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 Subscriptionapp (talk | contribs) at 07:50, 15 February 2023. 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


February 9

Request on 16:42:13, 9 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by امیررضا شریفی کلاکی



امیررضا شریفی کلاکی (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:18:25, 9 February 2023 review of submission by BenTuck34

I would like to have a wiki article. I took the paper about me signing the decloration of independence. :-( BenTuck34 (talk) 18:18, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BenTuck34 You would only merit a Wikipedia article if independent reliable sources choose on their own to give you significant coverage, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. This isn't social media where existence permits you an article. If you do merit an article, you or your associates shouldn't be the one to write it, please read the autobiography policy. Please also read about the good reasons that an article is not desirable. 331dot (talk) 18:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:40, 9 February 2023 review of draft by 2405:201:3002:A025:1CED:ADEB:26EE:8FAF


2405:201:3002:A025:1CED:ADEB:26EE:8FAF (talk) 18:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, so it's difficult to help you. 331dot (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:51, 9 February 2023 review of submission by ZacSifron

Hello! I wrote up this article specifically for Wikipedia, and I also supplied the text to the Association of Jewish Libraries, who put it on their website before my draft was approved. The first draft was deleted for copyright infringement, so I had the AJL send a release of copyright according to the instructions at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries. I recreated the draft and put {{Permission pending}} in the talk page. The submission was then declined due to the same copyright issues before the permissions were assessed. Am I missing something? ZacSifron (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The template you show indicates that the volunteer response team has not yet assessed the email. When they do the template will be replaced with a permission notice. Until then, the material is STILL a copyright violation. Also a straight copy of an organization's website is not usually appropriate for an encyclopedia article. They are publicizing the collection. An encyclopedia article should be neutral information about the museum. Leave out most of the stuff about the collection - do a brief summary. Add the history, rewriting it in your own words. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did write the history in my own words. I did not copy from Klau Library's website. I provided the write-up to another organization collecting information on Jewish libraries. That website published my draft before it was processed on Wikipedia. They have submitted a request to release my work because of the copyright confusion. Thank you for the feedback about the content. I'll take a look at it and at other major research libraries' pages. ZacSifron (talk) 18:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 10

Request on 01:09:11, 10 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Jerdwyer


Hello, thanks to Greenman you for the review of my Layser cave submission. I found additional sources, including a US forest services page which describes the cave as "one of the most significant archaeological sites in western Washington."<https://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/giffordpinchot/recarea/?recid=31348>

But information on the cave is scarce. The forest service page says barely more than that and all the other pages only repeat what is on the interpretive signs at the cave itself. Would that move it into the notable category?

After reading the notability requirements, I figured maybe it belonged as part of another article, so I added it to the list of notable places in the <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gifford_Pinchot_National_Forest#Points_of_interest> entry.

Jerdwyer (talk) 01:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:21:16, 10 February 2023 review of submission by Qnique


Qnique (talk) 04:21, 10 February 2023 (UTC) all is ok but they decline the post said just give relible sources , i use most of references from govermets but .....they decline multiple time[reply]

12:09:13, 10 February 2023 review of submission by Stefani94

UPE, among other issues. Editor is now blocked.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



Please I would like to have an opinion if there is any chance to make this post happen. This is all the valid reference I got. Sir is a well known Australian filmmaker but not a lot of articles was written about him. I would strongly appreciate help or any pointers on how make this work, because I tried everything. Thank you Stefani94 (talk) 12:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC) Please if there is anyway that references can be accepted. I would need help with any possible solution for this 13:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Stefani94 (talk)[reply]

Stefani94, Remove all material not supported by a source. You are ignoring the comments by reviewers which have told you that you have far too much information that show no citation and can not be verified. A short well-sourced article is far more likely to be accepted. Also, f you know the subject, see WP:COI about declaring relationships, WP:AUTO about why biographies can be bad, and WP:PAID if you are receiving compensation. Also check out this guide for further information on editing. Slywriter (talk) 14:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Would you be kind enough and view my article Draft:Michael Nicholson#cite note-2 one more time and give me a feedback if this is better! Thanks! Stefani94 (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop soliciting multiple offers to review your draft. That can take place on the article's talk, or your own, where it already is. If the rejection is removed, you can submit it again.
cc @JCMLuis @Timtrent @Theroadislong
Note, thank you for making appropriate paid disclosures @Stefani94. Star Mississippi 18:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems the invoice is not getting paid. Or, if the editor is employed, the employer has an unreasonable expectation. I have now been asked multiple times on my own talk page to re-review. It is not going to happen 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User is now blocked. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

13:33:13, 10 February 2023 review of submission by Razer2115

I came across this on NPP.I found that the article has failed an AFD more than 2 years back and was subsequently rejected as AFC. Digging deeper I found a lots of confusion regarding the subject and notability among the reviewing editors and administrator. I will try to clear the points

  • The Person was a somewhat famous police officer who joined BJP - Which is the current ruling party of India. The original article was created at that time and was subsequently deleted through AFD.
  • However since then, He has risen to be the state chief of tamil nadu for the BJP and has been receiving significant media coverage.
  • Now the confusing part - There is already an article named - K. Annamalai . Who is a former MLA of Tamil Nadu state assembly and since then has retried from public life.
  • The numerous attempts to hijack that article to this and the numerous attempts to create an article for this person is not due to some nefarious reason, but because he has been receiving significant media coverage for the last 2 years. If you will search K Annamalai on google, You will find thousands and thousands of news stories about this guy. I am sure readers are googling this guy, Landing up on K. Annamalai and trying to change it or creating new articles.
  • I mean , its absurd to me that the guy doesn't have a Wikipedia page, Anyone remotely following Indian politics will know that he passes WP:GNG and WP:NPOL . Its akin to GOP Chair for Texas state committee not having a wikipedia article.

Razer(talk) 13:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another Thing I forgot to mention is that the person is more commonly known as " K. Annamalai " and not Annamalai Kuppusamy. Googling K. Annamalai will fetch far more accurate results. Razer(talk) 13:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Razer2115 Not every regional head of a political party merits a Wikipedia article. The head of the Maine Republican Party typically does not unless they already held elected office. It depends on the coverage in independent reliable sources. Most sources about such people describe their activities, or quotes from them articulating the positions of the party or endorsing candidates- all routine coverage that does not establish notability. Sources need to describe his significance or influence, either as a party head or as a police officer. Did he establish a new policy of some kind? Move his party in a particular direction due to his influence? Things like that. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The preferred term is "article", not "page", which has a broader meaning than article. 331dot (talk) 13:46, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the majority of the news article will be obviously be routine in nature due to him being in the public sphere. Tamil Nadu is one of the largest state in India and BJP is currently the largest party in India. Apart for the usual politics stuff. there are numerous another special coverages like - Him being the youngest state president ever - 1 , In depth policy articles - 2 , him being the only BJP state president to invited for president dinner - 3 . Razer(talk) 14:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from that, I am sure the head of Maine republican party is not subject to extensive media coverage where almost a dozen article is being written about him daily. Razer(talk) 14:11, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dozen articles written daily about them? Or daily passing mentions and policy quotes? There's a significant difference and such a hyperbolic statement implies that numerous in-depth sources discussing the subject exist, so please provide them as this should be a no-brainer then. Slywriter (talk) 14:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure I fully understand what kind of coverage you are referring to but here are few links I could find from a cursory search ( Apart from the one mentioned above . - 1 , 2, 3 , 4 , 5 . Its also worth seeing the google trends for the term "K Annamalai" 6. I have compared it to the maine republican chief just as a reference point for the Non Indian editors and not to start a straw argument. Razer(talk) 14:38, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even the term "K Annamalai Wikipedia" has a fairly high google trend score - 1 and may explain the persistent creation of articles for this topic. Razer(talk) 14:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some more in depth coverage - 1, 2 , 3 Razer(talk) 15:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That he was given a security detail isn't significant coverage of him. Nor is his having dinner with the Prime Minister. There is one piece which says he has attracted young people to the party because he is young, but that doesn't speak to any particular influence on his part(any young person might have done that). 331dot (talk) 09:50, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: WP:NPOL is clear - " The following are presumed to be notable: Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. " . The subject is - A) A major local political figure by virtue of being the state president of the state of Tamil Nadu for BJP, which is currently the ruling party of India. and B) Has received significant media coverage as shown by various links and google trends. Am I reading WP:NPOL wrong or missing something ? Razer(talk) 21:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And before you dismiss the significant media coverage by selectively picking out my links - Here are the example of significant media coverage - 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 5, 6 Razer(talk) 21:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like I'm going around in circles now; maybe some others will offer their views here. 331dot (talk) 23:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The reference section of WP:NPOL clearly explain about significant media coverage as - "A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists".
I do not understand how you have come to your own version of significant media coverage for politicians. As I see here , The subject might not pass your version of notability criteria but it certainly passes WP:NPOL . Razer(talk) 23:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:35:52, 10 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by 182.54.155.36



182.54.155.36 (talk) 13:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:08:41, 10 February 2023 review of draft by LeGoldenBoots


Hello, I'm having trouble finding some other sources for this song draft and other things to write about that are associated with the song. But mainly sources, as most of the sources that are covered on this topic are 3rd party.

LeGoldenBoots (talk) 14:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LeGoldenBoots Most of the sources seem to just document the availability of the song, and are not significant coverage of it(like an unsolicited critical review). You write that it's known for being used in a video game, but have no sources documenting that. If you do not have independent sources with significant coverage, the song would not merit an article. 331dot (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:14:59, 10 February 2023 review of draft by 112.206.193.27


pls accept
1. creating page (disambiguation)
2. accept reviewer
112.206.193.27 (talk) 14:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

accept (disambiguation) page SM Mall 112.208.236.28 (talk) 02:51, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:07:47, 10 February 2023 review of draft by GMorris419


I need help understanding what needs to be updated on my submission (Sugar Valley Rural Charter School) before it can be submitted as an article. I'm not sure what specific criteria I'm not meeting.

GMorris419 (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, Wikipedia has zero interest in your mission statement, that is just promotion, articles should be based on what reliable independent sources say about your school. Theroadislong (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:43:07, 10 February 2023 review of draft by Yhyhyhyhy


Yhyhyhyhy (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


February 11

00:12:31, 11 February 2023 review of submission by DarkKingLuffy


DarkKingLuffy (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2023 (UTC) Why did my draft get declined[reply]

01:36:03, 11 February 2023 review of submission by Rajmohanaushik


Rajmohanaushik (talk) 01:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rajmohanaushik, provide sources in the article as the previous reviewers have requested. As it stands there are zero. Slywriter (talk) 01:38, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:43:08, 11 February 2023 review of draft by Scribes52


Scribes52 (talk) 09:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My original draft contained a paragraph where I unwittingly let personal emotion through with the wording "Sadly, ...". I have now changed that into an entirely factual account. I have also read through the entire draft to try to ensure that everything is factual, unemotional, and supported by numerous references. If it is felt that anything still needs attention I would be pleased to do that and would appreciate specific pointers to the paragraphs concerned.

16:10:37, 11 February 2023 review of submission by Örverpi

Hello, I see you declined my draft for this page stating that 3 sources are from the same website. This shows that you didn't actually check the sources. Yes 3 sources I referenced are from the same website and it's because it's an archive for old newspapers in Iceland. They are all different if you actually check the link. The 4th source is an open report from the Icelandic safety transportation board with help from the NTSB and Sikorsky aircraft. Kind Regards. Örverpi (talk) 16:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Örverpi I'm fairly sure the reviewer looked at the sources. Instead of citing the website which hosts the newspaper articles, you should cite the articles themselves, just as if you found them in a physical library(you wouldn't cite the library, you would cite the newspaper. It's the same with an online archive). 331dot (talk) 08:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:42:09, 11 February 2023 review of draft by Mlsmith1962


Hello - I have made edits to the article based on feedback received in the initial review. I have seen references to adding audio materials, and found an interview between the songwriter and one of the artists who has covered the song on youtube, that provides additional information on the writing of the song. I have two questions. Can I include the interview as a link in the interest of including audio information about the song? Or would it be preferable to create a background section citing the interview as a reference? Thank you! Mlsmith1962 (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mlsmith1962 Note that interviews do not establish notability, which is mainly what this process is concerned with, because it is the person speaking about themselves or their own work, and Wikipedia is primarily interested in what independent reliable sources say about a topic. You can certainly include an interview, but it doesn't contribute to notability. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:16, 11 February 2023 review of submission by GXRG


GXRG (talk) 18:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GXRG You edited your user page, which is not article space, but a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor only. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. If you still want to attempt it, please use WP:AFC. 331dot (talk) 20:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:48:19, 11 February 2023 review of submission by 66.119.24.210

I just don't get why you would ever deny my religion like that. What's the reason?

66.119.24.210 (talk) 20:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No one is denying your religion, but for it to merit a Wikipedia article, independent reliable sources must choose on their own to write about it, establishing that it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Once you have a few million followers and the news takes note of your religion, then come back. I suggest you use social media to tell the world about your religion. 331dot (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 12

03:18:50, 12 February 2023 review of submission by RobertB71


The page describes a band with thousands of views on Youtube, with extensive coverage on Google, see search results here: https://www.google.com/search?q=thr%C3%B6nn

The band is genuine, has released an EP - with verifiable sources provided on the Wikipedia page.

I don't understand why it has been marked NOT notable.

Please re-review. Thanks.

RobertB71 (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a new paragraph has been added about the innovative approach to christian music that the band perceives as somewhat stereotyped.
Their biggest influence is Polyphia - which also started as a christian band.
Have you even tried to listen to their music? It's a progressive EDM combined with metal.
This is no ordinary "church band" and it most certainly deserves to be on Wikipedia. RobertB71 (talk) 03:25, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RobertB71 The only sources you offer just serve to document the availability of their music, which is completely irrelevant to if they merit an article or not. Anyone can post music to the internet these days. A Wikipedia article about a band must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the band, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable band. Please read Your First Article. If the band meets at least one aspect of the notability criteria, a re review may be possible if you start from scratch(you may simply blank the draft and start over), summarizing what independent reliable sources say about the band. If you have no such sources, or the band does not meet the criteria, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:42:23, 12 February 2023 review of submission by 2A02:CB80:4226:2047:EDC1:D69E:51C6:5DB


2A02:CB80:4226:2047:EDC1:D69E:51C6:5DB (talk) 12:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but two weblinks will never be accepted as an article. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:13:39, 12 February 2023 review of draft by Karpour


This article was rejected on the basis of sources being primary. The issue is that sources are hard to find.

There is almost no published press about this event, as press was not invited. The only exception is Computer Chronicles, which was the only TV show to do extensive coverage of ETRE. I could include a mention of this in the article, but adding these episodes as sources do little more than confirm the location and attendees of certain ETRE editions.

I can provide sources for dates and locations of ETRE editions, but these are mostly directly taken from the respective website of the event. And it feels like adding a citation for every single date an annual event took place would clutter up the page. This is also not done on other annual event pages.

The best source I have is a cache of scanned correspondence which the Computer History museum digitized upon my request.

I'm looking forward to constructive input on getting this page ready. Please keep in mind that - apart from computer chronicles episodes and more ETRE websites from the internet archive - there are few additional sources available. In my opinion this event is still notable enough in that it is long running and influential to warrant a Wikipedia page.

Thank you.

Karpour (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there are few sources then it is a very strong indication that the topic is not notable, Wikipedia requires there to be significant coverage in reliable independent sources to justify there being an article. Theroadislong (talk) 18:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only one media outlet was allowed to report from this event, the coverage is fairly extensive though. Any claim in the article is supported by sources. Whether this event itself is notable enough should not be decided on a whim based on the fact that few sources are available as of now. The issue is that most secondary sources would be in magazines that are not (yet) digitized. Karpour (talk) 19:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since I have been accused of being a paid editor, let me clear up my motivation for creating this article. I run a project for the Internet Archive to properly archive all episodes of the TV show Computer Chronicles. For this I had to do research on several conferences, including ETRE. See https://computerchronicles.karpour.net/
I am not affiliated in any way with this conference or any person involved in organizing this conference.
You can watch episodes covering ETRE here: https://archive.org/details/computerchronicles Karpour (talk) 19:56, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sources do not have to be online or digitised. Theroadislong (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:53:23, 12 February 2023 review of submission by CHAINA CHIRKOFF


CHAINA CHIRKOFF (talk) 22:53, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello please tell mw why you have reject it?

Hi @CHAINA CHIRKOFF: read through the decline notice. In-depth coverage from reliable sources is required and the draft has no sources nor any indication it could meet the notability criteria. S0091 (talk) 22:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 13

00:38:38, 13 February 2023 review of submission by PeterSmith6396


PeterSmith6396 (talk) 00:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added more relevant information, he is also a really famous game creator.

00:40:43, 13 February 2023 review of submission by PeterSmith6396


PeterSmith6396 (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I added more relevant information, he is a well known game creator.

(didnt mean to send a message twice

05:58:30, 13 February 2023 review of submission by Ninanicolletti


Ninanicolletti (talk) 05:58, 13 February 2023 (UTC) My submission is for Anthony Michael Nicolletti. This was my father with whom I interviewed before his death. I am having problems creating links to other pages for name association, places, schools, organizations, and etc. With this I want to associate his life to other people he was friends or employed by and other points of interest. Thank you.[reply]

Stephenie Price (Nina Nicolletti)

Ninanicolletti Before you worry about creating links, you need to establish that your father meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, through summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him. An interview is not acceptable for establishing notability, as it is the person speaking about themselves. There is also no way to independently verify the content of your interview. Your personal thoughts("Stephenie ("Nina") had a fond relationship with Anthony") are not acceptable article content as they too are impossible to independently verify. Please read Your First Article, as well as conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:41:52, 13 February 2023 review of submission by XACAT


XACAT (talk) 13:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Tokugaw Iechiyo has no content, so there is nothing to review? Theroadislong (talk) 13:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@XACAT An article about this person already exists at Tokugawa Ieyasu, where you are welcome to improve it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:20:36, 13 February 2023 review of draft by CastJared


Um, I copied multiple related controversies from 8 HBO series into this page, including 1 film, I need help for this, expand to include more controversies involved. CastJared (talk) 17:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I shortened them on Game of Thrones, Girls, Euphoria, and Leaving Neverland. CastJared (talk) 19:15, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:29, 13 February 2023 review of submission by Rsimpson3490


Hello, my name is Robert Shiloh Simpson. I am a new-coming up Rap Artist, and college student. This page "Robertsky" has been messing with my Wikipedia artist page. I believe it is my step-sister and my step-father, I know this because he believes we share the same name and I am his junior even though we do not share the same middle name. My step-sister always said to me she wanted to name her "daughter" "Sky" so I do not believe in this coincidence. These two people mentioned are trying to sabotage my Rap career. Please do not allow this "Robertsky" page to review my wikipedia page. I have muted them from my notifications already. Thank you. Robert Shiloh "Shy Stacks" Simpson Rsimpson3490 17:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Robert Shiloh "Shy Stacks" Simpson Robert Shiloh "Shy Stacks" Simpson Rsimpson3490 17:27, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have rejected your draft I'm afraid, there was zero evidence that you could pass WP:GNG, or WP:NSINGER. Wikipedia is not for "new-coming" talents I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:24:46, 13 February 2023 review of submission by JuMu411

I cited three independent and reliable sources that should meet the notability requirement but the draft was not accepted. I could possibly find a few more sources if needed but I would first like to know what the ones I have already cited are not adequate. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuMu411 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Large portions of the draft are unsourced. One source was the New York Times, but only gives a date; there should be enough information for someone to locate the source if they wished(author, page number, etc. 331dot (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:19:53, 13 February 2023 review of submission by Tt78155


This article is not a user guide - it is an overview of some of the archival holdings in the VOCES oral history project.

Tt78155 (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC) Tt78155, See WP:NOT but Wikipedia is also not a a portal to assist people in finding specific collections. It is also not a place to solicit submissions. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with articles that summarize what reliable sources say about a subject with limited use of their own words, publications, and documents. If the organization can meet WP:NORG, then you need to demonstrate independent sourcing that shows WP:Notability and remove everything not covered by those sources. Slywriter (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:55:20, 13 February 2023 review of submission by Csimmsclark1790


I feel I have provided enough solid sources to warrant publication and prove notoriety. While the initial entry very much did not come from a neutral point of view, I feel it has been properly altered to feel more encyclopedic and in line with the tone of other local/regional publication entries. Csimmsclark1790 (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Csimmsclark1790 We're looking for not "notoriety"(which has a slight negative connotation) but notability. I can't say I disagree with the comments left by reviewers on the draft. Typically rejected drafts can't be resubmitted. If you have new information the last reviewer did not consider, the first step is to ask them to reconsider. 331dot (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 14

02:27:04, 14 February 2023 review of submission by Thepres1s Stuff

I updated things, and I bet that other pages here have around 1 million downloads yet you reject Progressbar95 for being "not notable" Also, references has been fixed. Thepres1s Stuff (talk) 02:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has a single reference to progressbar95.fandom.com/wiki/Progressbar95_Wiki that is NOT a reliable independent source and the draft was correctly rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 10:43, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for Perplex Cities EP, Serj Tankian (Submitted 03.02.23, declined)

Hi so basically I tried writing a bit on the latest EP by S. Tankian and it got rejected Honestly there isn't a whole lot of stuff about the EP online, so I'm kinda bummed on what I could add to it now I took the same structure as the previous EP, Elasticity, but significantly fewer sources are available for this one ... TheÆtherPlayer (talk) 09:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:09, 14 February 2023 review of submission by Bilwal20


Bilwal20 (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bilwal20 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about someone- please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bilwal20 Please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 11:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:45:07, 14 February 2023 review of submission by Waheeddehaw


Waheeddehaw (talk) 14:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Waheeddehaw You don't ask a question, but a test edit will not be accepted as an article. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:15:09, 14 February 2023 review of submission by HayaSim


Hello, I want to now why the page is refused as Pierrick Pédron in one of the most important Sax player and has a solid career. Thank you very much. Haya

HayaSim (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HayaSim I've fixed the link for you- we don't need the whole url. The reason for the decline was given by the reviewer at the top of your draft. Do you have a specific question about it? 331dot (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:39:12, 14 February 2023 review of submission by GreenEli

I have been working on a draft for this article over the past few months, basically tearing it down to the bones left by its original creator and editors, and building it back up again into a more accurate and neutral article on its subject.

I've submitted it for AfC, as I think its details are ready, but I believe I've left an issue with the layout, having unintentionally created a second reference section with a reference to an external link that does not mention the subject herself (rather, her great grandfather). My understanding is that references should directly mention an article's subject, so it didn't qualify for inclusion in the article body. But I didn't want to simply leave out this reference, or the external link from which it came, as I think it's important to her ancestry. As such, I removed the reference from where it originally lay in the article body, placed it on the external link, but that also created this second reference section (which I named in the meantime, until someone with knowledge about how such a reference should appear corrects its placement/appearance). Can anyone let me know whether or not this needs to be changed, and, if it does, how to do that (or, if it's not too much trouble, make the change yourself)?

There is also a script warning that appears when I check Preview in Edit source, from some script left over from the previous editors. I'm not well-versed enough to pick that out and fix it.

Apologies if this should have been asked in the Teahouse instead. Wasn't sure about where it was better to inquire.

Thank you, GreenEli (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 15

Request on 07:50:30, 15 February 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Subscriptionapp


I wank to know why my article is decline so i can resolve my article problem


Subscriptionapp (talk) 07:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1139463044"