Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 September 23

= September 23 =

04:10:28, 23 September 2017 review of submission by Imranspatel
Dear Sir

I am the grandson of the person of whom I am writing this details. Please help me how I can verify the content as the person of whom I had written has died long long back


 * Hi . A typical source for verifying content in a biography of someone who flourished in the 1950s and 1960s would be books. However, you describe him as an "unsung hero". If no one wrote about him in books, magazines, newspapers, and so forth, then he does not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline, and there should not be an encyclopedia article about him. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize someone. You may wish to explore alternative outlets, such as FamilySearch, that have different inclusion criteria than Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

I have come across a book published by Memon Welfare that mentions his name and his life history. It is printed in local Indian Language (Gujrati). His name was also printed in news papers of that time, which I am unable to get due to long time. Please help me to prove to you about his great work from that book. I am not trying to advertise him through any source, but just trying to let people know him as a great person.

11:07:47, 23 September 2017 review of submission by J3010daahfuq
The name Bavarians is taken for 2 different concepts(historic tribe and the today's people of bavaria), that needs to be seperated(I explained this more detailed in the talk page of Bavarians). This problem doesn't exist in the german wiki, because there are two distinct names for these 2 concepts("Bayern" for the people of Bavaria and "Baiern" for the tribe), whereas in english both concepts are called "Bavarians". I now wanted to improve(or rather create) the article Bavarii(which links to the article Bavarians), for the tribe, and make a disambiguation page to seperate them accordingly. Now is the question, how the progress this succesfully. first disambiguation page or first the article(I would have to delete the link to the current page). respectively if it would be better to make this two seperate topics in the existing article(which I would strongly oppose, however) J3010daahfuq (talk) 11:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ by --Worldbruce (talk) 17:09, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 16:26:04, 23 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Soccerg7932
Hi, I am having trouble getting my article published. I cannot find sources on the internet to verify the Cortland information because they are printed articles from newspapers with no online sources. I can take pictures of the articles and send those to you if that works? Thanks, Alyssa

Soccerg7932 (talk) 16:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Soccerg. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Off-line newspapers are acceptable as sources, but only if you can provide the essential bibliographic detail that would enable an interested person to verify the accuracy of what you are reporting.  For newspapers, this would mean the name of the newspaper, the date of the particular issue, the title of the article, the author of the article, the location of the paper, and the page on which the article appears.  Additional information, such as the name of the company that publishes the paper, is helpful but not essential.  You will find that this information is easier to present if you use the cite newspaper template.  By the way, I noticed that the existing references have been placed in the draft as what we call "in-article external links".  This is not a permissible method of referencing.  You probably want to take a look at WP:REFB for information on the proper approach.  Later today, I'll drop by your draft and re-format one of them for you, which you can then use as an example for re-doing the rest.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC) Minor amendment by NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:34, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 17:18:12, 23 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by NindriIndri
Hi!

My draft was declined on grounds of poor notability and references. Since the publication of the draft, several articles more have been published online regarding Barkat's work (some already referenced in the draft):

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/europe/venice-biennale-2017-10-best-fringe-events-dates-tickets-on-kawara-beverly-barkat-ai-wei-wei-rachael-a7736571.html

http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2017/05/08/biennale-di-venezia-i-dieci-appuntamenti-irrinunciabili-di-questa-edizione/3570123/10/

http://www.theartsdesk.com/visual-arts/57th-venice-biennale-review-riveting-and-bewildering

http://www.theartsection.com/women-in-venice

http://www.artribune.com/arti-visive/arte-contemporanea/2017/05/intervista-beverly-barkat-mostra-museo-palazzo-grimani/ (interview with the artist)

http://www.exibart.com/notizia.asp?IDNotizia=53287&IDCategoria=204

http://living.corriere.it/tendenze/arte/10-cose-da-vedere-a-venezia-fuori-dalla-biennale/

http://ad.vfnetwork.it/artcorner/2017/05/31/beverly-barkat-evocative-surfaces/

https://www.espoarte.net/arte/beverly-barkat-evocative-surface-a-palazzo-grimani/

https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4965289,00.html

https://www.calcalist.co.il/local/articles/0,7340,L-3715343,00.html

https://www.architecturaldigest.in/content/epic-guide-20-must-see-exhibitions-57th-venice-biennale-straight-local/#s-cust0

Would any of these improve Barkat's notability in the eyes of Wikipedia? Some are in Italian or Hebrew but nevertheless come from reliable, verifiable and independent sources.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to improve my article and if the references above make any difference to its status. If not, I suppose all I can do is wait?

Many thanks for your reply.

NindriIndri (talk) 17:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Many of the above are only brief announcements of Barkat's exhibition at Palazzo Grimani. Such trivial listings don't help establish notability, and could detract from the draft by hiding good sources in a pile of poor ones. I recommend citing:
 * The blog that the draft cites should be removed. Also try to replace www.rgfineart.com, www.snunit.k12.il, and imagomundiart.com with stronger sources. Don't limit yourself to what can be found through an internet search. The library at a good research university will have art and news databases that can uncover sources that search engines miss. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The blog that the draft cites should be removed. Also try to replace www.rgfineart.com, www.snunit.k12.il, and imagomundiart.com with stronger sources. Don't limit yourself to what can be found through an internet search. The library at a good research university will have art and news databases that can uncover sources that search engines miss. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The blog that the draft cites should be removed. Also try to replace www.rgfineart.com, www.snunit.k12.il, and imagomundiart.com with stronger sources. Don't limit yourself to what can be found through an internet search. The library at a good research university will have art and news databases that can uncover sources that search engines miss. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The blog that the draft cites should be removed. Also try to replace www.rgfineart.com, www.snunit.k12.il, and imagomundiart.com with stronger sources. Don't limit yourself to what can be found through an internet search. The library at a good research university will have art and news databases that can uncover sources that search engines miss. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The blog that the draft cites should be removed. Also try to replace www.rgfineart.com, www.snunit.k12.il, and imagomundiart.com with stronger sources. Don't limit yourself to what can be found through an internet search. The library at a good research university will have art and news databases that can uncover sources that search engines miss. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Dear Worldbruce,

thank you very much for your help and instructions. I will make the changes you proposed and try to find better sources. I had some trouble finding sources for the exhibition in Japan, in fact the blog was the only mention of it I found online - I suppose I'd have better luck searching in the Japanese language. I'll try to find the catalogue and cite it. Thanks again!

NindriIndri (talk) 06:33, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Request on 19:15:00, 23 September 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Filthyfrankfan
I can't find a reason for why this has been rejected. Please clarify and tell me how to improve it so i can get it accepted

Filthyfrankfan (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The reasons Draft:Luke Terkovich (Abstract) was declined are in the big pink boxes at the top of the draft and on your talk page. Based on the sources cited and searches, the subject does not appear to be a suitable topic for a stand alone encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is not for advertising, self-promotion, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:52, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

22:07:15, 23 September 2017 review of submission by AllenDRose
{{Lafc|username=AllenDRose|ts=22:07:15, 23 September 2017|page=

AllenDRose (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

22:07:15, 23 September 2017 review of submission by AllenDRose

{{Lafc|username=AllenDRose|ts=22:07:15, 23 September 2017|link= Draft:Ryan Leone }}

I am trying to create a page on author Ryan Leone. I was rejected because of references. I cited LA Weekly, Los Angeles Times, and Internet Movie Data Base. The Los Angeles Times article does not mention his name, just talks about an international case he was a part of. This is my first Wiki page and it is very confusing. Any suggestions on how to get this published? There are a number of articles written about him online that are less prominent but he is the focus point. Any guidance is appreciated. Thanks.
 * {{declined}} for the reasons stated on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)