October 19

Hello,

I have created the article like "Amaithi". so please review itNiraj.bmsit 04:54, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks & Regards,

Niraj Kumar Thakur — Preceding

• Your article was reviewed several days ago, and was immediately declined because it had no information. An article of this sort in the main article space would probably be
  speedy deleted. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Niraj, you appear to have made a blank article at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amaithi, yet on a completely different userpage you made a very small article about Amaithi at your userpage, User:Niraj.bmsit. The blank "Amaithi" article was of course declined, and the one you have on your userpage is too short, and provides no footnotes, to be accepted.

To help you out, I have added a

the Teahouse" and volunteers there can give you helpful advice. Don't get discouraged, we can work together to make this a good article! MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

It would be very handy to have information on the highest and lowest terrain in wales uk. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.100.49.131 (talk) 07:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• This page is for questions about article submissions to the
  reference desk. The highest points in the UK are covered by List of highest points in the United Kingdom. There is no corresponding article for lowest points, though there are entries for specific places like Holme Fen. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]

If you'd like to make a suggestion for improving the page Wales, I'd suggest going to Talk:Wales and raising the point there. Hope this helps! MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wiki-Reviewer, I have great respect for your work. So first I like to thank you ! My Question is about the review order. The article on

Those numbers are the totals of submissions awaiting review. Drafts are reviewed in roughly chronological order, with the oldest drafts currently awaiting review dating from October 6.

• Your draft currently does not show evidence that Bertsch has received significant coverage in
  notability. If no better sources can be found, the draft will probably be declined. Huon (talk) 10:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• (edit conflict) Articles get reviewed when somebody has a chance to look at them. Some articles (such as those that are blank or have no references to any
  notability. One problem is that there are too many vague terms such as "He has authored books, articles[3] in print" - which books and article exactly? Just writing a book doesn't automatically mean you're notable. I would recommend seeing if you can find some news coverage about things he's done - which if Bertsch genuinely is notable it should not be hard. Don't worry too much if you can only find sources in German, as although we prefer English sources, we don't insist on them. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]

How will i restart the review process again, after the editing of declined article ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.45.12.196 (talk) 11:35, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The decline message says: "When you are ready to resubmit, click here. But I don't think the references you have provied are sufficient to establish the Anel Group's

verify significant parts of the draft. If you re-submit the draft in its current state it will probably be declined again. Huon (talk) 11:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

I have reviewed it, but I had to decline it again because too much of the content is not

primary source which hardly mentions the Anel Group. Huon (talk) 15:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

SPEAK the movie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SPEAK_the_movie

Paolaseminario (talk) 21:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't make any changes to the draft, you just removed the reviewer's decline message and comments. Those should be kept as a historical record until the draft is accepted. I have reverted that edit; you'll find that the decline message contains this line: "When you are ready to resubmit, click here. But you should indeed address the reviewer's concerns. The entire draft is unencyclopedic in tone, and while one of your sources, the NYT review, is just the kind of

primary source, written by the society depicted in the movie and hosted at the movie's own website. Furthermore, you only point out that these sources exist, but the draft is in no way based on them. All Wikipedia content should be based on reliable secondary sources. Huon (talk) 21:35, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

What are the next steps for our article about Brainwave Optimization? (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brainwave_Optimization&action=edit) I have revised it and added all references. I also have tried to change our username from brainstate to me as an individual. So their are no conflicts. Please let me know our next steps? Thank you very much!

Apparently your haven't changed your username consistently; you've still asked this question as

conflict of interest, if one exists, is not resolved merely by a name change anyway (though your user name may indeed have been a violation of our username policy

).

Anyway, the article currently has some primary sources, including two copies of the same article by the inventors (that is not considered a reliable source on a medical topic, compare

notable

medical procedure.

The old decline message, which I re-added as a historical record until the draft is accepted, provides a link to re-submission: "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." However, you should show evidence of significant coverage in

reliable sources that are independent of the subject before you re-submit it or it will be declined again on notability grounds. Huon (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

How do you get Wikipedia to create a page on an artists. I am in a band called Kid Tested from Cleveland, Ohio and we have been around for over 10 years. I am just wondering when and how I can help so that and article can be created..thanx.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.142.134.147 (talk) 21:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can use the

verify the draft's content. I just did a quick Google News search, and all I came up with was a single article in a local student newspaper - that would be too little. Huon (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

This email is response to a couple of failed attempts at creating an entry for "Roaring Lion energy drink"Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Roaring Lion energy drink. My question pertains to what further modifications need to be made in order to have this article approved. This article has now been declined twice for reading too much like an advertisement, which is confusing as it was based from the Red Bull wikipedia entry, using many of the facts in that article. Screen captures of both pages have been taken as for comparison purposes and it's difficult to distinguish where the "Roaring Lion" article is more of an advertisement than the Red Bull entry. ~ ~ ~ ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.16.106 (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That article has severe

reliable source

, and secondly it should actually support that statement.

In summary, while I expect significant coverage of the drink in reliable sources exists, you haven't shown it: Your sources are either dubious or don't mention Roaring Lion, and they don't say what they are cited for. And

other problematic articles may exist, but that's no reason to create more. By the way, the Red Bull article, while it also has its selection of primary and dubious sources, also cites the likes of The Economist and Forbes, both of which cover Red Bull in depth. You have nothing comparable. Huon (talk) 02:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply

]