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 Loveneetsingh123 (talk | contribs) at 07:35, 27 March 2022 (→07:05:57, 27 March 2022 review of draft by Loveneetsingh123: Reply). 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


March 21

07:35:17, 21 March 2022 review of draft by Wikitehedia

I'm looking for suggestions on how I can improve my citations.


Wikitehedia (talk) 07:35, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitehedia A Wikipedia article does not just document the existence of a topic. It 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. Sources must not be based on materials that the company puts out itself(like staff interviews or press releases) and coverage must be significant, meaning it goes beyone merely telling about the existence of the topic. Please see Your first article. 331dot (talk) 08:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:17:59, 21 March 2022 review of submission by Sonygskuk


Sonygskuk (talk) 08:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sonygskuk You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:29:14, 21 March 2022 review of submission by 103.156.209.34


They have included as much data about the subject, and hope the subject is important and must include in Wikipedia. 103.156.209.34 (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:36:34, 21 March 2022 review of submission by Shubjt

Hello there,

I created the draft Dharia that was declined due to lack of notability. Now, the subject of the article was mentioned in a Billboard and an ANT1 article. There's already a page in Turkish WP: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHARIA. So, I'd like to know what else might be required for proving notability.

(Also, she has been featured in La Maruta but I don't know if this is any good for notability.)

@User:Liance @User:Mako001

Thanks

Shubjt (talk) 10:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:24:49, 21 March 2022 review of submission by 82.113.227.110


Hi, I found it difficult to read this page as when I searched I couldnt found it. I found it from the hyperlink in Mallory Factor. And then draft:.. Could we get thie published. 82.113.227.110 (talk) 12:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:38, 21 March 2022 review of draft by Tycho.brodersen


I would like to connect the Draft onRobert Ehrlich (musician) with the German version of the article. Sorry for my small skills! I couln'd find an instruction to this point. Tycho.brodersen (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tycho.brodersen. Do not connect the draft. If the draft is accepted, the resulting article will be connected via wikidata. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
THANKS! Tycho.brodersen (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:57:31, 21 March 2022 review of submission by Garrettboller1451


Garrettboller1451 (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the article on Jerome Tang and utilized his own biography from Baylor University Athletics website. So I'm a little confused as to why it was denied.

@Garrettboller1451: No sources, no article, no debate. You cite no sources what-so-ever, and we cannot accept text plagiarised from elsewhere. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:42:55, 21 March 2022 review of submission by ChArLeS sTuDeNt

My page got rejected ChArLeS sTuDeNt (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ChArLeS sTuDeNt: YouTube is, as a rule, unusable as a cite unless the video was made by an outlet we'd normally consider acceptable and uploaded to that outlet's verified channel. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:51:08, 21 March 2022 review of submission by Sutakku

There are hundreds of articles, the majority are in Japanese or Korean, which I saw were acceptable for similar groups. e.g. nmixx Wasn't sure how many to include, but a sample of global articles are below: https://www.thesundaily.my/style-life/yg-set-to-debut-japanese-girl-group-xg-AG8877222 https://www.bandwagon.asia/articles/yg-entertainment-and-avex-join-forces-to-launch-new-girl-group-xg-debut-2022 https://hot.detik.com/kpop/d-5990086/debut-xg-tippy-toes-yang-catchy-dan-jedar https://www.republika.co.id/berita/r90mpg456/girl-group-xg-asal-jepang-akhirnya-resmi-lakukan-debut https://www.msn.com/id-id/hiburan/celebrity/girl-group-xg-sangat-berbakat-akhirnya-lakukan-debut-mereka/ar-AAVeSVH

CS_2407 (talk) 23:51, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 22

00:30:14, 22 March 2022 review of submission by SavageBWiki

When I created the article Battle of Kryvyi Rih (2022), but some bot keeps redirecting it to Southern Ukraine Offensive. Can you please fix this issue and tell the person who did it to stop? Thank you.

SavageBWiki (talk) 00:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to deal with a content dispute with an IP editor. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Argument/content dispute. This is not the venue to deal with this.
There is no Battle of Kryvyi Rih mentioned by Reliable Sources. Current reports are that Russian troops are about 45 km south of Kryvy Rih. The article that was created took sources out of context. Such as an article from 9 months ago about a Ukrainian police officer from Kryvyi Rih getting killed in Donbas, the wiki page used this article to say that Ukrainian soldiers are currently getting killed in Kryvyi Rih which is some fantastic OR. Seeing as how no Reliable Sources mention a battle currently taking place in Kryvyi Rih Curbon7 made a redirect to the Southern Ukraine offensive, that got reverted by SavageBWiki. I began editting the article, I reviewed the sources cited, found no mention of an ongoing battle in Kryvyi Rih and reinserted the redirect that Curbon7 had originally placed in to the article. There will very likely be a battle in this city, but critically one has happened yet. I agree with Curbon7 that we should wait for a battle to take place before writing about one. 191.177.204.73 (talk) 00:41, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO DEAL WITH A CONTENT DISPUTE. I am going to drop EE warnings on both of you now. Continue in this vein, and you are apt to be sanctioned. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:42, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but in the article I wrote that Russian soldiers are on the outskirts of Kryvyi Rih. SavageBWiki (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And it was also approved when I submitted it as a draft. SavageBWiki (talk) 01:37, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:35:15, 22 March 2022 review of submission by Tykeysz

Hello, my name is tyrell keysz and I need help making a page for my friend who is a producer his name is Aelo Beats. Thank You.

Tykeysz (talk) 02:35, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tykeysz, If and when your friend becomes famous, someone unrelated will write an article. Wikipedia is not a promotional vehicle for up and coming producers. It also requires verifiable information that comes from reliable sources, we do not care what the subject or their friends think about them. Also see conflict of interest for required declarations should reliable sources actually exist and WP:AUTO for why having a wikipedia article isn't always the best idea.Slywriter (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tykeysz: No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 02:39, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:14, 22 March 2022 review of submission by Vishalyoman

I would like to ask for help to list this article as I have sufficient coverage related to the subject.

Vishal Yoman is an Indian filmmaker, you can google search about him

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Google Knowlage Panel [6]

Vishalyoman (talk) 08:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Vishalyoman: The Knowledge Graph pulls information from, amongst other sources, Wikipedia, and none of the information on it is verified in the slightest; we can't use it. Four out of the five sources proffered here are of unknown provenance, likely regurgitated PR; the last one isn't about Yoman, but Mirzapur Official. We have a distinct distate for autobiographies. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.bollywoodlife.com/news-gossip/directors-ayushi-anand-vishal-yoman-brings-the-real-side-of-mirzapur-via-mirzapur-official-2007470/
  2. ^ https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/outlook-spotlight-vishal-yoman-ayushi-anand-founder-of-mirzapur-official-a-platform-for-unheard-voices/409576
  3. ^ https://www.tellychakkar.com/tv/tv-news/wow-find-out-the-insights-of-mirzapur-city-mirzapur-official-vishal-yoman-and-ayushi
  4. ^ https://www.filmibeat.com/bollywood/2022/mirzapur-official-founders-vishal-yoman-and-ayushi-anand-say-always-stay-true-to-your-roots-328539.html
  5. ^ https://www.oneindia.com/partner-content/mirzapur-official-initiates-love-mirzapur-a-tribute-by-vishal-yoman-ayushi-anand-3360057.html
  6. ^ https://g.co/kgs/QSyTtP

10:06:49, 22 March 2022 review of submission by 193.52.24.5

I think Rithika Merchant's article deserves to be published and I don't understand her rejection. The last editor to deny publication, Hatchens, said that the topic is not notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. However, contemporary artist Rithika Merchant has many articles published on the internet referring to her work. She has even worked with major brands such as Chloé and has 30.5k followers on Instagram. She is a living visual artist, objectively valid to be represented on Wikipedia. I look forward to hearing from you in order to find a solution and be able to publish her page on the platform.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)193.52.24.5 (talk) 10:06, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you need to use a translator to communicate with us in English, I would suggest that you should edit the version of Wikipedia that is in your primary language. The person you wrote about does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable artist. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:18:10, 22 March 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by FFaruq


Hi, I am having trouble creating a page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Afzalur_Rahman_(author)).

I have been told that the references are not good enough, but not told which ones need changing, or adding. Also, a link was added referring to the "Primary Page" for the person, but this is in face no the same person.

I'd just like a straight answer not a rejection and a link to a page of vague conditions I already thought I'd met. Please advise.

Kind regards. FFaruq (talk) 10:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was only declined, not rejected. Declined means resubmission is possible. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:47:38, 22 March 2022 review of draft by Pyrrorhiza


Hello. I've just created an English page for Alexandre Antonelli. He already has a page on Swedish Wikipedia (https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Antonelli) and so I have requested a translation. I hope I have done this correctly, but please let me know if not. The automated translation is not quite accurate. Can I just ask if it's quicker to wait for a translation and then edit it if necessary, or create an English page myself? Many thanks in advance for your help.

Pyrrorhiza (talk) 11:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pyrrorhiza Wikipedia has articles, not pages. It is not recommended to use automatic translations. 331dot (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Apologies for the incorrect terminology. I am not using an automatic translation for the new article - this just happens when I open the Swedish article. I have requested someone to translate the Swedish article but I wanted to know whether it would be quicker just to write the English version myself. Pyrrorhiza (talk) 12:13, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given everyone is a volunteer, do it yourself will always be the quickest and best option.Slywriter (talk) 17:51, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:48:52, 22 March 2022 review of submission by Mazetorch


Hi, I need help regarding the editing of this page above. I would like to know if my sources are not suitable. My main and only source for all the information is Lord Russell Baker's book "My Way" on Amazon. This is my first experience as a contributor. Thank you.

Mazetorch (talk) 11:48, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mazetorch: Find other sources and incorporate them into the article text - One source alone cannot carry an article, least of all one the subject wrote themselves. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:32:48, 22 March 2022 review of draft by Phoebae

Hi, there. I've written my first article on a company named Eloelo (India) and would like to need your assistance since I'm new to Wikipedia.

Phoebae (talk) 12:32, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Phoebae: All of your sources are routine business news that don't help for notability. Are there any in-depth, non-routine, independent sources written by identifiable authors and published in outlets with editorial staff that fact-check, retract, and correct? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks for checking out. I've added a few more links. Is it okay now? Phoebae (talk) 10:36, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:25:23, 22 March 2022 review of submission by 136.228.35.174

my artcle wuz very acurat 136.228.35.174 (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We're not a comedy club. If you're not serious, find somewhere else. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:27, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:38:20, 22 March 2022 review of draft by 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579


I would like to make one case for this draft, so if an objective editor could read on, it would be appreciated. This seems like a bizarre and seemingly personal rejection rather than an objective one. Reasons given for decline include “lack of reliable sources” - in fact, sources include The New York Times, the permanent music archives of the State University of New York, reviews from various major publication such as the Chicago Reader, a documented award from the gov’t of France, and a documented substantive publication by the legendary music publisher Edition Peters. In addition, numerous other sources are given as well as external links. There are “wiki quotes” associated with this potential entry. Nothing personal, but the rejection is laughable with respect to the above points and the reasoning. The potential entry also has removed the references to the personal website as well as the podcast in which the figure spoke of themselves with American podcaster Studs Terkel and John Cage. Please advise as to how to improve upon such “reliable” sources. This rejection does not appear to abide by Wikipedia standards of reliable sourcing. The “close connection” appears to be a dismissal of the role of a professional historian who by nature of employment is in contact with historic figures. Maybe that is too close? Someone needs to put up an entry for this individual, the relationship to careers of major American composers are well supplemented as knowledge in this manner. I’ll check for a reply later. I would especially appreciate an explanation of the primary rejection, i.e. reliable sources. I do not know what is possibly more reliable than the New York Times, university archives, independent reviews, and traditional publishers, etc. Thank you.2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC) 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NYT makes no mention of the subject, so not sure how it would contribute to notability of the subject.Slywriter (talk) 17:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That’s true, I didn’t notice that until you pointed it out. The subject actually directed the entire festival as reported, as the Chicago Reader indicates, although the Times does not refer to Peter Gena. See what you think, could be removed, the source for the Chicago Reader tells the same story. Maybe I’ll remove it since the same fact is sourced in two other sources. 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 20:09, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The other two footnotes for that fact, are New Music America and Chicago Reader, as sourced. 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 20:13, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it would be good to know if the Wiki-quotes that are automatically included in the draft are considered unreliable sources. 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Removed NYT which does not mention subject. The other two sources for the fact remain sourced in the potential article. Suggestions as to how to improve sourcing as sourced fro, the Music Archives of The State University of New York, the Chicago Reader, French Gov’t, other sources? As well as external links for reliability? What remains unreliable about these and other sources? 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking out. Do please let me know with respect to the reliability of the remaining sources and the external links. 2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579 (talk) 20:27, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@2601:18E:8201:7B50:8E0:D88A:EFF1:2579: I stopped after the first 10 sources all appeared to be Primary sources or passing mentions. Please identify WP:THREE sources that are independent secondary sources that discuss the subject with some depth. External Links is same issue, all Primary sources. Wikipedia wants to know what others have to say about the subject, not what they say about themselves. Additionally, running his name through google scholar showed a low cite count (though admittedly niche field), so not an obvious WP:NSCHOLAR, though perhaps meets a different criteria there. I'll take a further look tomorrow and leave comments for a future reviewer but try and find secondary sources or show that the alternative criteria is met.Slywriter (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:28:44, 22 March 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Andylanterman


First, let me apologize for the forwardness of this request but I would like some specific clarification on what the problem is with our article? I've continued to change or add what you say we are missing or need more of. So either I'm not adding the correct information you are requesting or there is a different issue.

Please, can someone look over this and advise on what specifically is needed? This is getting frustating.

Andylanterman (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Andylanterman: Your citations are primarily to website homepages, which are completely worthless as citations because a homepage isn't going to have the in-depth information we're looking for. You need to link to specific subpages (read: articles) on that domain. We also do not cite Wikipedia. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:51, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have added several reviews and articles regarding this mobile game. The "homepages" are referencing the tracks, brands or real-life people who are involved/included with the game in some way. Many other mobile app/game pages on Wikipedia have these included in them. So they are not worthless, as you put it.
Please review this article again, having taken all the above into account. Andylanterman (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Andylanterman: Then those pages need to be edited to get rid of terrible sources, rather than you adding to the pile of junk. My answer remains unchanged, and I'm sceptical the next reviewer will have an answer much different than what I've given here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:10, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not junk and I don't appreciate the tone you are taking here. I'm asking for help on what you all are wanting or not wanting on this page. The only term I keep reading is "sources", which I provided an abundance of, which are directly connected to the app. I've already removed almost all the "sources" and it still is denied because I don't have enough sources. Andylanterman (talk) 21:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your sources need to be placed directly after the content that they support, not dumped in a list at the end. Theroadislong (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Andylanterman: Please refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode, and remember: you asked for this.
Literally the only source in this entire list we can use is Touch Arcade. And one source in and of itself is not enough to justify an article on any topic on Wikipedia. So the answer is, yes, you need more sources, ones of similar nature and calibre to Touch Arcade. Not trying to make it seem notable by association with other entities. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are proving the subject exists with your sources. Existence is not notability. Otherwise Wikipedia would have way more than 6 million pages. and Jeske's analysis may seem harsh but its accurate.Slywriter (talk) 04:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

00:04:05, 23 March 2022 review of draft by PreyBird


PreyBird (talk) 00:04, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I delete my page?

00:14:18, 23 March 2022 review of submission by PreyBird


PreyBird (talk) 00:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I delete my wiki page?

03:43:32, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Thecontentcreator20


Hi there, can kindly elaborate how i can amend the article for it to be published. What do you mean by your comment? Is there anything wrong with my current references. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thecontentcreator20 (talk) 03:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thecontentcreator20, You do not have any secondary sources that would establish notability. Press releases and routine business announcements are useless for this purpose.Slywriter (talk) 04:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:02:19, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Gobautista

Looking forward to reconsider this article. Thank you. Evo1885 09:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gobautista The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review the messages left by reviewers. If you have new information that the last reviewer did not consider, please appeal to them directly. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:06:03, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Samwel peter masinga


Samwel peter masinga (talk) 10:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

i just submit my aritcle declined so i would like your help

Samwel peter masinga Fixed your link for you. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or their accomplishments, please see the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, please use social media, a personal website, or alternative forum where that is permitted. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
okay can i get an example Samwel peter masinga (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An example of what? 331dot (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:08:30, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Padres Hana


I have been using the subject of this article as the source for additions to over thirty Wikipedia pages and I am concerned that no-one will know where I am getting the information from. Can you help? Padres Hana (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Padres Hana (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Padres Hana A publication does not need to have a Wikipedia article about it in order to be used as as source in other articles. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that it would be impossible to have a page for every publication used as a source. I am currently working on pages relating to the modern history of Lebanon which are littered with dubious references to dodgy websites and such like. I would like a reader who wants to know more about the source to see some of its background. e.g. published by a couple of heavyweight British politicians; 500-600 issues over thirty years etc. Examples where I have used it are Michael Aoun#Liberation war against Syria: 1989 and War of Liberation (1989-1990). Padres Hana (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:17:17, 23 March 2022 review of submission by 188.96.230.188

Alexandra Würzbach is editor-in-chief for German newspaper Bild in Germany. This newspaper is one of the most important newspapers in Germany. 188.96.230.188 (talk) 14:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft does little more than state that she exists and works for the newspaper. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about her, showing how she meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The draft shows, that Würzbach is editor-in-chief for German newspaper Bild, one of the most important newspaper in Germany, --188.96.230.188 (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if the sources do nothing other than document her position, that is insufficient for an article. An article about her needs to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about her personally, not just that she holds a position. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please make further comment in this section only, do not create additional sections. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:34, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Joliehorowitz


I am reaching out to get a better explanation for why my page was declined. I was notified that my submission lacked sufficient relevant coverage—however, I carefully followed the stipulated instructions while creating this post by utilizing three objective press sources. If the reviewer could give me more information on how to edit my page for resubmission, that would be extremely helpful. Thank you in advance.

Joliehorowitz (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joliehorowitz Your sources consist of a piece that briefly mentions the organization, an interview and a promotional piece written by a trustee. These are not objective sources. A Wikipedia article about this organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization.
I see you declared a conflict of interest; if you work for this organization you must make the stricter paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement. 331dot (talk) 15:52, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:28:03, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Francewhsd


Francewhsd (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Francewhsd You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a host for primary source content like a speech transcript. 331dot (talk) 16:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:28:30, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Breadyornot


Hi there, I, and other more experienced WikiProject Writing editors, have made significant progress to this draft article on Dr. Linda Adler-Kassner. We recognize that the review process can take over three months, and we have been waiting almost two months as of now, but we think the article is in good shape to be added to the mainspace. We've addressed significant errors to citation, close paraphrasing, and neutral point of view suggested by our previous reviewers. Additionally, we've added new independendent reliable sourcing to improve the article for the Wikipedia mainspace. This is just a friendly bump that we believe the article is ready to be moved. Thank you! Breadyornot (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breadyornot (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breadyornot Who is "we"? Only a single person should have access to your account. As noted on your draft, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,983 pending submissions waiting for review." Volunteers doing what they can when they can pick drafts to review, there is no queue to "bump" a draft higher up. Please continue to be patient. 331dot (talk) 16:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 331dot, thank you for your speedy reply. 'We' refers to WikiProject Writing participants, most notably Matthewvetter and JayKayJay. Your response is noted, thank you.
@Matthewvetter: I took a quick look at the article, and the biggest issue is demonstrating notability. In Wikipedia's definition, that means finding media coverage of Adler-Kassner or her books, or at least showing her influence by demonstrating that her scholarly work is heavily cited. The coverage there is mostly things she has written, or school biographies. It doesn't seem to be enough to meet the threshold. See WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOLAR. (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.) TechnoTalk (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoTalk Thanks for the clarification. I am aware of WP:GNG and am continuing to work on this article to show notability. DarthVetter (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoTalk I have done some additional work on the Linda Adler-Kassner article to demonstrate notability. Per WP:NSCHOLAR, Adler-Kassner "has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level" (CCCC Chairship; CWPA Awards for "Best Book" and "Outstanding Contribution to the Discipline") - this is criterion #2. Adler-Kassner has also satisfied criterion #6, by holding the "highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society" (CWPA President and CCCC Chair).Finally, Adler-Kassner has also satisfied criterion #7 "making a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity" by promoting the Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing as president of Council of Writing Program Administrators to the department of education under Obama administration. Keep in mind that, according to WP:NSCHOLAR, the subject only has to satisfy one of those criterion. Thanks so much for your review. DarthVetter (talk) 17:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:55:07, 23 March 2022 review of submission by JaneLoone


JaneLoone (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This organisation has recently gained further popularity and notability following the introduction of UK roaming fees and has become widespread within France and Spain in particular among businesses and the organisation service provider industry and is highly relevant to recent amendments in roaming fees.

JaneLoone, Nothing added indicates that. Neither article has a reporter byline. One is a passing mention and the other (Olive Press) is clearly written by the subject. "We came up with Xpatfone, powered by Devyce;". Now then please see WP:PAID, WP:COI and WP:NCORP and make any necessary declarations and to see what Wikipedia policies are for inclusion of corporations. We are not a place to market a product and take a dim view on such attempts to waste other volunteers time by attempting to do so.Slywriter (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


March 24

Request on 01:45:16, 24 March 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Christopher Cottle



Christopher Cottle (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:40:01, 24 March 2022 review of submission by Greentechnik

This project page includes references from Google, Google Books and Google Knowledge Panel. Recommended for approval in Wikipedia. Greentechnik (talk) 02:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

None of those are appropriate sources. A Google knowledge panel is not a source itself, but a collection of sources. 331dot (talk) 07:09, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:10:15, 24 March 2022 review of draft by Sigridsgatan


Sigridsgatan (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My submission was rejected on this ground: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources." I am uncertain how to handle this. I believe that the correct references have been added to all factual quotes, such an memberships in the American and Swedish academies, as well as PMID links to the publications listed. I would appreciate if you could give me a more specific hint of what in the text in not supported by "a reliable source".

@Sigridsgatan: I'm afraid there is a more immediate problem with the draft: it looks like you copied Draft:Anders Björklund and pasted it into a new draft, with an incorrect spelling of his surname, and then added a few sources to that. This is a problem for reasons explained here, and also because the article should have the correct spelling of his last name. Perhaps you thought that you would not be allowed to edit a draft created by someone else, but that is not a problem. The draft you copied had been declined a couple of times; adding the sources you provided for the "Bjorklund" draft to the "Björklund" one would be a good first step. Please also read this guideline regarding conflict-of-interest editing, and disclose any connection you have to Björklund, as explained there. --bonadea contributions talk 15:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply.I understand that copying from the earlier rejected draft is a problem.I was under the impression that, since the earlier draft was rejected, I could not continue to edit it further, and thus went on to make a new submission. Easiest for me would be if the earlier rejected (Björklund) draft is deleted and removed, and that the new (Bjorklund) submission, which uses parts of the text in the rejected submission, was given the name with the correct Swedish spelling "Björklund". Is this possible? Otherwise, the "Bjorklund" text does not contain any controversial statements, and all specific quoted facts are supported by links to public sources. The correctness of Björklund´s bio-data given here is supported by the link to the Lund University web site, where a complete CV also is available. I am at loss to see what other sources could be added. Your view on this would be appreciated! Sigridsgatan (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sigridsgatan Please edit this existing section for additional comment, instead of creating new sections. I've moved your comment here. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:48:06, 24 March 2022 review of submission by Likhari12

Hey my name is PARAM BHATTAL and I am a writer I write my own songs and I upload them on Instagram and YouTube. I want you to publish my profile on Wikipedia so that people can know about me and i can give my songs to the intrsuted ones. Likhari12 (talk) 11:48, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Likhari12 You have confused Wikipedia with social media; Wikipedia is not social media, but an encyclopedia. Wikipedia has no profiles, not a single one. We have articles. We have no interest in helping you promote yourself. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:23, 24 March 2022 review of draft by Publiconline123


Confused about article submission.I tried my best.Now i want help on submitting the article.I need help on fixing article Publiconline123 (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:50:38, 24 March 2022 review of submission by JanPawel2025

Please review my draft. I believe that many words in the article are enough.

JanPawel2025, You have proved existence, but existence is not notability. Need more than just routine announcements of its creation. Are there reliable secondary sources discussing the subject? See this guide for some pointers.Slywriter (talk) 02:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected the page about the Polish Cyberspace Defense Forces. JanPawel2025 (talk) 15:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


March 25

00:16:04, 25 March 2022 review of submission by GenesisGSE

review of submission by GenesisGSE

Below this line, tell us why you are requesting a re-review. Take as many lines as you need.-->}} {Lafc|username=GenesisGSE|ts=00:16:04, 25 March 2022|link= }} GenesisGSE (talk) 00:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

01:56:50, 25 March 2022 review of submission by Imcdc

This article wass created before by other users and deleted because it seemed to much like advertising. I have created a new version of it which is pretty much based on just factual contents of it. What can be done to make this seem like a company article rather than a promotional tone? Imcdc (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:43:51, 25 March 2022 review of draft by 97.119.210.101


Waiting for the draft to be deleted. 97.119.210.101 (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:23:57, 25 March 2022 review of submission by Ilieșu Petru


I have tried to upload on the Wikipedia the draft of a CV belonging to a Romanian poet and civic activist (Petru Ilieșu) I also have many references that can sustain the information from CV. Please tell me what kind of information do I need in order to provide a reliable article (respecting the criteria of obiectivity required by Wikipedia) Thank you very much!

See references, below the line:

http://levurelitteraire.com/marcel-cornis-pope-author-translator-editor-and-academician/ ”Romania Post Scriptum” https://diazilla.com/doc/997569/libretto-petru-trilingue---rotary-eklubo-esperanto https://www.biblioteche.comune.parma.it/alpi/it-it/scrivere-poesia-a-timisoara.aspx https://dusic.unipr.it/it/notizie/26-settembre-2019-petru-iliesu-parlera-di-romania-e-europa https://www.amazon.it/Iliesu-Romania-rivoluzione-Quattro-momenti/dp/8832158124 https://www.diacronia.ro/ro/indexing/details/A21734/pdf/October 2014Journal of Literary Studies https://www.erstestiftung.org/en/publications/return-to-europe-a-ten-part-documentary/ http://www.uniuneascriitorilortm.ro/content/ilie%C5%9Fu- https://www.buecher.de/shop/gedichte/rumaenien-postskriptum-romnia-post-scriptum-/iliesu-petru/products_products/detail/prod_id/60560025/ https://shop.falter.at/detail/9783863563158 https://videovest.ro/proiecte/ https://adz.ro/meinung-und-bericht/artikel-meinung-und-bericht/artikel/die-anonymen-menschen-sind-die-wahren-helden https://www.rri.ro/it_it/giornata_europea_delle_lingue_2019_rivoluzione_89_incontro_all_universita_di_parma-2604649 https://books.google.ro/books?id=CVPPGw_ZyO0C&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=Petru+Ilie%C8%99u&source=bl&ots=ux36-CyK2U&sig=ACfU3U0B03-3Da4jOunIOqwAzL0roJjgDw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEn-Tw4ezvAhXOl4sKHcKpD4Y4ZBDoATAFegQIBxAD#v=onepage&q=Petru%20Ilie%C8%99u&f=false https://books.google.ro/books?id=MhKxDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA120&lpg=PA120&dq=Petru+Ilie%C8%99u&source=bl&ots=fMgkVbVtt-&sig=ACfU3U2c7FiYyqv_lU_4YTRc7V4ki2AMaw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEn-Tw4ezvAhXOl4sKHcKpD4Y4ZBDoATAJegQICBAD#v=onepage&q=Petru%20Ilie%C8%99u&f=false https://www.observatorcultural.ro/articol/nonconformistul-petru-iliesu-2/ https://www.lovelybooks.de/autor/Petru-Ilie%C5%9Fu/ https://romanialibera.ro/cultura/arte/destinul-poetului-disident-petru-iliesu--80767 https://books.google.ro/books?id=j2PmEIYMsHUC&pg=PA618&lpg=PA618&dq=Petru+Ilie%C8%99u+Return+to+Europa&source=bl&ots=maZkPWeZlZ&sig=ACfU3U3wsTW3GMRar9WBFzmxtMlDzm3Y7g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwivyP3q5ezvAhVHEncKHaXKD9c4MhDoATAJegQIBhAD#v=onepage&q=Petru%20Ilie%C8%99u%20Return%20to%20Europa&f=false


Ilieșu Petru (talk) 07:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ilieșu Petru: We don't host cirricula vitae in the first place. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 08:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:35:41, 25 March 2022 review of draft by Kateryna mayer


Hi, I want to confirm that the 'reliable souces' issue in my article means that I have too many references to the IT Guild news web pages and their Social-channels news references as a confirmation of my statements? if yes, can I use them in cases when I want to describe a point of view of IT-Guild or its official reaction to some events in the past? In this case, I will be describing its reaction\opinion and I do not show it as a 'truthful statement' Also, will the removal of such kinds of references and adding some other external "news" articles will help to solve the problem? will this approach work? Regards, Kateryna mayer (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sources to establish notability cannot come from the subject itself. A Wikipedia article about an organization must primarily summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia is not interested much in what an organization says about itself. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:47:44, 25 March 2022 review of submission by Jorge Granier Phelps


We already added more sources that mention our company, our journalists and the Media outlet itself. We also linked other wikipedia articles related to our journalists and founders.

Please verify these changes and let us publish El American Wikipedia Page. Thanks in advance.

All the best.

Jorge Granier Phelps (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, it will not be considered further, Wikipedia has zero interest in promoting your company. Theroadislong (talk) 14:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:57:17, 25 March 2022 review of submission by Nikkimar


I NEED HELP! Trying to get a biography published for a living entrepreneur.

Nikkimar (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Your draft doesn't even begin to suggest any notability whatsoever. Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:59:28, 25 March 2022 review of submission by JanPawel2025

Please see the page on Polish Cyberspace Defense Forces. JanPawel2025 (talk) 14:59, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JanPawel2025, First stick to one thread. No need to create another today. Second, all you did was add more sources covering the creation. This may be a case of WP:TOOSOON if no other coverage is available. Third, thousands of articles are pending in the queue and posting here will not get it reviewed quicker.Slywriter (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:16:28, 25 March 2022 review of submission by 41.138.72.11


41.138.72.11 (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is far too detailed and has too few sources. We're a general encyclopaedia, not Fandom. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 18:41, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


March 26

00:10:34, 26 March 2022 review of submission by Marjoram48

What Wikiproject classification tags should I put in? Marjoram48 (talk) 00:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marjoram48. You are not required to add any WikiProject tags to a draft. If User:Marjoram48/sandbox will be a biography of a historical figure, a woman in Australia, then WikiProjects Biography, Women's History, and Australia might be appropriate. There's little point in adding WikiProjects, however, until you've made a solid start on the draft. You may find Help:Your first article useful. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:34, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:11:04, 26 March 2022 review of submission by Phoebae


Hello there, I'm a newbie here. So, could someone review my draft and point out mistakes?

Phoebae (talk) 05:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Phoebae: The lists in the article need to be removed, especially the investors list. Refer to the top table here:
As this article potentially falls into a topic area under sanctions, this is all I will say on this matter, beyond dropping a sanctions alert on your talkpage. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:14, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:16:23, 26 March 2022 review of submission by 張民耀


張民耀 (talk) 05:16, 26 March 2022 (UTC)I mean, some people love Roblox games and they want information about the game. Why not post some information about the games in Wikipedia?[reply]

@張民耀: No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 06:59, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok… 張民耀 (talk) 08:47, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If there are zero reliable sources online about the game, I doubt many people actually do want information about the game. Bsoyka (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:39:04, 26 March 2022 review of submission by Reayl name


Reayl name (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but two words that have no sources will never be accepted as a Wikipedia article. Please read more about what Wikipedia is, as well as Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This would be a slam-dunk no-content or no-context speedy deletion if it were in article space. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:24, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:25, 26 March 2022 review of draft by Shayaccount


Shayaccount (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can online store selling a book related to the article be accepted as reference links? I am writing about a author of a book.


Also! How do I insert picture (s) of the author, in visual editing mode?

In order:
  • No. Online storefronts are only useful insofar as they provide a release date; the publisher is going to be a far more reliable source for this nine times out of ten.
  • Images don't help a draft what-so-ever, and we would need a freely-licensed image, not one you pulled off of Google Image Search.
—Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shayaccount: As to your actual sources, refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
Absolutely none of the sources you cite are usable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I insert an author's photo for a biography? YouTube videos show a simple search made in Template. However all videos predate an obvious setup change. There is no search bar in template, only already used private templates. Please help!

As I said above, images do not help a draft what-so-ever, and we don't accept fair-use images of living people. Please reply in this existing section instead of making a new one. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:42, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:07:52, 26 March 2022 review of submission by TomahF


I have spent a considerable amount of time preparing this timeline and believe it will be of interest to mechanical engineers. Drafts have been reviewed several times and I have addressed the various issues. The current version is much improved as a result.

The latest response that "This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia," does not seem valid. Wikipedia currently costs numerous timelines, some of which are quite similar to the one I am proposing. For example, see the numerous examples available at List_of_timelines (List of timelines).

I serve on the history and heritage committee of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and I know that committee is very interested in seeing this effort go forward. We wish to use the Wikipedia space to allow others to add to the listing, as well as for the listing to be available for research and other uses.

Please let me know how we can move this effort forward.

Sincerely, TomahF (talk) 21:07, 26 March 2022 (UTC)Tom Fehring, P.E. Member, ASME History and Heritage Committee[reply]


TomahF (talk) 21:07, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TomahF Rejection means that resubmission is not possible, at least in the short term. I apologize greatly for being frank, but Wikipedia has no interest in the goals of other organizations like your society(please review conflict of interest) with regards to Wikipedia content. Much of the draft appears to be a copyright violation, which is an instant fail. Something being an "innovation" is an opinion and not an appropriate title for an encyclopedia article which should have a neutral point of view. Who views it as innovative?(rhetorical question) We're interested in what independent reliable sources say, not just the opinion of one organization. Please see other stuff exists; other poor articles existing does not mean that more can be added. We just haven't gotten around to addressing them yet. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 27

05:58:46, 27 March 2022 review of submission by Anthonypontek


Anthonypontek (talk) 05:58, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:11:48, 27 March 2022 review of submission by Anthonypontek

06:11:48, 27 March 2022 review of submission by Anthonypontek

Because I did not meet the requirements of Wikipedia.

Anthonypontek (talk) 06:11, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthonypontek: No sources, no article, no debate. We're also not interested in what you have to say about yourself. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:30, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:34:14, 27 March 2022 review of submission by Ayubsaifi6767


Ayubsaifi6767 (talk) 06:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:05:57, 27 March 2022 review of draft by Loveneetsingh123


This is regarding declined draft of Advocate General anmol rattan sidhu. Reason - Large section of content unsourced

We will surely work on that. One thing I would like to bring to attention here that we did added number of references but many of those were infact deleted by other moderators as they were used to source info added in content.

Please guides what kind of references we can add further to source the info added in content. And how much should we add. we have 100s of those as the person in question is AG of Punjab government and hold very high position in government. Im his legal advisor to Punjab government and we can furnish government proofs as well in form of documents to proove that this is fully authentic and genuine request of page creation. Please let us know whom and where should we submit those documents to support our case.

Please suggest that, Do you mean references like related to his schooling, or legal positions held in the past ? need to be sourced too with references? Is it something that we should add so that the article is accepted. We added references for his current position as Advocate general in punjab government only . I would be very thankful for your help and guidence. Loveneetsingh123 (talk) 07:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Loveneetsingh123: We're looking for sources that are in-depth, non-routine, independent news articles with identifiable authors that are published in outlets with editorial oversight that fact-checks, discloses, corrects, and retracts. Government documents do not fit that description. And literally every biographical claim that could be challenged MUST be cited to a source with the characteristics I detailed above. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:29, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for quick response Jeske. I editeds the draft and added independent news articles as well as web sources that cite the facts mentioned in the content mentioned in the articles. Morover all the refernces cited and added are genuine and well established BIG MEDIA OUTLETS in India. Please let me know should i resubmit draft now for consideration or should i wait a bit. Loveneetsingh123 (talk) 07:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1079526991"