• GosheronGaucheron (talk · contribs)
  • Ed Herring (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Ed Herring (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

GosheronGaucheron (talk) 09:40, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GosheronGaucheron, you have not yet submitted the draft for review, please click the blue "Submit your draft for review" button in the grey box at the top of the page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ruhjillah (talk · contribs)

I have recently had the page for 'Gerry Raffles', rejected for not citing enough independent sources. I would like to know whether the problem with the evidence I cited was that it is a collection of unpublished papers or that I, as a new editor, just didn't cite them properly. I am trying to cite a collection of papers held by the British Library as a source. The person who rejected my contribution stated that was because these were a memoir - which they are not. The archive collection held by the British Library may be named after Gerry Raffles partner, Joan Littlewood, but holds many of his own papers including his own passports, birth certificates, diaries and correspondence etc. and all the things mentioned can be verified by visiting the reading room. I may be misunderstanding the ability of Wikipedia to rely on archival sources but they are open records with the ability to be verified. The fact there are not more published sources is simply because the archive has only been released this year. Thank you for your help! Ruhjillah (talk) 11:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archive collection can be used but in this case they are WP:PRIMARY sources so they do nothing to prove the WP:NOTABILITY of the subject. You need WP:SECONDARY sources written and published by WP:INDEPENDENT commentators such as mainstream news media, magazine articles or books. Wikipedia cares very little for what subjects or their frieds, associates, family, employees, employers, agents or any other connected persons, have to say about the subject. In short WP:NOTABILITY exists only if people with no direct interest in the subject have taken note of the subject to the extent that they are motivated to write about it/him/her. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:57, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is really helpful. It shows my misunderstanding of the importance of notability over primary sources which is what I originally thought was more important to Wikipedia. I still believe this person is notable enough for a page so can now go off and work on better published citations. Thanks. Ruhjillah

• Łowiczanka (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Rogues (Buffalo, NY 1960's rock band) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How do I add a sidebar with info on the group members? Also, there are tons of photos and newspaper articles... should I put them in a gallery?

Łowiczanka (talk) 16:36, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Łowiczanka. Your first priority should be finding in-depth reliable sources in order to prove that the band meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. However, to answer your specific questions, some articles have a sidebar called an "infobox" at the top right. Band articles such as The Cure use {{Infobox musical artist}}. If you had in mind a graphic specifically about the band's members, some articles use a timeline such as the one on List of the Cure members. When it comes to photos, galleries are rarely the right answer. Some resources that may help are:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy, particularly the section Image galleries
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images
• Wikipedia:Picture tutorial

--Worldbruce (talk) 14:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ve1wab (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Lincoln Shotguns (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can someone help me link to the picture and line up the Refrences? I am new at this and i have been fiddly farting around with it for two hours. I am not a programmer buy any means. Also is there any reason that this would be not accepted?

Ve1wab (talk) 16:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ve1wab. I've added the photo for you, and tidied up the references a bit. I've left a more detailed note on the draft as part of my review of it. If you can improve it along the lines outlined there, I think it has a good chance of being accepted eventually. Worldbruce (talk) 16:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Doris Kadish (talk · contribs)
  • Sophie Doin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Sophie Doin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I received a an acceptance Start Class for my article, Sophie Doin. I understand that it can and should be expanded or improved. But for now, will it be available for viewing and if so when?Doris Kadish (talk) 19:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC) Doris Kadish (talk) 19:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Doris Kadish Sophie Doin is now in article mainspace. Thanks for your contribution. Mduvekot (talk) 19:56, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Aysasi (talk · contribs)
  • User:Aysasi/Andrew Ysasi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Curious if I have to cite information in the text to the reference information I submitted? Also, when I created the references it only showed the number, not the entire URL in the preview page. Is this correct? Thanks again - Andrew Aysasi (talk) 19:45, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft appears to be an autobiography, and the submission of autobiographies is discouraged. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]