Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 April 18

= April 18 =

04:00:46, 18 April 2015 review of submission by Lunasasukeaeris
Are these revisions sufficient?

Lunasasukeaeris (talk) 04:00, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Your submission is nearing the top of the queue. The lead is supposed to state why the subject is notable. (See Writing better articles and Manual of Style/Lead section.)


 * The most common way to demonstrate the notablity of an entertainer is to cite reliable, independent, secondary sources that prove they have had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. (See WP:ENT.)


 * Your submission will take less time to review and is more likely to be approved if you edit the lead to include a credible claim of importance. Buffalo Boys is a notable film, and Castro's role in it is significant, but one is not enough. Which other roles of his do you believe your sources prove are significant and in notable productions? Worldbruce (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

06:23:13, 18 April 2015 review of submission by Yifymp
Hello, I'm just not too sure how to create the standard 'Contents' box for an article on an actor, also the side box to feature a headshot. Furthermore 'Television' 'Film' 'External Link' subheadings.

Please help.

Appreciated

Yifymp (talk) 06:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * As long as you use our headings for sections

This is a main heading
main text

This is a subheading
Sub text


 * the table of contents is automagic, and appears when it is needed. I thin your fourth main heading creates it. Before that it is not needed. Fiddle   Faddle  07:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

14:05:51, 18 April 2015 review of submission by Birkwad
Interested in getting some assistance in learning how this subject in not notable. There is a little more work to add for content, but the New York Times, Many Law Reviews, International Newspapers, CNN, ABC Nightly News, and others have made a point of covering this person for an extended period of time and integrating his story into the greater fabric of american history, racism, and our flawed legal and justice system. By publishing this notable person's basic profile here we invite more people to add to it, which would be valuable to American History and the evolving nature of our justice system. Admittedly, the article is not complete, but that's why it should be published. How could I add different citations? Birkwad (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not the place to publicise your good cause. If it has notability then it ha s place here. If not, not. There is no "why it should be published" here. it either merits inclusion or not.
 * Your question "How can I add different citations?" is answered by your doing more of what you did when you created references at all. However, your topic seems to fail, under WP:BLP1E. Matters of public interest are better covered by news media. Fiddle   Faddle  14:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

17:43:42, 18 April 2015 review of submission by Akibah
I asked people on the help page to review the article as it presently stands and they thought it looked fine. I do not presently see any issues of personal opinion versus neutral and objective fact. Everything is documented. There are appropriate cross-references to other Wikipedia articles. In a personal note, the person who rejected the article told me that he was not sure the topic was notable. It was assigned by my professor at the University of Texas. There are similar articles for other groups.

Akibah (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * As the reviewer who pushed this draft back to you, I remain unsure that the topic is notable. It is not notable simply because it happens to be a part of a religion. WP:BURDEN means, pretty much, that you have to prove it with references et alia within the article, but not to me, Your role during this process is to prove it to the reviewer who decides to accept your draft, and then to watch what happens when the community as a whole gets its hands on it.. Your professor's opinion is of interest, but is not something that holds any more weight than your or my or any other person's opinion. Course assignments are not generally given out because they are inherently notable. They are given out to test your mettle and skill as a Wikipedia contributor, and to see how you interact with the community, how you draft articles, and how you handle the challenges on the way.
 * Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. When and if this one is ready it will be a reviewer's joy to accept it. Fiddle   Faddle  19:16, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

How do I enhance the notability? Keep in mind I an a noob for content creation and editing. However, I use Wikipedia for everything, and it seems consistent with that I have seen before. I have looked at the various links to notability and content creation, but am not seeing anything that jumps out at me as saying 'oh, here is the issue.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akibah (talk • contribs) 20:11, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * The notability comes from what other people say about the topic. The work you need to do in my opinion (which is one editor's opinion only) is to research and research for references, on and offline, which speak about it. The issue is that these might be viewed as primary sources because they are likely to come from within the faith. WP:PRIMARY tells you that you can use primary sources, but with restraint. You certain;y need to find significant coverage of the topic, and the sources must be WP:RS. So you cannot enhance the notability, but you can demonstrate and verify it. I think this is a hard project, but that is not a bad thing. You're asking questions, which puts you ahead of the game.
 * I'd love other reviewers and editors to join in and advise you, even, perhaps especially, if they differ from me in opinion. Fiddle  Faddle  20:19, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

19:06:27, 18 April 2015 review of submission by Shumbard
Shumbard (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC) Shumbard (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Help desks usually answer questions. I see you have a declined draft at Draft:Adaptive Behavior, but I have no idea what your question is. Your draft cannot go forward because there is already an article, but you can edit that article. Fiddle   Faddle  19:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Request on 19:09:00, 18 April 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Krutz27
Krutz27 (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Works well enough as a resumé, I suppose, but not as a Wikipedia article. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS. It needs work. We really do need to know the help you need when you visit the help desk, though Fiddle   Faddle  19:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)