Help desk
< September 2	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 4 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

September 3[edit]

John Zed King/artist[edit]

This famous southern artist had many drawings, paintings and sketches sold throughout the south. His paintings and values are hard to find and even his history is somewhat of a mystery as to whether he is still alive. I bought several originals at a mall sale in the late 1980's and at one time had many of his calendars and pictures. No mention of this artist on Wikipedia and he represented the true history of the signs, barns, buildings, gas stations, etc of the past. A history of this man and his paintings would be of great interest to many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.179.68.206 (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you intend to dig up reliable sources (such as books, magazines or news coverage about the subject) and write an article on this topic? If so, you're in the right place. If not, but you would like to request an article, this would likely fit Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Visual arts if you wish to make the request there. K7L (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Biology Open[edit]

[[1]]

I am slightly confused about the comment - about the journal, rather than from as I have included the Press release. I have compared this to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Biology (a different journal - similar name) and they have included similar to Biology Open. Our journal in now in a new abstracting and indexing service, so I would like to include this also.

Sarah

Sarah.r.sharpe (talk) 10:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, other articles on Wikipedia may not be necessarily be in good quality (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), so we can't judge a new article based on others (except if, say they are good articles or better). In the case of your references, they are all primary sources except for the press release. Unfortunately, to establish notability, we need multiple, independent, reliable sources - and press releases, while they may well be from reliable sources, generally aren't considered independent for this. Hope that helps. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Prajnana/sandbox[edit]

Hi, there.

Thanks in advance for your time. Question: There is an existing UNPUBLISHED article with the same title as mine. It has been in the User's 'sandbox' for a very long time, possibly more than a year. I don't think the user is awaiting publication but I cannot know that for certain.

How can I learn whether this will be a problem? The article title is Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. I was unable to move the article to the page suggested as it said my account was too new.

Thank you. --Prajnana (talk) 12:29, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's the sandbox copy, User:Mallarme/Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet? That seems to be a copy of an article that has sice been deleted; I don't think it's awaitig publication (it's unchanged for more than five years).

Anyway, I'd ignore the other draft; the worst that could happen would be that you both aim for publication, one draft is published first, and we have to merge them. That's not a problem.

There are, however, some other issues with your draft that should be fixed. It relies heavily on primary sources such as Norelli-Bachelet's own books or the Aeon Group. Other parts, such as her early life, are entirely unsourced. Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

I'd also get rid of the "quotes" section. I do't see why those specific quotes, out of all Norelli-Bachelet's works, were chosen; if they are not commonly reproduced or discussed in secondary sources, there's no reason to discuss them here, and if they are, we should report on that discussion, not just reproduce the quote. Huon (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmission of new article for creation Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Rolt[edit]

On August 30th I submitted a new article about the artist David Rolt. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Rolt Unfortunately, doubtless due to inexperience or finger trouble on my part, I somehow managed to submit it as a blank document - and duly received a message that it had been rejected for this reason. So on August 31st I returned to the article, re-inserted the text and images and saved the changes. I also added copyright tags on the images that I had uploaded.

So is there anything else I need to do? I am now able to see the article in my watchlist, but I'd just like to be sure that the article isn't continuing to languish somwwhere among the rejected.

Many thanks,

Roberte207 (Roberte207 (talk) 14:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Your article didn't have a review template on it. I have now added this. For future reference, you can do this yourself by adding {{subst:submit}} to the article. However, I can't pass the article, as the references are either primary sources, only give a brief mention to the article's subject, or don't mention him at all. Sorry about that. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since the template has been added or restored, you can simply click where it says: "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." -- :- ) Don 15:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how to create and mantain a private project for a movie studio?[edit]

hi, i would like to know how to create a multi colaboration project where our supervisors can submit articles related to our internal workflow and document them.

thanks

Ruben — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaxan (talk • contribs) 17:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suspect this violates WP:NOT: Wikipedia is not a free webhost, and I doubt there are reliable independent sources for your internal workflow. We're trying to build an encyclopedia here, and I don't think your private project would help.

The MediaWiki software is free software; you can download it and set up a wiki of your own. Huon (talk) 21:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:Artinavedissian/sandbox[edit]

The "Help Desk" has a "Live Chat" which requires copying what you see garbled letters! I tried hard but always failed... This is ridiculous...!

I just wanted to add a name to your "Miniature Artists" as Edward Ter-Ghazarian or Edward Kazarian -who is the inventor of Miniature art, is not included in your list of "Miniature Artists"! How can I do this?

Artin Avedissian Artinavedissian (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Action Figure Appreciation Day[edit]

why was my submission declined by lugia when i can prove i did create this event and have 2 facebook pages showing proof this event occured..over 550 people attended online and yet i get insulted saying that im making a ruse and hoax..i thought the reveiwers was supposed to help and not put people down..this is the page of the event http://www.facebook.com/groups/106851109464287/ ..please take a look and THEN tell me this event never happened..my name is ed "hi" ponce and id like to know why my submission was so rudely declined by this message Submission declined on 3 September 2012 by Lugia2453 (talk). Thank you for your submission. It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous over being factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time. ......... i find this seriously insulting to me and the over 550 people who attended it is obvious this lugia person didnt even check the link i provided showing the event really happened — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hi10462 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook is usually not a reliable source on which to build an article as it is user-supplied content. Anyone can write anything there. It's also poor form to rely on sources you authored yourself or engage in advertising or self-promotion of anything in which you have a potential conflict of interest. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 03:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]