Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Threesingh (talk | contribs) at 18:11, 16 May 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


May 10

10:03:29, 10 May 2021 review of submission by Clipswretch

Clipswretch (talk) 10:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clipswretch You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 13:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What reference sources do I need for my page to get approved, Clipswretch (talk) 05:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing that you can do to get your article draft approved, it has been rejected. If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


12:56:51, 10 May 2021 review of draft by Cherishmanjooran

I would like to know how to improve this article to get published. Cherishmanjooran (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cherishmanjooran You can't, as it was rejected and then deleted as a blatant advertisement. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:26:59, 10 May 2021 review of submission by TullikaInode1

I have created Intelligence Node company page which got declined today with a comment "indicate why this company is notable." Its a notable company with all references with all reliable sources. Please help me for the same.

TullikaInode1 (talk) 14:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Crunchbase isn't considered a reliable source by Wikipedia. No comment about the other ones. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources are useless. Not counting the already-dismissed Crunchbase source, two are standard fundraising news, one is a non-sequitur, and the last is a press release. Nothing that shows notability of any sort. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 19:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:45:42, 10 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by 1друг

Previously, I was helped & guided by admin and some users to increase sources and content here, Adda52 Discussion but once I updated the page and submitted @HitroMilanese: & @Theroadislong: rejected it without explaining any reason and checking the sources. It seems users are trying to delete the page with no reason to me. Please enlighten me.

1друг (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:21:56, 10 May 2021 review of submission by TullikaInode1

We have submitted our company page ( Intelligence Node) today but the draft got rejected due to not enough significant coverage. In my view we do have enough coverage. Could you please review our copy and tell us the exact reason for the rejection. We will try to modify and re-submit. TullikaInode1 (talk) 16:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:TullikaInode1#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing the required disclosure. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:33:19, 10 May 2021 review of submission by 89.134.114.222

89.134.114.222 (talk) 17:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Already answered below. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to get some advice in improving my page because currently it is nominated for deletion. I took some parts out but I'm not sure if it's done properly right now or needs more improvements.

17:34:28, 10 May 2021 review of submission by Gittahrszt

I'd love to get some advice in improving my page because currently it is nominated for deletion. I took some parts out but I'm not sure if it's done properly right now or needs more improvements. Gittahrszt (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gittahrszt The nomination for deletion would I call a mistake by a newbie user but anyway your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered any further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to get some advice in improving my page because currently it is nominated for deletion. I took some parts out but I'm not sure if it's done properly right now or needs more improvements.

May 11

02:19:40, 11 May 2021 review of draft by Homero29love


Homero29love (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my name is Homero and I would like some help with my biography. If someone can let me know what I need to do to publish my bio. You can verify my music at youtube.com enter homero singer you can see my music videos.Also you can verify a lot I wrote in Cashbox magazine November 2, 1996 page 18 Thank you Homero (Redacted)

Anything you wrote, said, or recorded is useless for notability as Wikipedia defines it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:37:22, 11 May 2021 review of submission by True sephiroth

Sephiroth (talk) 03:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hope this is the right place to seek advice. It has been a long while since I logged into wikipedia to edit a page.

I noticed this draft has been denied several times over the last year and I would like to take this page up on getting it published fully. If I am correct, the page is getting denied on the grounds that the sources are not reliable enough. From what I understand the two 3rd party sources I see referenced on the page are both sparse on info, and basically are about the same thing. Aside from Simmons being a show creator of his series I would assume further sources such as interviews talking about his career, his work on youtube, and other news sources would be adequate yes? I was able to find additional sources that would work well with this page, and even be able to improve the information already provided on the draft.

Any advice moving forward on getting this page approved would be greatly appreciated.

Interviews would not work. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:51:54, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Abhrajitga

Abhrajitga (talk) 08:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhrajitga: You didn't ask a question. Draft:The Guided Life is full of puffery, but lacks sources to verify its content. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:21:01, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Chrisadasia

Thank you for reviewing my created page. My submission was rejected as it didn't meet significant coverage requirements - published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

I just wanted to clarify which source it refers to (I've read the documentation around referencing, but still can't determine what exactly I'm missing) - as all sources are independent/secondary from the subject, published and reliable. The only thing I can think of is there are a few referenced news sources that are behind subscriber paywalls, but there was also some documentation saying that this shouldn't affect the review.

Please let me know what I can change, thank you!

Chrisadasia (talk) 09:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chrisadasia I do hope you read the big pink decline box which tells you broadly what is wrong. It is the referencing. This is a well disguised advert. Many of the references are regurgitated press releases and PR material. Which source? Please check 100% of your sources.
Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Chrisadasia Please note that Wikipedia is a volunteer organisation. Please read WP:PAID and declare with precision your relationship with the org you write about. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:27:01, 11 May 2021 review of submission by RYVIAS

I'm looking to get a business page uploaded for the company I work for. Many of the links will come from inside the company page, although I've tried to make everything verifiable where at all possible.

Obviously I don't want to contravene any rules of Wikipedia, so any advice of how I can better place it to be suitable for publishing would be hugely appreciated.

Thank you RYVIAS (talk) 11:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RYVIAS Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. First, you will need to change your username immediately; business names as usernames are not permitted. Your username must indicate that a specific individual is operating your account(your real name is not required, just something unique). Please see your user talk page for more information on this. Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves and what they do, a Wikipedia article(not just a "page"), summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a business wants to say about itself, such as through press releases or announcements of its routine business activities. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:00:58, 11 May 2021 review of draft by JohnTiberi


I would like advice as to adding a hard link to the existing Russian language version entry i.e placed in the left menu Thanks JohnTiberi (talk) 13:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Морозов,_Алексей_Викторович

JohnTiberi (talk) 13:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnTiberi: once this is an article, it can be linked to the russian version through Wikidata. For now that is not what you should focus on. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:58:12, 11 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Marly2021


Marly2021 (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question but 'a mother of 6 lovely children," is clearly not neutral encyclopedic tone, neither is "Her dedication, passion and down to earth attitude has inspired people to completely change their lifestyles to healthier states and better well being". please re-write. Theroadislong (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:13:53, 11 May 2021 review of draft by Tngchen


I understand that I need to provide more supporting links and mentions. However, on Wikipedia Iceland, we were able to put up a page. Would this be a sufficient reference? I would just like to have an equivalent page for English US. https://is.wikipedia.org/wiki/66%C2%B0Nor%C3%B0ur

Tngchen (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tngchen unfortunately different Wikipedias have different standards. For each you need to follow the essential acceptance criteria FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 17:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:30, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Cyber3Xenocide

My article has been reject. I would like to know the faults. Can anyone help me out please? Cyber3Xenocide (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyber3Xenocide you seem to have written a blatant advert. Please read WP:YFA FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 17:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:22, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Nearlyevil665

Would holding the position of Chief of Staff and Executive Secretary of the White House National Security Counsel qualify for WP:NPOL#1? I'm leaning towards the negative, but wanted to make sure with more experienced reviewers to make sure I'm not missing out on something. nearlyevil665 16:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

nearlyevil665 16:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:00:30, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Muhammad Haris08

I need help in creating my page because i dont know anything about wikipedia and i am new to this Muhammad Haris08 (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhammad Haris08 Your user page is not a contact page or a dating app. What you have done instead is created a brochure about you as a draft article. Please read the welcome message on your talk page, and absorb the information in it FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 17:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Muhammad Haris08 @Timtrent: I suspected a Sock and I was right, is blocked (next to 4 others socks of him). CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford good shot. 👍 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 18:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:47, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Fexulaan

The following is copied from the talk page of the reviewer, who kindly redirected me to ask my questions here instead.

Hello! Thank you for reviewing my draft. I did not expect it to be reviewed this soon, and I certainly intend to make further edits. Now that you have given it a close evaluation, would you mind answering some burning questions I have with regards to the sourcing policies?

I understand that some of the current sources, being interviews with the subject in question or descriptions written by affiliated parties (record labels, etc) do nothing to adequately establish notability. I could realistically find a number of sources that refer to Das Ding as one of the pioneers and more prominent faces of the modular synth scene in Rotterdam and perhaps the Netherlands as a whole. However, none of these sources would be considered noteworthy publications, as the subject, a niche scene in a small country, does not see itself covered by major publications.

The fact is, minimal wave and modular synth tinkering are both very niche subjects. Had there not been Wikipedia articles on either of those topics, I would not have even tried suggesting an article on Das Ding. I guess the bottom line of my question here is; how does Wikipedia deal with subjects that are niche enough so as to have a sparsity of sources available, yet are already half-represented by a number of other existing articles (sometimes poorly sourced, but evidently acceptable since they exist in mainspace)?

(When it comes to the points outlined in Wikipedia:Notability (music), Das Ding qualifies at the very least for points 5 and 7:

Point 5; Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable.

I would argue Stones Throw Records qualifies for the latter part of this;. Das Ding has been featured on multiple compilations released on this label, namely, two individual volumes of "The Minimal Wave Tapes"[1]. Or does the fact that these were collaborative albums ("Various Artists") mean that it doesn't count?

Point 7; Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city.

I believe Das Ding's qualifying for this point is established by the fact that minimal wave, a genre apparently notable enough to warrant its own Wikipedia article, saw its early-2010s revival based entirely around, among other things, the rediscovery of this subject's music.)

Despite remaining relatively obscure, Das Ding has regularly performed at a number of Dutch music festivals and venues, including WORM (Rotterdam), Amsterdam Dance Event, Motel Mozaïque, GOGBOT, etc.; yet any sort of lineup or announcement posted by any of the aforementioned sources would not constitute an acceptable source, correct?

Thank you for your time. Fexulaan   talk 18:23, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ popmatters.com/126314-various-artists-the-minimal-wave-tapes-volume-one-2496186929.html

18:27:27, 11 May 2021 review of draft by Bjdepasquale5114


I cannot seem to figure out how to create and edit the "lead" section of my submission. I thought I had turned on the relevant settings in preferences, though no text appears above the table of contents. Here is the text that I think would be suitable for my "lead" section of the "Novyi LEF" draft...

"The Novyi LEF or New LEF journal (Russian: Новый Леф, The New Left Front of the Arts) was a literary-critical periodical published by the State Publishing House “Gosizdat” from 1927-28 in Moscow, RFSFR. Futurist poet Vladimir Mayakovsky served as editor-in-chief, with Sergei Tretyakov replacing him in August 1928.[1] Novyi LEF was a 22-issue revival of the original LEF journal (Russian: Леф, The Left Front of the Arts), which was published in seven issues from 1923-25. Both LEF and Novyi LEF emerged from the LEF literary group, composed of Futurist and Formalist writers, theorists, and artists committed to a revolutionary transformation of Soviet culture.[2] Novyi LEF consistently showcased photography (often by the constructivist Alexander Rodchenko, who also designed many of the journal’s covers), literary theory and criticism, poetry, editorials, and occasionally creative prose."

Bjdepasquale5114 (talk) 18:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bjdepasquale5114: the issue with the lede was you had it within a section therefore it was placed after the table of contents. I removed the section coding and you will now see it precedes the table of contents. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:28:30, 11 May 2021 review of draft by Ggassist


Hi, I submitted the article "Debra J Fisher" for review which was apparently declined because it lacks "significant coverage." I'm not an experienced editor myself. Can anyone help edit? Thanks!

Ggassist (talk) 20:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:59, 11 May 2021 review of draft by Limbkow

The help I need is in understanding how the array of citations (as in, from various sources, not just 1 source, to include the numerous references of Sean Momberger's credits within many other profile/pages on wikipedia, is not sufficient? I'm not upset, but i just dont understand, considering the references to his work in other pages that are approved through the wikipedia process and non-wikipedia references that give him credit for his production/writing. Any clarity would be appreciated.

Limbkow (talk) 20:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Limbkow: Wikipedia does not consider itself to be a reliable source and the genius.com ones are problematic as well. The existence of other poor articles does not mean we create another one. If you find other articles which are inapproiate, please point them out so somebody can take action on them. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:54, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:58:05, 11 May 2021 review of submission by FpsJimbo

Good evening,

Requesting re-reivew for approval for Wikipedia page for Irish MMA flighter Peter Queally. I had the inital page denied for submission due to lack of fights back in July 2019 to be a worthy notable athlete due he now as of May 11th 2021 he has the required numbers of fights within Bellator to be approved. He has now been ranked #6 in the lightweigh division within Bellator.

I will continually update the page.

Thank you, James FpsJimbo (talk) 20:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:43:44, 11 May 2021 review of submission by Hridoy443

Hridoy443 (talk) 23:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


May 12

01:22:22, 12 May 2021 review of draft by 71.187.40.39

I don't understand why my submission was rejected. 71.187.40.39 (talk) 01:22, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am at a loss as to why this entry was declined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jeff_Burger As far as I can tell, it sticks to the facts, does not read like an advertisement, and is written in a neutral tone. Moreover, it cites numerous reputable sources, such as Who's Who, The New Yorker, etc. I'd be grateful for any guidance.

The sources you have offered cite what he has done, but are not about him personally. A subject must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:27:11, 12 May 2021 review of draft by Darveshpur


Darveshpur (talk) 09:27, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Darveshpur You don't ask a question. You have a draft pending, but it is not in English and will be quickly declined- contributions to the English Wikipedia need to be in English. There is likely a version of Wikipedia in your primary language if that's what you are looking for. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:32:57, 12 May 2021 review of submission by TrisAdler

Hello, I want to know why my article keeps on getting declined over and over again. I have tried to cite as many sources as I can that are "verifiable" but it's hard because I can't find that much reliable and trustable sources about the subject. I've also tried to update and improve my draft with the help from some Wikipedia help articles. I feel like my draft is good enough to become a Wikipedia article. Can anyone explain and help me about this problem? TrisAdler (talk) 11:32, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:21:46, 12 May 2021 review of draft by Darveshpur


Darveshpur (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Darveshpur: You didn't ask a question AGAIN and you didn't address the concerns told to you in your last post and on your article declined message. Any further requests here without any sort of question or improvement on the issues will be reverted. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:04:09, 12 May 2021 review of submission by Harsha666d

Harsha666d (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:04:09, 12 May 2021 review of submission by Harsha666d

@Harsha666d: your draft has already been reviewed and outright rejected, this means it will not be considered any further as the topic is not notable and the article is in fact partially if not totally fabricated as I highly doubt they are India's first film producer only making a film in 2020 and at the age of 14. This is not the place to write about these things. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:58:38, 12 May 2021 review of submission by SVDUSA

I am requesting assistance because my submission was denied. The reason I received was it appeared more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia article and I need guidance on what needs to be updated to have my entry approved. In addition, I would like to confirm that my pagename is "Save The Duck" even though the title at the top of the page is listed with my username and "sandbox". It currently reads: "User:SVDUSA/sandbox". SVDUSA (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SVDUSA If the draft is ever accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. You have summarized what the company does. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. That does not include announcements of niche awards, announcements of routine business activities, or other basic coverage. Please see Your first article.
If you represent the company, you must read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. If your username has abbreviated the company name, you will need to change it at Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:15, 12 May 2021 review of draft by Olgreenwood

Hello My Draft article “Iconography of Correlations” not currently submitted for review. I have a diagnostic: “Expression error: Unrecognized word "iconography".” I don’t understand this diagnostic. What do I need to do to get my article submitted. Thanking you in advance Olgreenwood Olgreenwood (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Olgreenwood (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Olgreenwood: I have found & fixed the issiue here. The issue was that in one ref you used {{number|19}}, presumably in an attempt to display an episode number or something. However, {{Number}} is actually a shortcut for the template {{Infobox number}}, which has a whole different purpose, and is only to be inserted on pages about numbers such as 42, causing the template to throw errors because it wasn't. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:23, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Victor Schmidt, I puzzled over that for some time! Theroadislong (talk) 21:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I actually too. The trick with that ine was that I used the VisualEditor to find the offending ref, because it is much easier there to find out which template is responsible for which output, even inside refs. The ability of the VE to preview refs was actually quite usefull there, because it allows you to check each ref until you found the one with the wrong template call. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:17, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:02:58, 12 May 2021 review of submission by Hi from hello world

We Really Need this, Or The Old Net won't Have A History! Hi from hello world (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hi from hello world Wikipedia is not for things you made up in school one day FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 13

08:12:06, 13 May 2021 review of submission by Ramkrishnadas1

Ramkrishnadas1 (talk) 08:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ramkrishnadas1 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, as Wikipedia is not social media. In addition, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:38:20, 13 May 2021 review of draft by Gradechanger


Hi - I submitted a draft quite a while ago - at 18:36 on 1 February, and have heard nothing since. I realise that not 5 months have yet elapsed, but I might have done something wrong...

Thank you for your help!

Gradechanger (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:50:03, 13 May 2021 review of submission by Friedmans

I would like to create an english wikipedia page for the topic currently only available in Swedish https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmans_apostlar

Other university choirs are featured on the english wikipedia page such as the one linked below.

[university choir]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link%C3%B6ping_University_Male_Voice_Choir

Friedmans (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Friedmans Your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It is completely unsourced and does not indicate how this choir meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable music group. Note that the English Wikipedia likely has different standards and policies than the Swedish Wikipedia.
Please see your user talk page for important information about your username and conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:56:08, 13 May 2021 review of draft by Darvespurvillage

18:40:53, 13 May 2021 review of draft by JohnJoePayne


Hello! The AFC that I had submitted Draft:Karl Zelik was rejected based on notability, but I believe he meets notability criteria #1 for academics based on the combination of highly cited papers in biomechanics and a number of awards from biomechanics societies. What is the proper way to continue from this point? Thanks! JohnJoePayne (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined NOT rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JohnJoePayne: In other words, you may improve and resubmit the draft. Here you say he is notable for having highly cited papers, and you may be correct, but the draft doesn't say anything about his papers being highly cited, or about the criteria for selection his "selected publications". The lead should make clear what he is notable for. The awards may not be as helpful as you think. The awarding organizations are notable, so it would be good if you added internal links to them, but not every award from a notable organization is a "highly prestigious academic award or honor", which is what Wikipedia is looking for. Did any independent (i.e. not Zelik, his employer, or the awarding organization) secondary source cover his receipt of the awards? If not, don't mention them in the lead. Similarly, has any independent source covered his being the chief scientific officer of HeroWear? Perhaps the business section of a regional newspaper? If not, including it in the lead sounds rather promotional. Also, external links, ones that take the reader away from Wikipedia, are not allowed in the body text. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:05:50, 13 May 2021 review of submission by Mrexcoder

Hi, I saw that reviewers rejected the article 'Minus Zero' stating that company is not notable as per references. But all articles were independent including renowned Economic Times, Dataquest India, etc. Only two of those were interview based. As per Wikipedia guidelines the company seems notable, and articles have proper coverage (not just passing mention). I even didn't add any info that was not covered by independent sources.

Can you let me know what were the errors regarding each parameter? It would be a great help to improve my future articles or edit and contribute better to Wikipedia

Mrexcoder (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mrexcoder Your draft does little more than tell about the existence of the company. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company. If you review WP:ORG carefully, it points out that announcements of routine business activities do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:35, 13 May 2021 review of draft by MatthewMarani


MatthewMarani (talk) 21:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you point out the primary flaws in this submission that are preventing it's publication?

Best, Matthew

@MatthewMarani: the way it is written feels promotional. I think it probably passes WP:NCORP, though have not checked in detail, nor checked the references. What you need to achieve is a very tightly written précis written in dull-but-worthy prose, well referenced. WP:42 is agood guide. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:20:22, 13 May 2021 review of draft by Pjedicke

I think this article already meets the requirements. What am I missing? Peter Jedicke (talk) 23:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC) Peter Jedicke (talk) 23:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pjedicke As noted by reviewers, you do not have independent reliable sources to support the content of the draft. Interviews, information from the publisher, blogs, fan websites, and other similar sources do not establish notability. Independent reliable sources need to have a reputation of editoral control and fact checking, and be independent of the subject(no interviews with the author). Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 14

02:09:33, 14 May 2021 review of submission by Rushabhbokefode1998

Rushabhbokefode1998 (talk) 02:09, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rushabhbokefode1998 You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media where people tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 07:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the page Zimbabwe Library Association

10:15:06, 14 May 2021 review of draft by DeLilGwashoper

Learning how to add an association which appears not only online but in reports, books and research papers. I am trying hard to speak neutral and wanted to work on the page with other librarians during the #1Lib1Ref and #AfLibWk African Librarians week starting on the 17th-24th May, 2021. Kindly assist with guidance on how to set up a working template that will undergo edits during an event.

https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/AfLIA/AfLIA_1Lib1Ref_African_Librarians_Week_2021_(May_-_June_2021)?enrolled=true

Dagwashopa 10:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

10:16:17, 14 May 2021 review of submission by Drashti R Joshi

Can you please help how to increase the encyclopedic value of the House of Hiranandani Projects page?

Drashti R Joshi (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The company is just a routine property developer like millions of others, nothing to suggest they are notable. Theroadislong (talk) 10:44, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:00:51, 14 May 2021 review of submission by HannieBeen

Dear sir, madam, I am requesting a re-review. The subject of this article is a professional journalist: https://journa.com/denise-delgado. Also, a professional singer. She has performed often and in countries such as France, Belgium and The Netherlands. Furthermore, she is a public figure because she was a main character in a TV show. Her audience keeps on growing. In addition to all of this, she has her own business in content creation called ImContent (www.imcontent.nl). She is the role model for many, but especially for girls growing up. All the more reason to accept this article in Wikipedia.

Kind regards. HannieBeen (talk) 11:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reviewed, nothing you have said indicates that the person is notable in Wikipedia's terms. Having her own content creation business confers zero notability and being a role model is subjective, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:29:52, 14 May 2021 review of draft by Vinod2608

I have recently joined Wikipedia and this article was my first post. I think it's fine if it has to be deleted if it doesn't meet the required standards. I had created this article about a school as I read somewhere that school articles are usually accepted. But I completely agree and respect your decision to delete it as otherwise a lot of wrong information can come to Wiki.

Can you share what else information, do I need to add to make this article acceptable? Can I add news links of Hindi website for adding creditability? I'm not sure if an news article written in Hindi can be added as reference. I intend to work on this draft to get it to acceptable standard and then publish it.

Thanks a lot for help.

Vinod2608 (talk) 11:29, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vinod2608 Sources may be in any language. English helps, but is not required. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:45:36, 14 May 2021 review of draft by 71.187.40.39

My article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jeff_Burger) was rejected because it supposedly reads like an advertisement and doesn't quote independent reliable sources. But it consists solely of facts and is written from an objective point of view, and it cites such sources as Who's Who in America and the New Yorker. I am at a loss as to how to improve this entry and would be grateful for any specific suggestions. 71.187.40.39 (talk) 13:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was declined, which allows improvement and resubmission, not rejected, which is final. Who's Who in America is considered generally unreliable. Most of its content is provided by the person concerned, so editors generally treat it analogous to a self-published source. There is a broad consensus that it cannot be used to establish notability. The New Yorker article merely quotes Burger briefly. That does nothing to help establish notability. Try to make better use of independent sources that contain significant coverage of Burger, and minimize non-independent sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:42, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:47, 14 May 2021 review of submission by 2603:8000:2D01:EDAB:8DE1:E940:621E:34DC

Because I'm curious to see how much military occupations the United States has done. 2603:8000:2D01:EDAB:8DE1:E940:621E:34DC (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No page is specified, and I can't suss one out from your contributions. Are you sure you're in the right place? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 10:54, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:03:14, 14 May 2021 review of draft by Afrah4483

This personal is a notable individual in the health sector of Maldives and Maldives Army (Maldives National Defense Force. Wo also received National Award of Honour and National Award of Recognition from President Yameen (former President of Maldives). Since Maldives Army is small force colonel is a third most senior rank. Please refer to the credible sources such as the web sites of presidents office along with ministry websites and websites of local news for verification. Please help me improve this article and publish it in Wikipedia.

Thanks


Afrah4483 (talk) 17:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:54, 14 May 2021 review of submission by Gigara

Contents updated. Gigara (talk) 18:23, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gigara You do not ask a question but your draft had been rejected, meaning it will not be considered any further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:58:47, 14 May 2021 review of submission by Nabil1992

Nabil1992 (talk) 22:58, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nabil1992 You do not ask a question but your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered any further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:09:40, 14 May 2021 review of submission by Indyplant

Hi commander Waterford, thank you for the feedback, i didn't realise my draft might read as an advertisement as I mainly quoted independent sources like scientific articles. I have rewritten it, i hope this version is better!

Indyplant (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Little or no wiki-linking, too many assertions sourced to primary sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:13, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

11:26:13, 15 May 2021 review of draft by LindySQ

Hello. Please could you tell me how to delete citations from my draft article so that I can replace the citations with more appropriate ones? How to I actually delete the inline numbers as well please? thank you.

LindySQ (talk) 11:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LindySQ You may simply edit the draft to remove and/or replace the citations. 331dot (talk) 11:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please advise me exactly how to delete the citations I have made and replace them with new ones. I cannot see how to delete the ones in my draft at all. thank you

LindySQ (talk) 12:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LindySQ Could you describe the specific difficulty you are having? As you created the draft, you are the best one to see where you placed the citations- simply open the edit window, locate them, and remove or replace them. Please edit this existing section to reply, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope this is the right way to reply. I have no idea how to remove or replace them. I open the edit window, and try to click on the numbers but nothing happens. Perhaps I should delete the entire article and start again. Could you tell me how to do that please?— Preceding unsigned comment added by LindySQ (talk • contribs)

@LindySQ: (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Are you using the wikitext editor (i.e. You have a giant textbox with source code) or the visual editor (which looks similar to when you view the page outside of editing mode)? Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:19, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:09:32, 15 May 2021 review of submission by Rakesh2 Basfore

Why my article has been declined ? Rakesh2 Basfore (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rakesh2 Basfore: Wikipedia is not social media. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:11, 15 May 2021 review of submission by XtinaS

I promise that I am not being snarky or sarcastic. However: I hit the "Random" link a lot at Wikipedia, and there are a lot of stubs about insects, sports players, and villages, all of which seem to exist for the sake of existing. Therefore, the rejection reasoning "Mere existence does not show notability" doesn't make sense to me. Can someone explain the difference, please?

XtinaS (talk) 14:15, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Most insects and villages are considered notable enough for articles, sports people need to pas the criteria at WP:NSPORTS and films need to pass the criteria at WP:NFILM, your draft was sourced to IMDb which is not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is an entire section of pages for how to determine notability and I am just now learning about it. Thank you!! XtinaS (talk) 15:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ignorance remediation time: If this continues to be determined not notable, would removing links to that page be useful? (See John Sparkes for an example of what I mean.) XtinaS (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@XtinaS: Removing the inter-language link Melancholia [de] on John Sparkes probably would be useful. If you do so, make very clear in your edit summary why you're removing it - that although an article exists on the German Wikipedia, it's sourced only to IMDb, which, being user-generated, is not a reliable source, and your searches of [wherever you searched] found insufficient sources to demonstrate notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:47:35, 15 May 2021 review of submission by DarveshpurShikarpurUttarPradesh

Darveshpur,Shikarpur Tehsil, Bulandshahr District Uttar Pradesh, DarveshpurShikarpurUttarPradesh (talk) 14:47, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:55:47, 15 May 2021 review of submission by Preethi srinivasa

Preethi srinivasa (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Preethi srinivasa:, you did not ask a question, the draft has been rejected and will not be considered any further. As stated in the decline comment the page is a promotional vanity piece not based on any reliable source. At this point I would recommend working on other articles and familiarizing yourself with the policies within Wikipedia before attempting to make another draft. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:47, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like user has been blocked for advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:36:30, 15 May 2021 review of submission by 71.126.181.87

I am requesting help because im trying to submit my page for review but their is no submit for review button. Ive followed all the instructions to submit but it still isn't working. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:The_Club_at_Ibis 71.126.181.87 (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@71.126.181.87: I have submitted your draft for review this time on your behalf. For future reference, the "Submit for review" button looks like this: Submit the draft for review!. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:15, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

04:12:43, 16 May 2021 review of draft by 2409:12:9060:B00:E57C:C699:1117:70C2


I wrote an article about "Echigo yoita uchihamono". However this article have been declined by "requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. " I had added some secondary sources in "reference" before last submition. I coudn't understand why it was declined. Is it a mistake the way how to write an article? Or, Isn't it enough number of references? I can put other references such as https://kougeihin.jp/en/craft/0705/ , https://nippon-kichi.jp/article_list.do;jsessionid=5F8186FF37E54664969E960B23F7DDE9?p=5522&ml_lang=en , https://www.japaneseknifeimports.com/blogs/news/63928965-regional-knife-makers . Please tell me how to currect it.


2409:12:9060:B00:E57C:C699:1117:70C2 (talk) 04:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:34:52, 16 May 2021 review of submission by Mikecameroon

I have reviewed the references and drafted new article (not the outdated article deleted earlier). Kindly advise if more work is required. Mikecameroon (talk) 08:34, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:40:32, 16 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Msp7com


Msp7com (talk) 10:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:40:40, 16 May 2021 review of submission by Askadvice

Hi, I would like to ask for an advice on how to expand consensus gathering. In my humble opinion the article has been rejected and shut down by a small dissenting group and the previous AFD discussion on the topic is not based on a logical basis. I just would like to know if there is something wrong with the sources being provided and what it needs to be done to eventually improve the article. Many thanks Askadvice (talk) 11:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Askadvice The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. That, combined with the AFD, means that this person likely does not merit and will not get an article at this time. He has not been shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability and no amount of editing can change that. If you have an association with this person, please review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Askadvice. The previous AFD discussion was based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so you are unlikely to convince Wikipedians that it was illogical. There are many problems with the sources. Examining a handful of the provided ones at random:
  • Elle and La Voce di New York are passing mentions, not significant coverage of Morassutti.
  • Letteral Mente has none of the characteristics of a reliable source. It says its information is "tratto liberamente dal Web", and mentions Wikiquote.org specifically. In addition to not being reliable it is likely circular.
  • Il Piccolo, Messaggero Veneto, and comingsoon.it [it] are independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of Morassutti. However, Il Piccolo and Messaggero Veneto have the same publisher and what they say is very similar, suggesting that although the pieces were published two weeks apart and nominally have different authors, either the second borrowed heavily from the first, or both used a common source, such as a press release. They won't count as separate works towards notability, so pick just one so it doesn't look like you're trying to game the system.
If the rest of the draft's sources are like the sample, then half to two-thirds of them don't suit your needs. Get rid of them, and make heavier use of the independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of him.
The previous article was deleted, and the draft rejected, for the topic not being notable. If that can be overcome, the draft's promotional tone will need to be fixed too. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:07:31, 16 May 2021 review of submission by Official TusharSahu

Official TusharSahu (talk) 15:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:11:15, 16 May 2021 review of submission by Threesingh

Threesingh (talk) 18:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1023495410"