Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 September 11

= September 11 =

09:20:45, 11 September 2017 review of submission by Tart Herb Hug
I was wondering if a particular source is appropriate for citation, the source being 'Brass Band Results' (https://brassbandresults.co.uk/bands/sun-life/). Is it acceptable to use this source as a reference for the band winning competitions?


 * Hi . At the bottom of the page you linked, it says "Don't forget you can always register and add missing results yourself!" This indicates that brassbandresults.co.uk is user-generated content, which is not a reliable source. If you want more information or have more queries of this nature, there is an entire noticeboard dedicated to questions about whether a particular source is reliable for supporting a particular statement, see WP:RSN. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 13:58:41, 11 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Candide124
It is hard to find any reliable secondary sources for this topic. Subjects are more concerned with research on this aspect, thus there are more first hand sources. Researchers are more interested in the broader picture: anal incontinence, IBS, etc. I would appreciate any recommendations.

This is not "an attempt at lavatorial humour disguised as a serious topic".

Candide124 (talk) 13:58, 11 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . If there are no reliable secondary sources for the topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it. If there is only one reliable secondary source that covers the topic in any depth, then the encyclopedia probably shouldn't have an article about it. The more attention reliable sources have paid to the topic, the more likely it is that there should be a Wikipedia article on it. If you're looking for recommendations about how to find sources, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine would be a good place to ask. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

19:06:19, 11 September 2017 review of submission by Linnaean Street
Dear Wiki Editors, Thanks for reviewing my biography of Ann Sutton. It's my first go at creating an article for Wikipedia, so I am grateful for your feedback, especially as I know all Wiki editors are volunteers.

My article was rejected as it did not meet the minimum requirements for citations. However, I had not included inline citations because the article did not include any of the four things you require them for: direct quotations, statements that have been challenged, statements that are likely to be challenged, or contentious material.

I certainly agree that had I included any of these I would have needed inline citation. But as I had not, I had included a general list of sources at the end.

What's your recommendation on how best I should proceed? Would it be acceptable, for instance, to re-title my final section as "General References" to follow the Wiki guidelines for: "a bibliographic citation, often placed at or near the end of an article, that is unconnected to any particular bit of material in an article, but which might support some or all of it. It is called a "general reference" because it supports the article "in general", rather than supporting specific sentences or paragraphs."?

Very happy to take your advice, whatever you suggest.

Thanks for your time and guidance,

Linnaean Street


 * Hi, as the subject is a living person you really should change to inline citations. I'm afraid the policy you quote is a bit outdated, as actual practice has become "stricter" about referencing than the limited cases the policy describes. The policy page really needs to be updated. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * This might get a bit long-winded but here goes. Let me start with some of the corrective refinements I've made. BTW, we never use the word Biography in the title of a person's article; we just use their name, but that can be omitted on moving to mainspace. You may want to refer to WP:MOS especially to MOS:BIO. For things like what the introduction should contain read WP:LEDE which does not get a section header. I've corrected the format of the headers and refined some and well a group them better. The lede should be a precis of the whole article as a stand alone paragraph or two. Several terms require wikilinks and I have done some for you. Also only proper nouns are capitalised, so go through and make them lowercase if I have missed any. The awards section should probably be in a list format and should have inline citations per award. The publications can be reformatted with ISBNs in the form I have done for the first book. There is really no need for a "general references" section as you will likely use all those source as reference in some form, so we don't repeat them. In the "References" section you will see the template reflist which will display the inline citations you add for the citations using templates you will find at WP:CIT depending on if they are from the web, news, journal, etc., and if there are sources you do not specifically use for inline citations you could add them under the reflist template or add a maybe add a separate "sources" section if you like and there are more than just one or two.


 * Regarding citations, generally now we like to see at least one or two citations per paragraph, especially where disconnected statements are being made, though longer paragraphs may need more citation in the inline format. You stated that you did not see any prose that statements that could have been challenged, statements that are likely to be challenged, or contentious material, but in fact virtually everything can be challenged because we don't know where you got that information, it could just be your original research which we don't accept. So for instance, there is a statement that "failing O-level Art –a fact of which she remains proud". That sticks out like a sore thumb as something that would certainly be questioned, so I've added the cn template as an example for you but much else can use a citation. In the "Teaching career" section you could integrate the years into the prose for better word flow. So use the sources you have listed to support the statements made, with page numbers if they are from books. Just read a sentence or two and ask yourself: where did that information come from and can I see or refer to the source for that. I'm sure you can tidy it up as Sutton is certainly notable enough for her own article but it does need some work and you are the one to do it. I'll keep an eye on it and see what you make of it. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 22:31, 17 September 2017 (UTC)