Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 October 2
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 1 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 3 > |
| 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. |
October 2
editReview of User:WikiVent/Wii U launch
editAs of October 2 2012, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WikiVent/Wii_U_launch article is written in future tense, as in events such as release dates are yet to occur. However, these events have been confirmed by multiple sources.
My question is, are articles meant to only be written in past or present tense? This is my first article by the way.
WikiVent (talk) 06:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- If well-sourced articles refer to future events, future tense is appropriate; there are, however, tricks to sidestep the entire issue. From the Wii U article: "On September 12, 2012, Nintendo announced that launch date was set to December 8, 2012 in Japan." That saves us from rewriting the article in a few weeks.
- Anyway, I doubt the launch (as opposed to the Wii U itself) is notable; wouldn't a merger of that information into the Wii U article be more appropriate? Huon (talk) 13:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Well my reasoning for creating it was due to the fact that the previous generation home consoles also have articles dedicated to their launch, so I thought it logical to keep to that process. With it's predecessor, the Wii there was an article branching off the main Wii article which was specifically about it's launch. But anyway, thank you for answering my question.
WikiVent (talk) 14:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware there's precedent. Probably the "launch" articles were created because the main articles became too long; that may indeed become an issue with the Wii U article, too. Huon (talk) 14:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Just wanted to check that I have got the numbering correct on my sources for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdmhuisclos (talk • contribs) 15:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- The references' numbering is automatic; that's hard to get incorrect. I removed many of the unreliable or irrelevant "sources" (ie his own company's website and the sources that didn't even mention him), but I'm not sure the rest suffices to establish Morley's notability. For that we require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The BBC's summaries of its own broadcasts aren't quite reliable secondary sources, and they only drop Morley's name without any elaboration. The Herald article is, for all I can tell, not a review but rather an excerpt, written by Morley himself. That's obviously not independent, and it doesn't mention him except as author of that article. The Independent article is a truly independent review, and it does provide some details on Morley (including his political leanings and some praise for his work), but unfortunately the draft's content is almost entirely unrelated to that lone good source. Besides, "significant coverage" is usually interpreted as "more than one good source" anyway. Huon (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I keep creating a page and can't get it approved. I don't understand this lingo. What do I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiuserb (talk • contribs) 16:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- Firstly, you should not remove the "decline" messages from the draft before it's accepted. Those messages serve as a historical record and allow the next reviewer to easily see what problems the previous reviewer found, and whether they were addressed.
- Secondly, all Wikipedia content must be based on reliable sources such as newspaper articles. Significant coverage in such sources that are independent of the subject are required both to establish the subject is notable enough for an article, and to allow our readers to verify its content. Your only source is the company's own website, which is neither reliable nor independent. Furthermore, that source doesn't even confirm what you write about the corporate history, and most of the draft doesn't deal with Pie Five but its supposed owner Pizza Inn, on whom we already have an article.
- In summary, you must find reliable sources such as newspaper articles about Pie Five, and the draft's content must be based on those sources. Huon (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to be certain the following article entry was received successfuly for review:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jeffrey_Ajluni
Any idea when it will be posted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bucafan1359 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- The article has been submitted for review; as long as there's a "review waiting" message and it's categorized among the pending AfC submissions (the very last line), everything is ok. The "not currently submitted" message is a relic that should be removed by a bot (but if it isn't, the draft will still be reviewed). There's a massive backlog of unreviewed submissions; it may take two weeks until it's yours' turn.
- In the meantime, you should have another look at the references. Two issues: Firstly, some of them are not the reliable secondary sources we need; this includes LinkedIn, his employers at Palace Sports & Entertainment, and Wikipedia itself. The Sports Business Daily is just a reprint of the Telegraph article and adds nothing. Secondly, you should use inline citations and footnotes to clarify which source supports which of the article's statements; see also WP:Referencing for beginners. For example, the draft currently gives more details about the ManU sponsorship deal and Ajluni's role than I found in the sources - where does that come from? Which source says he's married? Which source mentions his birthdate? Huon (talk) 17:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I have tried making 2 articles for Wikipedia after opening an account.
The first is in my sandbox and is awaiting submission review. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eshingodfrey/sandbox
I set up a second article in the empty editing space when I clicked my login name (not the sandbox). How do I submit this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eshingodfrey
Eshingodfrey (talk) 22:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've moved your user page to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zen Centre of Vancouver and submitted it for you. Your user page is now a redirect to the draft, but you can change it to suit your needs. In general, if you want to submit drafts, the proper place to create them is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Draft title or something like that - I believe your sandbox has also been moved to a similar title. You can submit a draft for review by adding {{subst:submit}} to the very top.
- If you are Eshin Godfrey, as your username suggests, you might want to have a look at our guideline on conflicts of interest. Writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged, and writing about your own temple is proably not a good idea either. Huon (talk) 22:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)