Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 July 7

= July 7 =

00:24:31, 7 July 2015 review of submission by Tush Dayo Pearl
I dont understand how and where the draft shows excessive detail in an advert form and also how do i remove the multiple unneeded external links? Tush Dayo Pearl (talk) 00:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Starting more or less at the top...
 * Wording like "celebrates" and "outstanding contribution and publicly excelled in their chosen field" and "the pioneer of awards platform that bridged gap" and "worthy Role Models in our society" and "Nigeria's Most Consistent All Youths Awards platform"... "the prestigious GeneSix Hotels and Suites"... and so on... is unduly promotional
 * Wording like "is a Nigerian Youth Project" and "A review is done yearly on the Student categories so as to portray the mission of the event" is vague... what does it mean?
 * "It was basically a platform for the up and coming stars to really make a point. It had an encouraging turn out of youths around, and was described as an impressive start"... "This was the show that really announced Tush as a brand to watch out"... "This event made a stand to be known as one of the most promising"... "it was an atmosphere of value"... this is fact-free promotional language. It does not impart any information
 * Lists of attending celebrities that may or may not be notable are not useful. If they need to be mentioned, at least wikilink them, plus include an inline citation to a reliable independent source that mentions them being there
 * Likewise lists of sponsors
 * The "Criticism" section is completely unsourced. Source it or get rid of it.
 * It would be a good idea to better format your references so that information on the publisher, author, date, page number, article title or other similar information is included
 * To remove unnecessary external links, click Edit at the top of the Draft, scroll down and remove any unnecessary lines, then save the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * To remove unnecessary external links, click Edit at the top of the Draft, scroll down and remove any unnecessary lines, then save the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * To remove unnecessary external links, click Edit at the top of the Draft, scroll down and remove any unnecessary lines, then save the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

00:29:08, 7 July 2015 review of submission by 82.159.127.166
I submitted an article for review and it was initially rejected by because the reference was not valid. I made the requested change. But the second reviewer Sulfurboy rejected it again saying "Fails for the same reasons given by MatthewVanitas". I am not sure what more changes I need to do as I have already done the changes MatthewVanitas asked for. Please help me to create this page about Börs Anders Öhman as his name is already in the list of bagpipe makers of Wikipedia and he deserves to have a page dedicated to him in Wikipedia since he is one of the well known makers of Swedish bagpipe and a great musician.

82.159.127.166 (talk) 00:29, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * He might be notable, but we need to see evidence for it, such as extensive coverage in independent and reliable sources. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

02:52:22, 7 July 2015 review of submission by VTflatlander
I am quite puzzled that my submission was declined. Most of my references were either from recently published books of widely recognized periodicals. I do not understand how these were not verifiable. If your editor could not locate them, I could supply copies from the originals. VTflatlander (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC) VTflatlander (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * @VTflatlander, I have reverted the incorrect review and accepted the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Roger (Dodger67) for your quick response. I was thinking that writing for Wikipedia might be a fun way to pass the time once I retire. However, to receive such an off-handed rejection was very off-putting. The style difference I used in my references is noted and will be converted to the Wikipedia standard as I have time. I really appreciate your resolving this matter. VTflatlander (talk) 00:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi VTflatlander - You don't need to change the referencing style, it is perfectly acceptable. There is no official Wikipedia referencing standard, any style of referencing that meets the minimum criteria of WP:Verifiability (and for biographies of living people must be an inline method) is acceptable. In fact changing the referencing style without a good reason is deprecated. Unfortunately reviewers do sometimes make mistakes. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:43, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again Roger (Dodger67). The person that rejected my piece made it clear that the reference style was wrong. I read through her comments on other pieces and frankly am surprised by her attitude. She loves praise, but when questioned directly, she says she "is done now" or has "had enough". Does Wikipedia ever review its reviewers?VTflatlander (talk) 03:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)


 * VTflatlander, you appear to be new to Wikipedia, so perhaps you have not yet encountered a large number of our "social policies." One important one is assume good faith. People may have different ideas, different levels of skills, and all of us at times make mistakes. To keep the community as supportive as possible, it is a good idea to assume that all of us are working in good faith, unless proven distinctly otherwise. Another policy is WP:CIVILITY - that we treat each other with respect. The latter is definitely not shown in your latter statements about me, which are false. Not only is it rather rude (at least the way I was brought up) to criticize people "behind their back" (we're all available through our talk pages if you want to discuss something) but because everything on Wikipedia is linkable, we tend to stick to those demonstrable facts. I apologize that I did not know that the citation method you are using was an acceptable one (there is a similar one that is deprecated). But saying unpleasant and false things about me is no way to deal with an honest mistake. I hope you will join us in the spirit of Wikipedia and work well with all of us here. LaMona (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

03:56:57, 7 July 2015 review of submission by JKhade
JKhade (talk) 03:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the review but which content or text of this draft you think is having material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations and you think it needs to cite sources using footnotes?? If you mention then I will be grateful. Last reviewer 'Primefac' left a note YouTube is not considered a reliable source and I removed that.


 * Some people would suggest that the Early Life section needs inline citations. But at any rate, statements like "music was made on Computers & laptop with Hi-End softwares & Gears" and "He did over 50 Jingles around 15 TV Soap Title Songs" and "He also did work for Academy Awards winning musician [1]A.R. Rahman for his movie Slumdog Millionaire" do each need inline citations to reliable sources.
 * You also do not currently have a reliable source for "Asad has the honor of being the first Sitarist to Perform at the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize Concert". Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:47, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You also do not currently have a reliable source for "Asad has the honor of being the first Sitarist to Perform at the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize Concert". Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:47, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

05:17:48, 7 July 2015 review of submission by Axykno2015
Axykno2015 (talk) 05:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you have any questions? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

06:02:31, 7 July 2015 review of submission by 110.20.234.69
I translated this article from fr:George Wickham (a BA - French Good Article), and did some additional research from reliable sources. It has been declined twice for 'reading like an essay', and I don't think this is appropriate, because the article uses the opinions of experts for its commentary. When I have shown the draft in the IRC channel, people have been fairly positive about its appropriateness for the English Wikipedia. Where can I go from here?

110.20.234.69 (talk) 06:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I broadly agree with your summary, and I have therefore Accepted the Draft... it seems someone was planning to do this a month ago but never did. I have confirmed that the translation is suitably acknowledged in the edit history. Anyone concerned about an essay-like tone can improve the tone or indeed take it to Articles for Deletion if necessary. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for accepting the draft! --110.20.234.69 (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

09:42:14, 7 July 2015 review of submission by KylieRice
I would like to add a logo in the right side. I've seen procedures in creative common, as well as wikipedia and was not sure which route to take. I have and own the logo, it is public already on website and on google play and other places. Thanks for your assistance!

KylieRice (talk) 09:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It would be best to wait until your Draft is accepted, and then upload the logo to the English Wikipedia as a non-free image file for use on the article about the product only. Logos gives more information on this. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 10:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

11:23:29, 7 July 2015 review of submission by Joseph turrin
Wanted to know specifically why my article on composer Joseph Turrin was deleated

Joseph turrin (talk) 11:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It was not deleted, it is still at User:Joseph turrin/Joseph turrin. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * In any case, the article has poor prospects unless you clean it up and provide extensive coverage about the musician from independent and reliable sources. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

17:38:04, 7 July 2015 review of submission by 65.114.37.218
I was just curious as to why my article wasn't approved and what I need to change? I used references in my article and believe the musician in question does meet your notability requirement. Please let me know! Thank you! 65.114.37.218 (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ The two sources cited are solid. A cursory search turned up additional independent, reliable, secondary sources, so I've accepted the draft. You are encouraged to improve the new stub, which is very brief. Worldbruce (talk) 22:39, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

17:42:17, 7 July 2015 review of submission by Laynecoop
I was just wondering why my article was not approved and what I need to change in order for it to be approved? I used references in my article and believe the musician in question meets the notability requirement. I also submitted another article titled "John Gourley" that was not approved. Please let me know what I can do! Thank you! Laynecoop (talk) 17:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

19:02:14, 7 July 2015 review of submission by 45.49.207.215
I thought I had made the necessary edits on the page to allow for a live posting but unfortunately it still will not be cleared. I am unsure what else will be necessary. Any assistance will be great. I hope to have the page up some time soon. 45.49.207.215 (talk) 19:02, 7 July 2015
 * Commented in detail on draft. Worldbruce (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

19:41:17, 7 July 2015 review of submission by 72.74.199.93
Hi. An article I submitted yesterday was just rejected and I'm not sure what the issue is. The person who reviewed it basically said it was too long and that it didn't have enough citations. I've re-read the AFC wizard twice and there's no mention about citation or length requirements. I don't mind adding more but there's already 90 sources and every single paragraph is cited. Almost all of them are from reputable newspapers, radio and television interviews.

I know it's not a featured article but I used some of the pages highlighted by the Internet culture wikiproject (William Gibson for example) as a guideline. This is as close as I could get on my first try. Is there anyway I can improve the page before I resubmit it?

72.74.199.93 (talk) 19:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Re-reviewed and accepted - with issue tags. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

21:27:20, 7 July 2015 review of submission by Bbcrossword
I believe I addressed the issues, i.e., removing the trademarks and registrations. What other changes are needed? Bbcrossword (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are asking about submission User:Bbcrossword/Nanography, you have not fixed the problem described in the big pink box on the submission. Also, the submission contains external links within the text. If they are meant as references, they should be converted into such using tags (which would go part way towards fixing the reliable sources problem, although large parts of the text would still be unsourced). Otherwise the external links need to be removed, or if they meet WP:ELYES, moved to the external links section at the bottom. Worldbruce (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)