Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk
| Main page | Talk page | Submissions Category, Sorting, Feed | Showcase | Participants Apply, By subject | Reviewing instructions | Help desk | Backlog drives |
- This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
- For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
- For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
- Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
- Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
- Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
| Ask a new question Please check back often for answers. |
| Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions |
|---|
September 20
Hello,
I was hoping I could get some feedback on the recent updates to my revenue based financing page. This is a key up and coming topic in the financing world and I'd like to make sure it gets published soon. I've added the new sources requested by the individual who initially declined my submission, and now I seem to be at the back of the review queue. Is there anything I can do to accelerate?
Thanks! nick Nmacey (talk) 02:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- No, there's nothing you can do to accelerate the next review. There's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and many of them are re-submissions. Please be patient. Besides, Wikipedia is not a newspaper; there's no need to have the article up now instead of in two weeks (or two months).
- In the meantime you might want to improve the references. Quite a few of your sources seem to be blogs or company websites without any indication of editorial oversight or a reputation for fact-checking; such sources are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. Huon (talk) 03:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I submitted a new article, came back submission declined, I would like to address the editor's concerns and resubmit... but I can't find them (duh). Where do I look? --Winterskunk (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- The reviewer's concern is part of the decline message on the draft: "Thanks for your efforts but the article needs additional sources to establish verification." Wikipedia articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject, both to establish the subject's notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. For all I can tell, the draft's lone source doesn't even confirm all the awards it's cited for, and it says nothing else about Colombo (such as why he was honored in the first place). My suggestion would be to look for newspaper coverage or maybe for scholarly papers discussing Colombo's work. Huon (talk) 04:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
elaine webb
ho do i get hold of user manual for janome sewing machine model jb 1410 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.146.86.240 (talk) 07:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- This page is for help on articles submitted through the Articles for Creation process. You may have more success trying the reference desk or searching the web instead. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I have been working on submitting an article, Articles for creation/Clay Mathile, since May. The process is defeating me. My latest attempt is awaiting review. My question is, why are things that I have addressed and tested in the sandbox showing up in red under my submission as though they are still wrong. When tested in the sandbox those items appeared to have been correctly addressed. (Peachyjust (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC))peachyjust(Peachyjust (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC))
- The errors you are seeing is because the web references don't have a title associated with them. I've fixed up a couple to give you an idea of what's needed. One of the problems I see at the moment is a lot of references, such as the Mathile Family Foundation and the Mathile Institute are primary sources, and some of them are dead links. However, that is not necessarily a reason to decline an article. Fundamentally, we decline articles because the subject cannot be verified as being notable.
- In particular, I think these comments are incorrect : "article needs to be wikified before accepting" - it doesn't. "There are significant sections of this article which are unreferenced." Doesn't matter - as long as there enough references to verify the subject is notable, it can be passed.
- My gut feeling, however, is that the book reference, the Ohio Northern University reference and the Forbes article, are sufficient to sustain notability. I also assume that being a former CEO of a major company (I used to feed my cats Iams regularly, though like 8 out of 10 I switched to Whiskas) suggests more references are likely to be available.
- I am passing the article now, though be warned it will have lots of cleanup tags. (If anyone disagrees, feel free to send it to AfD and pass me a trout in the process.) --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Five low-hanging fruits for reviewers (and a feature suggestion)
I was perusing for fun the list of pending articles; if someone is looking for quickies, enjoy. Mostly it's declined articles that have been resubmitted verbatim or with minor changes unrelated to the decline, which is easily checked from the compressed history; surely they could be automatically re-declined on the same grounds?
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Wabi Collection - one-paragraph spam with its own homepage as source, declined on 3 september as unsourced: author basically added the word "Canadian" and resubmitted the same unsourced paragraph,[1] now that's encyclopedic.
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Koyakatsi - non-notable upcoming film, declined on 5 September: author basically deleted his extensive plot section then resubmitted the same non-notable stuff,[2] so now that's okay.
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Taming The Restless Mind - non-notable self-help book submitted by its own author, rejected in August but relentlessy resubmitted: since rejection, all he added[3] are rubbish sources: worldcat.org, alibris.com, books.google.com, etc. (In addition to the previous great sources like Goodreads.) "In Taming The Restless Mind many winning tricks are highlighted to help readers", and I suppose #1 is to never take no for an answer?
A bit different:
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amethyst Lady of Gothicness - unsourced autobio of a non-notable self-confessed "Unsigned Artist": it's been padded with extensive copy-pastes from wiki articles such as Asperger syndrome and Dysgraphia, creating a serious-looking but unrelated "References" section.
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bolano (disambiguation) - much quicker and easier to process than an article. (Yes, that's my baby.)
(Oh, I also encountered the lame hoax Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jacques Boules de Fer and tagged it as such, prompting its decline. "France´s largest collection of white flags", still.)
Last but not least, a feature suggestion: I was thinking maybe it could help your backlog if proposed disambiguation pages were listed at "Category:Pending AfC submissions" under "D" instead of "P" with all the others? (Or listed also into a special subcategory?) Because it'd be an easy source of low-hanging fruits... 62.147.24.55 (talk) 11:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- This should have been discussed on the reviewer page rather than here, but from previous discussions I don't think there's anything stopping you from putting {{db-g11}} (for example) on an article sitting in AfC if you believe it is totally unsalvageable and the submitter gives every impression of being more interested on self-promotion than building an encyclopaedia. However, if somebody is making a genuine effort to learn Wikipedia policies and just keeps getting confused or not quite understanding how to get an article passed, leave them be. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Nassim Haramein
It has come to public attention that Wikipedia is participating in the suppression of this scientist's work and proposals to the scientific community and world. If this is indeed the policy and practice of Wikipedia, I must begin my protest by stating here my observations of the situation.
- The work presented by Nassim Haramein comes into direct conflict with the Standard Model of the atomic/subatomic scale and the work of thousands of physicists over recent decades. It calls into question the validity of an entire sector of our global scientific focus and budget. In other words it threatens many important persons livelihood and would call for an immediate restructuring of many departments within the research institutions of the world. I get it. And so does anyone who can view such events with detachment and understanding.
- The socioeconomic deterioration occurring globally offers an impetus for all persons involved to choose differently than our predecessors in this regard. Rather than the predicted decade or two of resistance while others secretly flesh out the supporting proof to integrate the unification theory that will arise from Nassim's work into mainstream thought and perspective, why not embrace it immediately? We do not have time to behave like children when the state of our world is as it is.
- Wikipedia is an incredible presence in today's world. Your influence on public opinion is significant. My only question to you is: from where and whom does the pressure to suppress this body of work come? Whom do you serve? And how should we go about dismantling any such agency that deems itself capable of determining the direction of our future technology and capacity? For it is these very agencies that are in place to hold society to the path. The individuals within them are no more capable of preventing the herd from running over the cliff than anybody else.
- Truth is the only option that offers promise. The continuation of Deception will only hold us to the rut we are in. We NEED this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.171.66 (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- I believe this is about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nassim Haramein 2. Wikipedia's standard is verifiability, not truth. That draft cites not a single reliable source that is independent of Haramein, which raises problems of both verifiability and notability. In fact, an article on Haramein once existed and was deleted because of the lack of reliable secondary sources. In summary, Wikipedia isn't part of a vast conspiracy to keep Haramein from achieving success; in order to become the subject of a Wikipedia article he must already be notable. Huon (talk) 20:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I created an article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Overseas Research Scholarship almost a week ago, but the grey box saying "Article not currently submitted for review." is still there. Am I supposed to delete the box manually? I thought a bot was supposed to tidy it up.
Thanks
- A bot is supposed to tidy it up; apparently the current backlog is too great for the bot to catch up. You can delete that box manually or you can just ignore it; that box doesn't keep your draft from being reviewed. Huon (talk) 20:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
September 21
102 b panasonic user manual instructions
102 b panasonic user manual instructions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.82.129.114 (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Or try a Google search. Huon (talk) 02:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:Djorgovski/sandbox
Hi, I edited my entry, adding the references, and clicked on the link to resubmit. However, that simply opens a new, blank page to edit. How do I get to have my new, improved draft edited and approved, as it now stands in my sandbox? It is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Djorgovski/sandbox
Thank you. S. G. Djorgovski S. G. Djorgovski 04:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- I beleive it does open a new page with the submit template added to it. I believe you simply have to save the page, and it will be submitted. However, I have moved your article to Articles for creation and resubmitted it. I have left a link in your sandbox. Please edit your article at the new ___location. Your sandbox is now free for any other use you care to make of it. Thanks. -- :- ) Don 13:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
FARTT also pronounced as fart double t or dubbel t in Dutch is a famous word among dutch dutsch schoolkids
The word was created by Masih razegh a very strange guy who made this word in Picasso Lyceum FARTT has actually no meaning although the word is derived from the english word fart
a person says the word FARTT double T when he is bored and wants some attention. The word fartt double t is becoming popular by the day in Holland 145.103.250.125 (talk) 09:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not for things you (or your friends) made up one day. I have declined your article as being a neologism, and because I do not believe it is possible to fix it using reliable sources to a suitable state, I would also suggest that it is speedy deleted. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi How do I change Wikipedia talk articles title to Sumed International (UK) Ltd without the Wikipedia Talk bit in front Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sumed International (UK) Ltd
SumedMarketing (talk) 13:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Simply move "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sumed International (UK) Ltd" to Article space with the name of "Sumed International (UK) Ltd". Doing so will move the article into Main space. You will also need to delete all of the AfC templates. Your article will then be without the protection of AfC and subject to immediate deletion since it has not been approved. -- :- ) Don 13:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- I believe you cannot move the article yet because your account isn't autoconfirmed. Also, technically, a lack of approval on its own is not grounds for deletion, but a lack of notability, shown by a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject such as newspaper articles, is, as is being spam. See also our guidelines on advertisement masquerading as articles, in particular mission statements, and conflicts of interest. Huon (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- As others have said, moving the article as it currently stands into mainspace without review is probably a bad idea. Anyone can come along and request that it gets deleted, and then you'll have to (usually) wait a week while everyone decides to keep or destroy your article, often with people throwing unfamiliar arguments at you as to why it should be deleted. In fact, as your username matches the article, you could even find yourself blocked from Wikipedia due to having an unsuitable username. Best not go there! --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
How to submit "scanned" newspaper articles for attribution
I have been trying to make a submission for several months now. The problem is this person (historical figure) was in the news media primiarily in the 1980s and early 1990s, prior to when many articles were posted online. Therefore, I have scanned the articles and would like to include them with my submission. How would I foward these to a wikipedia editor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cefaan (talk • contribs) 15:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- While having online scans helps, you don't actually need them to pass an article. Provided you cite the news articles properly (see {{cite news}} for further information), and they are sufficient to verify notability of the article's subject, the article should pass. There is absolutely no requirement whatsoever that a reference must be easy or quick to find. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- (ec)No you do not do that, it would be a copyright violation if you included a scanned image of the newspaper in your article. Just reference the newspaper article the same way you cite any other source. The {{cite news}} template provides an easy "form" into which you just add the necessary details. Roger (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- You can still scan small sections of a newspaper under fair use - see File:It's The Sun Wot Won It.jpg for an infamous example, and I have made extensive use of newspaper cuttings in www.vandergraafgenerator.co.uk to get Van der Graaf Generator ready to be reviewed as a good article. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 please do not dilute the advice to a newbie that adding scans of copyrighted material is generally not acceptable. The fair use exception is a fairly sophisticated concept and not at all relevant in this specific case. Roger (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, are you implying the above editor is too dumb to understand something? That's not particularly civil. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 06:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- Ritchie333 please do not dilute the advice to a newbie that adding scans of copyrighted material is generally not acceptable. The fair use exception is a fairly sophisticated concept and not at all relevant in this specific case. Roger (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- You can still scan small sections of a newspaper under fair use - see File:It's The Sun Wot Won It.jpg for an infamous example, and I have made extensive use of newspaper cuttings in www.vandergraafgenerator.co.uk to get Van der Graaf Generator ready to be reviewed as a good article. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:Mukesh1997/sandbox
Shantanu Prakash Shantanu Prakash is an Indian entrepreneur. He currently serves as the chairman and managing director of Educomp Solutions Limited, after acquiring a MBA degree from Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. He is also Co-founder and chairman of Lakshya Digital Pvt. Ltd. Contents 1. Early life 2. Career 3. Honours and Award 4. References 5. External Links
Early life Shantanu Prakash was born in Raurkela, a small town with only notable feature – the steel plant in Oddisa. His father was in SAIL and mother was a school teacher. After class 10, family shifted to Delhi and he enrolled in Delhi Public School and later joined Shri Ram College of Commerce where he graduated with a B.Com in 1986. His early years were influenced by voracious book reading. His father used to buy him a book in travelling. Career Shantanu Prakash, after completing his Master’s from IIM Ahmedabad in 1988, did not go for placements. With his friends and partners from the event management business (at SRCC he stared a business with friends to organize events) launched a company focused on education. The idea was to set up computer lab for schools. In two years company made turnover of 40-50 millions. But, there was ideological difference among partners.
In 1994, Mr. Prakash founded Educomp Solutions Limited with a vision to transform the teaching-learning process through the use of technology. Today Educomp is the India’s largest education company with the market capitalization of over US $ 1.5 billion. He founded Edumatics Corporation USA in 2001. Shantanu is also the Founder and Managing Trustee of the Learning Leadership Foundation (LLF), an organization dedicated to bringing best practices in education to under-resourced schools. He is also the Co-founder and Chairman of Lakshya Digital Pvt. Ltd.- a pioneering game development studio, based out of New Delhi, India. Honours and Awards • National Talent Search Scholarship • Entrepreneur of the year -2012
References 1. Stay Hungry Stay Foolish by Rashmi Bansal. 2. LinkedIn 3. Educomp Solution Ltd.com 4. Bloomberg Businessweek External Links • Shantanu Prakash at Educomp Solutions Ltd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukesh1997 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- This seems like a copy of your sandbox, not like a question. The draft definitely needs better sources. Firstly, these are so hard to identify that they're almost useless. Firstly, Bloomberg Businessweek covers lots of topics, most of which are unrelated to Shantanu Prakash. Where among Businessweek can I find the relevant information? An external link to the specific web page would be a great help. Or what precisely is "Stay Hungry Stay Foolish"? A book? Published when, by what publisher, what's the ISBN? Or a newspaper article? From what newspaper, published when? Secondly, many of the sources, such as LinkedIn or Shantanu Prakash's own company, are not reliable in the first place. Thirdly, you should use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which source supports which of the draft's statements. For example, which source details the "ideological difference among partners"? Which source discusses Prakash's birthplace? Does that source draw some connection between Prakash and the steel plant? If so, what's the connection? If not, why mention the steel plant at all? Huon (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, For the past year and a half, I've been working on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John O'Callaghan. I have added two references, yet the article isn't confirmed by Wikipedia, therefore won't publish. How can this be resulted, so it will publish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaRayeeee (talk • contribs) 18:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- As the reviewers said, the problem is the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Such coverage is necessary both to establish O'Callaghan's notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. The band's website is not independent (and probably not reliable either); the same holds for the photographer's website. AllMusic's reliability is debatable and it is independent, but it doesn't cover O'Callaghan in any detail anyway. Two of the five sources given don't even mention O'callaghan. It seems his band is notable, but notability is not inherited. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper articles that cover O'Callaghan in some detail. Huon (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
hey i made an atricle that i really would like to be put on the website its been two days how many more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.139.106 (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Reviewed. -- :- ) Don 21:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:Shannaheight/sandbox
Didn't read all the rules, just skimmed them, but I am the source of the band icecreaminnovember and now icecreamindecember.
Shannaheight (talk) 23:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Shannaheight
- Unfortunately Wikipedia requires published sources, not personal experiences. Put bluntly, If I claimed to be the source for conflicting information, how could our readers verify who is right? Furthermore, significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject is required to establish its notability (see also WP:MUSIC for more specific notability guidelines). Huon (talk) 00:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
September 22
Document Project
I would be interested in helping me in a book series, or a document WikiProject, if any one already knows a project, help me into editing and allowing a project where maybe confirmed users can allow edits of famous lost notes, ballads, and constitutions, to keep them locked, and used for further notes, I know they maybe compact usually on the internet over years, however, for Wikipedia, it's already there on the main page on every major web browser, this site can keep documents such as Magna Carta, Hammurabi, Le Prophecies of Nostradamus, Ozymandias, and condense the verses better then most websites, and keep different chapters, otherwise, I am hoping under WP:Notability and other policies the document articles for creation noticeboard would offer it if possible.
Thanks and please comment on my page if you wish--GoShow (...............) 00:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- The place you're looking for may be WikiSource, a sister project dedicated to housing source documents; it already has the Magna Carta in Latin and in an English translation, the Code of Hammurabi in two different translations and a transliteration, Les Propheties by Nostradamus in an English translation (the French text seems incomplete), and two related but different poems named Ozymandias). Huon (talk) 03:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
All right thanks--GoShow (............................) 05:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
how to create another sandbox page, while an article is awaiting review?
how to create another sandbox page, while an article is awaiting review?
saraevens7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saraevens7 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- There are various easy ways: You can simply enter the desired name of further sandboxes (such as User:Saraevens7/sandbox2 or User:Saraevens7/Name of proposed article or whatever) into search box and it should give you the option to create the pages. Or you can create your user page and insert redlinks to the desired sandboxes (by adding code like [[User:Saraevens7/sandbox2]]; that's how I created the redlinks in this message); clicking the redlinks should also give you the option to create the pages. If those sandboxes are meant for article drafts, you can also use the Article Wizard and create a page in AfC space (ie at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Name of the proposed article or the like) instead of in your userspace. Finally, reviewers (or maybe even a bot, but that's apparently overworked) might move your current sandbox into AfC space, leaving your sandbox usable again (initially it will be a redirect to the moved draft, but it can be changed into something else again). If you prefer the last method, please drop me a line and I'll perform the move.
- On an unrelated note, the draft currently in your sandbox does not cite a single reliable source that is independent of the subject. Significant coverage in such sources is necessary both to establish the topic's notability and to allow our readers to verify the article's content; without such sources the draft will not be accepted. Huon (talk) 01:25, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- Your sandbox is clear. We just can not move them fast enough. -- :- ) Don 04:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Site-specific recombinases: Classification, properties and dedicated applications
I found this comment on the main page (WIKIPEDIA TALK: Articles for creation...)
"Comment: Not being an expert on the subject or the Jargon and not having read every word of each article, it seems the me that this article covers the same area as Site-specific recombination. Site-specific recombination is more basic and generalized, this article is more technical and detailed. Site-specific recombinase technology seems to be the explanation of one specific method. My guess is that all three could be combined, but probably this article and site-specific recombination. My two cents. -- :- ) Don 17:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)"
Regarding the fact that "Site sprecific recombinase technology" is short, that it covers just one topic (Cre-recombinase), needed references and that I added minor updates, I would be willing to combine it with my contribution. The joint header could be "SITE-SPECIFIC RECOMBIBNASE TECHNOLOGY" considerably expanding its scope.
Cross-reference to "Site-specific recombination" is already part of my contribution and I agree with the statement that it is more basic and general. Juergen Bode (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. This isn't really a question, nor does it require any action from the people at Articles for creation, does it? All the proposed changes are regular editing. Huon (talk) 01:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
September 23
My article has been declined; references are easily checked and McCafferty is a notable LA artist. Not sure what else to do. Need suggestions. Is it that the text needs to include more recent achievements? I've got one suggestion to break up the copy with sub-headlines, perhaps that will help? Thanks. Marilyn Nix (talk) 00:29, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I found the references anything but easily checked. I have added links to some of them, but several were problematic: One was a 2011 art exhibition; I found the exhibition's archived website, but it doesn't say what we cite it for. Wikipedia requires published sources; if the source isn't the website I found, what exactly is it, and where is it published? Another is Random Lengths, and again I found an archived copy, but I couldn't verify the publication date, and I cannot tell whether Random Lengths is a reliable source in the first place - it looks rather dilletantic and could just be one person's glorified blog without editorial oversight. Then there is the 300-page book which didn't give page numbers - I fixed that to some extent, but it would help to be even more specific and to give the exact page number every time that book is referred to. I didn't find copies of Jay McCafferty at Cirrus Gallery, Los Angeles (though the Cirrus Gallery website itself seems to be a heavily-used, though uncited, source, one we probably shouldn't rely too much on due to the gallery's association with McCafferty) or From California: A World of Textural Beauty online, so I can't say much about those sources.
- In summary, I think the LA Times article and the interview in the book suffice to establish McCafferty's notability and I'm prepared to move the article into the mainspace, but the references could do with still more work. Huon (talk) 02:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please do. More refs have been added. Thank you Span (talk) 00:16, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
article
Hi, I submitted an article on 16 September. How long, on average, does it take to get a response from a reviewer? Thanks (Eartha78 (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2012 (UTC))
- Currently the oldest unreviewed submissions are from 10 September, so it would have taken about another week. However, your submission left so little to be done that I accepted it outright. Huon (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
thanks! (Eartha78 (talk) 23:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC))
I give up. There's plenty of info about this guy on line. I've cited links and references to his work. I'll keep my journalism degree and let someone else do this. I quit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiowriter (talk • contribs) 14:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear that, especially if you know where to find that available information. The current sources aren't quite what we need: IMDb and YouTube videos are usually not considered reliable, and many others are primary sources written by Weigle himself or by organizations he's affiliated with. Wikipedia requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to establish Weigle's notability. The only source satisfying that standard was the news report on the Aerosmith music video, and "significant coverage" is usually interpreted as "more than one source".
- Furthermore, as the reviewer noted, you should use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which reference supports which of the article's statements. For example, which source says Weigle is "perhaps best known as the creator and voice" of all WWE radio commercials? Not even the primary sources call him the creator, for all I can tell.
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ed Weigle 2 also has a few good sources, but it also has lots of primary and unreliable sources. Combining both drafts' reliable secondary sources and removing all the others might suffice to establish Weigle's notability, but even combined it may not be enough. Huon (talk) 14:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:Maku nra/sandbox
Alifereti Goneyali Vakacokovanua
Maku nra (talk) 21:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- Your sandbox is empty, for all I can tell. What do you need assistance with? Huon (talk) 21:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
September 24
Hi my last log in was around 10 pm (Singapore time) on 23 September (Sunday) and the status of my article was "Review Waiting". But this morning I've seen that the notification was gone, but no updated comment of accept/ decline was shown. Was there any error? I've revised the context several times after being declined first time. And now I think the context are quite comprehensive enough to best of my knowledge. And I could get more contributions from my old classmates once the article is visible to public. Thanks. Hnaungtagu1348 (talk) 01:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Unfortunately your submission has been declined because it does not cite any reliable sources. Both Wikimapia and Wikipedia itself rely on user-submitted content and are not considered reliable. While notability standards for schools are notoriously low, we still need reliable sources to verify the article's content. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper articles. Huon (talk) 02:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
HI ... what do you mean by "standards for schools are notoriously low"? Can explain more please? Hnaungtagu1348 (talk) 04:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC) By the way I don't quite understand why this article without listing any references was already accepted. Hnaungtagu1348 (talk) 04:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Usually a topic must have received significant coverage in reliable sources to be considered notable (the general notability guideline). For (secondary) schools, however, the mere existence has often been taken as sufficient to establish notability - see WP:Notability (high schools) and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. The article's content must still be verifiable from reliable sources, though. Regarding Basic Education High School No. 5 Botataung: While other insufficiently sourced articles exist, that's no reason to create more. The proper course of action is either improvement or deletion of the deficient article, not its elevation to a new (low) standard of acceptability. Huon (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing my article. I have to tell you that I first attempted to add an article many, many years ago, but after reading your guidelines I felt that my article would not qualify. Then the other day I happened across Wikipedia pages for Rainbow Christians, Gay Christian Network, Adam4Adam, Gay.com, etc, etc, my direct competitors, and I wondered why they would be allowed to post a page and I would not.
I understand that I don't have a lot of references. This is because the website speaks for itself and from what I read of your guidelines it said that links to the site are not encouraged, so I deleted all that I had originally posted.
If it is references that are the problem, please tell me what kind of references you want - or is there some other issue?
Thank you. http://ChristianGays.com (talk) 02:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Mary Pearson Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Christian Gays
- Unfortunately Wikipedia cannot let the website speak for itself; we require reliable sources that are independent of the subject, both to establish the website's notability (see also WP:WEB for website-specific notability guidelines) and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. A link to the website may finds its place in a dedicated "external links" section, but the article's content should be based on other sources. Huon (talk) 02:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I'm writing this article about Cherry Weiner, but there's some information that is missing. She is a great hammond organist and there are many videos in youtube, but her birth date for example is an enigma. I'd like tu summit this article because I want wikipedia editors to help. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackvirwik (talk • contribs) 03:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Unfortunately we'd need reliable sources about Wainer before accepting this submission. At Wikipedia, YouTube videos, blogs and forum posts, or even other Wikipedia articles, are not considered reliable. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper coverage; if we're lucky Google News has archived some old articles about Wainer. Or she might also be mentioned in textbooks about 1950s music. Without reliable sources, however, we cannot accept the submission. Huon (talk) 03:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Somebody said I was a great hammond organist at a gig on Saturday, but without multiple, independent, reliable sources stating this several times over, I can't have a Wikipedia article. Being a bit of an expert in this field, having worked intermittently on the Hammond organ and Leslie speaker articles here, not withstanding WP:IDONTKNOWIT, the fact I haven't heard of Cherry Wainer is a bit of a red flag. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anand Krishnamoorthi
I'm trying to create this page, but my entry just got rejected. I have access to the trophy and the original newspaper citation of the Hindu which covered the award giving in 2005 with the date, can I cite that instead?
Also to confirm does an IMDB account suffice as a valid source? Can anyone give me any more feedback on what I can do to improve the chances of acceptance of this article?
Guspooidli (talk) 10:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- While the original newspaper covering the award would be a good source, I'm a little surprised: The draft says the award was given in 1994, and the newspaper is from 2005?
- IMDb is usually not considered a reliable source because there's very little editorial oversight; much of the content is user-submitted. While it might be acceptable for his sound credits, the rest of that sentence (and that paragraph) is unsourced.
- Also, the Prasad Group's website would be a primary source on a lecturer at Prasad Academy, not the secondary source we're looking for, but it does not support the statement it's cited for anyway. And there are numerous other statements small and large that I could not verify from the sources given - Krishnamoorthi's screenwriting, for example.
- If you indeed have acces to his trophy, you might be a little too close to the article's subject to avoid a conflict of interest. In that case it might be better to let someone less involved with Krishnamoorthi write the article. Huon (talk) 10:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Chandrika Balan
Dear Sir
Some time ago an article was created for Chandrika Balan. I wanted to add her picture to the article and had asked you as to how it is to be done. You had replied that the photographer can directly load the picture and I had conveyed the same to the photographer who is Chandrika Balan's husband. He has an account with Wiki but could not copy and paste the picture and had asked a question. Usually your reply comes per return but he says he could not get any reply. Could you advise me the method by which he can upload the picture so that I can communicate it to him.
Your help and cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thanks Panank (talk) 11:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- Images cannot be copied and pasted to Wikipedia, but if he is the copyright holder and is willing to release the image under a free license, he can upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. That should provide step-by-step guidance. Huon (talk) 11:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I had prepared this article having read the already existing articles Astrological aspect and Hindu astrology. In both these articles I found the essentials which needed to be high-lighted missing. Therefore, I thought of posting this article that you have reviewed but declined. The article Astrological aspect exists even though there is an article titled Western astrology. This being the case my article ought to have drawn your kind approval. The subject article if retained is bound to attract attention of more knowledgeable editors/contributors who I am sure would work on this and improve. I submit I am not an expert in the field of astrology.Soni Ruchi (talk) 12:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm also not an expert in the field of astrology, and I found your draft gave so little context it was almost incomprehensible. Take for example this sentence: "Natural benefics owning evil bhavas, combust or in debilitation sign or defeated in planetary-war become tainted and prove contra-productive." That's rather early in the draft, and I have no idea what bhavas or combust are (the latter is explained in the astrological aspect article, and the Hindu astrology article explains both), and I doubt my idea of "planetary-war" is the correct one. Trying to clarify such questions by looking at the sources wasn't really successful either: I did find an online copy of Prasana Tantra, but for all I can tell it's using "aspected" in the same meaning as our main astrological aspect article. If an aspect were an exchange of energy, what would "Mars and Mercury aspect the Moon in the ascendant" mean? I didn't find an online version of "Jyotishtatwam" - in fact, I found no indication that a 1927 book of that title even exists. The claim that the Varahamihira has been misinterpreted is sourced to the Varahamihira himself - while it would be an impressive feat of astrology for a work to state that it will be misrepresented (or a sign that the author couldn't clearly express his thoughts), I doubt that's the case. I found two different online versions of that work, and while their page numbering differs significantly, neither mentions aspects on p. 93. The more relevant seemed the Harvard College Library copy which at least mentions astrological houses; the other version discussed the ___location of the place of birth within the (physical) house. The misinterpretation claim seems to be original research in any case.
- In summary, I'm not convinced that aspects in Hindu astrology are actually different from aspects in Western astrology - different in interpretation perhaps, but not in definition. If there are reliable sources discussing the interpretation of aspects in Hindu astrology, that might make for a paragraph or a section in the main Hindu astrology article, but I don't think the sources provided are remotely sufficient to establish ascendants in Hindu astrology as a notable topic of their own. I also doubt the sources are reliable in the first place. Huon (talk) 14:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- My dear Huon, nice meeting you. You have taken immense care to point out deficiencies in my draft, I agree I have tried to be as brief as possible, might be too brief, but we editors are there to assist each other. No one is perfect, at least I am not. I cannot even sort out for anyone the kind of astrological technicalities you have high-lighted. As regards the references I insist they are all reliable references; they are mainly most quoted ancient Sanskrit texts adorning Hindu astrology to which texts I was guided to by a practitioner of this science. The 1927 edition of Jyotishtatwam is still in my possession which I have to return to its owner. Brihat Jataka was written by Varahamihira, Tajika Nilakanti by Nilkanth and Jaimini Sutras by Rishi Jaimini of the Vedic era. B v raman who had written several books on Hindu astrology is an authority on this subject as is Gopesh Kumar Ojha http://www.flipkart.com/Gopesh+Kumar+Ojha Kindly do not fault these texts or authors. On the contrary both of us can work on the article and improve it. RegardsSoni Ruchi (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- P.S. Huon,I have now revised this article. I am eagerly awaiting your opinion.Soni Ruchi (talk) 08:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of User:Danjo99/sandbox
I seem to have put my request in the wrong place User:Danjo99/sandbox it was meant to be an Article for creation about Ann Wild OBE. I am not able to move it because my account is too new. I am not sure now how to move it to the appropriate place.Danjo99 (talk) 14:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- I've moved the draft for you; it's now at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ann Wild. One unrelated issue: We should refer to Wild by her surname, not by her given name. An OBE isn't sufficient to call her "Dame Ann", and even if it were, she'd still be better-known by her surname. Compare for example John Major who I believe is by now entitled to be called "Sir John", but is referred to as "Major" throughout the article. Huon (talk) 14:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
how to download a photo for an article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.242.27.187 (talk) 14:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- If the photo comes with a free license, you can upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. However, your draft does not even have an assertion of notability and appears unsuitable for Wikipedia. Before bothering with an image you should show that Lulaj has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of her. Huon (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of Articles for creation/Rich Wolski
Hi everybody, I posted this page 9/17 and I'm trying to figure out why it hasn't gotten published yet or why I haven't received any tips on things I should fix before its published. I did get one message to clarify the ownership of a photo which I did, but my question is did I submit it correctly and should I just chill out till I hear back or did I do something wrong? (It's the first new page I've posted, and at the top it says in a grey box "Article not currently submitted for review) but at the bottom it says in a yellow box "Review waiting" so I'm not sure if I got it into the review cycle ok. Any tips are greatly appreciated, and thanks for your time--Chris Chriscarrolljcc (talk) 19:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
- The draft is correctly submitted for review; the "not submitted" message is a historical artefact that can be ignored. But there's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and it will take more time until yours gets reviewed, probably about a week or so.
- I don't think your draft shows enough coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to establish Wolski's notability. His blog and Twitter are not independent, and YouTube or Vimeo videos are usually not considered reliable. Huon (talk) 23:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
September 25
Review of User:Beginings/Hidayat Khan
I am writing an article for Hidayat Khan which got deleted 2-3 times. I am new to wikipedia and have written basic information. I do not know how to add references. Please let me know. When i add under Ref. a link to another website from where i took article, the code shows in the main page rather than just the link. Beginings (talk) 08:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)Begining Article is Begining/Hidayat Khan
- See WP:Referencing for beginners. Wikipedia considers itself not a reliable source; links to external websites are produced by single square brackets. For example, "[http://www.google.com/ this link]" will look like "this link" (and links to Google). You need to show that Khan has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of him to establish his notability, and reliable sources are also required to allow our readers to verify the article's content. For example, the article says Khan composed the music for Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love, but IMDb (which is usually not considered reliable) disagrees and says he was just one of the players while Mychael Danna composed the music. Huon (talk) 13:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Once you've made changes recommended by the editors, how do you load the article back up again to be reviewed? I've saved the changes, but was expecting a notification to say my Article for Creation is waiting review. Thanks. DrLilliput DrLilliput (talk) 11:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- You can resubmit it either by following the instructions in the 18 July decline message (use its click here link), or you can manually resubmit it by adding {{subst:submit}} to the very top. However, I don't think you have sufficiently addressed the last reviewer's concerns. The draft still reads like an essay, and major parts are at best marginally relevant to the article's topic. For example, the attack on Lübeck had nothing whatsoever to do with the hotel (even less whether or not Lübeck was a legitimate target), and at least one of the sources for the Bath Blitz section doesn't mention the hotel at all. Similarly, the coverage of John Wood is much too detailed; we have an article on him that can be referred to; only those details directly relevant to the hotel should be mentioned in the article on the hotel. Even worse, sentences like "Wood was undoubtedly a driven visionary and perhaps very difficult to do business with" are editorializing and not of value to the readers. Is the difficulty of doing business with Wood relevant to the hotel, and if so, how? If not, why mention it? And is it equally possible that he wasn't very difficult to do business with? If so, why mention it? If not, why add "perhaps"? The draft is rather full of adverbs like "thankfully", "sadly" or, as here, "undoubtedly". These express a personal opinion and should be avoided. I also have my doubts about the sources. I don't have access to many of the books, but do all of them really discuss the Francis Hotel? Even if I had access, checking them would be quite a task since you don't give page numbers. Huon (talk) 13:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
The article about Manuscript Pen Co Ltd is being created/edited by me, Malissa Stockbridge, shareholder (via Highley Pens Ltd) and Director/Company Secretary of Manuscript Pen Company Ltd ("Manuscript"). It has been rejected at the moment because of what appeared to be infringement of copyright, however, all relevant copyright/trademark information included in the original article belongs to Manuscript.
The D. Leonardt & Co trademark 2794 belongs to Manuscript Pen Company Ltd. Can I provide Wikipedia with proof of ownership so that this trademark can be included on this Wikipedia article? Manuscript owns the copyright on our website. Can I refer to product pages on the Manuscript website? or do I just give the main website address?
I am editing the article to remove any content which is not impartial but would be grateful for your assistance with copyright issues Malissastockbridge (talk) 14:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles may not use copyrighted text except in the form of brief quotes that are deemed necessary to make a particular point. It does not matter that you might be the owner of the copyright or that you are employed by the copyright owner. You may mention trademarks in the article but you may not include a trademark symbol (® or ™) in the text. However you first need to read the rules regarding conflict of interest. Roger (talk) 14:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- Technically Wikipedia articles may use copyrighted text if it has been released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License by the copyright holder and confirmation of that release has been submitted to "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org". However, it's often easier to rewrite the text so that it no longer violates copyright. The draft's main problem was its complete lack of reliable sources that were independent of the subject. All but two were the company's website, another was a website about a former owner written by a company employee (you, I believe), and the last one was a history of the trade written by that former owner. A trade history like that last one would be a good source if its authore weren't as closely linked to the business. My suggestion would be to look for similar sources with less of a connection to the company you want to write about, and maybe for newspaper coverage. Of course it might be wiser to leave the article to be written by someone else because of your own close connection to the topic, as pointed out by Roger. Huon (talk) 14:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Could someone please help me determine why the proposed BRHC entry is not submittable on the basis of citable references when these are:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_Hockey_Club http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southgate_Hockey_Club http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Grinstead_Hockey_Club — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmoosehead (talk • contribs) 16:47, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- While other insufficiently sourced articles exist, that's no reason to create more. Your draft at least has some secondary sources, but they don't provide significant coverage of the club, and per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, routine news coverage of sporting events is insufficient. Even worse, your sources don't even say what they're cited for - for example, the statement "The mens 1st XI reached National League status in 2010 to much acclaim" is sourced to the local paper which mentions that they didn't win any of the awards they had been nominated for, but doesn't say anything about acclaim. Many of the basic facts, such as the founding date, the number of teams or the claim that the number makes them "one of the largest in Yorkshire", are entirely unsourced. Huon (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Accessing the article through search engines
Hi,
I created an article for James Sandler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Sandler), which can be accessed through wiki, but not by just googling the subjects names and "wiki", which was possible at one point.
Is this a google issue, or is there something I can do in the article to make it more prominent?
Many thanks!!! Bobfish23 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobfish23 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Bobfish, this is a search engine optimization question, but at this point it boils down to the fact that Google visits websites every few days (time depends on the website's activity as well as how often it is updates). Only once the Google crawler visits that page does it show up in Google. Give it a week and it should show up. The page would get more prominent with inbound links from other websites going to that page, but Wikipedia being Wikipedia, that's likely a non-issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olwagner (talk • contribs) 21:55, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I wrote Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Elisabeth Peltier and I am willing to improve the article in order to meet Wikipedia's guidelines, but I don't see how to respond to the reliable source denial. The explanation box lists Google Scholar as a reputable source, and already included a link to Google Scholar in my original submission. Please let me know how I can improve this article.
Thank you, Olivier Wagner Olwagner (talk) 21:49, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- That's a misunderstanding: The link to Google Scholar is meant to help find sources; Google Scholar is not a reliable source on its own (and even if it were, it doesn't have much to say about Peltier). The other sources you provide, her employer's website and the paper she wrote, are not independent sources. What we need is significant coverage by unrelated sources writing about Peltier so we can establish her notability, and to allow our readers to verify the article's content. For example, how can I verify that she was born in Louisiana? None of the sources say so. Which source says that the "more litigious environment in the United States provides a reason for higher auditing fees"? Is that a result of Peltier's own research, or a well-known fact of basic economics (that I'm unaware of)? (As an aside, more litigious than what? Going by the name, ADRs are issued only in the US, aren't they?) The draft also provides very little context and no links to other articles. I ha no idea what an ADR is; a link to American depositary receipt would have been helpful. Such a link could be generated by code like this: "[[American depositary receipt]]" gives "American depositary receipt", "[[American depositary receipt|ADR]]" gives "ADR" (same link target, different text). But that's less important than the issue of sources; we cannot accept an article which does not establish the subject's notability. My suggestion would be to look for newspaper coverage or for academic papers discussing Peltier's work (written by others, not by herself!). Huon (talk) 22:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
September 26
i need the lifecycle of a chimpanzee
what is the lifecycle of a chimpanzee i need to know please tell me i need them do u know anyone who know them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.145.110 (talk) 02:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Chandrika Balan
Dear Sir
Mr. C G Balan informed me that he had already uploaded the picture. Can you now kindly move it to the article to appear on the right hand box or do I have to do anything else. Kindly guide.
Your patience and cooperation is greatly appreciated.
Thanks and regards. Panank (talk) 02:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Old question
Chandrika Balan
Dear Sir
Some time ago an article was created for Chandrika Balan. I wanted to add her picture to the article and had asked you as to how it is to be done. You had replied that the photographer can directly load the picture and I had conveyed the same to the photographer who is Chandrika Balan's husband. He has an account with Wiki but could not copy and paste the picture and had asked a question. Usually your reply comes per return but he says he could not get any reply. Could you advise me the method by which he can upload the picture so that I can communicate it to him.
Your help and cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thanks Panank (talk) 11:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Images cannot be copied and pasted to Wikipedia, but if he is the copyright holder and is willing to release the image under a free license, he can upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. That should provide step-by-step guidance. Huon (talk) 11:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Panank, do you know the photographer's username or the page where the uploaded image can be found? You can move it yourself if you like, if it has already been uploaded. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:02, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Unsure if the (right) article is really submitted
Hi, I have submitted an article for approval Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Theory of the Modernization of Islam and get two warnings under the submission field: Warning: This page should probably be located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox (move). Warning: A page with this title exists. Please make sure that this proposed article does not already exist or that it does not need to be moved to a different title.Trond Øverland (talk) 05:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Trond,
- When the template is added, it appears in the listing for review. Moving from sand boxes is a problem. There have been some recent technical changes and not all of the bugs have been worked out. I have moved your article to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation. There will be a link in your sand box. Thanks for your submission. -- :- ) Don 05:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please take a look at the existing article Islam and modernity and consider if your draft might be better as part of that article. Roger (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan ( India)
Year of Establishment: 2008( Enacted by the Government of Rajasthan under The Nims University Rajasthan, Jaipur Act, 2008 and duly recognized by the UGC as well as apex level regulating councils.)
Type of Institution: Self-financed and dual mode composite model educational institution at tertiary level.
Programmes: Certificate, Diploma, P.G. Diploma, Under Graduate, Post Graduate,M.Phil., Ph.D., and Post Doctoral.
Courses: 314+
Nature of the Courses: Inter and trans disciplinary vocation oriented
Fee Structure: Affordable
Vision: Education’s World. World’s Education
Mission : The mission of the Nims University is to create pathways through career to future by the means of quality teaching and meticulous research in all areas of human endeavor and groom professionals with requisite competencies to meet industrial needs and standards at local and global level.
Profile of the University
Structured at par with the composite model universities of the leading institutions of the world, the Nims University has been legendary in quality teaching and action oriented research in all disciplines. Adjacent to the Aravali ranges and located in the outskirt of the pink city of India, the University has been listed in the top ten medical universities in India and heading towards a leading center of education in health sciences to human sciences, technical training to advanced engineering, personnel management to corporate management, creative literature to innovative multimedia, art and architecture. Being an exemplary landmark in the area of Higher Education, its lush green campus, state-of-art infrastructure, and modern laboratory equipped with latest technology, interactive pedagogy, and academia with proven proficiency, the Nims University has been the paradise for thousands of on-campus as well as off-campus learners.
Knowing "the NIMS UNIVERSITY-- the Knowledge Paradise"
Global warming, environmental pollution, urban and modern life style, and eco system at large has brought noticeable effects on human life in the new millennium. Substantial improvement and developments in all directions of Indian society, rather across globe have been sufficient and in order to prevail a" learned healthy society". Delores' four pillars of learning (are fundamental principles to reshaping education) may judiciously be further extended with the concept of health and learning. Since inception, NIMS, the University of new millennium, has been raising concerns on health which is fundamental to individual and societal growth and development.
Being an exemplary landmark in the area of Higher Education Institutions of India(HEII)and in the arena of cutting edge technological innovations, keeping the urban maddening crowd of Pink City at bay, standing against Aravali Hill ranges to fight with great moral courage and determination against all issues that are potent and vital for social exclusion. Marching ahead with mission of inclusiveness of all social-political-economic phenomena and ensure democracy to the republic of India, small experiment as a medical college is capable of providing world class modern --innovative-- ICT enabled--blended with a mixture of learning and studying strategies, clientele--friendly pedagogy, state-of-art infrastructure, lush green hundred acres of land, round the clock power supply, round-the-campus Wi-Fi, participatory management and customer friendly attitude of management functionaries coupled with latest technology based modern laboratories, research and innovations in all disciplines, right from medicines to paramedical, Engineering to Technology, Social Sciences to Humanities, IT and Computer science, Health and Allied Sciences, Management and Applied Sciences ( which are termed as non-paramedical courses/programs within NIMS)so on and so forth, National Institute of Medical Sciences has left no stone unturned to acknowledge its identity at the global level. NIMS as a university is not unique rather its locality that connect the busiest traffic based national highway. Academia call it as paradise as one spends a day or two within its calm residential campus breezed with fresh air round the clock make you feel healthy and pleasant. Well monitored strategic placement mechanisms on placement of successful passed out alumni, students support services and integration of cultures, cosmopolitan administrative structure at NIMS University have made its campus to be shared democratically by abroad and in-land students to represent the fundamental tenets of “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam ", literally meant as entire world is but one single family " The Whole Universe is One.............. We belong to one race............ human beings are in a global village.......Let's learn to live healthy and live together." Let's live peacefully with sustainable eco-friendly environment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof. Sanjay Kumar (talk • contribs) 06:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- That seems to be a copy of your draft. It doesn't cite any reliable sources, reads like an essay instead of an encyclopesia article, and is unduly laudatory, probably due to a conflict of interest. It would need to be rewritten almost entirely. Did you have any specific questions? Huon (talk) 08:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Review of Article about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP)
I have submitted an article about the Open Charge Point Protocol, but it was declined for lack of notability. I have added several more references, but it still has not been accepted. I assume it is still about notability. The OCPP only exists for around 2 years and is rapidly gaining popularity in the world of electric mobility as it is the only vendor-independent protocol for connecting charge points with back-office systems. For this reason operators of public charge point networks often require the use of OCPP to avoid vendor lock-in. So, the topic is definitely notable in the electric mobility world, but how can I make it notable enough to pass the Wikipedia notability guidelines? Any suggestions appreciated, ˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fbuve (talk • contribs) 07:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- Articles in general magazines or websites about motoring or "green living" for example - aimed at the general public rather than the industry itself - would go a long way to establish notability. Notability means the subject has come to the attention of the general public, that people outside of the industry itself know about it. Roger (talk) 07:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I have created article to review. still awaiting. There are some of the references and links are not well formatted. I am new user. Would you please help to resolve the issues with the draft. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retajsaima (talk • contribs) 09:43, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- There is currently a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions, and it takes about two weeks for an article to be reviewed. In the meantime, I can help with the technical issues of tidying up the references, but the draft's main problem is that the references are all primary sources - Atteeq-Ur-Rehman's own research papers. To establish his notability, we'd need significant coverage in independent sources, such as newspaper articles or published reviews of his academic work (written by others!). I don't think I can help you much with finding such sources beyond a Google News search or the like. Huon (talk) 12:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sayed Ihsanuddin Taheri
Respected friend,
I am writing to know about this that how this article was deleted based on?
Wanted to add more information as he is appointed "Government spokesman" in the Government of Afghanistan. The news in the following is the reaction of Afghan government on Pakistan where the government spokesman Sayed Ihsanuddin Taheri announced that the government of Afghanistan bans all pakistani newspapers.
The News, Pakistan's International NewsPaper http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-17645-Afghanistan-bans-Pakistan-newspapers-over-Taliban-propaganda
The New York Times Paper http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/world/asia/kabul-bans-pakistani-newspapers.html?_r=0
I wish we could republish the page as he is an official of the government of afghanistan and is a need to have him online.
In this case, I need your supportive comment,
Regards, Kalim
(Kalimkarim (talk) 11:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC))
- I cannot read the deleted article, but apparently it had been proposed for deletion, the proposed deletion hadn't been contested for ten days, and it was deleted. The reason given was "not relevant for Wikipedia". Proposed deletions are a low-hassle way to get articles removed when doing so is uncontroversial, but they are equally simple to overturn. I've notified the deleting admin; He may consider this inquiry as "contesting the proposed deletion" and undelete the article, or you could recreate it yourself. However, the newspaper articles you linked to don't provide the "significant coverage" of Taheri we need to establish his notability´. If notability cannot be established as soon as possible, the article will be deleted again via more formal processes (see WP:Articles for deletion) - and those don't allow recreation. As I said, what we need is significant coverage about Taheri, not just a passing mention while he does his job as spokesman. An entire paragraph about him is the bare minimum, I'd say, the more the better. For example, when was he appointed to his current position? What did he do before that appointment? Where was he educated? When was he born, and where? The sources you provided answer none of those questions. Huon (talk) 12:08, 26 September 2012 (UTC)