Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 November 12
Hello! I wrote an article about Dany Cotton. 7 and Schmloof helped me with it. Is it okay?
Beth 84 (talk) 00:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- It seems like you've got a nice first draft there. The references are very good and I think reliable (or suitable), at least from the looks of it, but I'm probably not in the best position to comment on that as I don't know much about reliable references! Overall, I think the article is excellent, and I can't see any immediate issues. It's a nice stub. Chevymontecarlo 19:46, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for reading my article!Beth 84 (talk) 01:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Please review my page and give me some comments for improvement :)
Scz1001 (talk) 03:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent job so far, particularly with the overall formatting/layout and the references - you certainly seem to know what you're doing in that respect ;-) I do think however, and I know this is very minor, but you should really put any related external links in a separate section rather than as a link in the main body of the article. Chevymontecarlo 19:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your time and comments i decided to take out the external links because it is not necessary :) Scz1001 (talk) 03:05, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to know if this is OK to post. THanks!
Quitetight008 (talk) 08:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- From a formatting and tone point of view I think the article is very good but where I think it needs work is in the references. At the moment you have very little references, and as a result the article is likely to just get deleted for lack of notability unless you try and add some more. You've used footnotes to display the one reference you have so far, which is great, so if you can use the same style with your new references that would be great. Good luck with your article! Chevymontecarlo 19:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
This is a new article and the first one I've written for Wikipedia. All guidance welcome! Thank you!
EnjoyReading (talk) 11:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Enjoy reading, had a quick run through the article. There are plenty of editors far more experienced than me on here, but I did pick up on a few possible issues:
- You should have your intro above the navigation box - You can do this by hitting the "Edit" tab at the top of your article page, and typing after the existing Readathon text (but before the 'Origins'section header)
- Currently your 'References' all link to other wikipedia articles, while your external links seem to point to the organisations involved. I believe that it is policy not to use other wikipedia articles for referencing, but you could probably include this link in a 'See Also' section. I would suggest that you find appropriate content to reference your article from external sites, such as the sites that you listed in external links, and a google-News search may be able to offer some impartial references aswell. A good example to try and follow might be the Children in Need article - It doesn't have to be anywhere nearly as big as that article, but I suggest that you look at the intro, its overall layout, and the sections at the end covering See Also, References, and External Links.
- I'm really not sure if it applies to you, but you *might* also want to look at WP:CONFLICT (Sincere apologies if there is no conflict of interest)
- In my opinion, its a very good start. Darigan (talk) 11:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Darigan added some good comments; here are a couple more:
- References are usually added after a punctuation mark, with no space, when possible. I made some changes. (I understand the position of one ref which is not after punctuation, but that one is fine IMO.
- We are not allowed to speculate about the future. See WP:CRYSTAL. I think the statement in the "Future Plans" section is acceptable, if it is sourced to a clear statement by the organization.
- I fixed the formatting of the external links section and moved it; I think it looks OK now, but I didn't check to see if the links work, please double-check to make sure everything is still fine.
- Sorry, just noticed what Darigan pointed out, all of your references are wikilinks. I removed them. You will need to add some references to reliable sources --SPhilbrickT 14:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- Darigan added some good comments; here are a couple more:
Hi guys and gals, an article on Gemma Gibbons, I *think* she passes notability, and I will be making more additions before moving it to proper article space, but I thought I'd request some opinions about whether I'm on the right lines. Also, medal box on the top right doesn't seem to be displaying as it should - I had tried to base it on the mdeal box at Kosei Inoue - Cheers - also, more sources pasted on to the articles's talk page.
Darigan (talk) 11:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Comments:
- You included an extra comma in some of your refs. I removed it, but you might want to take a look so you don't continue to do that; if you don't know how to look, just ask.
- I changed the spelling of "Gema" to "Gemma"' it was in a ref name, so it didn't appear in the article
- Style suggests we use last name rather than first name, so I made the change
- Other than those trivial items, looks pretty good. I removed the unreviewed template--SPhilbrickT 14:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Added new reference and citation, please consider
Iulia e (talk) 13:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Your references still need some work: one is a primary source while the other is a press release. You need independent third-party sources, especially to establish notability. -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 04:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
I would appreciate general feedback on notability, style and structure of article
Glasto1979 (talk) 15:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Comments
- Generally looks fine. The bio section is quite short, but for someone who died at the age of 22, I suppose there may not be a lot to say.
- I'm no expert on the specific standards of notability of an artist, but with works on exhibit at that many major institutions, I don't see a problem, but I'd defer to those with more expertise in the area.
- I didn't follow why "President" is surrounded by single quotes? Is it in the source?
- I fixed one mistaken word in a quote.--SPhilbrickT 16:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, as wikipedia repeats I hope I've included enough references, I have placed links and references throughout the article relation to David Beckham, the World Records etc. Will this be enough or do I need to change tact?
Many thanks in advance,
Charlie
Charlieuk01 (talk) 16:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- I think as to the references you've done a good job so far but there's still a number of statements in the article that need to be verified. I also think you need to be careful with the article's tone and point of view in the article; as some parts, to me, sound slightly like an advertisement. Phrases like 'has held over 110 auctions throughout the United Kingdom', 'achieve more than 50,000 unique website hits, and 1,000 customer inquiries a week' and 'at the heart of the H&H business, with the team achieving over 50 world records' might need to be looked at and edited to make them sound more neutral. Hope my suggestions are useful! Chevymontecarlo 20:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
That's great thank you, a third pair of eyes always helps. I'll get on the case when I'm back from work!
Just posted an article about Mike Halsey, can you check it's okay?
Techheretic (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- The first thing I noticed when I looked at the 'references' section is that as per WP:CITE other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as a reference, so please remove those Wikipedia references. However, if the article(s) on Wikipedia are related to the article's subject you can put them in a 'See also' section or something like that. I do think the main thing you need to work on are the references - see WP:Reliable references and WP:VRS. Chevymontecarlo 20:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to have this checked out to see how it would fair. Any feedback would be much appreciated!
Spite49505 (talk) 20:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Spite49505,
Had quick read of the article.
- First off, he seems to meet notability, which is good
- I would be tempted to break the intro in two, and start a new section with the sentence that begins "Adam explained how..."
- I would turn each of the following two paragraphs into their own sections
- The paragraph about sponsorship - I would be tempted to cull the end of it that mentions "two custom grips" etc
- The external links section appears (In my opinion) to suffer from overkill. Links to his facebook and twitter etc. might be seen to be overtly promotional. Having said that, the article itself is written from a reasonably neutral point of view.
- On the sentence: "Adam’s Eastern Bike was just added to the Flick Trix BMX finger bike line-up." I would remove "just" and try to give a date instead, for example: "Adam's Eastern Bike was added to the Flick Trix BMX finger bike line-up in November 2010 for the ###### <2011 season/tour?>"
- It would be great if you could add some sort of Competition Record to the article as well, perhaps including notable events he has competed in, and his placing/results in those events.
I'm not really familiar with BMX related stuff, so excuse my ignorance on that front. I'm not quite a seasoned Wikipeida editor either, so I may have missed some important points, but I hope if given you a few areas to look at. It might be an idea for you to look up the Wikipedia entries for some other prominent BMX-ers to see what their articles look like. Good Luck Darigan (talk) 12:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I would like a general review of this new article, which I created: Sixteen Rivers Press.
Sixteen Rivers Press is an award-winning poetry publishing cooperative that was established in 1999 and has to date produced twenty-three titles by nineteen poets.
I am not in any way directly affiliated with the press, and I am fairly certain that the article meets Wikipedia standards for neutrality, notability and verifiability, but would love feedback from a disinterested party.
David Kudler (talk) 20:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Quick Review
- Neutrality: watch out for phrases like 'dedicated to providing', 'explores the rich diversity', etc. Those should be edited to be more neutral
- Reliable sources: Seems to meet notability requirement for organizations, based on awards and a few secondary references. (More secondary references, and less primary references would be better) If possible, link the SF Chronicle references to the actual article from the newspaper (if the paper has a public archive?)
Thanks. Eclipsed (talk) (code of ethics) 08:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Roger I. McDonough
[edit]Requesting feedback on my new article Roger I. McDonough - all comments appreciated. Thanks!--Thelema12 (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Generally, a nicely written article. Some suggestions not in any particular order: (1) first sentence. You don't need to repeat Utah Supreme Court, second time could be Court. Make it 1947 to 1948 like 1954 to 1959. I'd make the second part of the first sentence a separate sentence. (2) infobox. You should have a section on the times he was NOT a chief justice. There should be a template for calculating his age on death. (3) Early life. Start the first sentence with just his last name. You're missing an "on" before October 3. I prefer 1921 to 1922. (4) On the bench. You use judge and justice for the Third District - must be one or the other. "One of the interesting cases" sentence is wordy and awkward. What's a "vice protection payoff"? Don't call him Judge, just plain McDonough. Don't need President for Truman's second mention. (5) References. How do I find the Illustrious Park Native? the Park Record? Is it a book in the library or what? The Bernstein and the NYT sources should be separated into two. Happy editing!--Bbb23 (talk) 01:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)