Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 September 24
Emalkay[edit]
Can someone help me with the page? Thanks.
Mbreak (talk) 03:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- The page was deleted under A7 "Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject".
- Please refer to WP:VRS, WP:BIO. Consider writing a user space draft next time - but you will need those references! Chzz ► 18:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Request for help with new page about "Tiempo".
Rc524 (talk) 14:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- It looks too promotional at present, mostly because there are no references, except for the first section. Please stick to verifiable facts, and try to introduce references to some newspaper articles, if possible, instead of relying on the various involved organization links.
- Claims, such as It has been in continuous production since 1994, has a global readership in excess of 10,000, and is available freely on request. - need an appropriate independent reliable source, or else should be removed.
- Be careful to maintain a neutral point-of-view - for example, you state expert advisers - who considers them 'expert'? It sounds like opinion, rather than fact.
- Trim it down to independently verifiable factual information, and try to make it more 'encyclopaedic' - just state neutral facts, and let the readers decide their significance. provides an opportunity for developing county authors to present their ideas probably needs removing altogether. this group includes representatives of other regions of interest to the Tiempo Programme [citation needed] to prepare for an increase in regionalisation of Tiempo to the South Pacific, Southeast Asia and Latin America [according to whom?]
Chzz ► 18:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Connecticut Resources Recovery Authroity[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Resources_Recovery_Authority (don't know why it didn't link it automatically... grrr, just when I think I'm getting the hang of wiki-ing)
Hello Wikipedians. Just posted a new article and would love feedback. My initial goal was to do a museum page for the Garbage museum but it morphed into this as it seemed a better way to handle the Garbage and Trash museums together under the CRRA (and since sourcable information was hard to uncover on the museums alone). So the article is a stub as there is far more inforamtion about the CRRA orgainzational structure, history, waste operations, etc... that would be better handled by someone more familiar with the topic.
ErinNik (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- Nice work. You've avoided most of the pitfalls of typical editors, so I'll have to come up with a nit: your section on Trash-to-energy is a bit choppy—seven sentences in five paragraphs. See if some of the paragraphs can either be expanded or combined.--SPhilbrickT 11:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you (I'm going to take a bow because I feel this feedback is quite a compliment - it's a tough crowd out there!). I am glad to have your nits! I actually hate a "looks great" when I ask for feedback because I think everything can be improved. I agree with the choppy comment and have fixed it. It looks different on the page than in the editor and I didn't do a once over with fresh eyes on the public view before posting. Thanks for taking the time to rewiew my article and provide comments! ErinNik (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
No published book has been written on the Samson V, yet it is the last steam powered sternwheeler to operate in Canada, one of five intact sternwheelers that remain in the country. With a similar operating history as the W.T. Preston and the Snagboat Montgomery, the Samson has the distinction of being the only Canadian sternwheeler snagboat preserved. The only references are newspaper and magazine articles on the ship and primary sources such as archival material which I have investigated extensively, but lacking any other published reference other than the New Westminster B.C. heritage website pages on the ship- how can you establish this as a subject worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia?
Mark MacKenzie11 (talk) 18:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- Couple comments:
- Don't indent paragraphs - that caused the blue boxes you saw. I fixed it.
- Check out Referencing for beginners
- Sounds like it has interesting potential, but references to reliable sources are needed, and in proper formats.--SPhilbrickT 12:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
The Google.org Project 10^100 recently draw attention to the Shweeb invention, a personal and eco-friendly transportation prototype. I created a very first draft of a page to describe Shweeb. Is this notable enough to be continued?
Cispeo (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- It might be, if you added facts from appropriate reliable sources, such as newspaper articles. Start with a Google News search gere, and add facts, with the reference details - see WP:CITE for how to do that part, and I'll add help on your own talk page too. Chzz ► 20:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm am creating a wikipedia page for a woman who is running for Congress in my area. She was a State Representative for 8 years before running for Congress. I was a bit surprised to see there wasn't already a page on her, especially since the other candidates have pages. (Even the one who was never in a political position before). I have used her campaign site as one of my references. I assume that is okay since it has been vetted by the newspapers, who fact-checked the Congressional sites. That should be alright correct? I do have newspapers and the state legislature as other references.
Csmr209 (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- Although the references are good, it really just sounds like an advertisement for this person, as the tag at the top says. Try and make the article's tone and language style more 'neutral' - see WP:TONE and WP:POV for more information. Wikipedia articles aren't supposed to sound like advertisements. Chevymontecarlo 09:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Created a draft for new research and technology park in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Following the advice of the wiki instructions, posting here for review/input. Thanks!
CAMiller62 (talk) 21:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- A few formatting/design ideas:
- According to the Manual of style, you really should use sections instead of bold text for each of the sections.
- Also, try and add some names to the references, like this:
This is an example sentence <ref>[http://www.example.com|Reference name goes here!]</ref>
This gives the reader more of an idea of what the reference link is, rather than just a bare link like you have at the moment.
As well as this, you might want to take a look at the tone and language style of the article, as at the moment it seems to just read like an advertisement in places. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be neutral in tone and not sound like advertisements for the article's subject. Chevymontecarlo 09:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi wiki editors, Please review my article about 'Bhavishya Chandra' is the person, who is the youngest provided computer training to kids in a remote villages of INDIA, and also keeping up -to-date with computer certifications at very young age of 9 years. Thanks. Again my article link is Bhavishya Chandra Kamineni User:Futuremoon/Enter your new article here
Futuremoon (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- Please read Manual of Style. Your over-use of big and bold fonts is not in keeping with the Wikipedia style. I fixed a few, but frankly, it was so distracting, I could not concentrate on the article.--SPhilbrickT 23:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
New article needing general review
Lmb1962 (talk) 22:31, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- I don't really have any suggestions as to the layout or formatting of the article, but the article's tone and language style does need a bit of work, as the tag at the top says. It sounds like an advertisement in places. See WP:POV and WP:TONE for more information. Chevymontecarlo 10:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
how can I make this one sound more encyclopedic.
MrsABK (talk) 23:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- It is too much like an essay, and appears to be original research - which we do not do.