User talk:FoCuSandLeArN/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:FoCuSandLeArN. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Reliable sources - George Davis
Hi,
Thanks in advance for your help. My article about George Davis was reviewed and it was determined that I needed to include more reliable, verifiable sources. What information needs to be cited? Please help.
Best, El Shaddai Gebreyes
elshaddai.gebreyes@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.178.227 (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- hello! please have a look at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. let me know if you need any further assistance. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 10 December 2012
- News and notes: Wobbly start to ArbCom election, but turnout beats last year's
- Featured content: Wikipedia goes to Hell
- Technology report: The new Visual Editor gets a bit more visual
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Human Rights
Resubmission of article Dr Beric John Croome for review
Dear FoCuSandLeArN
I've rewritten the article taking account of your advice and have resubmitted it for review (I think I followed the right process - sorry, I really am struggling to get my head around the Wiki programme, I'm trying not to blame my age!! :))
When you have the time, could I please ask you to check that you have received the edited re-submission in your review queue?
If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to let me know and I'll rework it again.
On another note, I was reading your "user page" and I see you're a member of the "kindness campaign" - just want to say what a wonderful idea that is! We need more kindness in the world and to find out that Wikipedia actually has a policy to encourage it was lovely to read (although, in a way, sad too, that people need a policy to remind them to be kind!) But full marks to Wiki & their team for highlighting the need and doing something positive!
With best wishes Judy, Aztar Press, Johannesburg, South Africa Aztar Press (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- hello there! thank you for your comments. the submussion will be reviewed as soon as possible, don't worry. yes, there is a kindness campaign, and it is worrying that such campaigns need exist, but better to have one than not. i am aware of the increasing regulation of personal and societal values and as such it should be unnecessary, but as it is it seems like the most prudent thing to do. happy editing! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- No rush - when you have time (I'm not sure everything I edited is showing up). And yes, much better to remind people that a little kindness goes a long way than to do nothing and let kindness as a human quality disappear in the anonymity of the internet. Have a great day and enjoy the holiday season, Best, Judy :) Aztar Press (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
| The WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Signpost: 17 December 2012
- News and notes: Arbitrator election: stewards release the results
- WikiProject report: WikiProjekt Computerspiel: Covering Computer Games in Germany
- Discussion report: Concise Wikipedia; section headings for navboxes
- Op-ed: Finding truth in Sandy Hook
- Featured content: Wikipedia's cute ass
- Technology report: MediaWiki groups and why you might want to start snuggling newbie editors
Françoise Berd
Hi, and thank you for spending time on reviewing the page I created about Françoise Berd.
I rewrote some sentences to get rid of 'peacock terms'. As for references, I don't know what's wrong. I checked them all once again, and they are all reliable from what I could judge. So, I added 5 or 6 more, some in English.
Chdumont (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- hello there! in case you're unsure what wikipedia regards as appropriate references, check out Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
jinx!
Jinx! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:12, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- hehe, sorry for the conflict! 'ave a good one :) FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2012
- WikiProject report: A Song of Ice and Fire
- Featured content: Battlecruiser operational
- Technology report: Efforts to "normalise" Toolserver relations stepped up
Celtic Woman: Silent Night
Thank You For reviewing my submission.
As this is my first attempt at the creation of a article, I will be the first to admit to needing some help. I am not sure what is meant by lack of content you are referring to. It seams to be one or two sentences are enough text for other articles for Celtic Woman's other albums. If your talking about the context box and listing box, then could you please give me a link explaining how to create them. I tried to create a page for the cover picture, it seams you need the article it belongs to first before you can add the page. There is not much information out there about this album, even the Celtic Woman's website is not listing it. I would like this article to be completed so any help would be appreciated. Thank you for your time and effort.
One Day At A Time Mrs. Tammy Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by F58tammy (talk • contribs) 12:21, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- hello there, thank you very much for your post. a very detailed guide for albums can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide. if you have any further questions let me know. cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
___________________________________________________________________ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anne Delong (talk • contribs) 20:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear FoCuSandLeArN:
I have just submitted my first article for review. While waiting for my submission to find its way to the top of the queue, I have been looking at some of the other submissions and occasionally correcting some spelling, punctuation, etc. Is this acceptable, or should I stop? So many years of proofreading makes it tempting...
Also, if I see an article that needs a reference, and I happen to know of one, should I add it, or should I wait until the page is part of the encyclopedia? Do you prefer that submitters do all of their own work?
Some of the references for my article about the Toronto Light Opera Association depend on newspaper pages which are on line, but behind a pay wall. I didn't include the URL as part of the reference for this reason, since it wouldn't work unless one had a subscription. Is this correct? Should I submit scans to the review process so that the reviewers can see the newspaper pages?
Thanks for your help. Anne Delong 20:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hello again! i am happy that you're getting the hang of editing on wiki! congrats on your effort and will to do so! please do edit any entry you deem relevant. anyone is free to edit submissions, given that wikipedia is a collaborative effort and most submissions could use some proofreading or referencing at the least. as for the newspaper references, please add the link whenever possible, even though it were a paid subscription. that should be enough. keep up the good work. i hope you join the community as a whole and enjoy your time here. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
You have new messages
Hello. You have a new message at benzband's talk page. ~ benzband (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
My Sandbox
Dear FoCuSandLeArN:
I have been waiting a long time for my article to be reviewed, and in the meantime I would like to begin creating an article about the Ontario Genealogical Society. The article in the queue, though, is redirected from my sandbox. Can I move it somewhere else so that I can start a new article? Or should I start my new article somewhere else?
Thanks, Anne Delong 18:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anne Delong (talk • contribs)
- sure, if you look at the review template in orange at the bottom there should be a link that says "move". FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Gastropod Barnstar | |
| For all the good work you FoCuSandLeArN have already put into WikiProject Gastropods, persevering to improve and expand your stubs a little bit in the face of some opposition and misunderstanding, I award you this Gastropod Barnstar. Congratulations! All the very best wishes for 2013! Invertzoo (talk) 19:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC) |
The Signpost: 31 December 2012
- From the editor: Wikipedia, our Colosseum
- In the media: Is the Wikimedia movement too 'cash rich'?
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser a success; Czech parliament releases photographs to chapter
- Technology report: Looking back on a year of incremental changes
- Discussion report: Image policy and guidelines; resysopping policy
- Featured content: Whoa Nelly! Featured content in review
- WikiProject report: New Year, New York
- Recent research: Wikipedia and Sandy Hook; SOPA blackout reexamined
December 2012 Wikification Barnstars!
|
The WikiProject Wikify Trophy | |
| Congratulations on your first place leaderboard appearance during the December 2012 drive! benzband (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
The Gold Wikification Barnstar | |
| And props for wikifying the outstanding amount of 256 articles during the December drive, keep it up! benzband (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC) |
Happy New Year! 
benzband (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Philip Coppens (author)
You declined this for good reasons. A few hours after this editor created the submission, another editor created Philip Coppens (author). Dougweller (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- cheers. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Copy editing
Hi FoCuSandLeArN. I took a look at a couple of your copy edits for the GOCE drive because the word counts seemed surprisingly low -- and in fact they are very much too low. How are you getting them? You need to take a look at the page size tool described Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives#here (at item 7, headed "Have fun"). Let me know if you need any assistance with it, but please have a look there first.
Also, please take a look at WP:OVERLINK urgently, before doing any more copy edits. Please note especially that we don't link years, major countries, and well-known words whose articles don't directly clarify the article in question. Your language improvements are generally good, but it's a mistake to turn articles as blue as you're doing. Please see this re-edit of one of them for some examples. (Also note that it is incorrect to put an expression like "in 1621" between a verb and its object or predicate.)
Let me know if you have any questions (I'll keep this page watchlisted for a couple of days). Kind regards, --Stfg (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- Dear Stfg,
- First of all let me thank you for your valuable remarks. I am trying one hand at copy editing as such (even though I've been editing articles to a lesser extent for quite a bit) for the first time. I appreciate your being kind enough to notice. What I've been doing thus far is to use the page size tool before and after I've finished with an article, and subtracting the latter from the former, the result of which (the absolute value) would be the word count for that particular copy edit. Is this incorrect? Please let me know exactly how it's done in order for me to implement said method in my future edits. Also, if my work has been deficient, I'd appreciate some tips on how to improve. I have been trying small articles for the moment, as I think you might have taken notice, for the simple reason that they would be easier to approach, and so the reduced word count could be attributed to that. I understand your point on over linking and will act upon it immediately.
- Once again, thank you for your help. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Chiming in here: your work has generally been good in terms of grammar, spelling, and punctuation. To determine the word count to take credit for, just use the original page size count. We use that because it indicates the total amount of text you had to read through and edit, regardless of how many words you had to add or remove. For example, Syeda Ummehani Ashraf should be counted as 341 words. Hope that helps, and feel free to contact me if you have further questions. —Torchiest talkedits 18:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, that makes sense. So the initial word count? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Chiming in here: your work has generally been good in terms of grammar, spelling, and punctuation. To determine the word count to take credit for, just use the original page size count. We use that because it indicates the total amount of text you had to read through and edit, regardless of how many words you had to add or remove. For example, Syeda Ummehani Ashraf should be counted as 341 words. Hope that helps, and feel free to contact me if you have further questions. —Torchiest talkedits 18:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the initial one. And if you forget to pick it up in advance, as most of us occasionally do, you can still use the page size tool on the older version if you open it from the history. Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I should have added: because you have a very high edit count I guessed you might already know a fair amount about the MOS, but in case not, the brilliant Wikipedia:Simplified Manual of Style covers 99% of what we need to know below GAN level in about 1% the size of the MOS itself. --Stfg (talk) 20:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I do, but one can always improve :) FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
SUPERIOR Magazine
Dear FoCuSandLeArN,
You declined my contribution "SUPERIOR Magazine" on 3 January since it seems not be adequately supported by reliable sources.
Following are magazines that wrote articles about SUPERIOR Magazine with the content written in the Wikipedia Contributuion:
- http://www.hypefashion.de/superior-magazine-avantgarde-fashion-welt
- http://www.wuv.de/medien/ex_bbdo_mann_felber_macht_superior_magazine
These are independent magazines and they should be reliable sources. Does this information help?
Best regards, Artofstyle Artofstyle (talk) 00:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Dear Artofstyle, thank you for your post. Please have a look here and let me know if you have any other questions. As a simple rule, citations should be as detailed as possible, and should be independent as you said, but also should establish the notability of the article's subject. Please do apply any changes and resubmit the article for review when you deem it appropriate. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The Visigothic Kingdom of Tolosa
Hello, I am DoctorTQ. I recently wrote an article on the Visigothic Kingdom of Tolosa and read how you declined it from publication for the reason of it already existing as a topic in another article. This is true, and I even used the page, History of Toulouse, as a source for my article. However, the article on the History of Toulouse page talks more about the city, while mine is focused more on the Kingdom itself. I also personally believe that it would be easier for someone to do research on the Kingdom by finding an entire article, not just a short chapter in another article. If need be, I can improve my article a tad more, and make it even distinct from the History of Toulouse page. I am glad that you have reviewed my page, and I welcome you to make any comments, tweaks, or whatever on said page.
Thanks a bunch, DoctorTQ (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Dear DoctorTQ, thank you very much for the points raised. I did notice those issues, and feel that if the topic is indeed expanded upon and its angle reflects a sincere need of creating a separate article, then so be it. If you believe that the outcome of your revision is sufficient (e.g. extensive enough and expanding on what the main article states) for a separate article, then please do resubmit your draft. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Father Police
Hi
You have declined my article on the band Father Police for lack of citing referances. I'm the creator of the band and that should be reliable enough in my opinion. Please have another look at it.
Pingorock — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pingorock (talk • contribs) 17:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hello. first-hand accounts are not acceptable as references. please have a look at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
english version of Boulou Ferré , the jazz musician.
Hello,
I am the managing agent of Boulou Ferré and have submitted his english Wikipedia entry for review. In Wikipedia he is reviewed with his brother , whereas mine would be a). in English and b). focus only on him. It has been declined for unknown reasons (at least I can not find the reasons anywhere in the correspondence). The original article is here : http://fr.wiki.x.io/wiki/Boulou_et_Elios_Ferr%C3%A9
please help , as I would like it to appear as soon as possible
thanks
A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vonrozen (talk • contribs) 21:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- if you are directly involved with the artist, then beware of conflicts of interest to begin with. that said, as long as an article's subject is notable, and the article possesses adequate references, it will be considered in due regard. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
First Female Kurdish Pop Recording Artist
Hello,
I would like you help on how to become approved for being the first Female Kurdish Pop Recording Artist. Here is a copy of my Biography I am releasing a huge single this month in all stores.
Helan Abdulla, pka Helly Luv (November 16, 1988) is a recording artist. She is of Kurdish descent and born during the Persian Gulf War. Helly and her family escaped death by fleeing to Turkey for safety, yet homeless living under the bridge and begging for money. Fortunately, their application to become citizens of Finland was approved, allowing her and her family to be one of the first Kurdish immigrants to live there.
Growing up in Finland was not easy for Helly. She was bullied for not looking like everyone else as well as for being from a different culture. Unlike most Finnish children, all of her clothes and toys were either second hand or donated. This type of treatment forced Helly to find an outlet for which she would channel her anger and depression. She took an interest in singing in a neighborhood choir and then broadens her interest by playing the piano, and taking drama classes, allowing her to feel more accepted. Dancing became her primary focus and afforded her an opportunity to compete in European Dance Championships and soon signed a contract with Finland’s Nike Woman.
At the age of 18, she felt ready to pursue her next step. She saved all her money to purchase a plane ticket to Los Angeles. Helly came to LA believing in the “American Dream,” yet nothing came out as planned. She got robbed, almost raped, and blackmailed for all her savings. It was difficult for her to find the right people that would take her seriously. Helly continued to push on, but the life she had dreams about was not shaping into the future she had hoped it would. Suddenly, reality hit her hard. She went three weeks without electricity, eating crackers to survive, and had to deal with a landlord who frequently used her apartment to have sex with hookers. This experience discouraged Helly and made her feel it was the wrong risk to take. Just before giving up and leaving America, she received a MySpace message from music producer Los Da Mystro, requesting her to call him. Helly made the phone call and sang her heart out. In response to her telephone audition, he flew her out to New York the next day. They met and she signed her first development deal. She had the opportunity to work with The Dream and inspired him to write her a new record.
Recently, she signed with G2 Music Group to execute a new project for her. Helly’s new album will be produced by Gawain “G2” Bracy II and has a world dance sound to it. The first release will be titled “Risk It All.”
Helly Luv (talk) 01:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Helly Luv
- Hello! All Articles for Creation will be reviewed accordingly. the most important thing an article has to comply with is referencing and notability. as long as you can reference the article with trustworthy third-party references that establish the notability of the subject, your article has a good chance of being accepted. hope this helps, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Fly Panda Article Submission
Hi,
I recently submitted my article (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fly_Panda) for submission but it was declined due to it "reading like an advertisement". I have reviewd my article and I'm having a hard time understanding where the language sounds like an advertisement vs stating facts. The reason for declining also stated that the article's references did not contain a range of independent, reliable, published source. All the references (sans the youtube link) are from independent journalists and bloggers. Do the references I have included not suffice?
Thank you for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macmints06 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello there. blogs are inadequate references. please read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. as for the language, phrases like "Fresh of the heels of their viral YouTube smash" or "and the rest was history" or "with rumored features from Kanye West" (which by the way, the latter needs to be referenced) are discouraged. thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
You declined my page for Robbie Whiplash , I have sources for everything listed but dont know how to add them .. you can find all the sources below
www.reverbnation.com/robbiewhiplash
www.shotgunmythos.com
www.therecentlydeceased.com
www.machinesoflivingdeath.com
www.imdb.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.93.122 (talk) 10:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello. imdb is not a valid reference. it can be used as an external link. the first link doesn't establish notability. the other 3 are not specific. please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. thank you, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 January 2013
- WikiProject report: Where Are They Now? Episode IV: A New Year
- News and notes: 2012—the big year
- Featured content: Featured content in review
- Technology report: Looking ahead to 2013
Jami Dread Article Reliable Sources
greetings n kind regards. thank you for reviewing my article "Jami Dread"
the thing is. this is my bio. i'm the artist itself n would like to add an wikipedia article about me !!! what do i have to add one reliable source !!!
thanks in advance... — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamiDread (talk • contribs) 18:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello there! writing an article about yourself is greatly discouraged in wikipedia. please have a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi - you declined my article on Igor Bely
With the only comment "notable for being a sailor?"
Why not? It's an extreme sport and also a way of life. Other sailors are: erik tabarly, and many others.
Igor is the first man to ever cross the pacific ocean from the coast of Chile to the coast of Australia on a boat with no cabin and no motor - a world record of extreme expedition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkalley (talk • contribs) 20:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- i did not review your article, i just posted a comment. be aware that references need to establish notability. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Rejected: Couchgating Page
Hi there -
You recently rejected my couchgating page. I was wondering if it would be of any help that it has been a trademarked term. Here's the U.S. Federal Trademark Registration for the phrase. Also, it was posted on urban dictionary here in 2006.
What would help us make the page more legitimate?
Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KMEmanate (talk • contribs) 22:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello! i'm afraid urban dictionary is not a reliable reference, and being trademarked does establish notability by itself. please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
The article Saccharomyces mikatae has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- non notable yeast. Must be improved.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Starship9000 (talk) 02:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- No need to get up--the matter is taken care of. Drmies (talk) 05:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- Cheers. already deleted the tag. regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:28, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Resubmission of edited article Dr Beric John Croome for review
Dear FoCusandLeArN
Firstly, all the best for 2013 and I hope you had an enjoyable holiday season! :)
Based on your recommendations, I resubmitted the edited article on Dr Beric John Croome on +- 13 December 2012.
As the article has not yet been approved I was wondering if it's just in the queue (in which case I can stop worrying) or if I forgot to click the right submission button for the edited version to be reviewed again.
I haven't received any notification of either approval or rejection, so I tried to check to see where it was the article was in the queue but, when I checked, I couldn't find it on the list of articles waiting. The thought crossed my mind that I may have submitted the edited version incorrectly! :(
When you have time, please could you let me know whether the edited article has been received for review and confirm that it's in the queue for review.
Thanks again for your help. Best wishes Judy Aztar Press Aztar Press (talk) 08:28, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- happy new year to you too! i can't find it on the list of submissions...FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh grrrrr! That means I probably didn't re-submit it properly! Let me take a look and see if I can resubmit it (correctly, this time!) Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! :) Best, Judy Aztar Press (talk) 11:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, much to my embarrassment I think I saved the edited page but didn't click on the "resubmit here" at the top of the page. :( I've now done that so hopefully the article will appear for your review on the resubmissions page. (and I even got brave enough to add in a photo ... I think!! :) ) Have a great day! and thanks again for getting back to me so promptly. Kind regards Judy Aztar Press (talk) 11:33, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Head Lice Hero
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me to improve my article. Head Lice Hero is an independent company that is trademarked. I can include URL links with the detailed trademark information from the official US federal trademark database as references if that will help verify? As for secondary sources, I also have put in a NEWS 12 video that covers a story about head lice hero. It is on the Head Lice Hero website but was not produced by the creator. I also feel as though it is written from a neutral point of view. My third try submitting my article was rejected for the same reasons you chose. However,the second time it was never said that it wasn't a neutral point of view or written like an advertisement. I feel as though I am getting conflicting answers. I am simply trying to describe the company not advertise it, please let me know what else I can do. Thanks so much, Headlicehero (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello there. put simply, a patent or a trademark registration is not enough to establish the notability of the article's subject. for instance, a new toothbrush might be patented, but if nobody uses it then it's not notable, and therefore shouldn't be on wikipedia. as for what references are appropriate, have a look at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. regarding neutrality and ad-like prose, have a look at Wikipedia:Spam and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. hope that helps! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Guidance on improving (declined) page on notable book "Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World"
Hi FoCuSandLeArN
First of all, thanks for all the time that you put into Wikipedia. People like you make an invaluable contribution!
Second, I recently tried my hand at creating an article on a notable recent book "Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870-1940."
I was not however successful: see "http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Anarchism_and_Syndicalism_in_the_Colonial_and_Postcolonial_World,_1870-1940"
I guess that the comment in the box at the top (alluding to articles on fictional subjects) is a slip of the keyboard (it's an academic text), but the other comments ("reads like an essay and besides reviews, cites no references") seems spot on.
How can I improve this piece?
Does it need more references?
Should these include page page citations to the book itself, when mentioning some of its key claims?
What is wrong with it reading like an essay (that is, what do I need to do better in the writing?)
Best wishes for 2013!
Here to learn, Redblackwritings — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redblackwritings (talk • contribs) 16:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- hello there! thank you for your inquiries. the template i believe refers to "all plot", and was the most adequate standardised template i could find for your case, even though it didn't exactly apply. that said, usually book analyses and reviews are discouraged on wiki, unless said analyses are based on the impact the book has had in society instead of trying to convey what the book is about (see more at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not). i felt in your case, it was more of the latter, therefore it needed improvement. basically, if you can write an article about why the book is notable (a section can be added as to what the book is alluding as well, but from a neutral point of view), with supporting references and in an objective tone, then that will probably be accepted. given what i've said about the article establishing the book's notability, primary-sources would be inadequate, and as such need to be avoided, except perhaps in the section where the arguments of the book are briefly discussed. for how to write an article that doesn't resemble a personal reflection or essay, please have a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style, which is a very detailed manual on what's recommended for wiki. hope this helps! regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 January 2013
- Investigative report: Ship ahoy! New travel site finally afloat
- News and notes: Launch of annual picture competition, new grant scheme
- WikiProject report: Reach for the Stars: WikiProject Astronomy
- Discussion report: Flag Manual of Style; accessibility and equality
- Special report: Loss of an Internet genius
- Featured content: Featured articles: Quality of reviews, quality of writing in 2012
- Arbitration report: First arbitration case in almost six months
- Technology report: Intermittent outages planned, first Wikidata client deployment