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 613codify (talk | contribs) at 18:07, 25 July 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


July 19

02:50:23, 19 July 2021 review of submission by ClearPill11


ClearPill11 (talk) 02:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Good afternoon. I'm not sure where to go with this but I'm wondering about the page I created -- Citizen Free Press. Someone is constantly editing it and taking out sources I put into the originally approved page. They are also making biased claims against the website without any evidence of their claims.

What can I do? Thanks

ClearPill11 You might want the more general Help Desk, but it's okay to be here. I have blocked the IP editor from that article for edit warring. Keep in mind that this is not a judgement about the merits of their claims specifically, but the fact that they were edit warring to keep unsourced claims in the article. Content disputes should be discussed to reach a WP:CONSENSUS. 331dot (talk) 07:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:48:25, 19 July 2021 review of submission by Anne Louise Thompson


Hello and thank you to Dan Arndt for his editing of my first solo article re artist Mary E Livingston. Will this article go online OR, as a Start article, is it deemed incomplete?

Secondly, I attended a Wiki edits workshop at the Womens Art Register, Richmond, Melbourne, Australia at which I posted an article. Since then, I've made more than 10 edits which Wikipedia acknowledged. Does this mean I can publish future new articles without asking for review? Best wishes Anne Anne Louise Thompson (talk) 06:48, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Louise Thompson: Mary Elizabeth Livingston is online in the fact that it can be found by everyone with Wikipedia's internal search. As far as I can tell, it should also be indexed by Google rather soon (but they sometimes take a while). Regarding your second question, yes, you can theoretically do so. Wether you should is a different question, and its a question I cannot answer for you. If you feel that you have enough experience with creating Articles that a new article you cresat in mainpsace isn't immedately subject to one of Wikipedia's deletion proccesses, you can certainly skip the review and either create the article directly in mainspace (not recommmended expect for very very experienced editors) or create a draft as before and then move it to mainspace. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:33:10, 19 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by AwesomeAubergine

This is my very first time submitting. I am trying to understand why 2 paragraphs - Background & History were completely deleted as well as part of the Intro. There is a Reference which was invoked. My draft is titled Girmit Global Museum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Girmit_Global_Museum) Appreciate help as would not like the page deleted - how long do I have before you debate rejected pages? Thank you.


AwesomeAubergine (talk) 07:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AwesomeAubergine: we can't host copyright violations, more about that on your talkpage in a second. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:27:33, 19 July 2021 review of submission by 129.12.34.45


129.12.34.45 (talk) 08:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC) My first attempt at writing an article was rejected for the reasons given below.[reply]

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)."

However, I referenced four published books and two articles in national newspapers, among other sources. In most of these books, there is a lot more than a passing metnion of the subject.

So my question is - how many additional sources do I need to add for the article to be accepted?

If you are the creator of the draft, remember to log in before posting. You have cited the specific points in the draft, but Wikipedia articles must do more than merely tell about a person and their accomplishments; they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, or in this case, the more specific definition of a notable entertainer. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:56:01, 19 July 2021 review of submission by Prashank321


Prashank321 (talk) 11:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Kindly please review the Draft:KGK Group page. I've added the citation and company references information can you please help me in making this content neutral as per the encyclopedia point of view to get published.

Prashank321 If you are associated with this company, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not associated with this company i searched this article and reserached its links for more information.

13:38:25, 19 July 2021 review of submission by 2600:1700:291:99C0:9CEF:422:14BF:53FF

Article was rejected but unsure why as I've provided relevant 3rd party sources and I based the submission off other similar posted wiki articles in the same industry. Please advise. 2600:1700:291:99C0:9CEF:422:14BF:53FF (talk) 13:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you provided are all press release-type articles, which does not establish notability. A Wikipedia article 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. Press releases, staff interviews, and announcements of routine business activities are not independent sources. Please read Your first article.
Please review other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. It could be that these other articles are also inappropriate and action has not been taken yet. If you would like to pitch in and help us manage the 6 million plus articles there are, please identify these other inappropriate articles for possible action, we can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 15:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:26, 19 July 2021 review of submission by 2001:8A0:F9D4:C800:FD3A:6C6E:4276:A683


2001:8A0:F9D4:C800:FD3A:6C6E:4276:A683 (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 20:19, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:07:48, 19 July 2021 review of draft by Crista2205


I am submitting an entry about a lawyer who I work for, Maria Herrera Mellado. It says that the person is not recognized enough, I dont understand why. We (the team) also got an email from an editor saying he/she would post it in enciclopedia form. I don't know if this person is verified.

Crista2205 You must read the paid editing policy and make the required formal disclosure. As noted by the reviewer, you have no independent reliable sources in the draft. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about her, showing how she meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone. You must set aside everything you know about your boss and all materials put out by her or her firm, and only summarize what independent reliable sources state. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If this editor has requested money from you to post it, I would be wary. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot @Crista2205 It's a copyright violation anyway, apart form being a blatant advert and having no references FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:00:45, 19 July 2021 review of draft by Michiken1970


Good afternoon, several months ago I submitted an article about Giorgio Bertellini, a major US-based scholar of Italian film, and was given a rejection notice on July 3rd. The explanation given was that the article was not properly sourced. However, I included over a dozen footnotes that cited all relevant information and provided links to all of his publications. Could someone kindly explain to me what I would need to do to improve the citations/sourcing so that the article can be approved?

Thanks,

Ken Garner

Michiken1970 (talk) 22:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michiken1970. The sections about his career, affiliations (a strange section to have in a biography, not sure what it even means), and awards cite no sources whatsoever. The only section where sources are cited is the section that least needs them, his published works. Someone's published work is, in a manner of speaking, self-supporting. The title and copyright page of the work prove he wrote it, what the title is, who published it, and when, all of the bibliographic information listed for the work. So no inline citations are needed there. Also note that ASINs are highly undesirable identifiers compared to ISBNs. ASINs are proprietary and lead to sales pages. Wikipedia should not be used to advertise or market an author's work, or to promote a particular bookseller.
The sources you cite appear to be reviews, which are good sources of information for the biography, but they are normally cited in the main body, where his work should be described in prose, or in a section just before the list of published works where the reception of his views by other academics is discussed. See Johannes Kepler as an example. Finally, the first or second sentence of the lead should tell the reader why he is notable, what criteria of WP:PROF he meets. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 20

Request on 01:40:02, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by DrJay31


I am not sure why this article was denied, it was all my original work. Lazaris The Top Don was featured as a guest on what was flagged as copyright issues yet I did not take any of the original work. Can you clarify specifically what is deemed as a copyright issue? Thank you!


DrJay31 (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:03:36, 20 July 2021 review of submission by 216.174.70.236


Polished the article. I trust this time around that it is satisfactory?216.174.70.236 (talk) 02:03, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further; No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:29:07, 20 July 2021 review of submission by Makan.Meenu


Makan.Meenu (talk) 03:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC) ehy was my article declined[reply]

Makan.Meenu It was deleted as a blatant advertisment. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:31:31, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Jliza.poseidonwaves


Jliza.poseidonwaves (talk) 04:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My question is if I don't have a resource page because this information was written by the artist himself. What do I do?

Jliza.poseidonwaves There is nothing that you can do. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If no independent reliable sources exist about a topic, it does not merit an article on Wikipedia. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:22:55, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Crazyharlem


Where can I get in-depth coverage of the subject? Also I need help with formatting!!!

Crazyharlem (talk) 05:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Crazyharlem A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Independent reliable sources are things like news reports(but not press releases) or books about the topic, anything not written by the topic itself. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:26:20, 20 July 2021 review of submission by MarikaAgu

Estonian pavilion appears in artists' profiles who have represented Estonia. In 2022 Estonian pavilion will be exceptionally in Rietveld pavilion, historically to represent Dutch artists. Netherlands offers such opportunity for outstanding previous exhibitions at the Estonian pavilion. MarikaAgu (talk) 07:26, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MarikaAgu The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears that there is not significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:30:32, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by RondDeJambe


Ref.attempting a new page Victor Ross (Businessman):Firstly, I wrote the page as Victor Ross (Rosenfeld) as that was his family name, only changed during WW2 when serving in the Pioneer Corps (on miltary advice to avoid reprisals if captured.) I would be keen to know why (Businessman) was substituted by the reviewer? Secondly,I am really puzzled by the rejection as VR has had a full page Obituary published in the Times(UK)recently & is a published author (Hodder & Stoughton.) He also had a series of talks on BBC Home Service during the 1950s (ref. notices in the Radio Times,)initiated a charity organisation which raised large amounts of money on behalf of the Association of Jewish Refugees which provided for educational grants & an annual lecture series (by renowned speakers)at the British Academy (info.on their website,) In his career,he rose to become Chairman of Reader's Digest UK & Europe, becoming a well-known public figure on the international stage. I would therefore welcome your help and advice on getting his page published ! Many thanks.RondDeJambe (talk) 08:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC) RondDeJambe (talk) 08:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RondDeJambe Be unsurprilsed. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style then Help:Your first article That will be a good start. Your referencing scheme fails, too FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 11:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:22:46, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by SunilJakhar07



SunilJakhar07 (talk) 11:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:29:54, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Mirih1809


Hi, following the commentsI received I have made some changes in the draft, but since then I did not get any more reviews or comments. What would you suggest to do? Thanks, Miri Mirih1809 (talk) 11:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mirih1809 You wouldn't necessarily get more comments until you resubmit it for review. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:37:30, 20 July 2021 review of submission by EssyDon100

Kindly assist me with to put my article in the appropriate manner so it can be approved. The topic is indeed notable and I'm working to gather more current information in order to continue editing. In another opinion, how can I make this a stub so others can help in developing it? EssyDon100 (talk) 11:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EssyDon100 This draft has been rejected and will go no further. You may start again with a new one. This essay should help you FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 11:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:02:12, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Berkim20


I wonder how to get my article published. Is it possible to get "Allo Allo" published on Wikipedia? In what circumstances?

Best regards, Azamat B.

Berkim20 (talk) 12:02, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Berkim20 As noted by the reviewer, your draft just tells about the subject. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about (in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article.
If you are associated with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:09:21, 20 July 2021 review of submission by Prospero1623


Hello. I recently wrote an article called Draft:MPB Group Limited that was rejected for sounding like an advertisement. I have since made some edits. However, I have been informed that my article (which I have not been paid for, nor do I work for MPB) doesn't reach the notability quota. Can someone explain to me why that is?

I have looked at other articles of a similar vein, and they contain similar content. To not breach OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I wish to point out that I'm not questioning the existence of my or anyone else's articles, I'm just curious as to why those passed the set rules and mine did not, despite similar content. Wiki page on OTHERSTUFF says: "In consideration of precedent and consistency, though, identifying articles of the same nature that have been established and continue to exist on Wikipedia may provide extremely important insight into the general concept of notability, levels of notability (what's notable: international, national, regional, state, provincial?), and whether or not a level and type of article should be on Wikipedia."

I understand that writing about the partnerships could be a red flag, but I am unsure why the history and funding is not deemed notable.

If anyone could help me out, that would be wonderful.

Prospero1623 (talk) 14:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Prospero1623: As there are quite a lot of references for us to go through could you follow the procedure explained at WP:THREE and provide links to those best sources on the draft's talk page? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Curb Safe Charmer: Hi, thank you for your reply. Yes, I believe these three may be classified as reliable:
  • "Brighton-based MPB snaps up $69M to build out its used camera equipment marketplace". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2021-06-24.
  • Loritz, Mary (2019-07-15). "Brighton-based MPB raises €10 million for its second-hand photo and film equipment marketplace". EU-Startups. Retrieved 2021-06-24.
  • Schutte, Shan (2016-03-03). "mpb.com: Disrupting the way people buy and sell used photo equipment". Retrieved 2021-06-24.

I also realise there are articles in there, such as the Express and Argus that do not classify as reliable, and will remove them ASAP. I have also put these sources on the draft's talk page.

Helped I'm helping Prospero out on the draft's talk page. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:27:54, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Yingying at MPS


Hi, I've been trying to upload a Wikipedia page for Malaysian Pharmacists Society but failed several times. I've tried to follow the same format as per other similar wiki pages e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Society_of_Australia and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Pharmaceutical_Society but it is still rejected. May I know why were other sites accepted and published even though they have similar issues as mine? Thank you for your help!

Yingying at MPS (talk) 14:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yingying at MPS No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy
You need to make a formal declar=artion of your paid editor status. Please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure I am about to leave a formal question on your talk page. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 16:26, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:04:12, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Eincrat


An editor that goes by the name Suart Yaetes made the following comment-"Wikipedia articles are built on independent secondary sources with in-depth coverage of the subject. Sources that don't meet these criteria need to be removed. I took a look at a handful of the wall of references and none of the ones I looked at were independent AND had in-depth coverage of the network." This criticism makes no sense as I am certain I could go to any number of articles and pull out a handful of references and discover that they don't have in-depth coverage as they are only being used to cite a specific fact that is important to the larger article. Moreover, I had a handful of sources that met his qualifications and mentioned which ones they were and asked the editor to further explain what was problematic. I have yet to hear a response but someone who posted after me has been replied to. The editor also appears to be an odd fit for the article as the individual appears to focus on biographies which theta network most definitely is not. As another editor correctly pointed out, it ideally needs an expert familiar with cryptocurrencies which the individual has not shown any knowledge of. What should I do? Should I just ignore the editor and repost it? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.Eincrat (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eincrat (talk) 15:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eincrat An editor that goes by the name of Timtrent finds your alleged question to be patronising.
No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy
Every editor here is an odd fit. Wikipedia is a site for various size legs in various sizes holes.
Advice?
We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 16:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:39:34, 20 July 2021 review of draft by AKAK2021

I want the article to be reviewed again. I find the reasons given by the reviewer to be irrelevant. He is a significant person according to your guidelines and the sources are intact.

AKAK2021 (talk) 16:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AKAK2021. You are mistaken. Annamalai K is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia as the subject of a stand alone article). Of the draft's four sources that are independent and reliable, one is about his joining the party, and three are news of his being appointed state president of the Tamil Nadu unit of the party. State president of a party is not a position that satisfies the notability criteria for politicians. Leaders of registered political parties at the national level are sometimes considered notable, but leaders at the sub-national level are usually deleted unless notability can be demonstrated for other reasons. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:26, 20 July 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:63A0:C801:A43A:3E25:1432:C1F7


Currently our knowledge panel on google is showing incorrect information for Jimmy, the incorrect information is coming from a wikipedia page but the pictures do not match the same person, so we need to create a wiki page for Jimmy so we can use this in our knowledge panel.

2A00:23C7:63A0:C801:A43A:3E25:1432:C1F7 (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. The same feedback facility is also provided on Bing and some other search engines. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:39:10, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Uvindu Abisheka


Hi There, 

    I am a Cambridge A/L Student of age 15. I really need to help other get to know generally of all laptops out there on the sale. This is my first article. But it got declined. I wish to get advice o trying to repost this article with required changes or a guide on what content and how should I do article.

Thank You, Best Regards, Uvindu Abisheka.

Uvindu Abisheka (talk) 17:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia’s purpose is not to be a guide for advice on purchases. Eternal Shadow Talk 18:33, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:29:08, 20 July 2021 review of submission by ArthurRobertRobert

I disagree; this company is notable enough to justify inclusion in Wikipedia.

ArthurRobertRobert (talk) 18:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission was Rejected, meaning it cannot be resubmitted. I rejected your submission because it failed WP:NCORP and your submission lacked secondary coverage. Eternal Shadow Talk 18:37, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:06, 20 July 2021 review of draft by Driverofthebluetaxi


Driverofthebluetaxi (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had added some links to references of the infomations in the article, especially the books. My question: Are the catalogues of the Libraries (german national, viaf, lcc, ub munich) objective enough? Where is still the deficit of the article, to remove the gaps. ;-) Please support me, its my first article in english wiki. In german wiki i had already published some. Driverofthebluetaxi (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if de.wp has a policy equivalent to our WP:Biographies of living persons, but that's some of where the issues are. You have uncited biographical claims in the article that need to either get a cite or get lost. As to the links to the catalogues, they don't help for notability. Assuming the German Nat'l Library serves a function equivalent to the Library of Congress, a listing there would be a matter of course and not noteworthy. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:11:47, 20 July 2021 review of submission by EvenToedUngulate


The proposed article was rejected for a lack of notability. I've revised the article to be more fullsome, both in describing the foundation and its impacts, and also provided a number of sources that I hope demonstrate its notability, such as through the receipt of awards, partnerships, and expansion of the foundation to other cities. The revised article now has:

  • An increase in the number of secondary sources, such as news articles and press releases
  • Multiple sources with multiple points of view
  • Improving the length and depth of the article so that it is not too short, but not overly long, either

The StopGap Foundation is an important organization in Toronto and has expanded to create a sister organization in Ottawa. The organization has brought forward projects to multiple municipalities, which I hope demonstrates its notability.

EvenToedUngulate (talk) 22:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EvenToedUngulate The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Press releases are not independent reliable sources, nor are announcements of its activities, brief mentions, or any materials put out by the organization. Wikipedia is not a place to tell the world about the good work of a charity. 331dot (talk) 23:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Oh, okay. Is there anything else I can do? I reviewed WP:NOBLE and I don't think it falls under the the 7 listed criteria. I can remove the press releases to be other secondary sources if they aren't acceptable. I was just using that as an example since it was issued by a company, not the organization I made the article about. I don't mind finding some other sources if a press release isn't high enough quality. I made some pretty significant changes to the draft, so is there anything else I can do? EvenToedUngulate (talk) 01:44, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EvenToedUngulate As the draft was rejected, it won't be considered further at this time. The reviewer rejected it because they believed the chances of addressing the issues raised are low. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Press releases, announcements of routine activities, brief mentions, staff interviews, or other primary sources do not establish notability. If you have appropriate sources to summarize and feel that the reviewere erred, you will need to discuss it with them directly.
If you are associated with this organization, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 01:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Okay, I will bring it up with the reviewer. I think the issues you've raised aren't present for this article, but I can see how they might be. I'm not associated with the organization, I was just surprised they didn't have a Wikipedia article, so I decided to make one. EvenToedUngulate (talk) 01:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:41:23, 20 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by MisterTech


Hi, Robert McClenon seems to have made a mistake with their AfC review of this article.

I've left a message on their talk page but they have not responded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_McClenon#Request_on_13:44:01,_16_July_2021_for_assistance_on_AfC_submission_by_MisterTech

How can I resolve this?

MisterTech (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm not seeing any mistakes by Robert McClenon. It reads like it was written by a PR firm, and voila, it was! Bkissin (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1. They questioned the notability of the subject yet it has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources including being covered multiple times by the BBC, and also by Wired, Znet, San Francisco Chronicle, The Dallas Morning News, TechCrunch, Cnet, The New York Times, Forbes, Engadget, etc
2. They said that "This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company", however it is not. It is written in my own words, for example nowhere does the company describe itself as an "indoor gardening company".
3.They also questioned whether there was a COI, but this was clearly declared when the draft was created https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Click_%26_Grow&oldid=1014871688
MisterTech (talk) 08:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 21

Request on 07:58:47, 21 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Martin karu


i need your help to publish my article..can you tell me what are the changes wanna i do...?


Martin karu (talk) 07:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are joking aren’t you? “faced an Advanced Level examination in biological science”, “nominated as the captain of the school football team” none of this even begins to make him notable! Theroadislong (talk) 08:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:20, 21 July 2021 review of submission by Yilmas.HF


I created the article Elcin Barker Ergun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elcin_Barker_Ergun. When the article was accepted it has been reviwed a lot with many changes. I would like to understand the detailed reasons behind each change to better contribute in future to this page. Furthermore even if I had all the permissions and copyright from the photographer, the picture of Elcin has been deleted (I actually could not find the corrispettive copy tag, so I wrote it down as "other tags", however it didn't worked). How can I restore the picture? Thanks a lot for your kind support, please let me have an answer.

Yilmas.HF (talk) 09:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yilmas.HF: See here: Wikimedia Commons: When do I contact the Volunter response Team?. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:50:06, 21 July 2021 review of submission by SidraRanaAdv


SidraRanaAdv 11:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SidraRanaAdv You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something; a Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to state about(in this case) an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 11:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked this user for one week for disruptive editing, as he has repeatedly submitted the same draft without making any attempt to improve it. I've also rejected the draft. Deb (talk) 12:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:01, 21 July 2021 review of submission by Imanav07

{{Lafc|username=Imanav07|ts=12:41:01, 21 July 2021|page=

Imanav07 (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anshu_Bisht is the page i was editting .. i need a reason why it can't be published

@Imanav07: I am afraid I have sent this to draftspace, as Draft:GamerFleet (2). I have done this because I don't see how GamerFleet is noteable in Wikipedia's sence of the word, and because this article lacks reliable sources. YouTube is rarely a reliable source (and in this case it isn't), see WP:RSPYT and WP:SELFPUB Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:31:11, 21 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Writerspace


I am attempting to create a Wikipedia page for author Denise Hunter. Hunter is an author of over 40 books, many of them bestsellers. 3 of her books have been made into movies on the Hallmark channel. My initial article submission for her was not sourced properly, but after this was brought to my attention, I edited the article several times. It is currently sourced with reputable media sources: television stations WANE 15 (Ft. Wayne, IN), WTHR 13 (Indianapolis), WPTA 21 (Ft. Wayne, IN) and CBN; newspaper articles from the Journal Gazette (Ft. Wayne, IN), Sterling Journal-Advocate (Sterling, CO), Pilot News (Plymouth, IN), magazine articles in Smart Living Fort Wayne and reputable websites such as Publishers Weekly. Still my most recent submission was rejected as not showing significant coverage "in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." I believe the citations listed below show significant coverage in published, reliable secondary sources. Please advise. Writerspace (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writerspace (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writerspace (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've snipped the references list here as it duplicates what is already on the draft. Refer to the top table here:
Does this help? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 16:09, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It does and doesn't help. I'm including links to the various media sources in order to provide sources for the facts asserted in the article (awards, bestseller list, Hallmark channel movies, etc.) Coverage on a local, network-affiliated TV channel or local paper doesn't count simply because the person being discussed lives in the area? There's no personal connection between the author and any of these media outlets. The decision on what is notable appears to be fairly arbitrary and subjective here. A bestselling writer of over 40 books with 3 movie adaptations is not significant enough for Wikipedia inclusion??Writerspace (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:44:26, 21 July 2021 review of draft by Fasterhorses


My questions are about the "Review waiting, please be patient" box information.

1) "Reviewer tools "Warning: This page should probably be moved to the Draft namespace." Question: This appears to be something that the reviewer would do? Or do I?

2) Tagging is for "User:Fasterhorses/sandbox" Should I wait till the title is changed or how do I proceed?

fasterhorses (talk) 14:44, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fasterhorses, You could move it to draftspace, if you don't, the first reviewer will do it. You can add project tags at any time. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:04, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:18:24, 21 July 2021 review of draft by CloudCapital


Hi, would be grateful if I could get some clarification on why my draft article Draft:Antler was considered to not have been written from a neutral point of view, and what are some of the edits that I should make in order to increase my chances of getting it approved. Many thanks!

CloudCapital (talk) 15:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ever heard of the concept of promotion by over-detail? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 15:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:23:15, 21 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Inrup


I am not advertising the company . It is just encyclopedic information


Inrup (talk) 17:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inrup I removed the coding that suppressed the display of your message. The text you wrote was a blatant advertisement. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Please read Your first article, and if you have independent sources with significant coverage to summarize please use Articles for creation to create and submit a draft.
If you are associated with this company, please read conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 17:28, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:24:12, 21 July 2021 review of submission by Abhishekgoswami21


Abhishekgoswami21 (talk) 18:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC) it was not a promotional page more article indeed to be added with time[reply]

India khelo football is a Non Profit Organization totally committed toward development of football or soccer eco system in India. this platform provide best possible opportunity for young budding talent to showcase there talent at India and international stage. Try using fewer buzzwords. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:21:23, 21 July 2021 review of draft by LCEnriquez


hello! I recently tried to publish an article to Wiki but was rejected because of the sources I used. I gathered various sources on the company prior to creating the Wiki page and used ones that I thought were reputable and meet Wiki's criteria. I was wondering if there is anyone who can help me determine which sources are acceptable for Wiki in order to create a new article page. The following articles were articles that were initially used: “Why Ella’s Bubbles is Becoming a Household Name.” Beverly Hills Times Magazine, 2012. Sarbacker, Macy. “5 Best Walk-in Bathtubs.” Earthtechling, 2021. Linehan, John and Michelle Shugars. “Ella’s Bubbles Announces Corporate Rebranding and Website Relaunch.” Cision, 2015. Ella’s Bubbles, LLC. Better Business Bureau Blair, Jennifer. “The Best Whirlpool Bathtub.” Chicago Tribune, 2019 Smith, Nicole. “Ella’s Bubbles Walk-in Tubs Review.” Top10Reviews, 2019 Lindberg M Ed., Sara.“Best Walk-In Tubs in 2021 | Costs, Ratings, and Reviews.” health.com (Health Magazine) “16 Reasons to install an Ella’s Bubbles WIB.” Surface Bella, 2020. LCEnriquez (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LCEnriquez. Of the cited sources, only the Chicago Tribune and Health.com might help demonstrate notability. Some Wikipedians may challenge even those two. The similar source TopTenReviews has been discussed several times at WP:RSN, and some of the concerns raised about it also apply to the Chicago Tribune (which is syndicating BestReviews) and Health.com. Is Ella's Bubbles a public or private company? If public, I would except to see in-depth coverage in the reputable financial press. If private, there isn't much chance of it meeting the notability (suitability for inclusion) criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:57, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:41:14, 21 July 2021 review of draft by Viktoriya Sa


Please let me know where and how I need to improve this article. Viktoriya Sa (talk) 22:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Viktoriya Sa (talk) 22:41, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim that could potentially be challenged for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to an strong, independent and in-depth source that corroborates it or (if no such sources can be found) removed wholesale. This is a HARD REQUIREMENT when writing content about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is NOT NEGOTIABLE. There are literally no cites for any of his biographical details; all there are is citations to the papers he's written. Just because WP:NACADEMIC is met does not mean we can accept a biography that is otherwise utterly unsourced. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Viktoriya Sa: Re-pinging as I botched the first ping. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 23:01, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


July 22

01:05:40, 22 July 2021 review of draft by Rybkovich


Hi, Draft:One World Family Commune got rejected on copyright grounds, I believe it was due to quoted info being too long. Can you run another check and let me know if there are still problems. Thank you Rybkovich (talk) 01:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC) Rybkovich (talk) 01:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

red-outlined triangle containing exclamation point Warning Copyright Violations are a serious problem. You will likely need to reword the draft entirely if you want to ensure that your submission isn’t declined on copyvio grounds again. Please read WP:COPYVIO in its entirety. Eternal Shadow Talk 16:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Listen, I'm a copyright attorney so I am familiar with copyright issues. If the issue with content within other articles - it 99% likely that I am the creator of that content. Copyright is an authorship issue. An author cannot violate her own work. Yes, our policy is different from copyright law, let me know which articles so I can make sufficient changes. It is much easier to reject articles than spending months to create them. In my work everything is cited, I'm the author of published articles in two different languages, I write motions and petitions in court. Some frustrations are silly while others are justified. You know this personally both in your life and here on wikipedia. Work is work whether you get paid for it or not and its especially frustrating when its work that one is passionate about. If our bot tells you the specific copyright issue what the problem of copy and pasting it so it can be addressed ASAP. I am an administrator on wikicommons, specifically regarding rejection or acceptance of uploads, with copyright being the primary issue. I have previously posted my request politely - two times here - NO RESPONSE - 7/11/2021 and 7/13/2021. Two times on the administrator's that rejected my submission talk page, AntanO - 7/11/2021 and 7/14/2021 - NO RESPONSE. The response to today's posting is that there's a copyright issue. Hence the frustration. Rybkovich (talk) 17:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a copyright lawyer, you should be aware of Berne granting all-rights-reserved copyright to a work by default, without need of registration. All-rights-reserved copyright is mutually exclusive with CC-By-SA, which is why even if you wrote it yourself, we cannot accept it unless it was initially released under that copyright licence or a functionally identical one. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rybkovich, I have just checked the draft, as of now there is no copyright problem. I have not checked previous versions. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Roger, I really appreciate it. Rybkovich (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

01:41:31, 22 July 2021 review of submission by ItsJustdancefan

What next steps should I take? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 01:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsJustdancefan, following this, this & this what would follow is an indefinite block on your account for not being here to build an encyclopedia, what did I tell you about forum shopping ? Celestina007 (talk) 02:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021-22 Premira Devision (Women)

I created a page called Draft:2021–22 Primera División (women) on Wikipedia on 21 July 2021 at about 11 o'clock AEST but today I got a notification that the article has been declined and I want to know what the reason(s) is/are however I understand that did not leave any preference in that article. Please let me know. Zaki Frahmand (talk) 22 July 2021 12:25 PM AEST.

Hello. It appears that your submission to Articles for Creation was declined because it lacked reliable sources. Please note that Wikipedia requires third-party, independent sources for an article to be considered notable enough for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If you need further help on what sources could be considered reliable, please visit the help desk. Thank you. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:30:27, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Chatterjee95


Chatterjee95 (talk) 02:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done should be merged to Tiger Shroff unless significantly expanded, as it is lacking reliable, secondary sources still. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:41:36, 22 July 2021 review of submission by SYYA96

Due to the pandemic, there has been major coverage on Zühlke Group, especially the successful development of the NHS Test and Trace application. They are now known as the NHS Covid-19 developer. Hence, it will be best if there is a English page available on Zühlke and their project. SYYA96 (talk) 02:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected meaning it won’t be considered further. Eternal Shadow Talk 03:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:22:13, 22 July 2021 review of draft by Coon923


I do not understand exactly what else to do, if what I am doing will not work with Wikipedia, then please delete draft; I do not want to waste anymore of my time if this page is not publishable, nor do I want to waste Wikipedia support team time.

Thank You, Coon923(Almighty Coon)

Coon923 (talk) 03:22, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it probably won't work with Wikipedia to write about your own work. Very rarely are unofficial video game mods notable. That being said, the biggest issue with the article is a lack of reliable sources. We don't normally consider Youtube a reliable source (because they are often self-published, and the information is unverifiable), and the GooglePlay store just shows that it exists, it doesn't really add any significant coverage to the article. Has there been coverage of your work on notable videogame sites (Kotaku, Polygon, IGN, etc.)?
I don't want you to be discouraged. Seems like you made a really interesting mod! That's more that I can do. Even if this article doesn't make it, I still invite you to continue to provide your expertise on video game related topics here. We could always use more volunteers! If you'd like us to delete the draft, then go ahead and put {{db-g7}} at the top of the page, and someone will delete it for you. Bkissin (talk) 15:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:09:25, 22 July 2021 review of draft by 45ispres


I got notification back concerning my article on the Jacksonville Sheriff Mike Williams^. The person who declined a submission said that there were no reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. I used references such as the Florida Sheriff's Association and the sheriff page on the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office website. I do not know exactly what this person wants me to do concerning the article 45ispres (talk) 04:09, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

45ispres Those are primary sources, not secondary sources. You should add articles in the news about him, as they will likely lead to an accept of your submission. It seems the subject is notable enough to have a chance at acceptance. Eternal Shadow Talk 16:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:12:00, 22 July 2021 review of draft by 182.74.22.30


We needed help to understand in depth all the reasons why our request has been declined on 21st July,2021 and also is publishing on sandbox right?


182.74.22.30 (talk) 04:12, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It appears that your submission to Articles for Creation was declined because it lacked reliable sources. Please note that Wikipedia requires third-party, independent sources for an article to be considered notable enough for inclusion in the encyclopedia. If you need further help on what sources could be considered reliable, please visit the help desk. Thank you. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, it appears you may have a conflict of interest or paid to create that page. Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:15:06, 22 July 2021 review of submission by BMMWikiedit

please suggest how to improve the article which totally qualifies as Bible Medicine is a unique kind of ministry that emphasises the Bible as a medicine to people. BMMWikiedit (talk) 07:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC) BMMWikiedit (talk) 07:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your submission was deleted as a blatant advertisement. Please read WP:G11 and WP:PROMO. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:53:27, 22 July 2021 review of submission by RAJESH CHAUHAN 47


RAJESH CHAUHAN 47 (talk) 08:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You didn’t ask a question, but your submission was deleted as a blatant advertisement. Please read WP:PROMO. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:35, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:13, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Dewi339458

I just don't understand, I understand the first few rejections and really have been trying to change things. Even tried deleting parts that can't be supported. I am asking for help, help me fix it because I really am trying my best. Please. Help me and allow me to prove myself. Dewi339458 (talk) 09:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dewi339458 No amount of editing can confer notability on a subject. It appears that the person does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable musician. This is why the draft was rejected, and will not be considered further. I would suggest that you spend time editing existing articles first, to learn more about notability. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes i understand, but he isn't a musician. He's an upcoming rising actor that starred in a movie that was released in his country and malaysia making him an international actor and popular tv shows. The articles i put as sources shows articles of his career existing as he is notable in Indonesia and malaysia for now. Dewi339458 (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done As mentioned before, No amount of editing can confer notability on a subject. The subject fails WP:NACTOR. Also, do you have a conflict of interest with your submission? Eternal Shadow Talk 15:32, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, i know the rules regarding conflict of interest

Dewi339458 (talk) 18:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:40, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Purushothaman2939


Purushothaman2939 (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was deleted as a blatant advertisement. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:44:37, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Daphinevadhera


Hi Admin, Richa Tilokani is an upcoming author. After writing successfully for different publications, she has released her first book - The Teachings of Bhagavad Gita - Timeless wisdom for the Modern Age. The book brings out the essence of the Gita in a simplified manner which makes the common man understand easier. Hope she will also pen a few more in the coming years. This Wikipedia page will help readers to know her better. Please suggest to me how to go about it. Thanks

Daphinevadhera (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Your draft was rejected, meaning it cannot be resubmitted, as it is not notable. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:28, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Nishantkumar930


Nishantkumar930 (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You didn’t ask a question, but your submission was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Eternal Shadow Talk 15:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:43:50, 22 July 2021 review of draft by Soft.hearted09


Soft.hearted09 (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Soft.hearted09: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. no sources, no article, no debate. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:18:32, 22 July 2021 review of submission by Misser420


Hello, I have written an article about a Japanese mobile game called Tagatame no Alchemist. Apparently, it got rejected, and labeled with "not adequately supported by reliable sources". I do not understand why there is not enough reliable sources? I took most of them from the Japanese version of the wiki, and added some extra based on the information I added. Because it is translated, I had to find other sources, even if they are in Japanese. The game is a Japanese game, so I do not understand what information requires more sources? (I do not see what sources are lacking) Even if there are english sources, they are not reliable because the page I created is based on the Japanese version of the page, so I have copied the Japanese page's sources and not sure which more do I need. Also, which sources are unreliable? I have checked the sources, and they are not other wikis, or sources like reddit/twitter. They are mostly news publications or official company websites, or other game guide websites, and the wiki does not list any game guide websites as unreliable. English sources are much more unreliable than Japanese ones since the information I posted specifies Japanese individuals, making it hard to find information. From what I am aware, I am not sure which ones are unreliable, but the sources I have used are:

onlinefanatic.com (game reviews website) eiga.com (Japanese movies review site) movies.yahoo.co.jp (Yahoo.co.jp is Japan's equivalent of google, one of the biggest search engine used by people in Japan other than Google) satelite.co.jp (A movie producer's official website) 4gamer.net (Japanese game outlet for reviews and entertainment news) alchemistcode.com (official US based website for the game) al.fg-games.co.jp (The japanese website for the game) sensortower.com (mobile games application database) anilist.co (anime database) natalie.mu (Japanese pop culture news, according to website description) spice.eplus.jp (entertainment news in Japan) myanimelist.net (anime database and review site) crunchyroll.com (paid anime streaming website) tracxn.com (corporate tracking and database website providing IT services) famitsu.com (game reviews website) tistory.com (one of the several korean blog website)

I have checked the criteria, and do not understand what exactly is the requirement for notability, if review websites/gaming entertainment news or corporate websites/official websites of games are not notable enough.

Misser420 (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


July 23

02:04:07, 23 July 2021 review of submission by NHPolitics603


NHPolitics603 (talk) 02:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Burns was elected countywide in the largest county in NH and he served on a national position on Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. He is also a major candidate for congress.

@NHPolitics603: as has been noted, countywide office doesn't pass political notability and neither does being a candidate. Should Burns be elected for congress then an article will rapidly follow Nosebagbear (talk) 10:52, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:46:21, 23 July 2021 review of draft by 45ispres


He gets significant coverage on news stations and other places. I want to know how the sheriff of the 13th largest city in America in one of the biggest departments does not "qualify" for man article especially because he has been a very controversial sheriff. Do I need more secondary sources to make this able to become an article? I am confused as there is so much mixed messaging

45ispres (talk) 05:46, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@45ispres: as an elected official, he may need to pass political notability, which it is unlikely a sheriff of a city (even a large one) can do. The mayor would likely be notable, but not the sheriff.
He would need in-ordinate amounts of reliable, independent secondary coverage to overcome that basis. Currently, sources 3 & 4 are primary, and 1 & 2 are (or functionally are) interviews, and therefore do not meet independent requirement. You want reliable secondary sources that talk *about* the subject Nosebagbear (talk) 10:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:54:48, 23 July 2021 review of draft by Wikimusicplaystation


Wikimusicplaystation (talk) 05:54, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hi....I just want to ask why my articles is being denied. can you help me with this?


It's not clear that he passes the criteria for a musician's article. If you're indicating that criterion #1 is met, you should clarify which three sources are the best for doing so Nosebagbear (talk) 10:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:34:54, 23 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mehedi Hasan Jakaria



Mehedi Hasan Jakaria (talk) 11:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mehedi Hasan Jakaria You don't ask a question, but the draft was deleted as a blatant advertisement or promotional piece. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:29:30, 23 July 2021 review of submission by 216.174.70.236


The article is not only a paraphrase but a genuine historical biography of the subject who was Karađorđe's leading commanders.

216.174.70.236 (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears he does not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable soldier. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:11:03, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Mountain Instructor


Hi, just looking to create a similar page to the Mountain Leader Award page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Leader_Award

But devoted to one of the other main qualifications for outdoor instruction in the UK which is the Rock Climbing Instructor award with info for those looking to understand what the award covers, and the process for achieving the award. Would it help to have more links to similar awards? The Mountain Training website is the most relevant source as they administer the award just like the Mountain Leader qualification. Should the link to the blog post detailing changes to the award be removed? Or does the page just need more information and links?

Thanks.

Mountain Instructor (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was deleted as a copyright violation and blatant advertising. The Mountain Leader Award article should probably be deleted as well for not being notable, so pointless basing your draft on that one.Theroadislong (talk) 15:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:38:44, 23 July 2021 review of draft by Carrabre


Hey there! i'm trying to write an article for Presearch, but it was declined. I'd like to know what parts specifically caused it and what i can do to fix it. I'd appreciate your help!

Carrabre (talk) 15:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Carrabre The draft is sourced to nothing but the website itself or announcements of its activities. A Wikipedia article must not merely tell about the subject and what it does; it must summarize 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 the company says about itself or in mere announcements of its activities. Please read Your First Article.
If you are associated with this company, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make. 331dot (talk) 15:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:40, 23 July 2021 review of submission by TheTechRobo3641

I don't know how LinuxFormat, is not reliable. It's a very well known magazine.

Are Wikipedia admins categorised, i.e. some will work on things related to computers, since they're knowledgable about that, others would work on history, etc...?

TheTechRobo (talk) 15:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TheTechRobo3641 Anyone may review drafts, not just administrators. Users may indicate areas of interest or expertise, but there is no requirement that one be an expert in the subjects they are interested in, because Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources state. The sources you offered seem to be largely routine announcements or press release type stores. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 16:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:55:33, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Shatbhisha6

The subject of the article is well renowned religious figure in India, he has millions of followers. The reasons to reject and then decline the article hold no ground. The person who has objection is very much working on the leftist agenda that Wikipedia is drawing flak for. The one who has declined the article is blocked for sockpuppetry, the reasons are obvious. Both these people have been working on the same agenda hand in gloves with each other. There is countless coverage across Indian media to prove notability of the subject.

Shatbhisha6 (talk) 15:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami Avdheshanand Giri (2nd nomination). Theroadislong (talk) 16:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:14:47, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Mojarra69

In your definition of criteria for a book to be notable, it says: A book is presumed notable if it verifiably meets, through reliable sources, at least one of the following criteria:

The book has been the subject[1] of two or more non-trivial[2] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.[3] This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists,[4] and reviews.

I have supplied several reviews by legitimate sources even though I only need one per your definition. Please reconsider my submission for inclusion to Wikipedia. I will add more content to it once I have been approved. Mojarra69 (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook, Goodreads and Amazon are NOT reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:58, 23 July 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C8:640A:5901:69D9:BD64:64B9:2259

I do not understand why my article was declined. The reviewer said that "It looks like it was copy and pasted from somewhere", but I do not understand what this means, and frankly, why it matters. I have not copy and pasted anything into my draft. 2A00:23C8:640A:5901:69D9:BD64:64B9:2259 (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want copy pasted content. There are legal issues with doing so. Your draft has no independent reliable sources to support its content. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 17:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:32:46, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Misser420

Hello, I have recently posted a request/helpdesk help on 20:18:32, 22 July 2021. In case it didn't appear, instead of posting again (I had to revert a page error since I didn't add the draft page back then, so it might have been ignored/hidden due to the page revert to fix the edit source thing when I attempted to add the draft using that way. I think it might have actually disappeared or not visible for everyone else other than me as a result tbh), I have posted the date/time on this request. If it's not visible, please reply here, otherwise please help me with this request.

Misser420 (talk) 17:32, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Misser420 Yes it is visible. It appears your submission lacks secondary sources needed to indicate notability. If you add secondary sources then it may be accepted. Eternal Shadow Talk 19:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:08:38, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Aren55555


Drake (the rapper) was featured on a song by Smiley this week. I was looking into information on Smiley and there didn't seem to be a page yet, so I added it.

Aren55555 (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Being in a song with a notable person such as drake does not make one notable. Your submission was rejected as well, with no option to resubmit. Eternal Shadow Talk 19:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:30:22, 23 July 2021 review of draft by 8.3.90.163


8.3.90.163 (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I need assistance because my draft says it is being marked as an autobiography based on some edits I made to grammar and the relevance of factual information; none of the edits I made are one sided or opinionated, it is all factual, neutral information. I would appreciate a review of the article to tell me what sections appear to be problematic, but I think it is all actually all fine and would not like the article to get disapproved for making these edits.

Thank you,

John

It appears you may have a conflict of interest. Please read WP:COI. Eternal Shadow Talk 19:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:43:05, 23 July 2021 review of submission by Zacharyb366


Zacharyb366 (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zacharyb366 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, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


July 24

01:01:38, 24 July 2021 review of draft by 45ispres


Leslie Dougher has a Wikipedia article with no references in her article. This is all the article says> Leslie Dougher is a Republican politician who served as Chair of the Republican Party of Florida.[1]. That was the entire article. I can find more secondary sources to add to my draft for potential article creation in the future if needed. I read through the requirements for notability and don't know how Dougher meets the requirements and Williams doesn't. This is my first attempt at writing an article so I have a few questions. Dougher also received no media coverage except 1 video I found and because of this I am very confused on what the qualifications are even with the notability guide. Thank you :)

45ispres (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

45ispres Please see other stuff exists. That other poor quality articles exist does not mean that other poor quality articles can be created. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. In addition, standards change over time, so that what was once acceptable may be no longer. We can only address what we know about; you are welcome to identify other inappropriate articles you have seen for possible action, we can use the help.
Regarding your draft, as an elected official a sheriff likely meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable politician, but they must still receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article. If no one writes about this sheriff, then they would not merit an article. I would start by looking for sources about his election and any positions he might hold. 331dot (talk) 07:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Leslie Dougher
Thank you for letting us know so that we can take it to AfD. (That article was never drafted; drafting was not made mandatory until February 2018. This is a perfect example of why we do not accept "What about Article X?!" arguments.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:39:54, 24 July 2021 review of submission by Andrebi46

Hello, please review my draft. If it is not notable as the reviewer said, how other researchers (Romanians, with the same accomplishments) have a Wikipedia page? Please review all the information, because it really is relevant and notable. It's about a Professor who impacted the life of thousand students and more with impressive research results and he is on the top of Romanian politics today. If something it's not good, please contact me to correct the mistakes/format, but it's not correct to say that the subject is not NOTABLE. Thank you for your kind review and response. Have a great day! Andrebi46 (talk) 05:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andrebi46 Each article or draft is judged on its own merits. Please see other stuff exists. That other similar articles exist does not automatically mean that yours can too. It depends on the coverage in independent reliable sources. Most of the sources you offer seem to just mention him or are simple directory listings, not in depth, significant coverage of him by sources that have chosen on their own to write about him. Please understand that the Wikipedia definition of a notable academic is likely different than the one you or I might use, but that's what it is. 331dot (talk) 07:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:13:52, 24 July 2021 review of submission by Sutatatabunwa

I've checked the criteria regarding musicians and ensembles and don't quite see why my draft was declined, as the band in question 1. has had not only one but THREE albums on Japan's national weekly album chart (Oricon) 2. has received coverage of an international tour in independent media (see https://www.bandwagon.asia/articles/where-ends-meet-cosmic-child-sg-and-for-tracy-hyde-jpn-live-in-manila-photo-gallery ) 3. has performed live on the Japanese national radio network TBS not only once but twice (see https://www.tbsradio.jp/417746 and https://www.tbsradio.jp/564039 ) 4. is a widely recognized example of the Japanese shoegaze scene. If this isn't sufficient enough than I don't know what is. Sutatatabunwa (talk) 06:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:53:45, 24 July 2021 review of submission by NKFJKFIFFF


NKFJKFIFFF (talk) 06:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 07:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:01:24, 24 July 2021 review of draft by Campbell Anderson


Campbell Anderson (talk) 09:01, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please may I ask, I have a page in "review" stage which I need to rename. DELETE Tony_Miller_OBE_SBS_JP RENAME Tony_Miller

Please can you tell me how I rename a page? Thank you

Sorry I stuffed up the naming conventions, I'll know for next time!

Campbell Anderson

Campbell Anderson You may leave a note for the reviewer on the draft talk page, describing what the title should be. If they accept the draft, it will be placed at the proper title when it is moved to the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:27:48, 24 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by 39.33.208.169



39.33.208.169 (talk) 10:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@39.33.208.169: You didn't ask a question, but we can't host copyright violations (see also WP:FAQ/Copyright), nor is Wikipedia meant to be a place to promote a given subject. Check out your first article for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:29:42, 24 July 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C8:640A:5901:BDE9:4A3E:85A:BB04

I have not copy and pasted anything into my draft but people say I have? Please help me! 2A00:23C8:640A:5901:BDE9:4A3E:85A:BB04 (talk) 11:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may not have copied and pasted it, but it is totally inappropriate for an encyclopedia " "How do?" would be used to connect two characters in a sexual relationship. It would be most commonly used in roleplay as two characters, usually virgins, pretending that they were experienced and professional in terms of "shagging" is clearly some sort of a joke? Theroadislong (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:26:17, 24 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Brian Ferro


Hi, I have made a Wikipedia article about a sportsperson and got this reply:

Possibly notable (likely, even, if the claims can be verified), but sourcing is wholly inadequate, and most of the contents are unsupported by citations; a problem for any article, let alone a BLP. Any copyvios must also be removed before resubmitting.

As a result the article is not published. All the information is correct and linked to the person's website, that's why inadequate is very confusing. Any suggestions how to make it pass? How many citations it should include? And the were no copyvios either.. Thanks in advance.

Brian Ferro (talk) 13:26, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Ferro, the sourcing is inadequate because your submission relies on primary sources. As for the copyvio issue, you may have to Revdel copyvio edits and rewrite. Eternal Shadow Talk 16:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:05:01, 24 July 2021 review of draft by Arentvantspijker


Arentvantspijker (talk) 19:05, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

My draft article on the COIN Framework (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Continuous_Innovation_Framework) has been rejected for publication multiple times, because it was deemed 'more like an advertisement and not an encyclopedia article'. I rewrote many times but never found the right touch, I'm afraid. People seem to think I get paid for this, as the article is about business, but I don't. This is an open-source initiative and I receive no compensation from anyone. Today in the chat RichSmith helped me a great deal, and I've made some major changes again, but he also referred me here to get more help to get the text right. Could anyone help me to get this text right? I really don't need advertising, I just want to mention and explain my project with proper references.

Thanks very much!

You say "I just want to mention and explain my project with proper references." that is explicitly NOT what Wikipedia is for, I suggest you put tye content on a website or blog.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Theroadislong (talk • contribs)
OK, I stand corrected... that was misformulated... the subject is a notable topic because of its impact on the subject of corporate innovation as regarded by its intended audience and current user base (if that is a correct definition of 'notable'). What I meant to say was that am not aiming to use Wikipedia as an advertising platform.

Any help to get the wording right in that sense is warmly appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arentvantspijker (talk • contribs)

21:40:47, 24 July 2021 review of submission by Kyereta


Kyereta (talk) 21:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC) I tried to create an Article but unfortunately it was declined, I don't have reliable sources for Citations Can any one help me trouble shoot this?.[reply]

Kyereta If you have no independent reliable sources, it would not merit an article at this time. To merit an article, a business must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about it, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable business. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about something. 331dot (talk) 21:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 25

04:14:50, 25 July 2021 review of draft by 2603:8000:CF01:6AAD:7C20:7063:F322:EBEC


My article has been rejected twice evidently because it’s not noteworthy enough. But the author of the story on which the article is based has had several other stories given articles on Wikipedia. Stephen King has almost every single one of his stories on Wiki. Why not this one?

2603:8000:CF01:6AAD:7C20:7063:F322:EBEC (talk) 04:14, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just because Stephen King wrote it does not make it notable by default. We do not accept notability-by-osmosis; we want to see professional reviews/criticism of the book; the issue here is that the article as writ is literally just a plot synopsis and naught else. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 08:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC) (Amended 08:24, 25 July 2021 (UTC) )[reply]

13:06:17, 25 July 2021 review of submission by Divyanshu Tejwani

Hello sir. I please check out the references in the article also I am notable if you don't believe me you can search "Divyanshu Tejwani" on Google. Please sir this article is important to me please don't do this to me. I beg you sir I beg you Divyanshu Tejwani (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:10:38, 25 July 2021 review of draft by Yoitsjae


Hi, I hope you're well.

First off, I would like say thanks for reviewing my article.

However, i'm confused as to why my submission was denied? I do not have any affiliation with Saatchi Yates. So i'm not sure how my article feels like advertisement? Their gallery is on Cork Street which has a rich history of art galleries and artists. Thus feel that it is an important part of the history of contemporary art.

I strongly feel that this is an important organization such as 'Lisson Gallery' which is also situated on Cork Street.

If you can please provide any advise Doric Loon (talk) , that would be great.

Thank you.

Yoitsjae (talk) 13:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:10:51, 25 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Divyanshu Tejwani


Sir Please re-review my page Divyanshu Tejwani the name is notable you can search Divyanshu Tejwani on Google please sir don't do this to him please I beg you sir I beg you.


Divyanshu Tejwani (talk) 13:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:15:27, 25 July 2021 review of submission by Sajidbuzz


Sajidbuzz (talk) 13:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:29, 25 July 2021 review of draft by Garcon-gaz


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:OChain has been rejected for publication due to a lack of notable resources. I've added a few more since then but have been avoiding the clearly commercial mentions due to sales agreements with Amazon and Oracle (who sell 0Chain services) and partnerships with other organisations ('x is proud to announce its partnership with 0Chain'). Is this the correct approach? Am I hurting the article's notbability claims by ignoring them?

Garcon-gaz (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:35, 25 July 2021 review of draft by Biloxiprohockey


I am the social media guy for a group called "Biloxi Pro Hockey". We are trying to get a wikipedia article written so past hockey teams in Biloxi, the Mississippi Surge, and Mississippi Sea Wolves aren't the first results when searching "Biloxi Pro Hockey" on Google. The references I listed when trying to create the "Biloxi Pro Hockey" wikipedia article are all media references and really all I have to go with because there was a press conference to announce 3 neutral site games that will be played at the Mississippi Coast Coliseum this December. I hope you can help get an article published, I don't think I wrote anything that violated anything.


Biloxiprohockey (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your user talk page for important information about your username. Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing or otherwise affecting search results for your organization. Our sole concern is in an article summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. If you have nothing except media events to cite, your organization would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:07:29, 25 July 2021 review of submission by Abhishekgarg224

Hi! Just need some clarification regarding Citations in footnote and how can we resolve the same. Also if there are any other changes that needs to be made for the draft to be published. Abhishekgarg224 (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:55:56, 25 July 2021 review of submission by 613codify

i'm not really certain why the references were bad. should some of them be deleted? this subject is probably notable as it earned a guinness world record. please advise as what to do to get this proper. thank you

613codify (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:07:50, 25 July 2021 review of draft by 613codify


please advise the issue of bad references. does some of them need to be deleted==if so which ones and why--thank you 613codify (talk) 18:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1035442044"