Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 May 16

= May 16 =

09:03:56, 16 May 2017 review of submission by Janweh64
Please kindly review the article as I am certain it is a fine addition to Wikipedia. It should be noted that I have a COI paid by the family of the deceased subject of the article. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 09:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC) &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 09:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * , the tone is too personal. Claims for what motivated the author & the connection with his personal life can only be based on what the artist chose to say,even when cited by other publications. I suggest you condense this a little, and not duplicate so much of the material from the article in the lede. There also needs to be some emphasis on listing particular pieces held in major museums.  Then resubmit. If there's a problem, get back to me on my talk page.  DGG ( talk ) 20:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have condensed the lede. I have added more quotes from his Oral History in the article. And also more pieces held at major museums and collections. &mdash;አቤል ዳዊት?(Janweh64) (talk) 00:26, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

13:27:17, 16 May 2017 review of submission by DavidA Minnesota
I am not sure I understand the rejection of the draft for IrriGreen.

As I understand it, references from trade publications are acceptable and valid. Yet, the rejection is based on the comment that reerences to such publications are insufficient.

Also, when I look at pages for other irrigation system manufacturers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rain_Bird), my submission for IrriGreen looks more completed and well documented. Another example is Hunter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Industries). Their references include some of the very same industry trade publications that I use.

DavidA Minnesota (talk) 13:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

, among the improper content in your article was a list of distributors and affiliations, and detailed product description--all of that belongso n your website,,  And "Finalist" is not an award, but a failure to get an award. There's also a somewhat personal tone. Revise and resubmit, though it remains unclear if the references are enough for notability. As for the other articles: There are several hundred thousand articles in WP accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower that we need to either upgrade or remove. The least we can do is not add to them. I've revised one of the articles you mentioned,and am working on the other. There may be some more similar ones also that need work.  DGG ( talk ) 20:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Choclawrence/sandbox
Dear HelpDesk Experts, Thank you. Already pushed the review button... I would value your comments greatly. It would be awesome if you choose to review it and share your comments there With thanks, Lawrence.
 * NOTE: Response appears on draft, which is now at Draft:Kobi Arad. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:30, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

21:57:58, 16 May 2017 review of submission by Lesliebaird
I am not sure what to do next with the current draft: the editor noted - Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), I think this is the main point? The subject (person) is very notable and I listed many sources/references. Do I need to include more citing in the summary or am I just citing incorrectly? Do I delete all exhibitions, etc. that do not have sources for the information?

Lesliebaird (talk) 21:57, 16 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I accepted it. But ideally, there needs to be a reference for each specific fact in the article, such as each exhibition.  DGG ( talk ) 19:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)