Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main page Talk page
ReviewerAFCH
Submissions
CategoryList
Showcase Assessment Participants Reviewing instructions Help desk Backlog drives
Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
  • Bona fide reviewers at Articles for Creation will never contact or solicit anyone for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, please post on this help desk page.
Click here to ask a new question.

A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

Contents


December 6

02:36:01, 6 December 2017 review of draft by Medical Imaging


Hi. I just want to make sure I have put in enough references to (1) make the article a valid one, and (2) to make sure that the formatting of the references is correct. (I sense that it is not). I tried to copy a template and make necessary modifications but I think that it got messed up. Please instruct on how to correct.

Best Wishes, from Medical Imaging.

Medical Imaging (talk) 02:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Medical Imaging. I filled in that cite template for you; you weren't too far off. Ideally, there shouldn't be anything in the References section except the {{reflist}} template. The five inline references clustered there should be removed or re-positioned after the specific statements in the draft that they support. One other thing that leapt out is that the three team names use external links. Those links should be converted into references if they prove the fact that he played for the team, or removed if they just prove the team exists. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

06:36:02, 6 December 2017 review of submission by InternetFriend


How can I improve this draft? InternetFriend (talk) 06:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, InternetFriend. Your references are presented as bare URLs and instead should be formatted with full bibliographic details. Please read Referencing for beginners. Also, you have way too many references for a draft article of this length. Reviewers find it irritating to see 17 references for a single assertion. Three is enough for almost all claims. Experienced editors sometimes call this "refbombing". It is far better to have six or eight high quality references in a draft than dozens of lower quality references. Please read Wikipedia:Citation overkill, and trim away all but the highest quality references, formatted and presented to properly display the bibliographic details, that show that this person is notable by Wikipedia's standards. This is a case where more is not better. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I already submitted the article. Is it possible to cancel a submission? InternetFriend (talk) 06:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@InternetFriend: Hello, Friend. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Yes, it is possible to cancel your request for review and I'll be happy to arrange for that if you would like. But, with the current backlog, it will likely take the better part of two months before a reviewer gets a chance to look at your submission. So there's plenty of time to address the referencing issues without withdrawing the request for review. Let us know which course you prefer. NewYorkActuary (talk) 08:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
@NewYorkActuary: Thank you for your feedback. I will try to address the referencing issues. Please don't cancel the submission. InternetFriend (talk) 14:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
@NewYorkActuary: I'm still trying to address the referencing issues. I was wondering, how do I add a content box? InternetFriend (talk) 16:43, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
@NewYorkActuary: I was able to add a content box. Please check back to provide more feedback.InternetFriend (talk) 17:13, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
@InternetFriend: WP:CITEKILL is the most obvious remaining problem. Anywhere you're using 13+ sources to support one statement, trim it back to no more than about 3 sources. Chose the most reputable, most reliable sources, those that contain the most information about Karas, so long as together they fully support the statement where cited. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
@Worldbruce: I'm now working on the blood donation section. Thank you for your feedback. InternetFriend (talk) 17:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

13:21:55, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Catalin.viciu


Hi, how can I make the page both in Romanian and English? Can I keep this version as the romanian version and make an english page?

Hi Catalin.viciu. This is the English Wikipedia and we only accept articles in English. The Romanian Wikipedia is a separate website and can be accessed at http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/. – Joe (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

15:28:31, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Robert L Mitchell2


The article is currently in review. At what point can I add pictures to the article? Robert L Mitchell2 (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Robert L Mitchell2. The answer depends on the source of the pictures and their copyright status. Some photos may not be added until after a draft is accepted. Because the presence or absence of photos will have no effect on whether a draft is accepted, at this stage it's more profitable to focus on the text of the draft, its referencing, and formatting. You may find Help:Referencing for beginners, Wikipedia:Manual of Style, and Wikipedia:Writing better articles useful. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

17:25:21, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Chrisking1977

Hi, I'm still very new to Wikipedia. I have created a draft page for someone I believe to be a very notable Canadian journalist. I had trouble getting his page published a few years ago, and am now trying again, this time with more evidence based citations. I just want to make sure I haven't forgotten anything so I can get through the approval process a little faster this time. If you have a moment, can you check my article and let me know if there is anything else I an do? Thank you so much for your help. Chrisking1977 (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

NOTE: Comments left on draft. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:02, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

22:07:23, 6 December 2017 review of submission by Danielweston007


Danielweston007 (talk) 22:07, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


Which exact information does wikipedia need proof of when creating an autobiography? Additionally, what sources are considered valid sources?

Danielweston007 (talk) 22:07, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Danielweston007. There are at least three issues here - the first is that biographies need to have inline references that show where the statements made about the person were sourced from - see WP:BLPSOURCES. The second is that of notability. All articles in Wikipedia need to be about notable subjects. Notability on Wikipedia is measured by the extent to which other publications have already written in depth coverage about the subject. You will need to show that there has been in depth coverage about Daniel Weston in multiple independent, reliable publications such as national newspapers, books, music journals etc. Thirdly, your user name matches the name of the person that the article is about, and the draft switches from referring to Weston in the third person (he/his) and first person (I/my). If this is an autobiography please read WP:Autobiography and take heed of the section about writing about yourself. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

23:34:38, 6 December 2017 review of submission by SheridanFord


THIS WAS A MISTAKE. I did not intend to submit this for review yet. My WikiEdu course is composing a book article from our textbook. It is notable as a recent publication by leading scholars in the field of music. sheridanford (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Not to worry, SheridanFord, the decline doesn't affect anything and you can re-submit it whenever you're ready. I would say that it's rare that scholarly edited volumes are independently notable. If this is an exception, I would advise focusing on adding citations to reviews and other publications that discuss the book. It's unlikely to pass review if it consists entirely of chapter summaries. – Joe (talk) 19:00, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Joe (talk)

I finally realized that. Noticed the issue during class and panicked. lol. Also since black music texts are often out of print or rare, this is notable because 1) it's written by major scholars in the discipline and the book itself is It meets at least two of guidelines on notability for books, and I will add this to the talk page as well:

  1. The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement. . [The books contributes to Black Lives Matter + Misogynoir; it's rare that a textbook focuses on women as central figures in black music since the blues or antebellum period].
  1. The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country. [The book is used and taught at University of Louisville, University of Maryland, Stanford University, and the University of Melbourne in Australia -- references found on Google here.

sheridanford (talk) 13:18, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

December 7

23:42:37, 7 December 2017 review of submission by InternetFriend


I'm still working on the references. How can I improve this article? InternetFriend (talk) 23:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

23:51:47, 7 December 2017 review of submission by BoofDoofPoof


BoofDoofPoof (talk) 23:51, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Why u deny my page.. I worked hard on what I wrote. :(

You haven't included any references to other sources talking about the show. I did a google search and all that came up is some wiks about lost media. Has the show ever been written about in books, magazines, official channel websites, etc? Where did you get the information you added from? Egaoblai (talk) 02:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


December 8

01:59:41, 8 December 2017 review of submission by RealityTVnerd


This was my first attempt at page creation. I would love the opportunity to work on it further to remove the issues that resulted in its deletion. Sorry, totally new to this and don't have super strong computer skills. I work as a producer on a number of Australian Reality TV Shows so I would like to create further pages for some of the people I have produced in the future. To be honest, I don't really understand why this page was deleted - are you able to shed some light on this so I can remove the problematic content and not repeat this error moving forward. I won't be mentioning my personal involvement in these shows - it isn't for self-promotion.

My training wheels are certainly on!

RealityTVnerd (talk) 01:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

NOTE: Comments have been left on the draft. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

05:04:01, 8 December 2017 review of submission by InternetFriend


I seem to have completed a suitable draft. Please review and provide feedback. InternetFriend (talk) 05:04, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

NOTE: Draft is now under review. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:11, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

07:04:35, 8 December 2017 review of submission by Shivkumar Dixan


Shivkumar Dixan (talk) 07:04, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

@Shivkumar Dixan: Hello, Shivkumar. Our apologies for the delay in response. Did you have a specific question? NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 14:33:55, 8 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Ashish2393



Ashish2393 (talk) 14:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

hi Ashish2393 I think you've picked a notable topic but your current submission is mostly an interview about the scheme. Instead of an interview, my advice is write a short paragraph. What is the Scheme? When was it launched? Who launched it? What does it do? Make sure to include references using the ref tags < ref >.... </ ref > . here are some sources: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/government-launches-saubhagya-scheme-for-household-electrification/articleshow/60828887.cms http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/modi-launches-free-power-scheme-for-poor/article19752583.ece https://www.thebetterindia.com/116702/saubhagya-scheme-to-provide-electricity-to-all-households/ http://indiatoday.intoday.in/education/story/saubhagya-scheme/1/1056069.html Use the information from these articles in your draft and reference them.

I have created some opening sentences for you with references, that should give you an idea of what is required.

Egaoblai (talk) 08:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

20:17:52, 8 December 2017 review of submission by Christina.Peterson05

To whom it may concern, I received the notice saying that my article was denied. From what I could see, the reasoning was because there is already an article on this subject. I did this article because I saw it was a requested article and I am wondering exactly what is wrong with it. If you could please elaborate exactly why it was denied so I can make the necessary corrections. Thank you Christina.Peterson05 (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC) Christina.Peterson05 (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Christina. This doesn't elaborate much on Analysis, a page which already exists. You could propose a merge with Analysis; the instructions to do so can be found here. JTP (talkcontribs) 05:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

21:33:09, 8 December 2017 review of submission by Coffinkid


I want to know what I am doing wrong with the article. Any help is greatly appreciated. I have gone thru thr tutorial twice now, please anyone help. Thanks.

Coffinkid (talk) 21:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

December 9

Request on 08:56:24, 9 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Editor0088



Soo I am confused..

What is a credible page exactly. Since ALL content online is "user" generated, even this one. So you are you referencing "credible news sources like CNN, or FOX News?

Since I am new to this process, can you list and example of a "credible source" if it's not a "metal" version of this one?

Editor0088 (talk) 03:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

   Hi Editor0088. Encyclopaedia Metallum (metal-archives.com) and discogs.com, being user-generated, are not reliable sources and should not be used as references. If thousands of articles reference them, then you can help to improve thousands of articles by finding replacement sources that are reliable. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources has some suggestions. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC) 



Editor0088 (talk) 08:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Editor0088: What Wikipedia means by user-generated can be found in the guideline Identifying reliable sources. Wikipedia doesn't use the term "credible", but news organizations like CNN and Fox News are generally considered to be reliable for facts about music, musicians, and recordings. They are not user-generated, they are written by trained, professional, credentialed journalists, whose work is subject to editorial oversight and to battalions of fact checkers and lawyers. The publishers have a reputation for accuracy and a history of printing corrections when they get something wrong.
Another example of a reliable source on the subject of music is Rolling Stone. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources lists hundreds of other sources that the community has generally judged to be reliable. The list is not exhaustive. A source may be reliable even if it isn't on the list. Do not, however, use a source (like discogs or Encyclopaedia Metallum) from the "Sources to avoid" section. They are not reliable because they are user-generated - anybody can write anything there. They have no reputation for fact checking or accuracy. See previous discussions at WP:RSN. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

09:50:45, 9 December 2017 review of submission by Poonkulanji


varghese kurian (talk) 09:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Poonkulanji: Your article appears to have been accepted. Can we help you any further? !dave 09:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

10:37:00, 9 December 2017 review of submission by Semantron

Hello, I hope somebody here can help me. I created a new article basically translated it from Serbian to English, here is the link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saint_Joanikije_Devički), very detailed and without mistakes. The problem is as I see that my references are not correct or reliable as the one who should approve say. But they are as my first reference I have redirected to the Wikipedia article written in Serbian language and have told that I translated all from there which can be saw and checked any time, the second is from some book on the internet about the Saint that I written in that article. So what should I do now to prove them that all that is in the article is correct ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Semantron (talkcontribs) 10:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Semantron. You also asked this question at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, and it has been answered there. To that answer I would add:
Thank you for your translation. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
The Serbian Wikipedia article must be removed from the references section because Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. The prayer to St. Joanikije doesn't support any of the draft's contents, so it should be moved out of the references section - to an "External links" section at the bottom, or removed entirely.
I've added a reliable scholarly source to a "Further reading" section, you may be able to use it as a reference. Other potential sources are [1], [2], [3], and [4]. If you rewrite the draft using these sources, it is likely to be accepted. It would be helpful if you used inline citations to show which source(s) each statement in the draft comes from. See Help:Referencing for beginners for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 14:08:11, 9 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by TRIVEDIYASH95



TRIVEDIYASH95 (talk) 14:08, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

14:15:34, 9 December 2017 review of submission by DillFredino89


Please could you assist and give feedback DillFredino89 (talk) 14:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi DillFredino89 The draft is in the pool to be reviewed. You will receive further feedback as part of the next review. Do not remove prior AfC reviews or reviewer comments from the draft. They will be removed automatically if and when it is accepted. With the current backlog you can expect it to be reviewed by early February 2018. Meanwhile I've left a welcome basket of useful links on your talk page. Asking about the draft every day will only slow the process down. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

15:01:54, 9 December 2017 review of submission by Faunevita


I recently created a wikipedia page for Laura Briggs. I am wondering how I can make sure the page is indexed and will show up in google searches? Thank you!

Faunevita (talk) 15:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Faunevita Whether and when Google and other search engines index a page is ultimately up to those companies, not Wikipedia. To the extent that it is possible to influence the timing from the Wikipedia end, you should not do so. Securing preferential treatment would be regarded as a "black hat" activity. However, you can indirectly make everything in Wikipedia happen more quickly and smoothly by pitching in and reducing backlogs that compete for limited volunteer time. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

16:25:56, 9 December 2017 review of submission by 2606:6000:6006:3400:413D:CE07:F11E:29FD


2606:6000:6006:3400:413D:CE07:F11E:29FD (talk) 16:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

How can I start writing on my wikipedia page to get this party started?

BR Gustav

Party? What party? You mean the one taking place at WP:Your first article? Sounds like a lot of fun. Happy editing! NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)


December 10

00:01:52, 10 December 2017 review of submission by 68.102.39.189

Where Can I Create the 2018 MAC Football season if I want to 68.102.39.189 (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC) 68.102.39.189 (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

11:43:19, 10 December 2017 review of submission by Ae410154


I am wondering how to add in citations without them showing up in the final edit??

Ae410154 (talk) 11:43, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

14:32:00, 10 December 2017 review of submission by Kmayasmith123

I've read the advice of create an article for a million times, and they still show the message of "before you create an article". Should I only to article wizard only?

--Kmayasmith123 (talk) 14:32, 10 December 2017 (UTC) (User:kmayasmith123/sandbox|kmayasmith123)

Request on 14:36:39, 10 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by SIR FRANCIS CORNWALL


How do I insert a box with my picture with basic info in the right upper corner as in most wiki articles?

SIR FRANCIS CORNWALL (talk) 14:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@SIR FRANCIS CORNWALL: See Wikipedia:Infobox for what you are looking for. JTP (talkcontribs) 19:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

18:04:48, 10 December 2017 review of submission by InternetFriend


How can I improve this article? InternetFriend (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC) InternetFriend (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


December 11

00:31:07, 11 December 2017 review of submission by T4mb4y 22


T4mb4y 22 (talk) 00:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

13:25:29, 11 December 2017 review of submission by 68.102.39.189


68.102.39.189 (talk) 13:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

14:19:43, 11 December 2017 review of submission by SIR FRANCIS CORNWALL


HOW DO I PUT A BOX WITH A PHOTO AND DESCRIPTIONS ON THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THE ARTICLE?

Question answered above. JTP (talkcontribs) 19:13, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

December 12

09:07:32, 12 December 2017 review of submission by Skazoo73


Skazoo73 (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

I am requesting assistance because my article was rejected. It's my first attempt and I'm going to improve, with any help you can provide of course. I included as references my imdb.com page and an interview with a notable publication LA Weekly. I also included my website, which I have since read should not be included. Was having it there in the first place and automatic grounds for rejection? Did I even include my references in the correct place? Please let me know my biggest inclusions or omissions that will help me going forward. Thanks.

Request on 10:39:04, 12 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by MichaelLawson


Hi, could you please help with the article I'm writing... It's on WOW Video Production : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:WOW_Video_Production

They are specialists in a niche area of video production for people trying to raise money through crowdfunding.

  • They have a book published
  • Interviewed and featured on Sky News as part of a major feature (lead story for the day)
  • Featured in Funded Magazine in a two page spread (print and online)

But the article was declined.

Is it because the link to the video of the Sky News report is not hosted on Sky News' website? If it helps, Sky News don't store video on their site for more than a few weeks which is why there is a copy of the programme referenced and linked to on the WOW Video Production website. If you take a look though you will be able to see it's the real thing.


MichaelLawson (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

11:37:55, 12 December 2017 review of submission by KingBruce

When can we have the approval for the page Hindu Chetana Sangam - Sajjan Shakti Sarvatr as there will be no relevance for this page after 7th January 2018 KingBruce (talk) 11:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi KingBruce. About 2,150 drafts have been waiting longer than User:KingBruce/sandbox. At the current rate of reviewing, that suggests it will be reviewed by the first week in February 2018. One of the inclusion criteria for events is enduring historical significance, so if the draft would truly have no relevance after 7 January 2018, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, not a community bulletin board. This is not the place to advertise, publicize, or promote an event. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 11:58:19, 12 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Sjalkema


After the following discussion with Verbcatcher, I did make changes on 11 April 2017, in response to question he asked on 7 March 2017. These changes were in accordance with all questions posed on my Talkpage:

Verbcatcher wrote and I quote: 'Hi, I noticed your edits to Talk:Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra. I suggest you add a note to the Your username section of this talk page (or on your user page) to clarify your non-connection with the CTPO, in case other editors reach the same conclusion that I did about a conflict of interest. I have not studied your proposed changes to the article in detail. As you have no conflict of interest you could edit the article yourself, subject to the usual Wikipedia rules and conventions.

You are allowed to cite your own PhD thesis, or other works that you may have published. This is not normally treated as a conflict of interest, provided that the citations are merited. I quickly found your thesis online – you may want to read WP:REALNAME.

Regards, Verbcatcher (talk) 01:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Verbcatcher I re-wrote the article: Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra on its Talk page. Above it, I wrote an Affidavit explaining why there no conflict of interest in my opinion, and would like to continue discussions on the article in an effort to have it placed in the Wikipedia Encyclopedia. Can you suggest what I need to correct, please? Sjalkema'.

The article of the Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra is still in my Talkpage, but as I did not hear from anyone since my edits, six months have lapsed, and the article has been deleted. I did make myself quite clear about conflict of interest. Can someone help to have this article 'reinstated' and say what is still needed to have it placed on the main article page, please?Sjalkema (talk) 11:58, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Sjalkema (talk) 11:58, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sjalkema. It isn't clear to me exactly how Draft:Cape_Town_Philharmonic_Orchestra figures into your tale, but if you wish to retrieve it, please see the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13.
When you propose changes to an article on the article's talk page (as you did on Talk:Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra) if no objects within a week or two, it's normally safe to make the proposed changes. As it has been 8 months, and no one has objected, I suggest you make the change, using the edit summary Rewrote as proposed at [[Talk:Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra#Rewrite]] The worst that can happen is that someone reverts your change, in which case you can engage them in discussion.
For a better understanding of how the community uses article talk pages, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines and the explanatory supplement Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Information page Wikipedia:Merging, although specifically about merges, has a well-written section about proposing changes. The practices outlined there apply well to most article talk page discussions. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:58, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

16:21:14, 12 December 2017 review of submission by 71.169.130.143


I am requesting a non-partisan review of this entry. Regards and thank you in advance. 71.169.130.143 (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

23:15:49, 12 December 2017 review of submission by Mightymouse00


Mightymouse00 (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Just wondering if someone can check out my first article and see if it is done, correctly - can edit if it isnt, just let me know what needs to be changed. ThanksMightymouse00 (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

23:16:12, 12 December 2017 review of submission by Mightymouse00


Mightymouse00 (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Just wondering if someone can check out my first article and see if it is done, correctly - can edit if it isnt, just let me know what needs to be changed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mightymouse00/sandbox#Parkpnp

ThanksMightymouse00 (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=815137024"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA