Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 May 18
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < May 17 | << Apr | May | Jun >> | May 19 > |
| 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. |
May 18[edit]
00:50:52, 18 May 2018 review of submission by Leo.Firestone.0810[edit]
- Leo.Firestone.0810 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
Why was my draft titled "Siegel Select" rejected?
Leo.Firestone.0810 (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- Looks to me like a non-notable division of the not-particularly-notable The Siegel Group. But Draft:Siegel Select has not been deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:24, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
[edit]
My submission was rejected because:
“Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.”
So I’m asking, what copyrighted material?
The unrelated kinsman (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- @The unrelated kinsman: in this edit, editor Chrissymad removed content apparently copied from a historical marker with a url saying where they found it. That puts the whole draft into suspect territory, but — as the other two sources have not been found online — it may be a while before they can be verified. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 07:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- @— jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) Ok, I can remove the other two sources, but why can’t I use a Texas Historical Marker as a reference? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by The unrelated kinsman (talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
86.150.194.165 (talk) 06:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
- 86.150.194.165 - as the two reviewers have indicated, your problem is sourcing. You've got three. The first is a mention in a list of 100; the second appears not to mention him at all. For me, the third doesn't work but, if it did, I doubt it would give detailed coverage. You need "significant coverage from reliable sources" to show Notability. I have to say that a quick Google search throws up very little. Also, none of the sources are inline, as they should be for biographies of living persons. KJP1 (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
08:45:17, 18 May 2018 review of submission by Caileam Raleigh[edit]
Hi All, I have been working on this article for a number of months now and I have been repeatedly told there are issues with either its notability or lack of quality sources. However, I believe that all these issues have been well dealt with and the article is definitely suitable for inclusion on the mainspace. I resubmitted the article about two weeks ago but I'm unsure what the status of the page is now. Maybe it is just waiting for review and I am being a bit impatient, which is definitely not my intention. If this is not the case however, I would really appreciate if someone could take a look at the article and give me some advice on where to take it from here, as I've put a lot of work into it. Thanks for any help. Caileam Raleigh (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Not doneDeclined again by Chrissymad. Hi, please look into WP:NCORP for more details. Thanks --Quek157 (talk) 13:00, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
22:50:29, 18 May 2018 review of submission by TomStonehunter[edit]
GOAL: I want to improve this article, perhaps even have it accepted at its next AfC review. So...
- Gut reaction: what areas need improvement? Suggestions?
- Several references are frequently used during the article, like 20 times or more. Is this okay?
- In the History section, 2nd para, there is a quote. Is this proper format or skip quoting altogether?
TomStonehunter (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC) TomStonehunter (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
(WITHDRAWN by Tom Stonehunter --TomStonehunter (talk) 12:47, 24 May 2018 (UTC)}