• 219.65.47.190 (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

219.65.47.190 (talk) 07:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is Draft:Mudasir Rashid Bhat. It consists only of an empty infobox. Do you have any specific questions about how to edit? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• JBarre03 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Grey Systems Theory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I need to re-submit an article (Grey Systems) that was recently rejected. However, the revised article has mathematical formulas included and I do not know how to include/edit these as the formatting goes to pot. Can someone explain please how this is achieved?

Many thanks John Barrett

Hi JBarre03 For help with formatting mathematical formulas see Help:Displaying a formula. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:57, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as the reviewer noted, your draft reads more like a technical paper than an encyclopedic article. Read some accepted articles to see how in general to format your submission. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The draft contains extensive verbatim copying from a copyrighted text. Details of the copying appear in a comment on the draft. I have nominated it for speedy deletion and have left a notice of that on the creator's Talk page. NewYorkActuary (talk) 15:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Christopher Mark Pattinson (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

Christopher Mark Pattinson (talk) 10:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article was supported by numerous references articles. This Doctor has helped millions of people across the world who have acne and skin problems and I feel its important people are made more aware of his work so he can help many other who suffer from skin problems, which can cause major depression effect people lives.

The draft in question is Draft:Michael Danielov. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is also being discussed at the Teahouse. As is being noted there, the references are mostly to his own papers. Please read the comments there. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Scerha (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jaroslav Cerha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi. I am writing this draft on Jaroslav Cerha, https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Draft:Jaroslav_Cerha. His work is from the 50s through the 70s, when all his published papers and books were just that. I have them all as originals, but they do not exist on the internet anywhere else. That seems to pose a problem when it comes to linking to 'independent, reliable, published sources'. How has others solved this issue when writing of people who's lives happened before the digital era?

Hello, Scerha. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. I took a look at your submission and I think that you are asking the wrong question here. The real issue is not whether you can find on-line versions of the subject's publications. It's whether you can find sources that discuss the subject himself. Although your submission provides a lot of biographical detail, you tell the reader nothing about where you got that information. Without referencing to reliable sources that are independent of Mr. Cerha and that discuss him in depth, the article will not demonstrate "notability" in the sense that Wikipedia uses that word. As for the list of publications, I find that list to be excessive. It would be preferable to identify only those publications that were the most significant (perhaps with reliably-sourced commentary explaining why they were significant). If there is an on-line source that lists all of Mr. Cerha's publications, that on-line source can be linked in the External Links section of the draft. On a different note, your user name suggests that you might have a family relationship with the subject of the draft. If you have not already done so, you might want to read our guidelines on conflicts of interest. I hope all of this was helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Nmducap (talk · contribs)

I understand the concept of notability in part. In this case we are talking about professional wrestling which isn't covered by mainstream sources, scholarly journals and periodicals. Therefore sources concerning said subject should be further considered:

Personal background is covered by Slam Wrestling which is owned by Canoe in Canada (a legitimate news source, the only one in Canada covering professional wrestling) authored by professional journalists in the wrestling field.

The person in question has won a major competition, which is highly valued in the field (CZW Best of the Best).

The person of interest has performed for major companies in the field around the world including Japan, Mexico and the UK. He therefore has global recognition in his field.

The person in question has been covered by the Wrestling Observer (aka Dave Meltzer) the most well-reputated journalist/publication in the field, a kin to wrestling's NYT.

Although not on the subject of notablity; it must also be noted that there are hundreds of wrestlers that are less known/notable/accomplished than the person of interest and who have their own wikipedia entry.

There's even a quote included in the article by Daniel Bryan, the most important wrestler of his generation, who believes that Mike Bailey is notable and of interest; as Bailey is being considered by the WWE, the largest professional wrestling company in the world.

Nmducap (talk) 17:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources that can prove notability in wrestling-relate articles can be found at WP:PW/RS. Happy editing! JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Marksairey (talk · contribs)
  • Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I d really appreciate helpp in correcting this page to resumbit and get it loaded. I'm not clear what I need to change. Any guidance would be hugely apprecated Thanks

Marksairey (talk) 19:23, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mark. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. I'll take a look at the draft and will leave any comments there. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]