MyWiki:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 January 28

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Archive header with {{subst:Archive header.

{| width = "100%"

|- ! colspan="3" align="center" | Help desk |- ! width="20%" align="left" | < January 27 ! width="25%" align="center"|<< Dec | January | Feb >> ! width="20%" align="right" |Current help desk > |}

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


January 28

[edit source]

12:14:21, 28 January 2017 review of submission by Parchahimanshuphil

[edit source]

Parchahimanshuphil (talk) 12:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Why my article on a an important Indian poet is not accepted for publication?

The article in question is Draft:Dayanchand Maayna. My own comment is that it contains peacock language. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

13:24:54, 28 January 2017 review of submission by Interpretation of Wisdom

[edit source]

Interpretation of Wisdom (talk) 13:24, 28 January 2017 (UTC) Please,this interpretation of Wisdom is quite interpreted from another perceptive and I see no reason why this article is not accepted because the Submission declined by Dodger67 the reason is not genuine enough as far as I am concerned by Mr.Olusola David, AyibiowuInterpretation of Wisdom (talk)

The page in question is User:Interpretation of Wisdom/sandbox. I found the submission difficult to read and follow, and am wondering whether you are having difficulty in writing in English, and whether you might be better off to contribute to a Wikipedia in another language. Also, as the reviewer said, we already have an article at Wisdom. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

13:27:48, 28 January 2017 review of submission by David hewick

[edit source]

I do not know why the date in Reference 17 is being queried. The format seems the same as the other acceptable reference dates, and December 31, 1954 is a valid date. Am I missing something obvious?David hewick (talk) 13:27, 28 January 2017 (UTC) David hewick (talk) 13:27, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi David hewick you had some extraneous text in the date field, I've fixed it. I've also made all the dates consistent with the standard British usage - day month year, rather than month day year, which is the common American style. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Dodger. Much appreciated.David hewick (talk) 17:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)