Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 June 3

= June 3 =

Review of Draft:Studio Under
Hello. I've been told that my submission had been denied. I would be happy to understand what to improve/change so it would be accepted.

Best regards,

Eran Gal-Or — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.5.10 (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * We can't tell which article you are talking about, but the reasons are given in the centre of the pink box on the article, with links in there to pages that explain the various terms. Rankersbo (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, found it now. There are no independent, reliable sources to the article. There are lots of external links to the websites of various entities referrerd to in the article, which prove those entities exist and nothing more. The links don't say anything about Studio Under. You need references that talk about Studio Under, and the events and facts in your article. Rankersbo (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Katch 22
I have edited the article for the band Katch 22 many times and all of the information is correct and available to be checked on the internet, i.e.record release dates etc. Why is it not entered on the website. (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)). mike-Eastman (Mike-eastman (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)).


 * Because this is what you submitted. What else could be done here?

Mike-eastman, it looks as if your draft had been deleted as an abandoned draft, a few hours before you tried to re-submit it. See. To get it reinstated as a draft, follow the instructions at Requests for undeletion/G13. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Good Katch, V. I should have spotted that. Fiddle   Faddle  20:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UK Data Service
Hi there I've responded to the original reviewer's concerns about citations and updated the page, but I can't figure out how to re-submit it. Can you help? Many thanks. Scozzolino (talk) 13:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You deleted the review templates and comments at the top of the page - I have just restored it. There is a big blue button in the pink template for resubmitting. Please do not delete any of the review stuff at the top of the page - it is the record of the progress of the draft and also has many links to advice and help pages. It is automatically removed when the article gets accepted, but until then it needs to be kept. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:GreenLips/Sandbox
Hi, y wife and I have been trying to post articles for wiki's review. Subject titled "Bill Haney". We have put probably 50hrs into trying to get this very worthy man listed. We keep getting deleted even through we are carefully following the many many many rules. We have submitted newspaper articles and a bio and it just keeps getting swallowed up - deleted with messages saying different reasons. The latest being "deleted: out of scope. Can someone please work with us? Thank you in advance to any one who tries to help us GreenLips (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Submissions like yours are problematic. Your words above hint that you have a conflict of interest. I might suggest quitting this effort altogether.
 * That said, here are my comments: You'll need to add in-line citations for all your assertions. Much of that content (high school, personal life) is really not important enough to mention. Your subject doesn't appear to meet any subject-specific notability criteria so you'd need to make a case for WP:GNG. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * In answer to your questions at my talk page: Your file uploads can be found at Special:ListFiles/GreenLips. You uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which is a sister project. WP:CITE does not require that you provide scans of newspaper articles (File:SundayOaklandPress,1997.png, File:NYTimes,Apr1993.png, File:JacksonCitizenPatriot,Mar2002.png, File:Detroiter1990.png, and File:BirminghamEccentric,Dec1989.png), you only have to list which periodical, on what day, on what page, as well as the title and author.  I'm sorry that was unclear to you.
 * When you use phrases like "very worthy man" and "someone who truly deserves it", it makes me doubt your objectivity. We are writing an encyclopedia; we're not here to celebrate heroes or condemn villains. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 18:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * : May I suggest Mentorship? Fiddle   Faddle  20:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Relativistic Global Non-Inertial Reference Frames
My recent;y submitted paper Relativistic Global Non Inertial Frames was declined for copyright violations. I would like to know which parts of the article the reviewer feels that there is too much overlap with published work ..

H Crater

Hcrater (talk) 14:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello Hcrater. According to the deleting administrator, it was an unambiguous copyright infringement from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.3257. That article appears to be co-authored by someone with a name similar to yours. Are you one of the authors? The problem is, even if you are the author and hold the copyright, if it has been previously published, then we cannot publish substantial chunks and/or paraphrases from it on Wikipedia unless it has been released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. I was unable to find anything to confirm what license it had been released under on either the article or its abstract page. Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. – Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I was very specific in my comments but perhaps the submission was blanked before you could read them. You wrote a very technical paper hosted by Cornell University and recreated that content in your submission. I determined that fact by Googling random sentences in your submission. We value your contributions but we cannot host someone else's content. When using even public domain content, you must leave a clear notification that the content had already been published elsewhere. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:13, 3 June 2014 (UTCIt
 * ((reply to Chris Troutman)) Yes, I am a coauthor with Lusanna on the arxiv paper paper you googled.  Our article is a distillation of our arxive paper.  Would it be possible to resubmit the article with this notification (i.e. that it is a distillation of the arxiv paper)? HCrater Hcrater (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hcrater, minimally you have to list the source(s) for any Wikipedia article, but a "distillation" (from what Chris says, the draft contained verbatim sentences, etc.) requires evidence that the paper has been previously published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Until that is in place, the draft cannot be restored. Voceditenore (talk) 16:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * ((reply to Chris Troutman)) I have contacted the  distribition arxiv  for the purpose of finding the liscense

agreement all contributors agree to. The URL with the details is http://arxiv.org/help/license The particular portion of that agreement I believe relevent is... " In order to submit an article to arXiv, the submitter must either: •grant arXiv.org a non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article, and certify that they have the right to grant this license, •certify that the work is available under either the Creative Commons Attribution license, or the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, and that they have the right to grant this license, or •certify that the work is in the public domain (we will store this information by associating the Create Commons Public Domain Declaration with the submission)...."

Please let me know if this is sufficient to allow me to have my article restored to my sandbox for further editing that would explicitly state it is a distillation based on the arxiv article and any other necesssary editing you would recommend. Horace Crater Hcrater (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid it's not sufficient, Hcrater. You must provide proof that your article was specifically released either into the public domain (highly unlikely) or under the Creative Commons Attribution license. We do not accept the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license, as all text on Wikipedia must be available for commercial use. This will probably entail an email from arXiv with a copy of the original submission which specifies the license. Donating copyrighted materials has more information on this. Voceditenore (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello ::((reply to Chris Troutman))   I received the following note from the Cornell arxiv  Dear Horace Crater, We do not provide any document regarding this. You should send them the link to our documentation regarding the licenses. --arXiv admin

Here is the note the above was a response to.. Dear arxiv admin, Thank you for your helpful response. Is there a way I can provide proof to Wikipedia that my article was specifically released either into  the  public  domain or under the Creative Commons Attribution license? Horace Crater

So, it looks like I have come to the end of my rope..My mistake was to submit to  Wikipedia a paper that was based on a specific article instead of one based on a general subject area. I will contact my coauthor to determine our next step. I suspect we will resubmit an article based on a general subject area which includes the area of the arxiv paper but not exclusively. In that event it would be most helpful if I could obtain the ascii version of the sandbox as there were many tedious details we may want to reuse. One suggestion would be for you to restore it for a few hours and when I copied it for my records I could notify you and then you could delete it permanently. Thanks in advance for any help in this regard. Horace Crater  Hcrater (talk) 18:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, I want to reiterate that we appreciate you bringing your technical knowledge to Wikipedia. Our rules are firm on this matter. Also, as WP:DCM explains this help desk can't process any type of permissions documentation.  Contact would have to go through WP:OTRS.
 * If you'd like your draft restored in order to copy it, see WP:REFUND. My suggestion would be to write a new article using your paper as a source as well as your other sources together rather than re-create a copyrighted work.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 04:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Craig Henderson
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haileesettle (talk • contribs) 15:01, 3 June 2014


 * Hello Haileesettle . I have removed the copy of your draft which you had pasted in here. The link to it sufficient. Can you let us know what your question is or what sort of help you are seeking with the draft? Voceditenore (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Local 77 Duke Labor Union
Hi, I was just wondering if I could receive edits for my Wikipedia article on the Local 77 Labor Union. Thanks. Karenli2014 (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Karenli2014. What do you mean by "receive edits"? Are you asking for someone to help you with the draft? Or are you asking for a review? You have currently submitted it for a review (half an hour ago). Unfortunately, a review may take more than 3 weeks. The Articles for creation process is very highly backlogged. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Hexagon Geospatial
Hi,

There is a note on my talk page that the article I submitted, Draft:Hexagon Geospatial, was not accepted because it contained copyrighted information. I don't understand.

None of the text of the article is copyrighted. It does include copyrighted images - the Hexagon Geospatial company logo, for example. Is it possible for you to look back and see if it was rejected because of the copyrighted images? Or if there was something else in it the reviewers thought was copyrighted?

Aren't company logos normally copyrighted? If yes, then how do other people include them on pages they create for their companies?

The page has been deleted for me, but I am hoping you have a record of it somewhere.

Thanks, Slhuff (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Slhuff


 * [[Image:Pictogram voting comment.svg|20px]] This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider checking out WP:REFUND. Hope this helps! APerson (talk!) 00:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Slhuff, According to the administrator who deleted the draft, it copied or closely paraphrased the text at http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/data-management-compression.aspx and other pages on that website. That website is clearly marked © Copyright 2014 Intergraph Corporation. As such, it will not be refunded. You will need to re-write the draft in your own words. But before you try that, I strongly suggest that you read:
 * FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
 * Copyright violations
 * Notability (organizations and companies)
 * And if this applies to you, also read:
 * Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
 * Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Rick Rosas
Hi, I am having difficulty with the submitted article on Rick Rosas. The references are confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey909 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Please would you explain your rather large question in bite sized chunks? Before you do, please read WP:REFB in case it helps your thinking.
 * Remember that references are intended to corroborate facts you have asserted in the article. They must come from significant coverage independent of Rosas, and in WP:RS Fiddle   Faddle  20:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of User:Liam.bertuzzi/sandbox
I was woundering why my great important article didn't make it through and I would like the honest truth pleaseLiam.bertuzzi (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * To quote the comment left by the reviewer:
 * It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous over being factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time.
 * I think this more or less sums it up. APerson (talk!) 00:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Liam.bertuzzi. you already asked the same question here and received an answer yesterday . Your behaviour and your "article" is disruptive and wasting everyone's time. Please stop it now. Voceditenore (talk) 07:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC
Hi there,

I'm new to posting on Wikipedia and am hoping to gain an understanding of what I can do/change to have my article published post rejection; Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neudesic,_LLC

Appreciate any/all help!

Best, schansler

Schansler (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello Schansler. The reviewer left some good guidance and links for you on your draft. I'm assuming you haven't read them? In any case, please read the following which apply to all editors, and especially to ones who are writing about subjects with which they have an affiliation:
 * Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
 * FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
 * Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
 * Notability (organizations and companies)
 * Voceditenore (talk) 07:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Fashionbi
Why my article was declined? Could you provide us with a better guidelines so we can post it correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fashionbi (talk • contribs) 23:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Fashionbi, did you read the reasons for the decline at the top of your draft, click on the guidance links you were given, and read them? Your draft was blatantly promotional and had no references whatsoever, let alone ones to independent reliable sources, e.g.
 * Fashionbi is an multicultural company, headquartered in Milan, Italy and Shanghai, China, which empower professionals to make smart decisions in the fashion and luxury industry.

The fact that you cannot even see how promotional and inappropriate the text is for an encyclopedia is a prime example of why Wikipedia strongly discourages editing with a conflict of interest. If you want some guides please read the following:
 * Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not advertising, marketing or public relations
 * FAQ/Organizations, especially Question 1
 * Copyright violations
 * Conflict of interest, i.e. "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships."
 * Notability (organizations and companies)
 * Please do not submit the draft again until it is written in a neutral point of view, and referenced to multiple independent sources.
 * Voceditenore (talk) 07:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)