Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 December 12
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < December 11 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 13 > |
| 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. |
December 12[edit]
00:42:54, 12 December 2016 review of submission by Iberian15[edit]
After the initial rejection by SwisterTwister, I put in a lot of work to add more external references. Now the article has been rejected again asking for further references. Clearly the editors do not understand the nature of these scientific events. I could comprehend it, if the article were rejected because of some policy to only cover the largest and most important scientific meetings. I just want to check that I haven't somehow just had bad luck with the editors, before telling my colleagues on the scientific committee that we should abandon the idea of informing the wikipedia readership about our series of meetings.
Iberian15 (talk) 00:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- I have asked both WP:WikiProject Mathematics and WP:WikiProject Physics for assistance. The fundamental problem seems to me to be the lack of independent sources. You need to find sources that have no direct connection to the workshops, the event organizers or participants, that have written about the event(s) in significant detail. Basically you need to show that at least a few people who have no connection to the subject actually care that it exists to the extent that they have published significant detail about it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
02:29:26, 12 December 2016 review of submission by Twitbookspacetube[edit]
Apparently I don't have enough reliable sourcing here. How many more sources do I need to put in where in order to have this draft accepted? Twitbookspacetube (talk) 02:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- It's not the quantity of sources that's the problem, it's the quality. You need reliable independent published sources with significant discussion of the subject. The draft cites four sources: the first is a directory enty, the second is an interview with the subject and so not independent, the third and fourth contain mere mentions of the subject. Adding more sources like those won't help at all. Maproom (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- The third source is literally an article written about something that happened to them! How is that a mere mention? Twitbookspacetube (talk) 06:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
12:58:27, 12 December 2016 review of submission by Mathematician1[edit]
I am requesting help because I need an explanation: Can I place an article from the site with information about well-known figure if I am the author of this article on the site and I collected all information, or have I have to change the content of the article (the fact that the article about mathematician, and I do not want to change the content to be exact)?
Mathematician1 (talk) 12:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Hey Mathematician1. It's not entirely clear what you are asking here. What do you mean by "place an article from the site"? TimothyJosephWood 13:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Seems this is related to this AfD discussion. From the looks of it, one of your submissions was speedy deleted because it duplicated the content of another article, which was deleted per an articles for deletion discussion.
- Judging from the discussion, others attempted to verify coverage of the individual in reliable sources and were unable. Maybe this is because of the language difference? If nearly all of the coverage of the individual is in Russian (using a non Latin script), it is likely that searches using an anglicized version of the person's name would not turn up any results. Is there other substantive coverage of the person in Russian that maybe people were missing? TimothyJosephWood 13:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
14:49:56, 12 December 2016 review of submission by CJM123[edit]
Hello, I had a page submitted on Larry Rand declined due to "notability" factor. I happen to disagree based on other Wikipedia pages published (I know you can't necessarily just point to this as a reason). But is there a way to have another editor take a look and offer feedback? CJM123 (talk) 14:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- I've read the lead of the draft, and it's not clear to me what the subject does, let alone why he's notable. I see that he founded a "corporate and financial communications firm". Don't corporates use telephones and letters to communicate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maproom (talk • contribs) 15:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)