Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 November 21
Just looking for feedback on my draft before I try my hand at a direct article using the wizard function! Who ever likes to view and or comment, I look forward to it and my email is: fibron3@yahoo.com Thanks.
JoeBell (talk) 03:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- Come back in a few years when/if she has a career bigger than being on ONE "reality" TV show. WylieCoyote (talk) 14:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
I created a List of plasma (physics) applications articles right now. It has no link i don't know how to get one maybe it needs to be approved. I made it up and down like index of wave articles . But it just keeps on going down how do i make it more even pot Like right next to article A index. Should i rename it and add plasma applications or technology with it. Side by side is harder to read so im making it up and down but if someone changes it do i still get credtit for what i added so far. i still have a whole list to add to it probably about 500 at least more plasma articles
Shawn Worthington Laser Plasma (talk) 08:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- You need to be accurate with the article name. The reason why the above are redlinks is that originally you called it List of Plasma (physics) articles, and now List of plasma (physics) applications articles, neither of which are what you've said above. If you don't give a link that works, no-one is likely to review your article. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:06, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks I am still debating on what I should name it. It has all aspects and elements of plasma physics sources like artificial natural phenomena and certain mechanisms that are driven by plasma. When I type it in the search box you have to type list of plasma and with a (p) added after plasma to actually see it in the search box. Why cant I see the whole thing when i type list of plasma, Its gonna be hard for people to find it. What should I name it to meet its standards? Shawn Worthington Laser Plasma (talk) 21:06, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
The page describes the dynamics of the system utility (usefulness). I would like to add more sources for describing the life cycle of the system utility.
Avi Harel (talk) 14:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, I am not aware of any other sources
Avi Harel (talk) 12:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Seeking feedback on my latest aquanaut article so that the "new article" template can be removed.
Gildir (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- Hello, Gildir. If you notice on some of my messages to people here, I ask them to Wiki link some items in their article. May I suggest you do the opposite? You whole article was BLUE from all the words you linked. I think it's safe to not have as many links, especially in the sections where most things should be known about - like the sports she likes to play. Also, you should fix the red ones, either research their links or re-word them. Other than that, it doesn't look too bad. Very informative to the point that, before today, I didn't know a thing about the woman. Now I do. Well done! WylieCoyote (talk) 15:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback, WylieCoyote. I have followed your advice, removing many of the blue links and one of the red links. I have been advised in the past to blue link words such as "sophomore", "undergraduate" and "thesis" because the concepts may not be familiar to readers from other cultures. As I explained in the edit summary when I restored the "Master of Space Studies" link, the degree was still called that when Meir received it in 2000. The "International Space University" article previously had a red link for "Master of Space Studies" in its lead paragraph which had not been corrected to "Masters of Science in Space Studies". I changed that link and used a piped link in the "Jessica Meir" article, i.e. "[[Masters of Science in Space Studies|Master of Space Studies]]", to reflect the name of the degree when Meir received it while making sure it would link to a future article on the degree. I think the other three red links are desirable. Wikipedia has long lacked an article on the National Undersea Research Center (NURC), and there were already red links for the Sylvan Heights Waterfowl Park in the "Aviary" and "Common Shelduck" articles. Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation sounds to me like an exciting new organization, and it's only a matter of time before it becomes definitively notable and has an article written about it. Once again, thank you for your feedback and your praise for the article. It's much appreciated. Gildir (talk) 19:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
- I removed the New Article Tag for you and also replied to your message on my talk page. — WylieCoyote (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback, WylieCoyote. I have followed your advice, removing many of the blue links and one of the red links. I have been advised in the past to blue link words such as "sophomore", "undergraduate" and "thesis" because the concepts may not be familiar to readers from other cultures. As I explained in the edit summary when I restored the "Master of Space Studies" link, the degree was still called that when Meir received it in 2000. The "International Space University" article previously had a red link for "Master of Space Studies" in its lead paragraph which had not been corrected to "Masters of Science in Space Studies". I changed that link and used a piped link in the "Jessica Meir" article, i.e. "[[Masters of Science in Space Studies|Master of Space Studies]]", to reflect the name of the degree when Meir received it while making sure it would link to a future article on the degree. I think the other three red links are desirable. Wikipedia has long lacked an article on the National Undersea Research Center (NURC), and there were already red links for the Sylvan Heights Waterfowl Park in the "Aviary" and "Common Shelduck" articles. Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation sounds to me like an exciting new organization, and it's only a matter of time before it becomes definitively notable and has an article written about it. Once again, thank you for your feedback and your praise for the article. It's much appreciated. Gildir (talk) 19:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Please review this article on Flud (a news aggregator app) for neutrality. I want this article to have similar information to that of Flipboard and Pulse (software).
Ericaberry87 (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
What can I do next?
Foreignmatter (talk) 21:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- Hello, Foreignmatter. If you check your article again, you will see I reworked it for you. I did it all in one Edit, so if you want to put it back to its original state, just click the Undo out from my name in the History of it. I think it helped it flow better. I also highlighted some words that people may not know and can Wiki-reference. The things that concerned me (and I leave up to others to mention/flag) are your references. There are many undocumented ones and some improperly documented. If they flag it, just do some more research/referencing. There are a lot of articles like this one with the same trouble, but the more I tweaked yours, the more interested in Miss Cachola I became. I think you have a good bio for her, if you can fix it more. WylieCoyote (talk) 16:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)