Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 April 6
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < April 5 | << Mar | April | May >> | April 7 > |
| 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. |
April 6
edit
Hello, I am requesting help to get this page get publish, I have tried my hardest and cannot seem to get it to where it needs to be to be published. So if anyone would be able to help that would be greatly appreciated.
Ktthatme (talk) 14:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Ktthatme: The fundamental problem is a shortage of reliable, independent, secondary sources about G-Fresh. I searched the main places and the Maine places, but other than coverage of the Nigerian singer Gabriel Afolayan (who also goes by G-Fresh), found only one trivial mention in the Bangor Daily New's Culture Shock blog. G-Fresh does not appear to be a suitable topic for an encyclopedia article at this time. Worldbruce (talk) 07:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
North Muskoka (talk) 14:37, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello editor gurus! I tried to post this earlier but not sure I did it correctly, so here it is again just in case. My first Wikipedia submission has been rejected because "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." Other articles for similar topics (a tourism region) are similarly worded to mine so I'm not sure where I went wrong. One suggestion was to add more sources, which I am in the process of doing. If you have other suggestions, I'd love to hear them. The page in question is North Muskoka. Thanks!
- Your Draft is written like an advertisement in that it concentrates mainly on explaining what is there for the visitor. This needs to be fixed in addition to any issues of sourcing.
- Using existing articles as examples is only useful if the articles you compare with are of recognised quality. You can find a list of recognised Wikipedia Good Articles about areas in North America at Wikipedia:Good articles/Geography and places#North America. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I have edited the entry with factual data and have provided references for such information. The reviewer says the entry is promotional in nature, yet I am not sure how that can be when I've only included the facts. One of the facts is that this test is a one of a kind---it is the only test on the market currently. Does that make the entry promotional because there is only one test like this available? I am not sure how to remedy the situation in order to be successful and have the entry accepted. I am not a coder or programmer, so a lot of this formatting is weird to me as well. Any help you can provide that gives me direction in regards to the promotional nature the reviewer believes is part of the entry and the formatting would be helpful.
JAS1127 (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2015 (UTC)JAS1127
JAS1127 (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- @JAS1127: User:Flat Out is the best one to elaborate on what he found promotional in the tone of Draft:NephroCheck. I'm confident, however, that any reservations had nothing to do with the test being one-of-a-kind.
- Please review and try to apply Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable.
- Also realize that the writing style and what you choose to include and omit can make an article promotional even when you're using neutral language. The draft reads like a diagnostic test maker's sales representative talking to a doctor. Perhaps you have a medical background and that has made you write this way.
- Think about what other aspects of the subject a journalist might cover. Might they mention who developed the test, when they developed it, how long it took to develop, where it was developed, how much it cost to develop, how much it costs patients, how much it improves outcomes...? Put yourself in the place of a reader interested in the history of medicine, one interested in the medical industry, one interested in health care costs, or one whose doctor has recommended they have this test. Would they get what they want to know out of the article? We like detail and accuracy; we're not saying dumb it down, but make the article serve as broad an audience as possible.
- I've taken care of the formatting for you. Worldbruce (talk) 19:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
though I have gray hair and 43 years in computing, I am new to Wikipedia editing. I was under the impression, I had removed all inline citations which referenced pages outside the Wikipedia universe, after the first refusal. Please advise me, were I am wrong.
As for the general claim, facts about my academic career were unsubstantiated, I am kind of helpless. Obviously, my graduation records are not online but were well documented whenever I received an offer for a professorship in computer science. Why would anybody who held a chair and gave presentations at Stanford, Princeton, and Jons Hopkins and corresponded with Donald Knuth and Edsgar Dijkstra lie about his high school graduation? Roman law knows the principle of "bonna fides" (explanation can be found on Wikipedia) - may I ask for its application. Thanks for any help.
Gelegenheitsleser (talk) 17:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- I assume you mean Draft:Lutz Michael Wegner, where "Besides his scientific achievements Wegner was instrumental in introducing computer science studies (Bachelor and Master) at the University of Kassel which started in 2001 after securing three additional, sponsored professorships with Traudl Herrhausen, then a member of the Hessian Parliament, opening doors to industry and charities." has no citation at all. You also need to attend to the "Achievements" section which is lacking in references. One is to a user editable Wiki, which is inadmissible.
- I wonder why you feel you need to have a Wikipedia page about yourself. Those writing autobiographies are not the best qualified to do this. Fiddle Faddle 08:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
I understand the feedback that this submission constitutes an "advertisement". However, I have provided more than two dozen independent references and I have tried to scupulously avoid adjectives that are promotional. I believe that I have submitted a factual description of the importance and impact of this non-profit vision institute and hope that the reviewers can be more specific in helping me modify the contents so that it is acceptable.
Thank you.
Jtrosenb (talk) 22:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have left you a comment on Draft:Legacy Devers Eye Institute which I hope will be useful for you. Fiddle Faddle 23:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)