Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 July 21

= July 21 =

07:08:52, 21 July 2017 review of submission by Jud Hudon
I am getting conflicting feedback. Some are saying that I can use Billy Christmas's first name in the body of the text, whereas others are saying I cannot – that I should use his surname. I have opted to use his surname but am perfectly willing to use his nickname should that be preferable.

Also, note that many of my references come from primary source newspapers. Until recently there was little to no secondary sources on Billy Christmas since he was inducted into Canada's Sports Hall of Fame as part of the Legends Class in 2015. These primary source newspapers, however, are easily accessed and bear witness to Billy Christmas's formidable sports achievements.

Lastly, in composing this article, I referred to a Wikipedia article on Charlie Liffiton who played alongside Billy Christmas for the Montreal Hockey Club. I did not use any of the wording in that article. I did, however, use the structure which broke Liffiton's life into various parts. I did this for one reason and one reason only: to adhere to Wikipedia guidelines. I did, however, find it rather curious that Liffiton's nickname, not his surname, was used throughout the article.

Sincerely, Jud Hudon

Jud Hudon (talk) 07:08, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * NOTE: Draft has been accepted for publication. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:04, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 09:24:43, 21 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Red & Black
Hi there, hope you're well. I am finding it difficult getting my draft posted on Wikipedia. It is my first time doing this and I feel my inexperience on how to write it properly is causing it to be declined as a post online. Would you be so kind to help me get this posted please? I also seem to have trouble with my referencing but all the links prove he's a notable person within the film industry. He's recently had an interview on BBC Worldwide, please see link below:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p057ht0b

Hope to hear from you soon and thanks for your time in advance.

Kind regards,

Red & Black Red &#38; Black (talk) 09:24, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Red. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the delay in response.  I haven't formed any opinion as to whether the subject of your submission meets our notability guidelines.  But I do note that, in its current form, it will never be accepted for publication because it fails our requirements for proper referencing.  It is generally a good idea to link particular statements in an article with the particular sources that are being used to support them.  And in the case of a biography of a living person, this generally good idea becomes an absolute requirement.  And so, clumping all of your references together at the bottom of the draft is not acceptable.  Instead, each reference should be directly linked to the particular statement(s) that they are supporting.  You can learn how to do this by reading our WP:Referencing for beginners.  It will also help your presentation if you format the references with an appropriate citation template, in this case cite web.  I've already formatted one of them for you, which you can use as an example for doing the rest.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

14:22:03, 21 July 2017 review of submission by Nayirim
Hi, I submitted this question to Dr.Strauss who had declined the Science Gateway entry I created. He replied to let me know that he is no longer reviewing for Wikipedia and that I should pose my question here. Here was my reply to him:

Hi DrStrauss. I noticed recently that the entry I submitted for Science Gateway was declined. If you don't mind, I was hoping you could clarify why it was deemed not worthy of having its own entry. Virtual Research Environment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_research_environment) has its own Wikipedia entry, but when you search for "Virtual Research Environment" in Google Scholar, for example, there are about 3,000 results, whereas when you search for "Science Gateway" there are almost 6,000 results. A portal, on the other hand, has 3.5 million + results, since it can be used to describe so many different things. To me, this indicates that all three terms are relevant to the work of scientists, but a science gateway, though similar to a VRE or a portal, is a term that's being used frequently enough with a specific definition that it should stand on its own and get linked to the portal and VRE pages (as well as some others) instead of being nestled in the portal page as suggested. The portal page has so many other explanations that have no connection to the typical science gateway and the work done by science gateway developers to offer modeling, simulation, visualization tools as well as shared equipment and instruments, software applications, etc. The term science gateway makes the work being done/offered more clear, and is being used more and more in the scientific community. Thanks for your feedback and help, look forward to hearing back from you.

Nayirim (talk) 14:22, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Nayirim. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the delay in response.  I also regret that the previous reviewer was unwilling to follow through with a discussion of your submission.  Nonetheless, I agree with their initial assessment.  Our article on web portals contains sub-sections on specific types of portals, and I see no reason why "science gateway" would not also be an appropriate sub-section of that article.  As for Google search hits and the like, it would be reasonable to add a "science gateway" sub-section to the web-portal article and then establish Science gateway as a redirect to that sub-section.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:09:56, 21 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Patatcmts
I would like to receive help on my article to get it accepted.

Patatcmts (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi I've done a few fixes/improvements and left some advice in the review I just did. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:05, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

15:46:39, 21 July 2017 review of submission by NatalieMartin82
Hi, How can an about section be added to this page? I noticed most Wikipedia articles about companies include a link to their website and a logo. Is that something that can be added to this page? Thanks for your help! NatalieMartin82 (talk) 15:46, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi I think you're actually looking for Infobox company, it is used to display the logo together with various other bits of key information. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2017 (UTC)