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 ARA Software Development (talk | contribs) at 12:09, 6 April 2022. 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
June 2025
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 31

03:40:24, 31 March 2022 review of submission by Olivia Knight22

I would like to request for a re-review of StockTrim's page. It was rejected for several times for being written like an advertisement. I have re-written, removed and added some phrases with the hopes that it will qualify for Wikipedia. If this still looks like an advertisement, please advice what I should remove to make it work. Olivia Knight22 (talk) 03:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The very first sentence of the draft has a spam link to the company! Theroadislong (talk) 03:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:49:03, 31 March 2022 review of submission by Wikiputta

Please let me know what are charges should I make https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tim_McGeary Wikiputta (talk) 08:49, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to suggest how they pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 09:02, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiputta: Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode.
The sourcing is no better than when I tore the original article apart to correct its (ultimately fatal) sourcing woes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 06:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano, did you intend to say "If that is the case, then this would be usable just based on the strength of its lede alone", or is a "not" missing? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That was intended. If the Jammerzine source is indeed plagiarising the Gulfshore Life source wholesale (as seems to be the case) then the GSL piece is an interview with a multi-paragraph lede that discusses the subject in some depth in it. An interview that has significant journalistic non-interview portions (usually the lede, though there's one case where it was after the interview) is at worst borderline. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:35, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:38:33, 31 March 2022 review of draft by Olivier Lahaye

Hello

My submission has been declined because i do not give any source or reference for the "Biography" and "Professional life" sections. The information in these section have been given by Mr Xavier Aiolfi himself, so the source is solid. Also, the draft is the translation of the French version which is already published.

Mr Xavier Aiolfi also asked me to create the translation in German, please let me know what i need to do so the draft can be published.

Thank you Olivier

Olivier Lahaye (talk) 15:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Olivier Lahaye: please see WP:V anyone needs to be able to verify the information in the article, so him telling you is not verifiable by anyone and is not "solid" for the purposes of Wikipedia. The existence of articles on other language wikis also has no bearing here as each language is it's own project and has it's own rules and policies. You may also want to read WP:COI as you obviously have a conflict of interest. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:47, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Olivier Lahaye: Aiolfi seems that he might pass the notability threshold, but the fawning tone and awkward translation are very distracting. Also, since you know him personally, you included too much unsourced and unverified info. I suggest you first read WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE, and then save the article as a text file. Then completely rewrite it using only information that can be sourced from independent third party sources. Don't include any unsourced info. Forget everything he told you. It will be a smaller article but will have a better chance of being accepted. If there's not enough material to build a biography, in any language, then he doesn't meet the notability threshold. TechnoTalk (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Olivier Lahaye Did you take the picture that's in the draft? You uploaded it as "own work", which means you took the picture. Yet it has the author listed as "Raphaël SCHOTT". You might not have taken the picture. @TechnoTalk, @Mcmatter, I am not 100% sure, but should that picture be tagged? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@73.127.147.187: I think the ownership is suspicious. OTRS should have flagged this and requested proof of ownership. You can list it at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:24:26, 31 March 2022 review of submission by 156.196.77.199

156.196.77.199 (talk) 17:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@156.196.77.199: You don't ask a question, but why don't you start by adding a perfectly sourced, succinct section about the organization to Feminism in Egypt#In the 21st century? You won't need as many sources. If there's enough material down the road, it can be later expanded into its own article. TechnoTalk (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:56:23, 31 March 2022 review of submission by Insanepro

Insanepro (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This would be a slam-dunk A1 deletion were it in mainspace. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:26, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

04:47:15, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Freetruthteller

Thank you for your quick reply. I translated the article via the Wikipedia tool and used the same sources as in the original. I will supplement them additionally with English language ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freetruthteller (talk • contribs) 04:47, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I translated article according to instruction I found. Due to the fact I'm not autoconfirmed user yet, I'd like to ask for reviewing the article and move it to the mian article section. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me Link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Freetruthteller/Squad303

Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freetruthteller (talk • contribs) 04:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Freetruthteller: I have moved the draft to Draft:Squad303 and added a template that allows you to submit it for review. It looks like it is probably a notable organisation, but while waiting for review you should try to remove all tweets used as references, especially where they are used to present claims made by the group as facts. "In total, more than 50,000,000 messages have been sent via 1920.in" is such an example; "Squad303 reported shortly thereafter that they had managed to circumvent the introduced restrictions and messages are effectively delivered to Russian citizens" is a little better since it doesn't state it as a fact that "messages are effectively delivered", but it would be highly preferrable to have a secondary source. --bonadea contributions talk 05:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:36:38, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Utilito

What sources are acceptable to prove military service and the rank acheived? THX Utilito (talk) 03:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Utilito I assume this is about the Lee Thomason draft(I've placed a link in the template above). It appears you are writing about yourself, while not forbidden(especially as a draft), it is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Please also be aware that a Wikipedia article about you is not necessarily desirable.
Military service should only be mentioned if independent reliable sources discuss your military service. Any article about you should only summarize 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 academic or more broadly a notable person. 331dot (talk) 09:39, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't know what is a reliable source to reference regarding military service. I have printed service records, but how could you see them or verify them. Utilito (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Utilito, if you click the blue words in 331dot's reply (labeled "reliable sources"), the resulting page will explain what reliable sources are.
Have any newspapers or magazines written an article about your military service? That is the kind of reference that is needed. Wikipedia won't verify "primary sources" such as your printed service records. Sorry, but WP operates on a philosophy that any reader can theoretically follow your "citation" to a published source (online, or published and printed material in a library, for example). 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:06, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:44:47, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Tanjirokiller

How can I make this topic notable? and also give some reasons for rejecting the article

Tanjirokiller (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tanjirokiller No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. While this man leads a branch of a political party, he does not hold public office(which would meet the definition of a notable politician) and coverage of him seems limited which would mean he would not meet the broader definition of a notable person. This is why the draft was rejected, and will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:27:43, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Annonymus45

my draft was deletet , so i want to know why so that i can fix the problem. Annonymus45 (talk) 15:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Annonymus45 Your draft, Draft:Blacckidd, was not deleted, only declined. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. Any Wikipedia article about you must summarize 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 musician. This is usually extremely difficult for people to do about themselves. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 15:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Annonymus45 Please see WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE. TechnoTalk (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:18:50, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Lastsolutiontechnolgy

Lastsolutiontechnolgy (talk) 20:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lastsolutiontechnology: We're not a personal website host. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:20, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:34:00, 1 April 2022 review of submission by Irodri63739082927

I just wanted to help you add more articles and you're rejecting that. Irodri63739082927 (talk) 23:34, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Irodri63739082927, you provided no sources and Wikipedia is not fandom, so its unlikely to have a full article on a minor fictional character.Slywriter (talk) 23:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, I already put the references. Irodri63739082927 (talk) 23:50, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of those are valid references on wikipedia. Need reliable secondary sources.Slywriter (talk) 23:57, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Irodri63739082927 Fandom and Dictionary.com are not reliable sources (not to mention Wikipedia is not a dictionary). Wikis (such as Wikipedia), fan sites/forums and the like are user generated so not reliable. Sources need editorial oversight and a history of fact-checking, similar to a traditional newspaper. S0091 (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

12:13:29, 2 April 2022 review of draft by QuantumMechanicsLover


QuantumMechanicsLover (talk) 12:13, 2 April 2022 (UTC) I need help to arrange this draft in a proper manner.[reply]

17:03:18, 2 April 2022 review of submission by Phigeus

Phigeus (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2022 (UTC) the response to my draft came back in just a few seconds, making it appear that the actual "responder" was a bot...the person about whom i was writing is astonishingly qualified for inclusion in wiki, highly regarded by people in her field as a scholar (Yale Ph.D. etc.) and with whom she has worked as a photographer (Jazz at Lincoln Center)[reply]

Sources need to be inline following the content that they support, not in a list at the end. Theroadislong (talk) 21:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:14:11, 2 April 2022 review of submission by ThedivineBroom

Why was my article declined?

ThedivineBroom (talk) 18:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ThedivineBroom I assume this is about the draft I have placed a link to here. The reason was given by the last reviewer. 331dot (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:40:31, 2 April 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Benjamin at TeComprendo

Why is this article not notable for you 😞

LOGOS has been covered by other secondary sources and had appeared in independent publications from companies with their own editorial team!

Benjamin at TeComprendo (talk) 20:40, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If they have, can you post these sources here to show us that it's notable? SK2242 (talk) 06:05, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 3

01:39:22, 3 April 2022 review of submission by Jschnurm

Jschnurm (talk) 01:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I don't know why my draft was declined.

Because we have no tolerance for unsourced claims about living people, especially if it's obviously bullshit. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 02:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:19:01, 3 April 2022 review of submission by Khalid-hassan-aziz

Khalid-hassan-aziz (talk) 03:19, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


‌i'm khalid hassan aziz.my date of birth 20 Jan 1999. I was born in iraq . [edit | edit source]

khalid hassan crede fermamente nei media liberi e nello sviluppo politico del Kurdistan. Un obiettivo a cui ha investito la maggior parte del suo capitale.Hi! My name is Khalid, I quit my job to write and make videos about life, love, and family.[edit | edit source] khalid hassan aziz crede fermamente nei media liberi e nello sviluppo politico del Kurdistan. Un obiettivo a cui ha investito la maggior parte del suo capitale.

@Khalid-hassan-aziz: Wikipedia is not free web hosting, and we won't accept unsourced biographical content. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:21:24, 3 April 2022 review of submission by LeoCampion

Hello, I'm so sorry to take up your time. If anyone has a moment free could they please help me and point out what specifically has made my article be declined. Is it a sentence or phrase? Do I need to add more references? I'd be very grateful for the help, thank you, Leo. LeoCampion (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LeoCampion (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LeoCampion The draft just tells about this organization and what it does. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Mostly you have cited name drops of the organization- this is insufficient. There must be significant, in depth coverage of the organization to summarize. It isn't more references that are needed, but better quality ones.
If you are associated with this organization, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, that's very useful and kind of you to help. LeoCampion (talk) 11:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:16:34, 3 April 2022 review of submission by QuantumMechanicsLover

QuantumMechanicsLover (talk) 12:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

QuantumMechanicsLover You can't "get out of this notability issue". No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. Popularity and fame is not the same as notability. As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:50:13, 3 April 2022 review of submission by Vinothcj

Annamalai was a popular IPS officer turned politician now in Tamil Nadu, I hope i have rectified all the citations which was mentioned as errors. Learning wikipedia by editing articles.

Cheers!

Vinothcj (talk) 17:50, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:03:17, 3 April 2022 review of submission by Bisti123123

Hey, i was wondering what more sourcing i need to get this site public? i do have some sites talking about this game but how can i know you guys consider them "legit"?

Bisti123123 (talk) 19:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has been rejected and tagged for speedy deletion, there is nothing you can do, there are zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:58:26, 3 April 2022 review of submission by Anasalaskari

Anasalaskari (talk) 22:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


April 4

Request on 00:37:01, 4 April 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by PetSematary182

I've edited and checked the sources on this article twice, with the same reviewer claiming that it relies too much on unreliable sources and isn't notable. I would like to challenge both of these claims. For one thing, the article includes both primary and secondary independent sources, including a published legal case that is noteworthy, a published book that mentions the case, a published magazine, videos and news articles. Secondly, Deborah Gail Stone is a notable figure for a variety of reasons, not merely her death, but also the social impact, legal impact, resurgence of her story in the digital age, and the accident's influence on Disney's decision to improve the safety features on its rides. If the argument the reviewer holds is that Ms. Stone herself is not notable as a person, then I could rename the article to reflect its focus on the case at hand that she was at the centre of rather than a biographical article, but I don't understand why this article keeps getting rejected, as it's been improved multiple times and cites a number of notable secondary sources. PetSematary182 (talk) 00:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)PetSematary182[reply]

PetSematary182 (talk) 00:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PetSematary182, Quora, Random youtubes, Top 10 lists, findagrave, Instagram... get rid of the junk sourcing. No Reviewer is going to approve an article with bad sourcing. When you have only actual reliable sources, re-submit.Slywriter (talk) 01:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, have done, but even at this point, with those sources now removed, that still leaves a number of valid primary and secondary sources, but the reviewer who keeps checking the article had no issue with the "junk" sourcing to begin with. They take issue with the notability of the subject, which seems strange considering that two published books (not self-published either,mind you), an official legal case digest from the state of California, a non-tabloid magazine, a news company and a filmmaker have all contributed coverage to the case extending beyond merely just a brief mention, whether Instagram, YouTube, Quora and all those other now-removed sources needed not to have applied. I've looked over what defines "notable" on Wikipedia when it comes to both historic cases and biographies of people, and this subject matter fits the criteria but for a few issues with the validity of contemporary sources, the majority of which, as you advised, have now been removed. PetSematary182 (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)PetSematary182[reply]
@PetSematary182: This falls under WP:1E as being known for a single event, but whether or not that one event is enough, the incident is also written about in America Sings#Deborah Gail Stone Incident. Perhaps do a redirect and improve that content instead? TechnoTalk (talk) 18:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:17, 4 April 2022 review of draft by Academician.NYAS

Hi, Academician Ljupčo Kocarev, as a President of Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts is clearly a relevant public person, so we will be grateful if someone correct or improve (Draft) article about him for English Wikipedia. Thanks!Academician.NYAS (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC) Academician.NYAS (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Academician.NYAS: I think your best chance to show notability is WP:NSCHOLAR, and the Google Scholar citations help. On the other hand, posting his writings about a political issue don't demonstrate notability, and clutter up the source section, per WP:OVERCITE. You need to include what others write about him. Has anyone written about him and discussed his political views? TechnoTalk (talk) 18:24, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I agree. You may edit all parts you think necessary. On my side I will not intervene on this Wikipedia with respect o this person any more. Besides, I am an amateur in editing. Some Macedonian editors should continue with any process left regarding the article. Sorry for any hardship or trouble. Best Regards, Academician.NYAS (talk) 20:11, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:10:39, 4 April 2022 review of draft by Tykosay


Hello, I am asking if my wikipedia page is ready to be resubmitted. The original edit request regarded a copy-pasted list of 20 key ideas that are essential to the page's subject. While the 20 lines were copy and pasted, I deleted them and resubmitted. The page was reviewed again and I was told that the Revdel was not completed. I must have done something incorrectly. Can you please tell me 1) if it is okay to quote from the source page (https://objectparadise.com/Manifesto) or 2) if I must delete this info (which I have), why the page has been declined again? Thank you.

Tykosay (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tykosay: After a quick review of the sources, there's little that suggests the organization meets Wikipedia's standard for notability. Please see WP:GNG. You want the sources to be less of what the organization and its partners write about it, and more about what independent writers write about it. TechnoTalk (talk) 18:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:29:34, 4 April 2022 review of submission by Colby221

Jared Goldsmith born in Livingston, New Jersey, Jared has been performing since the age of 5. As a child, Jared had his start in commercials for Quaker Oats (2003), Wendy's (2004) and Charmin (2004). He then began a voice-over-career on the Nickelodeon TV series Blue's Clues and its spinoff series Blue's Room. Jared went onto voice characters in the Warner Bros. film The Ant Bully (2006) and also landed a minor spot in the film Spider-Man 3 (2007). Jared has recorded many book series' such as Roscoe Riley Rules, Dan Gutman's My Weird School and Timmy Failure, for which Jared received the EarPhones Award by AudioFile Magazine (2015). He also danced multiple times in the Macy's thanksgiving day parade. Jared earned his BFA in Music Theatre from Elon University in May 2018. In August of that same year Jared began rehearsals for the First National Tour of Dear Evan Hansen, which officially opened on October 5, 2018. After playing Dear Evan Hansen to 25 cities, Jared took his final bow on the First National Tour September 22, 2019. Jared joined the Broadway company of Dear Evan Hansen on October 22, 2019 at the Music Box Theatre, where he was performing until the pandemic hit Broadway. In August 2021 Jared went viral on TikTok for his cover of Lemonade. It has over three million likes. On December 11th 2021 Jared helped reopen Dear Evan Hansen on broadway. He also landed a role in Disney's Better Nate than ever, playing the squeaky sophomore. Self proclamied bagel enthusiast.

Colby221 (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to suggest they are notable. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:41:29, 4 April 2022 review of submission by Showmewhatyouknow

Gayvn Locke is a game developer, an up in coming one in that, so I ask you to reconsider your decision. -Luke Showmewhatyouknow (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually nevermind I realized that they don't pass the test, mis read the rules. Showmewhatyouknow (talk) 20:42, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 5

01:52:49, 5 April 2022 review of submission by ICHx

There also exist a news article on the topic(https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/21/quite_ok_image_format/).

The entry is the only missing page under 'Graphics file format'. Thank you for reviewing the decision.

ICHx (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:45, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Valentinc9

Hello, I used references from Yahoo, Bloomberg, and local media outlets. The draft still got declined. Also, a scholarly article mentions the group. I'm not paid, but I mentioned that I might be paid in the future. I've received: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. How? I've seen a lot of pages with lesser information and sources. I think this is just ill will at this moment. Valentinc9 (talk) 06:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valentinc9 There is no "ill will" here. Please read other stuff exists. 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- this does not mean more can be added. In addition, the submission process has not existed the entire time Wikipedia has existed, and is not required of everyone(only new and unregistered users) so there are numerous ways to get something past us. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help out, you can identify inappropriate articles that you see for possible action.
The sources for your draft are almost exclusively press releases and announcements of routine business activities(such as opening a company facility). Wikipedia is not interested in the routine activities of a company. Any article about a company 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. As your draft does not do this, and the prospect of that happening seems low, the reviewer rejected your draft, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:56:19, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Alphaed

I trimmed the draft as possible. But posting is blocked. How i can submit an article for moderation? Alphaed (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alphaed The draft was rejected, meaning that resubmission is not possible. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company and what it does(such as the "solutions" it offers). Wikipedia articles about companies 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. If there is new information that the last reviewer did not consider, you must appeal to them directly. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alphaed, I previously rejected because you resubmitted without any attempt at improvement. While you have attempted some improvement, issues remain. 1) Please clarify your relationship with the subject per WP:COI and WP:PAID. 2) The article still has a completely unsourced section about services. 3) Sourcing still remains problematic, leaning heavily primary and passing mentions, If you want a another bite of the apple, please clean up these issues and identify WP:THREE independent secondary sources which discuss the subject and place them on the talk page of the draft.Slywriter (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:51:45, 5 April 2022 review of submission by LeoN4rdB0naks

LeoN4rdB0naks (talk) 13:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LeoN4rdB0naks You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not social media for you to tell the world that you like going to UMass games. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting a re-review because I have added a reference to the person the page is about. LeoN4rdB0naks (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LeoN4rdB0naks For additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. You seem to be writing about yourself; if so, please read the autobiography policy as to why this is highly discouraged. If you are not Mr. Banakos, you will need to change your username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS.
YouTube and Twitter are not reliable sources. As I said, Wikipedia is not a form of social media; it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Not every person merits a Wikipedia article. I don't think the fact that you attend UMass games is written about in independent reliable sources unless it is significant in some way. The draft was rejected, as I said, and won't be considered any more. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Social media-websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking, Wikipedia shares contend for social networking, does it not? LeoN4rdB0naks (talk) 14:46, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This has been some disappointing customer service. 1* LeoN4rdB0naks (talk) 14:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, absolutely not, Wikipedia does NOT share content for social networking. Theroadislong (talk) 14:49, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And we are not customer service.Slywriter (talk) 14:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LeoN4rdB0naks: That is because we are not a business and do not have "customers" as such. We are an encyclopaedia project, and our job here is to help users who are legitimately here to help build it, not those who only see it as a substitute for whatever social media platform. We have zero control over what content Facebook, Twitter, et al scrape from us, and in fact we receive a lot of complaints from users because this content tends to very quickly become outdated due to subsequent edits to the original article. We have zero tolerance for people editing Wikipedia simply to game a checkmark; the only reason that Facebook, Twitter, et al even have that as an option is for older people whose career largely predates the Internet writ large.
There is a very, very wide gulf between "creating and sharing content" and "social networking" - I create and share content every day outside of Wikipedia, but never to a mass audience. To assume that the two are the same is fallacious, and speaks more to your misunderstanding of Wikipedia than our (frankly minimal at worst) misunderstanding of social media. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:25, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:28:37, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Shehrozs

Hello,

I've completed a draft today for Bango plc and have added various references to coverage from neutral sources. I'm aware company material like blogs and press releases are not admissible, but feel the other coverage constitutes more than passing mentions. Would just like to notify in case other reviews are performed. Please inform me if the page can be approved in light of this, or whether additional material needs to be added.

Many thanks,

Shehrozs

Shehrozs (talk) 14:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shehrozs Wikipedia is not a place to document the existence of a company and tell what it does and/or who its customers are. Those are routine business activities that does not establish notability. A Wikipedia article about a company 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. Please read Your First Article. If you were to submit the draft as it is now, it would be declined again. What do others say is significant about the company(on their own, not based on materials it has been fed by the company? Is it dominant in its field? Has it created innovative business techniques? Influenced social policy or society? Just existing is insufficient for a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:23, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Rahamathullaitprof

Rahamathullaitprof (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rahamathullaitprof: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:27, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:50:45, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Cryptoluva

Genuinely confused what the issue is here? I Cited almost everything I included in the article fully, should I redo it without any of the information thats not cited in some random PR publication that got its actual information from the website of the platform? This rule makes no sense. Cryptoluva (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptoluva You have chosen to edit in a contentious area to start your editing "career", which will invariably result in you hitting many pitfalls along the way. This subject area has special rules, which I will inform you about on your user talk page. You appear to have a conflict of interest, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. A Wikipedia article is not for merely telling about a company and what it does or offers. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company(not based on materials it has been fed by the company) showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Mere existence is insufficient for this- others wholly unconnected with the company must have significant written about the importance of this company to establish notability. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 15:42, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can add to this a bit more beyond 331dot's on point assessment. This was also purely an advertisement as it only ever told the reader about the greatness of this product and all the wonderful features. It did not even attempt to explain the product in a neutral tone. If you decide you are going to continue to edit about this subject you will have to drop any form of promotion and stick to the facts as laid out by independent reliable sources. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 16:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:55, 5 April 2022 review of submission by DarylStories YT

DarylStories YT (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC) Why did my article get declined?[reply]

It wasn't declined it was rejected the topic (you) is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:48, 5 April 2022 review of submission by JM at Remitly

Hello! I'm a Remitly employee who recently had a proposed AfC draft for the company declined. The reason given was that the copy reads too much like an advertisement. I was wondering if someone might be able to point out which parts of it come across as dishonest or promotional? The draft is independently sourced and I tried to make sure it didn't hype up the company's accomplishments so much as neutrally describe Remitly and its technology. But I'm totally open to constructive criticism and want to understand what I could have done better. Thank you! JM at Remitly (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JM at Remitly The whole thing is promotional. You don't have to be soliciting customers or selling something. A Wikipedia article about a company must not merely document the existence of the company and describe its offerings. It must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage, and not based on materials from the company, have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Most of your sources seem to document routine business activities, which does not establish notability. Please read Your First Article.
The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor on their own takes note of a company in independent sources and chooses on their own to write about it. Trying to force the issue often does not end the way the company wants. 331dot (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:48:55, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Martinboyer

Martinboyer (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. IMDB is not considered a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 17:52, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:05:39, 5 April 2022 review of submission by Yosedelabianca

Yosedelabianca (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Why is this article considered advertising, when others in the same category (and linked in its content) aren't? I won't resubmit, but there doesn't seem to be a coherent policy on this regard.

Yosedelabianca Please read other stuff exists. 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. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help us out, please identify these other similar articles you have seen so we can take action. If you want to use other articles as an example or model, use those classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 18:24, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:51:13, 5 April 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by ChefBear01

I am looking to create a separate article that purely focuses on the comic series, I am unsure how to proceed to ensure it is as comprehensive as possible and could not expand the page due to not having a lot of experience creating articles on this topic (see talk page).ChefBear01 (talk) 19:54, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


23:48:40, 5 April 2022 review of submission by 2603:8001:6143:9E:6041:512D:47F:762C

2603:8001:6143:9E:6041:512D:47F:762C (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP, the draft was declined because of our policies against articles about events in the future (see WP:CRYSTAL). As the reviewer who declined the draft said, we shouldn't have any articles about these topics until some reliable information has been published, such as the hosting city. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 01:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 6

03:42:44, 6 April 2022 review of draft by VistaXL


I've just had an article rejected and would like some help correcting it.

VistaXL (talk) 03:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VistaXL (talk) 03:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined not rejected, it was declined because we already have an article on Recreational vehicle. Theroadislong (talk) 11:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:38:50, 6 April 2022 review of submission by DarylStories YT

DarylStories YT (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As above, your draft was rejected the topic (namely you) is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 12:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My [[1]] was declined with the below statement.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. 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. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please let me know how to improve it.

Thank you.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1081272209"