few interviews as well as announcements of awards elaborating on her work. The most recent review says that these sources are not reliable. I am not sure what I am supposed to cite to. Would appreciate your guidance.Mghovan (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)