Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2013 November 12
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 11 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 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. |
November 12
editHi, My first posting and it has been greater than 3 weeks. What should I do?Athoma103 (talk) 02:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- You could continue to wait, or you could improve the submission further while you wait. For one thing, all of your references seem to be bare links without supporting information; some are just links to YouTube videos. Their usefulness in proving the notability of the topic might be difficult to establish. Take a look at how the references are set out on some of the Wikipedia:Good articles. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 11:09, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
I submitted the article "European Company Lawyers" and it was declined, can anyone explain why ? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.128.12.218 (talk) 16:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Your article submission Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Company Lawyers was rejected for the reason given in the pink box at the top of that page. Is there anything we can clarify about the reason given and the details in the pages linked from there? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- It was declined because it's nothing more than an attempt to write a 'profile' or some kind of general overview about a company which is unlikely to be notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Bellerophon talk to me 21:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
I am in the process of creating an article titled Gyrotonic Expansion System. It seems there was previously an article by this title created at some point in the past, and that article was redirected to the article titled "Gyrotonic".
The Gyrotonic, and Gyrokinesis Methods are two movement methods that fall under one larger umbrella called "The Gyrotonic Expansion System". (see the official website gyrotonic.com for verification of system structure) Because "Gyrotonic" is a subcategory of "The Gyrotonic Expansion System", it is the Gyrotonic article that should be redirected to the Gyrotonic Expansion System article. Not the other way around. Is it possible to publish the new article and redirect the article titled "Gyrotonic" to the newly created article "Gyrotonic Expansion System"?
Oglala19 (talk) 16:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)Oglala
- It might be best to discuss this on the talk page of the article that already exists. We wouldn't necessarily rely on what the "official website" says, to decide how independent reliable sources refer to the topic. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 17:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
My submission was rejected but the referencing I think is fine and have compared it to other articles. As for the sources used, I used what the subject in question gave me and he says his notability is no different to that of his colleagues and they are accepted on Wikipedia- so why is he rejected? Thanks. Scubesscubes (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- It is rejected because you have no third-party references that talk about him at all, and thus have failed to prove notability. As a reviewer told you, notability for academics is not dependent on the number of research papers they've authored, but on whether reliable sources talk about the researcher. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
This page got created bypassing the review process. Do I put a speedy delete tag on it to get rid of it? (db-maintenance?) Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- never mind, I figured out how to decline it. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
My page says I need more or specific categories. Please make suggestions. NBELQ (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- @NBELQ:Well, I think the categories you have do not need to be more specific. But you add more like Category:Artists from New York and Category:People from Washington Heights, Manhattan. I get ideas for categories by looking at other bios. Go to the categories he is already in and look at some of the other bios and see what they have. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Well- one the one hand it says that, but on the other- you've succeeded, your article accepted and is in the encyclopaedia, yay!. It's now out of the AfC system. It's just a suggestion for an improvement, that's all, don't worry too much about it. Any member of wikipedia can do it now, the onus isn't on you personally to make this improvement. Rankersbo (talk) 09:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi
I am a bit confused. i have just entered this page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Daniel Greenberg, Parliamentary Counsel for review. However at the top of the page it says "Article not currently submitted for review." and at the bottom of the page it says "Review waiting. This may take over 3 weeks. The Articles for creation process is very highly backlogged. Please be patient. There are 1954 submissions waiting for review." Can you please tell me the real status of my article?
Thank you Laurasykes (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- It's awaiting review. When you added the submission box there was an explanation that read:
- Just press the "Save page" button below without changing anything! Doing so will submit your article submission for review. Once you have saved this page you will find a new yellow 'Review waiting' box at the bottom of your submission page. If you have submitted your page previously, the old pink 'Submission declined' template or the old grey 'Draft' template will still appear at the top of your submission page, but you should ignore them. Again, please don't change anything in this text box. Just press the "Save page" button below
- I've run a clean-up on the page and it should now look less confusing. Rankersbo (talk) 10:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Laurasykes. While waiting for a review, I strongly suggest you make some improvements to the article. It lacks inline citations to sources which discuss the subject himself, not the legislation he has helped author. Also, you should rewrite and restructure this so that it reads like a biography rather than a résumé, and to ensure that he is referred to as either "he" or "Greenberg" not by his first name. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies has further guidance on this. Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)