Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 July 18

= July 18 =

11:31:42, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Nour-hm
I have almost removed all the affiliated links from the article based on Dr Strauss  feedback: More unaffiliated sources are needed. I would appreciate if you can review it and share your feedback with me by telling if it's OK this way or if it still needs improvements. In order to make sure that the references I mentioned are fine or not, I saw what our competitors have done in their page in order to guarantee article submissions and I found that a lot of them mention a lot of affiliated links but they are accepted. Thanks in advance for your help and your feedbacks Nour-hm (talk) 11:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Nour. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the great delay in response.  Before discussing your submission, I'll address your concerns about that other company's article.  Wikipedia has more than 5 million user-generated articles and it is inevitable that some will exist even though they shouldn't.  As for the particular article that you linked, it wasn't sent through the Articles for Creation process and appears to have received little attention from the community.  In all, I'm not so sure that the other article would survive a deletion nomination. And I feel the same way about yours.  You have 12 separate sources, one of which is your company's own web site.  Of the rest, almost half are ServerSide pieces written (or, at least, co-written) by people associated with your company, including its founder.  I acknowledge that these pieces are authoritative statements of the features contained in the software, but they do nothing whatsoever to establish notability.  As for the remaining sources, the FCW piece gives your company only a passing mention.  Two others (ZDNet and InfoQ) are routine press-release types of articles.  So too are two of the articles on CMSWire.  Indeed, the March 2009 article steps well into the "promotional" zone when it provides little more than a brief product overview followed by the announcement that says (in effect) "Two guys from the company will be demonstrating the software on April 2.  Click here for details!!"  The only source in the draft that comes even close to being useful for demonstrating notability is the December 2013 article on CMSWire, but even this is tainted by its use of statements from a company spokesperson, especially given that the article isn't very clear as to which statements were from your spokesperson and which were from the author. In all, you haven't demonstrated that your software meets our general notability guidelines.  And if you assert that the software is notable for playing a significant role in the history of computing, most of us will look to see if it meets the criteria set forth in WP:NSOFTWARE.  I don't see how it does. I recognize that this is not the response you were hoping to get.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:34:28, 18 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Soumyaalma
soumya 15:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, Soumya. Did you have a specific question?  NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Strike response. Question was asked in a later posting. NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:35:02, 18 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Diyar Kurda
Diyar Kurda (talk) 15:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Diyar. Did you have a specific question?  NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

15:35:54, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Soumyaalma
soumya 15:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC) I want a full guidiance how to post an article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soumyaalma (talk • contribs) 15:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Soumyaalma. Welcome to Wikipedia!  Writing a new article is one of the most difficult things that a new editor can try to do.  Indeed, most of us here started out by making small improvements to existing articles.  By doing that, we became familiar with Wiki-code and with the various standards and expectations that the community applies to its contributors.  I encourage you to do the same.  But if you really want to try to create an article, good places to start are WP:Your first article and WP:Tutorial.  Happy editing!  NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

15:55:48, 18 July 2017 review of submission by 197.221.232.68
197.221.232.68 (talk) 15:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Greetings.

The reason I want to include this teachers college on wiki is that it is now defunct and may be lost for ever. It trained generations of teachers in this country. Also nothing has been written about it all the more it should be created so other people can enrich it. It existed in the pre-internet age.
 * Hello, IP address. Our apologies for the great delay in response.  Your contribution history doesn't show any record of you starting a draft about a teachers college.  Without seeing a draft and, indeed, without even knowing what college you are talking about, I regret that I can not be of any assistance to you.  If you do see this response, please feel free to provide more information.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:08, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

16:29:19, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Megangracehughes
Hi, I realized that my original post was deleted, I've since made another page Anatoly V. Zayats - I can't submit it so perhaps I've been blocked from doing that? Would you have a look and see if this draft page meet the standards for a page? If not please let me know what I should add. Then, would you have any advice so I can submit the page? thanks Megan

Megangracehughes (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * NOTE: Draft was accepted for publication later on July 18. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

19:31:36, 18 July 2017 review of submission by Vlaurentius
I received the following comment: Please remove the links to wikimedia images that are in the prose. If you want to include images in the content you can, but that's not the way to do it. My question is how do I do this the correct way I really liked into this in detail and thought I was doing it right, I am sorry.

VL 19:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello again, VL. Our response is the same as the one we gave you a few days ago.  To reiterate -- Uploading images can be a complex process.  You can begin learning about it by reading WP:Uploading images.  Note that, in some cases, an image cannot be added until the draft has been accepted for publication, so this might not be the first thing that you want to do here. I see that you've fixed the basic problem of failing to link your sources with the statements that they were supporting.  That's an excellent step, but you still need to fix the formatting of those references.  In a few minutes, I'll head over to the draft and do one of them for you, which you can then use as an example for the rest. But the submission still has other basic failings in the basic aspects of drafting a Wikipedia article.  I again urge you to work through our WP:Tutorial, which will provide you with the information needed to craft an acceptable article.  I also repeat my suggestion that you take a look at some of our better articles on inventors, such as Joseph Swan or Isaac Singer, because doing so will show how the techniques provided in the Tutorial are applied in practice. I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. I should have checked more carefully -- I see that you did upload the images.  The only remaining problem was the proper coding.  I took care of that.  Sorry about my error.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

23:56:54, 18 July 2017 review of draft by Grindcomber
Grindcomber (talk) 23:56, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Grindcomber. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the great delay in response.  Did you have a specific question?  NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)