Help desk
< September 27	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 29 >

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 28[edit]

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

Done

i am indian twin in tanzania i want to emgrate to america for cbservation thank you twin shafiq — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamed shafiq mustafa (talk • contribs) 11:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for asking questions on submissions via Articles for Creation. I want to visit Belgium next week. Do you think if I put a post on here somebody will pay for the travel costs for the Dover - Calais ferry and throw in some spending money? Of course they won't! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with article sources at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Collaborative Evaluation[edit]

Hello,

I am trying to publish an article about Collaborative Evaluation. The reviewer said that it was not adequately supported by reliable sources. The sources included are books and articles that can be verified so I don't know what to do. Thanks, ~Connie Walker~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conniewalkeregea (talk • contribs) 12:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem with your article as it stands is is not at all obvious what "Collaborative Evaluation" is or what it means. I would start off your article in this manner. I am also a little concerned that one reviewer stated that an author of many of the sources cited had been editing the article, which suggests a conflict of interest. Outside of books, has this process been cited in any major national journals or newspapers? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for all reviewers: Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 August 20#Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Collaborative Evaluation, Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2013_July_31#Resubmitting an article that was improved and the submission itself (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Collaborative Evaluation), and the user talk pages of (conniewalkeregea (talk · contribs) and Lilianarodriguez (talk · contribs) to avoid duplication of answers. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to conniewalkeregea: As Dodger67 said back on August 20th in the archive linked above, changing your username does not eliminate a conflict of interest. Because of the concerns from August 20, I would recommend that you read (or re-read) Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and add one the following near the top of the submission, right above the ----: 1) "{{afc comment|1=I have read [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]] and I DO have a conflict of interest in the topic and I understand that if it is accepted, there will be limitations on the changes I can make after it becomes a part of the encyclopedia. ~~~~}}", 2) "{{afc comment|1=I have read and understand [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]] and I DO NOT have a conflict of interest in the topic. ~~~~}}", 3) "{{afc comment|1=I have read [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]] and I need help determining if I have a conflict of interest in the topic and/or help understanding Wikipedia's rules regarding conflicts of interest. ~~~~}}", or something similar to one of the above in your own words (be sure to include the {{afc comment|1= at the beginning and the ~~~~}} at the end). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another comment for conniewalkeregea: The reason I declined the submission on August 20 was because the issues raised by TheEpicTracks (talk · contribs) on August 14 had not been addressed. In fact, no substantial edits had been made to the submission's content between the two declines (diff). Perhaps TheEpicTracks will chime in with reasons why he declined the submission on August 14. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And a third comment for conniewalkeregea: For book sources which are not available online, it is helpful to have "snippet quotations." These serve two purposes: They help VERIFY the content and give individuals who have access to online copies of the books key phrases to search for when fact-checking and avoid people challenging the accuracy of the reference, and they help provide context of just exactly what the reference is backing up, i.e. is it backing up only a particular phrase or the entire last few sentences? Also, they help us, the reviewers, to determine if the claims of notability are in fact backed up by the sources. These same things will help the article avoid deletion if the submission becomes an article but it is later nominated for deletion at WP:Articles for deletion. I also notice that you have a separate section for "Additional resources." If any of these resources duplicate the references, please remove them (I confess, I did not check). If the additional resources only provide a minor improvement in understanding the topic beyond what is in the references or in other "additional resources," I recommend removing them as well. I hope this helps. By the way, you might want to do a "books" or "scholar" Internet search for the snippets you wish to quote: Sometimes search engines are allowed to show such snippets online. If they are, a URL in addition to the quote would help although sometimes these URLs are generated "on the fly" and they expire quickly. Sometimes the entire journal paper or book chapter is available online. In those cases, a URL likely to be "stable" and it is highly recommended that you add it to your reference. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hugh Ross[edit]

Hi,

I'm trying to finish creating this article which was originally started by someone else. I believe I have made the appropriate changed to comply with article standards.

In my original submission I took a picture from the subject's website to upload to wikimedia - with the subject's permission. This picture was waiting for the photographer and copyright holder to email confirmation of permission. I haven't yet been able to get them to send the email and have simply removed the image in order to get the article created.

I am a little unsure how to tell where this article sits in the review queue, though I can see there is a backlog, I can't find this article listed anywhere.

Once creation is completed, I will need to submit a move request to Hugh Ross (actor) to aid with disambiguation. This will then allow already existing links to directly point to the page. I've seen the process to do this and am happy to submit a separate request if necessary.

AngusChisholm (talk) 14:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the submission, which will add it to the review queue. Before you do that, you need to find as many mentions of him in books, newspapers and magazines and add them to article, to ensure the reviewer will understand he is notable and pass the submission. I know who Ross is, he's the guy in Trainspotting who asks Spud "so what attracts you to the leisure industry?" in the job interview he's trying to get out of. I've added a book reference that cites that, but it's little more than a mention of him in the cast list, and I don't know if that, combined with the two references about his performance of Hamlet in itself is enough for a standalone article. But it looks promising. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Spoken English Corpus[edit]

Hi, I thought I had submitted this article on September 16th, but I can't find it in the list of articles waiting for assessment. Have I done something wrong? This was a resubmission, as the first submission was rejected. RoachPeter (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submit template seems to have gone awry, hence it wasn't listed. Never mind, I've just moved it to article space. An excellent article. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Vaibhav Maloo[edit]

How can I improve this article to make sure it gets accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Businessworld2013 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should add reliable sources that discuss Maloo in some detail. Those I checked either were not independent or mentioned him only in passing, in "... said Vaibhav Maloo" style. That's not enough to establish that he is individually notable enough for an article. Huon (talk) 00:41, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]