Talk:Griffith Review

Untitled

We are posting a first draft to include Griffith REVIEW (a major Australian journal) on the Wikipedia. We will review the Wikipedia guidelines and invite material from other objective parties. We respect Wikipedia's integrity and we'll endevour to post an entry that meets the objectivity requirements. We are a small organisation and we respectfully request a period of 6 weeks to submit our revisions. Best Wishes, Griffith REVIEW Griffithreview 04:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Two issues. First, per our username policy, group accounts created to promote an organization or company are prohibited, and may lead to an account being blocked from editing. Second, many here strongly frown upon creating or editing an article about a topic to which you have any relations or ties. The reason for this is that Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and be free from any personal or corporate bias. I've left a note explaining this in more detail on your talk page. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 04:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed some of the more promotional sounding language. I couldn't find any reliable sources to establish notability. Can anyone else turn some up? Cheers, --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I found a book review of Griffith Review in The Age from the weekend, I added it as a reference, I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure if I've referenced it correctly. I'm used to university guidelines and Hardvard referencing systems. It seems to be a really good quality journal hopefully we can find some more references for it. I'm going to try looking online for reviews. Lizzie Kate 9 March 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizziekate86 (talk • contribs) 05:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :) I recoded the reference you added so that it would display properly (which does have the unfortunate side effect of making the source code less human readable). Basically, the cite template goes inside of the ref tags, then you use <references/> to generate the bibliography automatically. Cheers, --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Edited some and added references where found. The Walkley awards are difficult to research online, I added the one but the other 2 awards that were noted somewhere could not be found. Stellar (talk) 01:52, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Griffith Review. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110821171730/http://www.litmags.com.au/home.html to http://www.litmags.com.au/home.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:55, 24 October 2017 (UTC)