Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 February 3

= February 3 =

04:26:18, 3 February 2015 review of submission by LadyG72
My Article page was published, but I received a message that says •	"This article uses bare URLs for citations, which may be threatened by link rot. (January 2015)"

Can I please get some assistance on how to do this? LadyG72 (talk) 04:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC) ✅
 * Hello LadyG72, this page is for drafts which have not yet been approved, but to answer your question, click the words WP:Link rot in the template itself, and it'll have advice. Take care! MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

07:50:04, 3 February 2015 review of submission by Vizzerdrix55
I wrote an article about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:University%27s_Children_Hospital_Basel. It was rejected with the information that it is unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.ukbb.ch/en/the-hospital.html BUT I wrote in order of the official instance of the University Children's Hospital Basel. Is there any way, I can verify this?

Vizzerdrix55 (talk) 07:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * To quote another editor on this page: Wikipedia assumes that any text published on the web, unless it specifically states otherwise, is under copyright. If you would like to use text from a website owned by your company, please see WP:Donating copyrighted material. However, even if the copyright issues are resolved, most text written on companies' websites is not appropriate for Wikipedia, as it is often not written in the proper tone and is too promotional sounding. You are much better off trying to write things in your own words. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to make it clear: The draft I wrote is a translation of an existing German Wikipedia article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universitäts-Kinderspital_beider_Basel. After someone published the German article, the company made an English translation in a Word-Document, that they planned to publish on their homepage (http://www.ukbb.ch/en/the-hospital.html) and on the English Wikipedia. As the responsible person was not familiar with Wikipedia, they decided to give the job to me. I embedded the Text of the Word-Document in the Wikipedia-Editor and now the draft is rejected because of unambiguous copyright infringement? If there really is a copyright infringement then it was realised by the company itself, isn't it? Vizzerdrix55 (talk) 12:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC) PAGE''' ]]) 17:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If the text on ukbb.ch is a direct translation of a Wikipedia page, legally it has to follow the guidelines specified at Reusing Wikipedia content. This means that the page has to 1) indicate that the text was translated from https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universitäts-Kinderspital_beider_Basel, 2) indicate that the text is licensed under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, and 3) provide a link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
 * Once those three things are added to http://www.ukbb.ch/en/the-hospital.html you are free to re-use the content on the English Wikipedia. --Ahecht ([[User_talk:Ahecht|'''TALK
 * I suggest you mean in your article over de UKBB instead of your written sentence Once those three things are added to http://www.ukbb.ch/en/the-hospital.html you are free to re-use the content on the English Wikipedia, right?Vizzerdrix55 (talk) 07:44, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

15:10:22, 3 February 2015 review of submission by DannyWigley
DannyWigley (talk) 15:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC) PAGE''' ]]) 17:58, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Your article needs to show that the movie itself, not just the reporter in question or his resignation letter, is notable. Notability is shown by citing significant coverage of the film itself (not of Rich Peppiatt or his resignation letter) in reliable sources that are independent of the film, filmmakers, film festivals the documentary was shown at, etc. You should also review WP:NFILM, which has specific notability guidelines for films that your article should meet in order to be approved. --Ahecht ([[User_talk:Ahecht|'''TALK

17:33:09, 3 February 2015 review of submission by Lbehrens
My recent article draft on "Virtual Walk Videos" was rejected, because, as the reviewer said, it reads too much like advertising. I disagree with this assessment, but in any case, I am confused as to why the current Wikipedia article on "Virtual Tours," a related topic, is considered acceptable, and mine is not. Perhaps you can help me understand this. Both articles define the subject technology--in the case of virtual walks, an increasingly popular one--and review its use and benefits. I explain where videos of virtual walks may be found but do not endorse any one source over any other. Moreover, my reference sources were not written by any of the makers of this technology and therefore can be considered objective.

I am the co-author of "Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum," one of the most successful and enduring college writing texts ever created; now in its 13th edition, it has been continuously in print since 1982.

Lbehrens (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Lbehrens (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

In my recent query requesting clarification on why my recent submission on "Virtual Walk Videos" was rejected, I neglected to include the text of the article itself. Here it is:



Lbehrens (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Lbehrens (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Lbehrens - please do not post the entire textof the draft here - it already exists at Draft:Virtual Walk Videos. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * the list of companies and their products is not really suitable content-- we're not a Directory (I removed it) . The rest seems good, but it needs some references to discussions of the genre that are not just examples. Add them, and let me know.   DGG ( talk ) 22:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)