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


August 11

20:28:04, 11 August 2017 review of submission by Syrenka V

(I first asked this question at the Teahouse, and was asked to take it here, since it concerns notability more than reliability.)

Notability: "independent of subject" for large collaborative journalistic projects

I'm constructing a userspace draft for the Documenting Hate project of ProPublica, and I have a question about the application of the notability criteria. Documenting Hate is a very large collaborative project among a number of journalistic and academic organizations (currently almost 100, including many prominent names). There is no problem with finding news stories from reliable sources that describe it. The problem is that most journalistic organizations that write about the Documenting Hate collaboration immediately join it! Indeed, most of the news stories about it, while including ample descriptive material about the project in general, double as announcements that the news organization publishing the story has joined Documenting Hate. There are a few substantive stories about Documenting Hate from organizations that have not (yet) joined it, such as the Nieman Lab story cited in my current draft, but not nearly as many as from organizations that have joined.

So my question is: for purposes of determining notability, would all of those news organizations be disqualified as "not independent of the subject" for having joined it? Apparently most joined after the project was created; they were not involved in its creation as ProPublica was.

Syrenka V (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Syrenka V. Independence would be a problem. Try academic sources - books, and articles in scholarly journals. You may have to wait a few years for such sources on the topic to appear. The delay is not a problem for Wikipedia, which by its very nature can't have timely information on all topics. Meanwhile there are many notable articles and drafts to rescue, and millions of other ways to improve the encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:11, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

22:10:31, 11 August 2017 review of draft by CharlotteMillion


I am writing an article for the new president of Colorado State University-Pueblo. How do I attach a jpg of him? I want the photo to appear in an inbox at the right. How do I designate the box, the header and the interior copy? Do I need to identify I am the primary source of the writing? (I have opened a wiki account.) Once I submit the draft for review, will you correct errors I may have made in html or other formatting (like references)? Do I have a final review before it goes live? Thank you. CharlotteMillion

CharlotteMillion (talk) 22:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

On hold pending paid editing disclosures, see User talk:CharlotteMillion. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:24, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi CharlotteMillion. Thank you for explaining your connection to the subject. I see that you've figured out how to use {{infobox person}} and have added a photo. Editing the draft is not a responsibility of reviewers, although some will do so. Reviewers primarily guide new editors while keeping deeply flawed pages out of the encyclopedia. If a draft's problems are few enough and minor enough, it likely will be accepted. Maintenance tags may be added to draw the attention of the editing community. The original author doesn't get a final review before an article is published. They do not own the page, which will be edited mercilessly by others. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

August 12

Request on 15:35:53, 12 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Chandan yadaw



Chandan yadaw (talk) 15:35, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

@Chandan yadaw: Hello, Chandan. Our apologies for the delay in response. The draft that you referenced was deleted last year for having been abandoned. If you would like to resume work on it, follow the procedure described at WP:Requests for undeletion/G13. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

19:36:48, 12 August 2017 review of submission by Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz

My Page Name is Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz (Zbigniew (Zbyszek) Darzynkiewicz. I made a mistake. The top section of my page has been already accepted and is in the Wikipedia. I was asked to revise the bottom section of my page. I did it but unfortunately I submitted it incorrectly, starting from the sandbox, with the incorrect my page name "Zbigniew Daarzynkiewicz", note double aa I am sorry for this mess I did. The Editor who was very helpful in developing my page was Jytdog. Please let me know how this mess can be resolved.
  

Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz. If you are the subject of article Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz, and wish to expand it, then create a new section on Talk:Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz for the specific change you are proposing. Wikipedia:Simple COI request explains how. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2017 (UTC): Thank youZbigniew Darzynkiewicz (talk) 15:40, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

August 13

04:46:52, 13 August 2017 review of submission by Kennedygregb


hello all , no problems but just wondering if i need to do anything else as this my draft libby birch has been waiting review for nearly 50 days many thanks , thanks Greg kennedy kennedygregb (talk) 04:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC) kennedygregb (talk) 04:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kennedygregb. Thank you for your patience. Only forty-five drafts have been waiting longer, so it shouldn't be too many more days before a volunteer reaches Draft:Libby Birch. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:47, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

many thanks Greg kennedy kennedygregb (talk) 08:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

05:27:03, 13 August 2017 review of submission by Shawn.hossan

Hello. This is my first contribution to Wikipedia.My article has been rejected several times. I cannot understand the reason for it. There is a message that says- "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time." I am unable to understand it. It would b really helpful if I get a solution as soon as possible.Thank you. Shawn.hossan (talk) 05:27, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Shawn.hossan. To show that the subject merits inclusion in an encyclopedia, the draft needs to cite independent reliable sources about him. The draft cites only organizations connected to him. They are worthless for demonstrating notability. Look for significant coverage in sources like The Daily Star, The Financial Express, or Ittefaq. The bulk of the draft should be based on such sources. Without arms-length coverage the draft will never be accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:58, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

10:48:08, 13 August 2017 review of submission by Skinduptruk

I have waited two months for two reviews. The editors seem junior and do not read, quote, or interpret wiki policy in proper detail. When I asked in the chat room the editor Huon openly displayed bias re Donald Trump (no idea why). When I questioned them, I was censored, which I posted about below. What will it take to get a fair review of my article??!!! https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6tef4x/wikipediacucked_bully_lie_censor_repeat_x/

Skinduptruk (talk) 10:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

You have received two fair reviews of your article already. Primefac is pretty senior and I, while only active at AfC for a short time, have enough experience on Wikipedia to give reasonably sound advice on matters at AfC. As best I can tell, you wish to substitute some common language understanding of the word "notability" in place of the somewhat intricately refined notion of that concept as it applies on Wikipedia, a product of a consensus process. In my review, I gave you what I thought was a fairly simple instruction: provide something like three examples of press coverage that are not based on the Pudniks political campaign that support notability in the Wikipedia sense. We all agree that an unsuccessful campaign for political office is, all by itself, not qualifying, but if there were significantly unusual aspects of the campaign that fact might be given some weight.
I don't know what you experienced on IRC with Huon and one of the rules there is "no public logging". The reason I urged you to use this help desk for presenting your notability evidence is so that there would be a record that we could point to where some editors agreed that the notability criterion had been met. I recommend this procedure when notability is debatable because leaving it to the reviewer to discover and judge which references are relevant is hit-or-miss after the initial review.
Complaining on Reddit about Wikipedia bullying may get you sympathy and moral support, but it does not further your interests here.
Finally, we are waiting for you to declare whether you, as a Wikipedia editor, have any relationship with Kurt Pudniks, which might constitute a conflict of interest. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 19:58, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the prompt follow-up. Again you assert my claims re notability. You should quote where I said that? You cannot, because I have only ever claimed the "normal" definition that you in fact quoted "Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". You are now suddenly demanding 3x non-politics references. Please show me the wiki policy for that demand? Also, note that whilst autobiography is difficult to maintain neutrality it is not banned. You said yourself the article is basically ok in regard to NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinduptruk (talkcontribs) 21:18, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
I think you and I are done. I find I am no longer able to be neutral. We'll see if there are other reviewers who are willing to help you. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:55, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
I hope I don't need to re-submit & wait another 5+ weeks... :x Skinduptruk (talk) 10:06, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
@Skinduptruk: Well, yes, you do need to wait in the queue. But you also have the option of withdrawing your draft from consideration here and moving it directly into Main space yourself. If you believe that your draft would survive a deletion nomination, then feel free to take this option. For what it's worth, I think User:jmcgnh is correct and that this will not survive a deletion nomination. Indeed, I'll probably nominate it myself if I see it in Main space in anything close to its current form. There's simply no getting around the fact that having a college degree and placing distant third in a run for Australia's House of Representatives is not the stuff from which Wikipedia articles are made. But I expect that you disagree and, if so, feel free to take actions based on that belief. By the way, if you haven't already done so, you might want to read WP:AUTOBIO. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Please read the "logic" links in full incl talk links to first editor's (primefac) page. Your comment is high in sass but low in wiki policy. You were so keen to criticise my draft you did not even address the policy points previously raised. At least you have demonstrated another case of unfair bias and an attempted yet very weak character attack on the subject*. The autobio policy says "strongly discouraged"... the most discouraging thing has been the personal attitude of the first four wiki editors I have had the displeasure of dealing with! What will it take for the fifth editor to read, quote, and interpret policy in proper detail?? 🤔🤔🤔 *Thanks for making my draft's AfC case stronger Skinduptruk (talk) 19:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

13:21:02, 13 August 2017 review of submission by Itswikimallik


Hi today I submitted my article for the second time and I don't know why my submission getting declined again with the message;

Message: "There is a message that says- "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time,"

The above mentioned message is attached with it, Can anyone help me to post it succesfylly? Why my article is getting declined even after attaching its References and Media articles? Is there anyone who can just review my draft and let me know why my article is getting declined? It would be great help, Thank You!


Itswikimallik (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

@Itswikimallik: Hello, Mallik. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Our apologies for the delay in response. I've taken a look at your submission and I don't see how the subject has demonstrated encyclopedic notability. If you disagree with this assessment, you should take a look at WP:MUSICBIO to see which of the criteria listed there have been satisfied, and then point to the reliable sources that back up your claim. I don't see how the subject has met any of those criteria but, if you have evidence to the contrary, please let us know. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:24, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

18:11:58, 13 August 2017 review of submission by Sayad 2


Sayad 2 (talk) 18:11, 13 August 2017 (UTC) deal done

because I want to know something about the muslim girlsw college and I want to mAKE AN ADMISSION OF MY GIRL THERE AS I HAD LISTEN THAT COLLEGE IS ONE OF

@Sayad 2: Hello, Sayad. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. What exactly is your question? NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

August 14

06:45:45, 14 August 2017 review of submission by Nimeshoza


Nimesh Oza 06:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC) HI I am creating an article on famous Indian classical singer Shri Nanu Gurjar. I am still gathering more information about him from Nanu Gurjar.... this is just a test article that i have saved. I that okay to submit so less information to begin with writing the article.

Hello, Nimesh. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. I'm unsure exactly what you are asking here. But we would prefer that you not submit your draft until after you have added all of the information that you intend to use. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:36, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

09:18:44, 14 August 2017 review of submission by Kstrickland431


It has been over a month since I have heard back on whether the Paul Davis Restoration article is approved or not as well as any suggested updates. Can someone please get back to me as soon as possible?

Thank you!


Kstrickland431 (talk) 09:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, K. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. As I write this, there are about 150 drafts in the queue ahead of yours, so it would have taken a few more days until someone got a chance to look at it. But I did take a look and found that it was extremely unlikely that any reviewer would have accepted it. So, I declined it on the grounds that there has been no demonstration of encyclopedic notability. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:44, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

11:51:22, 14 August 2017 review of submission by Tanya hope

Kindly suggest what changes I need to make to bring page online.


Tanya hope (talk) 11:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Tanya. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Writing an autobiography is extremely discouraged here. If you haven't already done so, you might want to read WP:AUTOBIO. As for the substance of your draft, being crowned Miss India Kolkata is not going to be enough to demonstrate encyclopedic notability. But in a few years, your acting career might -- after you are able to demonstrate that you've met any of the criteria set forth at WP:NACTOR. Right now, you haven't. So, I think it unlikely that an article about you will be accepted for publication. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

19:57:15, 14 August 2017 review of submission by Vikranthakur


Vikranthakur (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Vikranthakur. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Did you have a specific question? NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:14, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

August 15

02:05:17, 15 August 2017 review of submission by 27.33.47.61


27.33.47.61 (talk) 02:05, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

We have been advised that we need to provide additional material to substantiate what has been written in our article. We have provided references to Annual Reports of the organisation which have been submitted on a regular basis to the Parliament of Australia (up until 1974) and then to the Parliament of Papua New Guinea. Our organisation is not like the World Bank - there are not a large number of references to it in literary circles or research done into it so finding material other than these reports to substantiate our information is not realistic. The organisation ceased to exist in 1982 when it was replaced by The Agricultural Bank of Papua New Guinea so there is nothing to be gained for the organisation in providing an optimistic review of its operations. Similarly, we have not provided the names of any number of staff who could then go and promote themselves through reference to this article. Almost all staff who worked with the Bank up to 1982 are now retired so they are not in a position where they wish to use their experience in working with the Bank to gain financial benefit or improved employment prospects. We are unable to find supporting documentation of any note and still wonder why, when the article was originally accepted, that there was a further review of it and all these questions raised when we just added a photo to the article earlier this year. Wikidym

Hi WIKIDYM. Most of your concerns about Draft:Papua and New Guinea Development Bank were addressed here. Articles created directly in mainspace, as National Development Bank of Papua New Guinea was, bypass the review and acceptance process here at Articles for Creation. If those articles don't accord with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, that fact may go unnoticed for a while. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

08:53:28, 15 August 2017 review of submission by Pierrelias


How do i remove Thumb? "the 'thumb' bit in infobox images. "

Thanks

Hello, Pierre. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. I fixed the infobox image for you but, in the process, noticed that some of the information in it wasn't sourced. The reviewer might expect you to either source that information or remove it. For what it's worth, I don't think an infobox is necessary, given that the article is relatively short. But that's your call to make. Good luck with it. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:05, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:33:04, 15 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Sl29


I am writing to ask what I can do to make my subject a notable person. My article has been rejected due to the submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Since the rejection I have gone though and removed what I believe are inadequate references. What is left is a book written on the subject, Kamran Khavarani by art historian Albert Boime and a few articles. Is this enough? From my understanding these references follow Wikipedia's guidelines. If there are ones that are not good, which ones should I remove?

Sl29 (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sl29. I've left a comment on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

15:54:18, 15 August 2017 review of submission by Jessymacdonald


My page has been marked as advertising. I need clarification on where I need to make the changes.

Thanks

On hold pending paid editing disclosures, see User talk:Jessymacdonald. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 17:36:00, 15 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Careyjamesbalboa


can someone please help me with this article?

Carey James Balboa (talk) 17:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Corey. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Your draft suffers a great number of defects, so many that I think it unlikely that anyone here will want to take on the job of re-writing it for you. You really ought to work through our WP:Tutorial, which will provide you with the basic techniques that are need when crafting an acceptable article. As you work through the Tutorial, pay special attention to the sections on Links and Citing Sources. You might also want to read WP:MUSICBIO, which lists the various criteria that we use when assessing the notability of a musician. My quick look at your draft suggests that the subject meets none of them. If I'm wrong about that, you should be prepared to show which of those criteria are met by the subject and which references back up that claim. I hope this response is helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

19:53:56, 15 August 2017 review of submission by Masrorhausen

It's been a long tie since I submmited the article. Ghani Jafar Malik has passed away. He was a great writer and author. I would like to know how I can bring this man on Wikipedia. Thanks. MasrorHausen 19:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masrorhausen (talkcontribs)

Hello, Masrorhausen. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. As best I can tell, you never submitted your draft for review. I've gone ahead and placed a "submission" template that you can use when you think your draft is ready for review (just click the "submit for review" button at the bottom of the box). But before you do, be aware that most reviewers will consider your draft to be undersourced. I didn't take a close look but, from what I saw, most of the material in your draft is not being cited to any specific reference. You probably want to work on that a bit more before submitting it for review. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
@Masrorhausen: In addition to User:Masrorhausen/sandbox from 2013, there was an abandoned Draft:Ghani Jafar Malik that was deleted in May 2015. If you wish to resurrect the latter and continue improving it, follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:38, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

August 16

03:32:10, 16 August 2017 review of submission by Christy.kwon

Hi. I am currently working on DFRobot article creation in English. After Severl times deletion, I had to ask someone to help me to create an article in English(because I am not native in English, and it was difficult to understand the policies). However, he found out that DFRobot is blocked editing. In terms of DFRobot article, I would like to ask few inquiries: 1) Is DFRobot really blocked editing? and Is there any possibility that I can still create an article under "DFRobot"? 2) If so, how can I restore draft(DFRobot) to revise article for creation? or could you please list any wikipedia policies that can help me to solve this problem?

Since wikipedia ask me to click so many pages, I am really confusing about what I should read and what exactly they want me to do. Thank you so much for your answer and help! I've worked on it so hard for last two months, and i deadly want to solve this problem. Have a nice day ahead!!!

Christy.kwon (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Christy. I'm not sure that I understand your question -- nobody has "blocked" your draft from being edited. You are free to continue editing it, and to submit it for review when you think it is ready (you can do this by clicking the "submit for review" button in the box near the top of your draft). However, you have been told repeatedly that your company has not achieved encyclopedic notability and that an article about it is unlikely to be accepted for publication. And looking at the current version of your draft, I don't see how anything has changed. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 10:24:12, 16 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Said-Ul-Auliya


please change the Article title


Said-Ul-Auliya (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Said-Ul-Auliya. Your draft is nearly blank. Why does it need a title? NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

13:30:55, 16 August 2017 review of submission by Marcela Mare


Hi there, I subbmited the article Thomas Jenuwein on July 19, the message received was that it will take a couple of weeks... at that time, there were nine hundred&something articles waiting in line. Now, one month later, there are one thousand five hundreds. I don't understand. Is there something that I should/could do? Many thanks for any help. Best regards, Marcela Mare

Marcela Mare (talk) 13:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Marcela. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. As I type this, there are about 150 submissions in the queue ahead of yours. I expect it will take the better part of a week before someone gets a chance to look at it. In the meantime, I noticed that two of your six references are to Wikipedia articles. No reviewer is going to accept that as a valid way to source a statement, so you might want to find some non-Wikipedia sources that back up your statements. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Request on 17:18:12, 16 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by KamalMahrshi


Please help me in identifying the issues with my user page submission.

KamalMahrshi (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Kamal. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. Is there a misunderstanding here? If all you want to do is set up a user page for yourself, you do not need to have it "approved" by us (or anyone else, either). If that's the case, simply remove the submission templates that appear near the top of the page and copy the rest onto your User page here. After that, nothing further needs to be done. On the other hand, are you proposing that the material in your Sandbox should be an encyclopedia article? If so, please be advised that it never will be, for the reasons stated by the two reviewers who already looked at it. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


August 17

00:29:00, 17 August 2017 review of submission by Xu Zijun



I need help creating the page googlehedron.

Hello, Xu Zijun. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. The best place to ask for help on this will be the Talk page of our Mathematics project, which is here. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:35, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=795890217"
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