Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 August 4

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< August 3 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 5 >
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 4

edit

01:34:48, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Mikespit70

edit


Hello - I have just submitted for review my first Wikipedia article about the Beehive Foundation, which was rejected due to: "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability"

Could you give me some direction please on what would be some examples of references? For example, I describe "The Edge" as one of Beehive's programs, and the list of topics covered by the program. I can reference each topic back to published scientific research for which the topic is based upon, but the reference doesn't mention Beehive, so I am not sure if this is acceptable or not. Any assistance is appreciated.

Thanks Michael


Mikespit70 (talk) 01:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have given general guidance on the draft. If that is insufficient please come back to this section and ask in more detail. Fiddle Faddle 15:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02:23:34, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Scd82

edit

I am having a heck of a time putting together a page for Vikki Ziegler. She is on another page for Untying the Knot however when I try and make a page for just her it gets denied. I understand their are strict rules, unfortunately I am just unfamiliar. Can someone help me please get started. Maybe add a paragraph or two so I can see how it is structured and what type of references work. Thanks any help appreciated.

Scd82 (talk) 02:23, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the draft to Draft:Vikki Ziegler with correct capitalisation, and reformatted it slightly. But I suspect I am wasting my time. The real problem is not the draft's structure, but the absence of any evidence that its subject is notable enough for an article. Maproom (talk) 06:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:24:41, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Jo.voysey

edit


I need assistance with uploading my images please or rather with validating their copyright. I am in the process of making a wikipedia page for my boss who is a very famous South African artist. She owns the copyright for all the images I am using and has given me permission to use the images. She has also permitted that they can be used by others via wikipedia. If they are to be used in the published format then she is to be contacted. What do I need to do in order to prove that this is the case? Jo.voysey (talk) 09:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Giving permission for them to be used on Wikipedia, and to be used "by others via wikipedia. If they are to be used in the published format then she is to be contacted" will not allow them to be accepted by Wikipedia Commons. Only broader forms of licence are accepted there. You can probably get a fuller answer by asking here. Maproom (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo.voysey: Please see WP:Donating copyright material. Your description leads me to doubt that the permission suggested is sufficient. Fiddle Faddle 15:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:17:59, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Dlutz1542

edit

I was told the draft was rejected so I kept writing in the sandbox and resubmitted only to be told my much longer resubmission was lost because in the meantime a draft had been published (apparently based on the rejected older one. Can you tell me how to find the longer draft I submitted? Dlutz1542 (talk) 16:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC) DLDlutz1542 (talk) 16:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this is what you are looking for. It is in the history of what is now a redirect to the current, shorter, article, so you won't be able to use it directly. But you are able to copy content from it and use it elsewhere. Maproom (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:09:38, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Writeaway14

edit


Hi, I'm struggling with neutral point of view. I understand the importance of NPOV and I was wondering if someone could given me more specifics of where my NPOV falls short. I'm especially struggling with maintaining NPOV when I'm citing sources. Should I place those in quotes or rephrase?

Thanks so much in advance for your help! Writeaway14 (talk) 21:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have renamed the draft to Draft:Chris Hutchinson (author). That is sufficient to disambiguate him from the two other Chris Hutchinsons who have articles, and removes some POV. Maproom (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:17:03, 4 August 2015 review of submission by PhilipofBVM

edit


PhilipofBVM (talk) 21:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I may have detected some hacking; may I get some help here? If I recall correctly, I have not made any submissions here on Wikipedia for some 6 months. Now I am told I am ready for caput, due to the recent submission of a new article. Is there some researcher here, who can search this all out? It is not that hard to do, but is time consuming and I am not able at present to do this. It is said I broke some copyright law on some insertion of some photo from some copyrighted site, and copy write photo. I have yet to figure out what is going on here! As I said on one of the talk pages in this regards, if so, please take down that particular photo, but please do not delete my account on Wikipedia. Some six months or so ago, I was proving that Constantine was The Great Constantine, and that he was a true Catholic saint, and that he was lied about by Eusebius, who falsely claimed his Holy Baptism was not earlier on in his life, but was at his deathbed by some apostate bishop. The truth as I proved was that Saint Sylvester I the reigning pope of that time, did indeed baptize him during his life, and the miracles then wrought in confirmation of this, were proof enough. So, if you want to take down some photo, do so, if you must, but, please do not delete my entire site. Thank you. Nota bene: For your only hope of salvation, go to www.johnthebaptist.us Repent of your heresies and sins, become a true Catholic, that you might have a hope to be saved in the coming chastisement, and the latter days of the great apostasy. Sincerely, philipofBVMPhilipofBVM (talk) 21:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You added content to your sandbox that was copied and pasted from http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Two-saints-to-know-and-love that is what is being deleted. Nobody has mentioned any photographs except you? Please do not proselytise on here either, it will gain you no favours whatsoever. Theroadislong (talk) 21:25, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Please understand that we have no interest in your religious beliefs and that many people in this multicultural and multi or no faith website find religious blandishments offensive. Please do not do that any more.
Your "site" (a) is not yours, but ours. See WP:OWN and (b) has been judged by others to have been copied in whole or in part from http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Two-saints-to-know-and-love a site which does not allow onward licencing. We delete all copyright violations to protect the copyright owner's copyright. This is true even if you are the author there. Please see WP:Donating copyright material. Even so, please note that material written for one web site may be wholly unsuitable for another.
There is no hacking here. Your draft reached an expiry point and an editor noticed and determined it to be a breach of copyright. You had not edited it otherwise since January. Fiddle Faddle 21:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now, I see: I can explain all this to your satisfaction, but, must end it here, as I cannot go farther than this last point: philipofBVMPhilipofBVM (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC) Here is the point: yes, I did copy that information from cathinfo site; however, I am the one who penned that information, and it was backed up by some other Wikipedian. Ergo: this can never be considered copywrite infringement, to cut and paste one's own writing, word for word. Case closed. I might add here, that, for presenting the factual truth, in regards to the true Catholic baptism, of Saint Constantine the Great by Pope Sylvsester I, during his lifetime, and/or similiar factual reportings, such as this, and also, for example, that Marcel LeFebre was not a Catholic, but an apostate, for denying the "salvation dogma", I was banned from cathinfo site, and about 5 other sites, for telling the truth. Will also Wickedpedia also ban me? I can't go any further on all this. Go "seek, ask, and knock" and you shall find the true Catholic Church. Since you don't want me to give the site, most people can find it anyways by using key words. Thanks, again. Sincerely, philipofBVMPhilipofBVM (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PhilipofBVM has now been indefinitely blocked. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:11:24, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Snorky9

edit


Snorky9 (talk) 22:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC) Hello, Would it help my submission if I included more references? I have dozens, if not hundreds of sources.[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eckhartz_Press

It is not a question of number of sources, but instead a question of quality and relevance of sources. Regarding quality, blogs and similar amateur material are not normally considered reliable, thus any blogspot sources will not help in proving the notability of the organization. Regarding relevance, many of the sources your Draft currently has are about books published by the organization, or authors whose books are published by the organization, rather than being about the organization itself. Thus they do not contain significant coverage of the organization and thus do not help in proving its notability. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 07:00, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:04:02, 4 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Bige11378

edit


hi I am trying to create this because my work is being credited to someone else with the same name so I am not sure what I can do to fix this. any assistance or advice would be appreciated. and as a side note I did receive a reply to a previous request but basicly was a writer saying pay him 500 bucks and he would write a guaranteed article and I was like no thanks.


Bige11378 (talk) 23:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eric, thank you for alerting us to the scammer that attempted to contact you. It seems likely that you have saved yourself 500 dollars, as no payment of monies can guarantee a Wikipedia article being kept in place if sufficient sources do not exist to justify it. Whoever contacted you is not a legitimate Wikipedia editor.
With regard to Draft:Eric Trautmann, I cannot really give you any good news. With the references currently provided, the Draft does not come close to meeting Wikipedia:VRS which is our basic standard for whether Wikipedia can have an article about a topic. It seems to me that the only way to fix this is for you to find independent reliable sources (books, magazines, trade journals, mainstream news or factual websites) which talk in detail either about you, or about your writing, or about your TV appearances, or about your other work. And add those sources to the Draft and then resubmit it for another review.
As I understand the situation, there is an unfortunate coincidence that, although there is not a Wikipedia article about you (an actor and author), there is a Wikipedia article about another Eric Trautmann (a comic book and roleplaying franchise author). In my opinion, the article about the comic book author does not demonstrate that he meets Wikipedia:VRS either, and I have added a notability template to the article about him, which may be followed by a nomination for that article to be deleted. In such circumstance, there will be no article about any Eric Trautmann on Wikipedia, so although Wikipedia will not be helping to solve the misattribution of work and confusion of identity, at least it will not be contributing to such misattribution and confusion. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:17:59, 4 August 2015 review of submission by Novastage

edit


I am not sure this is the right place to inquire, but I try since I want to start writing articles about other scientists. In the article about "Stefan Mittnik" I wrote it still says

"This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources."

Since the sources cited are probably the most reliable out there (Deutsche Bundesbank, German Research Foundation, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung etc.), I assume there is another problem, which I haven't figured out.

Can you help here? Or where can I find out?

Thanks for your help! Novastage (talk) 23:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The first two paragraphs of the biography section do not have any inline citations, which I suspect is the main reason someone added the template. This is a bit borderline really... these are relatively uncontroversial facts about his education and early career, and I don't think anyone is seriously challenging them. So perhaps inline citations aren't really needed for these paragraphs anyway, even though we do try to be more demanding in articles about living people. Perhaps some of the existing sources, or some other sources, can be used to support the material in these paragraphs. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 06:55, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2015_August_4&oldid=675343097"