Help desk
< January 17	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 19 >

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.

January 18[edit]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PUBLIC NOTICE - OPPT- One Peoples Public Trust[edit]

This public notice , if no other is willing to sacrifice their IP address is groundbreaking. please edit it as of clear addressed examples, I have no experience! I am of no fear, I am free 92.109.107.26 (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your draft was deleted as (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP). That is, it appeared to the reviewer that your draft was not a proper article, but just a biased and negative expression about a person or group, that is why it was deleted. If you feel this is a misunderstanding, please clarify here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, the information is to delicate to address to the world and wikipedia does not want the truth on the internet, remember the truth cannot be held against the the will off the people. The G10 ground is unbiased, you can also just state: wikipedia does not want the real truth on the internet or the powers that where, want to reprimand on the organisation. You can block my ip now, I find other ways to reveal the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.109.107.26 (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jay-P[edit]

hello i think i have gathered all the info regarding this article. can you please advise me on any additions or ommissions i may have to make to it. AlexanderGee (talk) 07:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That page is not currently submitted for review. To submit it for review, add {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Srishti Innovative[edit]

I see Articles for creation/Srishti Innovative is rejected .I was not using it as advertising our company.I referred few approved company article and wrote a similar kind of article here yet it is rejected . My primary aim is to advise all professionals to follow our non-profit charitable organization kind of thing to help the needy child. Can you pls tell where i went wrong?

Can you please advise me to on this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srishtiics (talk • contribs) 09:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your aim and our aim seem to diverge, because our aim is to write an encyclopedia. Also, what is a "blood camp"? It sounds rather alarming. For comparison purposes, links to recognised Wikipedia Good Articles about businesses and companies can be found at Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society#Businesses & organizations. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Anscombe[edit]

Urgent - overdue review Dear Wikipedia, I am still waiting for review of this article. It's been 11 days now I believe. It took 2 days the first time you reviewed it and I have since made corrections. Please could you let me know if I have done something wrong and when this review will take place?

Best,

Ha0250

Ha0250 (talk) 09:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Ha0250, your article is not currently awaiting review. Note the large pink box at top has a green button saying "Resubmit". You have to push that button to get back in line for a review. We are currently running behind on reviews, so it could take a week or more; but remember, WP:Wikipedia has no deadline, so there is no "urgent" involved.

Before you Resubmit, note your draft needs to properly code its section headings (see WP:Sections) and your sources must be footnoted, not simply listed at bottom. Don't manually number your footnotes, instead use the coding given at WP:Referencing for beginners. Once you've fixed those two things, go ahead and Resubmit. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mulumba Ivan Matthias How do I put the image of the person in question? Faintsmoke (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please wait on uploading images until after the article is published. But for your reference, see WP:Images. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Silvius von Kessel[edit]

I introduced three external links, it works. BUT the external links relating to German Wikipedia Sites does not work. What am I doing wrongly? Could you help me and perhaps verify that? Thank you so much. Hikulus_07 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hikulus 07 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hikulus 07, I've fixed it for you, so take a look at how I coded it. Also, other WP articles go under "See also", non-Wikipedia links go under "External links". MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gainor Roberts[edit]

Hello, I just submitted my first article and have some questions. The article is titled Gainor Roberts and was created with the Article Wizard.

1. Do references go on a separate page or after the article text? 2. I put references to other Wikipedia articles directly after the word to be a hyperlink and enclosed the reference in parentheses. I didn't list them at the end. OK? How are they turned into hyperlinks? 3. I numbered my outside-Wikipedia references and listed them under references. I inserted the <ref> </ref> html and copied each where it belonged as a footnote in the text. OK? 4. I notice formatting is gone. How do I reinsert? 5. One sentence is now in a grey box. What does this mean?

Thank you. Evelyn4414 (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Evelyn4414 Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gainor Roberts[reply]

Hello Evelyn4414, your footnotes weren't appearing because you lacked the {{reflist}} which causes them to list themselves auto-numbered at the end. I fixed that for you, your list of footnotes appeared, and I deleted the redundant version you'd pasted at the end, so that's all good. For the hyperlinks, what we call wikilinks, you don't want to do what you're doing now, simply type double-brackets around key term like so: [[Japan]]. The words are in the gray box because you left an empty space before the start of a line, so I removed the space for you; that's why you don't want to "indent" any paragraph. It's good to get these technical issues sorted out now, so your reviewer will only have to concern themselves with content and sourcing. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/PJLink[edit]

Hi,

I just try to find some neutral references for my article PJLink. Actually PJLink is originated by Japanese Business Machine manufacturers assoziation. The task of that organization is to bundle the interests of the japanese IT manufacturers and to lobby as well as standardize them. In the Industry JBMIA is a strong and reliable institution.

For communication protocols for projectors JBMIA standardized PJLink.

The source to proof PJLink exists has to be

signigicant: With the use of PJlink in around 10 Brands with more than 100 Projector models, to my understaning, significance should be given.
reliable: JBMIA is reliable trustworthy japanese organization and
independent: With JBMIA being the initiator, independence is not given. How to do?

PJLink is trademark protected, but the Japanese Tradmark office at least in English version of page does not confirm existance of that trademark. How to do?

JBMIA in Japan is comparable to European Computer Manufacturer Assoziation in Europe. For the US I'm sure a similar organization exists, but I would not know their name.

Thank you for your advise. Heinrich — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heinrich.morgen (talk • contribs) 16:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of submission Marcia Willett[edit]

AT a loss as to what to do. Like many writers I use two names - my real name is Rodney Willett but I also write under the name Ron Widdicombe. I used the latter to "join" Wikipedia.

My novelist wife also uses two names. Her own is Marcia Willett (and under that name she has had some twenty-six novels published) and also writes under the name Willa Marsh.

Following comments from various readers, I created a sandbox entitled Marcia WIllett but did not publish it for a long time - mainly through being unhappy that I properly understood how articles should be published. Following further nagging, I published it yesterday.

Since everything about her is what it is, mots of the stuff in the article has appeared on one of our three web sites (ours, her and mine) or on one of my blogs. It is, of course, totally accurate.

The article was almost immediately deleted for copyright reasons.

I tried to use "chat" to dins out more but couldn't make it work - sorry about that - so where do we go from here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron Widdicombe (talk • contribs) 19:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article was rejected for not being written in an encyclopaedic tone before being deleted for being a straight copy-and-paste of your website. It read a lot like a feature in a magazine, or the blurb from the back of a book, rather than a flat, factual, encyclopaedia article. It also lacked any independent, reliable sources.

Writing articles when you are this close to the subject is not recommended, as it is difficult to write objective, neutral prose.

While we have your assurance that the content is true, I only know you are who you say you are because it is improbable that anyone whould want to impersonate you.

Where do you go from here? I would suggest trying the teahouse who may be able to talk youthrough the finer points of article creation, beyond the limited explaination of the reasons an article is declined that are possible here. Rankersbo (talk) 09:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/oganiru ndigbo ukraine, kyiv[edit]

Hello Editors, What can i do to get my article post and published on wikipedia? it concerns a non governmental, non profit organization called Oganiru Ndigbo Ukraine, kyiv. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.120.113.220 (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 176.120.113.220, did you read the pink box at the top, and the advice posted below it? Before we offer you more advice, we must be sure you've read the advice you've been given so far. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:18, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]