Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 June 7

< 2010 June 6

2010 June 7

2010 June 8 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

Results for Development Institute[edit]

This is a request for review for the article on "Results_for_Development_Institute." The article describes a nearly 3 year old non-profit organization that focuses on a number of health, transparency and education issues in the developing world. It is in many ways similar to a think tank, however the mission is to not only research and publish on the issues, but also actively engage policymakers, donor agencies, and other key stakeholders so that knowledge is translated into action. Please review this article so that the box at the top "unreviewed" article can be removed and any improvements necessary can be made. Thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_for_Development_Institute —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.86.242 (talk) 00:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to change the text so that it is neutral, not in favor of the subject. You should also add references that prove it's notability.

~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· The Wiki Puzzle Piece Award 00:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Espinosa[edit]

Can someone review this? -Espmone (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, but I would recommend the following improvements...

Adding Reliable References - References prove the notability, or importance of the subject, why it should be included in an encyclopedia. You :should add more from places that show this, such as a newspaper or bod website that is not theirs.

Adding Reliable Sources - Sources show where you got your info from and that it is reliable\accurate.

Inline Citations - Show where you got sections of information within the text - they are especially important for somewhat controversial topics.

Expanding It - The text portion is rather short and may need to be expanded.

Reformatting Coding - The coding is somewhat out of uniform and should be touched up.

Cleaning It Up - Improving the visual appeal of the article.

Adding Pictures - You can always use a good photo!

Adding An Infobox - Info-boxes are always good for an article - they help people see the most important info.

Good job though! If you have any questions or need help improving, or publishing it to Wikiepdia, feel free to contact me here or visit my page :here. I would also recommend possibly reading this. :QwerpQwertus (talk) 03:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Forma[edit]

Review of this draft appreciated User:Penbay/Warren_Forma Ron Huber (talk) 06:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to read WP:CITE and footnotes, which will help you make references properly.--SPhilbrick T 10:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

National Interscholastic Swimming Coaches Association[edit]

User:Emjulian/National Interscholastic Swimming Coaches Association

An overview of the NISCA organization and their programs.

Emjulian (talk) 14:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Espinosa[edit]

Can someone review this? -Espmone (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, but I would recommend the following improvements...

Adding Reliable References - References prove the notability, or importance of the subject, why it should be included in an encyclopedia. You :should add more from places that show this, such as a newspaper or bod website that is not theirs.

Adding Reliable Sources - Sources show where you got your info from and that it is reliable\accurate.

Inline Citations - Show where you got sections of information within the text - they are especially important for somewhat controversial topics.

Cleaning It Up - Improving the visual appeal of the article.

Adding Pictures - You can always use a good photo!

Adding An Infobox - Info-boxes are always good for an article - they help people see the most important info.

Good job though! If you have any questions or need help improving, or publishing it to Wikiepdia, feel free to contact me here or visit my page :here. I would also recommend possibly reading this. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 22:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Pink Pages Directory[edit]

Hello, I've only been able to find one online source to back up my contribution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vaughnlal/The_Pink_Pages_Directory

Is this ok to go live?

Thanks,

Vaughn Lal 06/07/10 Vaughnlal (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should add references to prove it's notability and make it sound more neutral most importantly. Also, a pic and infobox may help. After that, I can help you with possibly putting it up live here. Thanks! ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 23:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Espinosa[edit]

Can someone review this? -Espmone (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, but I would recommend the following improvements...

Adding Reliable References - References prove the notability, or importance of the subject, why it should be included in an encyclopedia. You :should add more from places that show this, such as a newspaper or bod website that is not theirs.

Adding Reliable Sources - Sources show where you got your info from and that it is reliable\accurate

Reformatting - The coding is somewhat out of uniform and should be touched up.

Adding Pictures - You can always use a good photo!

Adding An Infobox - Info-boxes are always good for an article - they help people see the most important info.

Good job though! If you have any questions or need help improving, or publishing it to Wikiepdia, feel free to contact me here or visit my page :here. I would also recommend possibly reading this. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 22:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sophie Chandauka 2[edit]

Sophie Chandauka

Dear Editor,

I would be very grateful if you would please kindly review my short article about Sophie Chandauka, a young Zimabwean corporate lawyer in London who has achieved notable success prefessionally, whilst advocateing the empowerment of young people and women.

The article was created carefully using the Article Wizard. I also sought and received some feeback from a volunteer editor, which I appreciated and took into account in revising the article before making a request for it to be posted.

I look forward to receiving your thoughts.

Thanks for your time.

With best regards,

Nondaba

7 June 2010 Nondaba (talk) 19:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to prevent it's deletion, I would add more content which emphasizes her importance now. - Other than that, it's very good. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 23:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks very good. I made a couple minor changes, the most notable of which was to use her surname rather than first name per WP:SURNAME policy. I did it semi-automatically, I don't think I made an errors, but you might want to make sure. Nice job.--SPhilbrick T 23:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request For Feedback[edit]

Dear Sir/madam,

I have drafted a small article of our club. I just want to know your feedback regarding this.

See we very well love our club and its activities. This is just another step towards its success. So i very much wants this to be in wikipedia.

I will be updating more with pictures and all.

So to add another milestone to our club i require your feedback & suggestions.

Thanks & Regards,

Krish —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcnmenon (talk • contribs) 20:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your contributions, but your article may not be suitable for Wikipedia as is, however, with some work, it may be...

You should add references to prove it's notability or importance to the world and why it should be in an encyclopedia. If it is not notable enough, it may be deleted.
It will need to be made longer.
It should have a very official and factual tone.
Pictures and an info box may help.

Also, would you like to make the name Mall Cricket Club instead of ARTICLE NAME HERE?

If you have any questions or want help, feel free to contact me! Thanks! ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 22:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(QQ responded while I was writing; I’ll still include with this similar observations.) I’m in a club related to a sports team as well, and we do love our club. However, that doesn’t make our club notable enough for Wikipedia. Unless you can find independent coverage of your club in reliable sources, the Club will not be considered notable enough for inclusion. In addition, the tome of the existing draft is not consistent with the desired tone for a Wikipedia article. see WP:Tone for more information.SPhilbrick T 22:37, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Scott George[edit]

Tony Scott George —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smeagol2010 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it's a pretty good article, but it could use a few things...

You should add references to prove it's notability or importance to the world and why it should be in an encyclopedia. (and inline citations may help.)
It will probably need to be made longer.
Pictures and an info box may help.

If you have any questions or want help, feel free to contact me! Thanks! ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 22:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to merge some of your external links into the article, using the inline citations that QwerpQwertus mentions. As well as this, you might want to add more links to the article as well. Chevy monte carlo - alt 12:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this is an article about the actor Tony Scott George, it should include things like: where he was educated, what he did before he got into acting, what stage school he attended etc. otherwise it just sounds like a resume. Adding stuff like this will make the article more interesting and longer which is one of QwerpQwertus' concerns.--Ykraps (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crizotinib[edit]

Please provide feedback on the following article: Crizotinib I am knowledgeable in this area, but this is my first Wikipedia article. Thanks!

ScienceRulz2012 (talk) 21:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's your first article? It's very good, though it may not survive if it's notability now cannot be proven - future notability is not counted. Other than that, all I can recommend might be a picture. ~ QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· 22:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine; move it to the live area. It would help if you could add a little more context for the layman; explaining it in simpler terms at the beginning.

It shouldn't be classed as a stub - it should be 'start class', and then perhaps ask for a more detailed review to expand and improve it towards B-class, etc.

If you have not already done so, join some project groups, and ask their opinions on their talk pages - e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology, Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology. Chzz ► 03:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked a couple experts to weigh in; hopefully, one or the other or both will provide some feedback.--SPhilbrick T 23:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]