Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 September 13

= September 13 =

Request on 08:43:20, 13 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Afra.vahidishams
lj9l 08:43, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Afra, and welcome to the AFC help desk. Did you have a question? jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:22, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

09:17:40, 13 September 2017 review of draft by Blench
Hello,

I am a writer working on behalf of Hearing Health Science, a company that holds the licence from the University of Michigan for the ACEMg technology. The company wishes to publish the compiled research on the otoprotectant technology known in the medical literature as ACEMg.

The company and I believe that this work benefits the encyclopaedia and its readers. The aim is to compile the work of academic researchers who have been working for several decades to advance the neuroscience relating to upregulated free radicals in inner ear pathology.

Is this OK? I don't believe there is a conflict of interest here, but please advise if you think my understanding is in error, and if you believe that there is a conflict of interest that would prevent this article from being approved.

Blench (talk) 09:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is a conflict of interest. The good news is that you can continue editing as normal- but first, under the Wikimedia Terms of Use, disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Blench, and the template can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:  . Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks JCC. So, if I understand you correctly, I need to add the disclosure to my user page only, right? There's no need to mention anything on the ACEMg article itself?

I've updated my user page now. Can you confirm that I did it right?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blench (talk • contribs) 09:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


 * When you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ), and if you want a particular user to notice, also use a notification template, such as reply to. In addition to the disclosure you've made on your user page, the talk page of any article you edit as a paid editor should be tagged with connected contributor (paid). I've done that for you on Draft talk:ACEMg. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance and for adding the connected contributor tag to the ACEMg page, much appreciated. Blench (talk) 17:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

14:44:08, 13 September 2017 review of submission by Coralroot
I have submitted a draft of an article about the human trace paradigm, an academic subject developed by Béatrice Galinon-Mélénec of the University of Le Havre in France. It is on a long list of articles to be reviewed. I notice that there is a half-page description of the human trace paradigm, one of Béatrice Galinon-Mélénec's theories, on wikipedia but it is on the same page as a description of Sebastian Faulks' Human Traces novel. I would like to create a new page for the Human Trace paradigm which is, in fact, very different from the human traces that Faulks is illustrating in his novel. How could I do this? Coralroot (talk) 14:44, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . The description of Galinon-Mélénec's work that was tacked on to Human Traces is out of place and should be removed from that article, although there is no great urgency.


 * If it would form a useful starting point for your proposed article, you may copy it, following the procedure outlined in Copying within Wikipedia, to wherever you want to write the article, such as your sandbox or a subpage thereof.


 * Your first article contains good advice that applies equally well to your second article. I would emphasize the importance of gathering references before you start to write, and making sure that the topic qualifies to be included in Wikipedia as a stand alone article - that it is notable, as demonstrated by significant coverage of it in independent, reliable, secondary sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

15:08:37, 13 September 2017 review of submission by Lena Weitz
I improved this draft after my first submission was declined. Please check the conversation with my reviewer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DrStrauss#14:25:21.2C_13_September_2017_review_of_submission_by_Lena_Weitz). I would like to ask if an experienced editor could take a look at the article and tell me what else I could improve before re-submitting it. Thanks!

Lena Weitz (talk) 15:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

17:12:15, 13 September 2017 review of submission by Abialic
Please I have been trying to create an article on my alma mater, but I just noticed the caption to be 'Methodist Boys' High School' instead of 'Methodist Boys' High School, Oron'. The article is in my sandbox and I'm having difficulty editing or renaming it. I need help. Abialic (talk) 17:12, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . The draft is now named Draft:Methodist Boys' High School, Oron, and will be reviewed in due course. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 17:25:30, 13 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Kouklatess
This page should be published now. First, Ahmed White meets the notoriety requirement. The requirement is: "The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon)." White holds the Nicholas Rosenbaum Professorship/Chair, which is a "named chair." The University of Colorado Law School, which is a "major institution of higher education"; it is one of only two state-run universities in Colorado. It is also a "major institution of higher education and research" as it is a "research one" university, the most premier type of research university. Therefore, Ahmed White meets the notoriety requirement. Second, Ahmed White is just as notable (and I would argue more notable) as others who appear on Wikipedia. For example, the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_A._Bintliff is a page for a librarian who previously received the same chair White has, i.e., the Nicholas Rosenbaum chair. Her Wikipedia page consists of two sentences: "Barbara A. Bintliff is an American lawyer, currently the Joseph C. Hutcheson Professor and Director of the Tarlton Law Library/Jamail Center for Legal Research at University of Texas School of Law, and was previously the Nicholas Rosenbaum Professor of Law and Director of the William A. Wise Law Library at University of Colorado." In short, if Bintliff is notable enough to have a page, then White is notable enough to have a page. Finally, White meets the requirements for significant contributions to a field of study. The requirements are variously described as: •	significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject •	The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources •	The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions In White's case, the partial list of law review articles goes to this requirement. Law review articles are what law professors do; most law professors do not write books (although White did). In other words, law review articles ARE the scholarship of law professors. The reviewer DGG says "We do not normally list law review articles, unless they can be shown to be particularly influential by third party sources." Well, if the first part of that sentence is true—that it is not normal to list law review articles—then Wikipedia is ignoring the scholarship that law professors engage in. As for the second part of the sentence, about influence, that is precisely why I gave a smattering of White's article titles, and described his theory (another thing DGG criticized): to show that White's articles have created a body of work that has been influential in the areas of criminal, labor, and feminist legal theory. These theories were sketched out and their influence was established by the citations to the independent third parties (namely other legal scholars) who have cited White's articles. White is the "father" of a line of theory in legal scholarship, and that is what the citations to these articles by White, and to the articles by the younger scholars who are now citing to him, show. In summary, the citations to the younger legal scholars show that White has gotten "significant coverage" in "published, reliable sources that are independent of the subject." They show that White's "research has had a significant impact" in his field (substantiated by "independent reliable sources," i.e., by the citations to people like Ben Levin and Aya Gruber). And they show that White's work has had a significant impact "affecting a substantial number of academic institutions"—as demonstrated by the articles authored by people at law schools other than the one where White teaches in journals housed at law schools other than the one where White teaches (Harvard, Rutgers, etc.).Kouklatess (talk) 17:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Kouklatess (talk) 17:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I've left a comment on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

17:26:16, 13 September 2017 review of submission by JustForAll
I would like to know how to correct the submission based on this message: Cite error: Invalid tag; name "Hosey1984" defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

I have given different pages for the respective citations, so please advise what else needs to be done.

JustForAll (talk) 17:26, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . It's good that you gave specific page numbers for each citation. When using the named reference feature (e.g. ) you can't use the same reference name with conflicting citation text. For example, you can't have both:
 * in the same article, because the first is for page 22 and the second is for page 24. A solution that will make the error message go away is to use different reference names for each page number, for example:
 * in the same article, because the first is for page 22 and the second is for page 24. A solution that will make the error message go away is to use different reference names for each page number, for example:
 * in the same article, because the first is for page 22 and the second is for page 24. A solution that will make the error message go away is to use different reference names for each page number, for example:


 * All of this rather misses the point of named references. Their main purpose is to avoid repeating the long text of the citation, see WP:INCITE. So typically one would define  once, and then write just   the next time you cite page 22. You can make this change to the draft to save some clutter in the editor.


 * There's another kind of clutter in the draft's rendered citations - the long description of Hosey is repeated four times with just a small variation, the page number. If you want to reduce that kind of clutter, you'll need to use some form of shortened footnotes. See Help:Shortened footnotes for details. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 21:51:55, 13 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Tranzcape
Hello,

I just created my aunt's page for the wikipedia review and she happens to be one of the most renowned yoga instructor of the country and we thought of including her in the wikipedia page. the submission was rejected stating reason being Advertisement. Can somebody help me more on this to how to make it a neutral one. Tranzcape (talk) 21:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . Online searches for "Bijoylaxmi Hota" didn't locate any independent, reliable, secondary sources containing a significant depth of information about her, so she does not appear to be a suitable subject for the encyclopedia. If you can identify a few such sources, you may request at Requested articles that someone write an article about her. Your family connection means you have a conflict of interest. Therefore it would be a very bad idea to attempt to write an article about her yourself. The problems you've encountered so far are just a taste of how frustrating and time consuming you would find it, and in the end it would almost certainly be unsuccessful. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

23:19:45, 13 September 2017 review of submission by CreedanceCanada
I am wondering why my page was not accepted.

CreedanceCanada (talk) 23:19, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . It was declined for the reason stated in the big pink box on User:CreedanceCanada/sandbox. The draft cites no independent, reliable, secondary sources. Without such sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on the topic. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)