Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 August 27

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 26 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 28 >
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.


August 27

edit

08:22:15, 27 August 2014 review of submission by Hamik.m

edit


Hamik.m (talk) 08:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear reviewers

I would like to ask you concerning my first article that is now waiting for a review. The article is about a painter Tigran Tsitoghdzyan, who is going to have his first auction in September. This is a pivotal event un the life of every painter and I assume there will be a lot of people trying to wiki him. The article contains only of general info, bio and a couple of citations about him from art magazines. I had already two rejections and worked in close collaboration with the reviewers to change everything that was not suitable for wikipedia. Even removed citation from dailymail.co.uk as one of the reviewers told me it is sometimes regarded as yellow press.

I would kindly ask, if it is possible, to review it before September (I hope now it is OK to be accepted.)

Thank you very-very much.

@Hamik.m:   Declined First, please don't take a partisan approach to editing. Wikipedia is not concerned with advertising the work of artists, musicians, or authors although many of those people want to use this website to advertise. Second, the handful of sources you have don't make the case for either the notability criteria specific to artists or general notability, especially as most of those citations only show the artist's work on the cover of non-notable magazines; they don't include articles about the artist. The key point is proving the artist's work is on permanent display in a museum. Your draft still doesn't have many in-line citations and it reads like an advertisement. I appreciate that you've put work in on this but sometimes it's too soon to push a subject when notability might not become apparent until many years from now. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris. I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you on all of your comments. The article is just a bunch of biographical facts and a couple of citations from respected art magazines, which do not only give a cover as you write (which is actually more important than article in many cases) but also have large articles concerning the artist. I do not know which part of it made you think it looks like an advertisement. If you find that any part there seems advertising, just kindly let me know and I will take it out. Concerning your point about the museums, will that mean that the painter is not a painter for wikipedia until a museum buys it for a permanent display? Does not make too much sense, right? As for now one of the works is presented at the Phillips Auction, which is one of the most respected in the art world. It is lot number 222 (http://www.phillips.com/detail/TIGRAN-TSITOGHDZYAN/NY010614/222). If this is not enough proof of existence of an artist for Wikipedia, or wikipedia wants to stay uninformed about the artist until one of the curators finally gets it to a museum - that's pretty ridiculous, don't you think so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamik.m (talk • contribs) 07:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"passion for art" and "chosen to star" are examples of non-neutral wording that are not suitable for an encyclopedia. One of the artist's works being up for auction is not enough to prove their notability. The Mail Online article goes some way to proving notability, but cannot go all the way on its own. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris, I have removed all the wording that may be considered non-neutral. Considering the sources, they are all 3rd party and totally independent. None of the articles was done because it was payed for by the artist. As I mentioned, I even deleted the "daily mail" as considered it not trustworthy enough for wikipedia. But Fjords Magazine and Visual Language are both respected art magazines and totally 3-rd party. The only external links that are connected to the painter are the links to his website and portfolio on the web. All of the other external links are 3rd party. Later the information about the work sold from Phillips Auction will be added to the article also, but for now there is no permanent link for the lot. I cannot agree with the remark of Arthur goes shopping that "One of the artist's works being up for auction is not enough to prove their notability." It depends on the auction first of all. I hope none will doubt Phillips is one of the most respected contemporary art auctions in the world and there is no possibility to get there without being a notable artist. Just have a look on the page about the Phillips Art Auctions on the Wikipedia before giving this kind of remarks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_(auctioneers). It is actually totally unprofessional that the highest rank experts working at the auction consider the artist notable, while reviewers of the wikipedia do not. After all the article is just about the existence of a man named Tigran Tsitoghdyan who is a painter. So can I assume that Phillips auction considers him a painter, and wikipedia does not? If there is anything else that wikipedia reviewers may consider advertising-like, i will gladly remove it, but concerning the notability I do not think there should be an issue. Don't you agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamik.m (talk • contribs) 08:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

14:34:21, 27 August 2014 review of submission by PraktikantatUFA

edit


PraktikantatUFA (talk) 14:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC) 14:34:21, 27 August 2014 request for review by PraktikantatUFA[reply]



The draft in question appears to be Draft:Wolf Bauer (film producer). This draft has been declined once and now submitted for another review. As it is a biography of a living person, it seems likely that inline citations will be needed. Have you taken a look at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners to see how to add them? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:01:49, 27 August 2014 review of submission by KreyszigB

edit


KreyszigB (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can the title of the article which is currently waiting for review/creation from Westland CL.20 to Cierva CL.20 because this seems to be the convention for this aircraft. (if you look at the Westland archive for instance http://history.whl.co.uk/cierva_cl_20.html) KreyszigB (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  Done I have moved the page to Draft:Cierva CL.20 in the draft space which is likely but not guaranteed to become its eventual name. I do not feel competent to perform the actual review of this article. I prefer to have a nodding familiarity with the topic material when an article has only one reference. While awaiting review please trawl for further references and add them to the draft, and make any other improvements that you can. Fiddle Faddle 09:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will request assistance from WP:WikiProject Aircraft. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19:17:29, 27 August 2014 review of submission by 67.78.65.202

edit

Hi - my page was declined so I'm just wondering why. Thanks Grant 67.78.65.202 (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Grantheadifen: As explained on the draft, it reads like an advertisement. Also, it is totally unreferenced and makes no claim to notability. 20:52, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

19:32:06, 27 August 2014 review of submission by John Rothberg

edit


John Rothberg (talk) 19:32, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drafted "Bruce D. Sturman" for a new inclusion. Want to do 2 things: first, contribute anonymously; second actually submit for consideration/review. What do I do to accomplish these tasks? Thanks.

@John Rothberg: We absolutely cannot have unsourced biographies of living people, especially where the article makes claims of criminal conduct. I assume you're looking at The New York Times and The Day? Neither of those sources makes out what the article claims. Please find serious references before attempting another article. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:32, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20:01:15, 27 August 2014 review of submission by TarvarusMedia

edit


I would simple like to know what I can add that will make this artist that as been indicated for 3 Grammy awards excepted. there are many third party news article I can add. but as ref, not as citations, does this help? and in addition, several musicians that have played on Orlando's albums and in his group or opening act for his group have Wiki pages.

This year Orlando's group releases and album featuring the Philadelphia Symphony.

Thank you very much for the help you can provide. TarvarusMedia (talk) 20:01, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@TarvarusMedia: Add references. References are essential. Please also read our notability criteria for musicians. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

23:53:42, 27 August 2014 review of submission by Butcan

edit


Kana 23:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Having gotten the cart before the horse, I submitted this afternoon the third (final) revision of a biographical article "Beebe Freitas" and THEN discovered the article "Wikipedia: How to save an article proposed for deletion". Is it possible to retract the article at this late point so that I can properly follow the suggested guidelines? If not, do I have any further recourse in the event the article is given its third rejection and the subject frozen out? Thanks. Kana 23:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Butcan the page Draft:Beebe Freitas is not under any threat of deletion at all. You can continue working on it and call on us for assistance at any time. I'm not at all sure where you get the idea that there is a "three strikes" rule - I've never heard of one and I've been active here for over seven years. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Butcan: The alleged three strikes rule must come from the rumour mill. If you can tell us where you found it we can work out how to snuff the rumour out, somehow. The entire review process is iterative. Some articles need far more than three iterations to become acceptable, and, while this can be a little tedious, this is absolutely fine. I'm glad this article has been accepted and that you have worked hard on it to solve the previous issues. We like accepting articles. I wish the ratio of those we can accept easily to those we have to push back for more work were higher. I suspect Dodger67 will agree with me wholeheartedly here, as will all other volunteer reviewers. Fiddle Faddle 09:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Butcan & User:Timtrent - Indeed I do agree! Congratulations on the very nice new article you started Butcan, so what's next? It would be really good if you can help us trace the origin of the "three strikes" rumour so that we can try to squash it - such nonsense can do a lot of damage to the project. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2014_August_27&oldid=1101227860"