Help desk
< July 4	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 6 >

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.

July 5

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest

Created new page with substantial CURRENT information regarding the newly merged National Forests--didn't consider it appropriate to keep updating OLD entities that no longer exist as such. The response was this:

"Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest instead."

Only problem is that the article that "already exists" IS this article, but the link goes to the OLD article. The article should be approved and the redirect link eliminated.

What to do? 161.119.83.151 (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you said, Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest indeed exists and redirects to the old article. Since anyone can edit existing pages, you can fix that by editing the redirect page and turning it into an article. Could you also add a reliable source for the 2007 merger of the forests? Surely newspapers will have covered the evet. Huon (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of User:RonCoyoteLee/sandbox

I am begging you to please publish this column,this is the only place on the planet that finally I might get the help ive so waited for. Every single word is the 100% truth, This is only a small part of what they have done to me since I was 7 years old,After being tortured by my step father I was taken at the age of 7 and tortured and they did tests on me and when i got released at age 18 after being locked up,raped,beaten,had experiements done on me they have never let me be free of them,Nebraska was the worst that they have done but not by much. I am telling the truth and they are probably going to kill me anyway,I was only a test that failed for them because I did not become the monster that they raised me to be and they have tortured me my whole life. I have no answers,I only know the facts of what they have done and im praying that if this goes out on wikileak maybe just maybe a country will take me.

I Swear to you that they will never ever challenge anything ive wrote because it will open the door to suining the whole united states government.I Will take any polygragh test and ill never fail because im telling the truth of what they did to me and this is the first time I finally had the chance to write it without colapsing or being sick everywhere.

I have wrote the truth and if anyone were to finally investigate then id finally get atleased a little dignity back because they took everything else from me.

Please dont let them get away with this,please. I have wrote about it on blogger and oped months ago when I was so sick I thought id be dead. Im still sick but my mind is here,ive lost 2 more pounds,thats 10 pounds in 9 days and they cant stop it or they wont,I should be in a hospital right now but even the mayo is trying to stay clear of this,they are trying to make me comfortable but they arent really trying to save me and I dont know how much longer I will have left if i dont stop losing weight.

Im praying that with this column out on wikileak it might bring me the help that I need,my passport is only good thru 2014 but at this rate i dont think ill see christmas.

Please please dont denie the column,it might be my last chance to get excepted into another country whom can save me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RonCoyoteLee (talk • contribs) 07:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately Wikipedia is not the right place for this kind of information. It is not a soapbox, and we require our content not only to be true, but verifiable from reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Since it also contained unreferenced accusations of a murderous conspiracy, I have nominated it for speedy deletion as an attack page. That's not to say that the allegations aren't true, but Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth, and such allegations agaist living persons cannot be accepted without a secondary source such as a newspaper article to back them up. Huon (talk) 12:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, it is an encylopaedia. Columns and autobiographical pieces simply aren't what we do.

It is also, emphatically, not a not the place to seek legal, medical, emigration or any other professional advice. You need to go to a professional for the help you're asking for. joe•roe^t•c 12:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jason Brooks

hello Im totally lost. this is my first wiki article. I've been getting the feedback but confused it keeps saying autobiography and peacock terms and I need better references. For the references the only thing I could find online was an old article, ian carry's biography and wiki article and some rave flyers. Peacock terms, I read and read and re read I don't think I played my article up or anything. If so please make a suggestion and i will change more Not an autobiography...I work as a bartender and club promoter, wish I was a dj thank you for your help with this.Dj jason brooks (talk) 08:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, if you're not DJ Jason Brooks, you should not have chosen the username User:Dj jason brooks. Usernames that impersonate another person are in violation of our username policy. You can either request a name change or simply abandon your current account and register a new one that doesn't imply you're someone else.

The lack of references is a serious matter. If no better references can be found, Brooks may simply not be notable enough for an article of his own. See also WP:MUSIC for notability criteria for musicians - I currently don't see which of those he's supposed to satisfy.

Regarding the "peacock terms": Brooks "gained successes in the Hip Hop world, real estate and fashion industries" - what exactly did he do, who called it a success? That would need more information and attribution to a reliable source. He's "a chart topping music producer"? That would also require a source, and I don't think it's actually true, since I'd read "chart topping" as "produced a Number One hit", which for all I can tell he didn't do. If I'm wrong, what was the hit? Surely there are secondary sources naming the producers of such hits. Huon (talk) 12:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Internews Europe

Dear Reviewer,

I have checked the reference guidelines by wikipedia and do not know how I could further improve my entry Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Internews Europe . Could you be more clear on what I have done wrong? Shall I ask Internews Europe to get the rights to use their references?

With kind regards, Stoefferlh Stoefferlh (talk) 09:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What we need are not more refereces from Internews, but reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles. Many of your current sources are by Internews and its affiliates, and many others only mention it only in passing. Still others, such as the blog at HuffPo, probably lack the editorial oversight and reputation for fact-checking and accuracy necessary to be considered reliable. But significant coverage in reliable secondary sources is necessary to establish a topic's notability. Significant parts of your drafts, such as the section on activities, don't cite any sources at all. Huon (talk) 12:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

parts of DOS commands

what are the parts of DOS commands — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.158.121 (talk) 10:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. joe•roe^t•c 12:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Fishing World Records.com e. U.

aDear friends,

the reference database on this website is used hundreds of times for different articles in Wikipedia (different languages) e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad_whitefish#cite_note-5

Therefore it is not logical that an article about the website/database itself is a problem without citation.

The website is often mentioned and described by different magazines in different languages e.g. http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/gallery/fishing/2010/04/world-record-fish?photo=0#node-1001324895 http://www.fischundfang.de/Service/Aktuelle-Meldungen/Surf-Tipp-www.fishing-worldrecords.com http://www.angelfieber.com/webnews-fishing-world-records/

Is this a source which can be used?

P.S. the article about the IGFA, a comparable organisation includes no single citation!

    Why was this article accepted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Game_Fish_Association

thank you in advance for your help HeinzHeinz3295 (talk) 11:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is logical, for a number of reasons:

That the site it used as a reference for Wikipedia says nothing about how worthy it is for inclusion in its own right – in other words, being a reliable source does not make something notable
All Wikipedia articles require cited sources, otherwise there's no way to verify the information. Furthermore, at least some of these sources need to be independent of the subject, because we can't fully trust what a body has to say about itself. There are no exceptions.
There are plenty of articles that probably shouldn't exist, that doesn't mean your similar one should

The links you've included here are exactly the kind of independent source that's required, however. You should include them in your submission. joe•roe^t•c 12:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

system software

what are the latest details about system software?? five detailed examples of application software?? comparison between application software and system softwaer?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.72.217.74 (talk) 11:39, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. joe•roe^t•c 12:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Yogscast

HOW LONG IS A HORSES DICK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.45.183.119 (talk) 11:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On average, 50 cm flaccid and 100 cm erect. But question like that really belong in the reference desk. This page is for help with AfC submissions.

Your AfC doesn't appear to be submitted at the moment. joe•roe^t•c 12:02, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Steve_Schlanger

I have edited the article, added new sources and resubmitted it for review. Can you please take a look? Thanks.

SessoccerSessoccer (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do some copyediting later tonight, but as the reviewer said, it currently reads like a resume: Schlanger is doing his job. So what? Doing his job, even for a rather public job like Schlanger's, on its own does not bestow notability. And while some of your new sources look good, you still haven't gotten rid of the bad sources, for example Wikipedia itself. Huon (talk) 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/CTI Electronics Corporation

What type of sources are you looking for? The company does not have any books or articles written about it. First reviewer wanted independent sources of information and I did provide sources that do cite CTI electronics and were not written by the company but by the other company that provides the site. What is in question after second review? Please be more clear there were no comments about what was in question. Is the company's credibility in question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CTIELECTRONICS (talk • contribs) 14:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately books or articles written about the company are exactly the kinds of sources we're looking for. Of the 25 references, one is a product review, another does not actually mention CTI, and the other 23 are all primary sources. But significant coverage in reliable secondary sources is required to establish the company's notability. If such sources do not exist or provide only trivial coverage, we probably should not have an article on the company. Huon (talk) 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jewish Fiction .net

Hi. I edited and resubmitted my article, but I must have done something wrong, since it just took me back to the page saying my first draft had not been accepted. Would you please advise me how to proceed? (I have copied the revised version below in case it was not saved properly.) Thank you, Dr. David S. Weiss (talk) 15:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)David S. Weiss[reply]

The draft has been properly resubmitted; there's a "Review waiting" message and it's categorized among the pending AfC submissions (the very last line). The message about the completed review is still the old one; think of it as a historical record that will allow the next reviewer to see what problems the draft had and to check whether they were resolved.

To me, the draft's tone still seems unduly laudatory. Take, for example, the claim that it's "a publishing space for first-rate but not yet well-known" authors: None of the references given make any claims about the authors being "first-rate", not even the interview with the founder herself. The secondary source has a much more neutral tone. Even worse, the Hadassah Magazine article gives numbers that differ from those in the draft.

The lines about the founder's award seemed rather irrelevant to me since the award was given long before Jewish Fiction .net was founded. Huon (talk) 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John X. Fernandez, Jr.

Regarding: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John X. Fernandez, Jr.

I'm trying very hard to address the reasons why this article isn't published. I believe I removed all inflated language, and am happy to remove as many links in the body as necessary to eliminate the spammy-ness.

At least two of the links in the references section verify Mr. Fernandez's work in the field. Am I misunderstanding what qualifies as verification? Also, his work is in the performing arts which I am not sure how to "verify" as they are ephemeral.

Please help me understand.

Very grateful for any help you can offer.

Thank you very much.

Alicia Ansteady (talk) 17:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requires significant coverage in sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles about him or independent reviews of his work, to establish his notability. (Such sources also discuss "ephemeral" subjects such as the performing arts - just look at a newspaper's feuilleton.) Almost all of your sources are primary sources such as the websites of organizations Fernandez is affiliated with. Most of the external links in the body are pretty useless because they only point to websites that do not mention him at all. For example, the Metropolitan Opera homepage does not mention Fernandez, and a search for him on that website came up empty. (If it did mention him, an organization's biography of their own employee would once again be a primary source anyway.) The only secondary source is the New York Times, and that provides only trivial coverage. Huon (talk) 20:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New article not searchable

The article Ben Downing (writer) was just accepted, but I am unable to search for it in the Wiki search bar. There is an existing entry for a different Benjamin Downing (member of the Massachusetts Senate); when I search for "Ben Downing" it automatically redirects me to this other page. How can I solve this issue? LLCBiography (talk) 23:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a little strange. For now I've turned Ben Downing into a disambiguation page, but that's just a workaround. Sometimes the search bar takes some time to find brand-new articles; if the problem persists, you should probably raise the issue at WP:Village pump (technical), where more tech-savvy people can be found. Huon (talk) 00:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]