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 Rihards.veters (talk | contribs) at 11:10, 28 March 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
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 22

03:05:12, 22 March 2023 review of submission by Nroosovsky

How are the things he's been apart of relevant and have pages, but he is not relevant when he was an integral part of their success? Nroosovsky (talk) 03:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nroosovsky: "relevance", or lack thereof, isn't why this draft was rejected; notability is. Several reviewers have spent time and effort reviewing the draft, and providing feedback on it – have you read any of it? In any case, now that this draft has been rejected, it won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nroosovsky Notability isn't inherited, and it doesn't transfer "sideways". A notable person can write a non-notable book, and a notable book can be written by a non-notable person. What references do you have where others have written about him, in-depth? David10244 (talk) 06:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:36:42, 22 March 2023 review of draft by AhuraPardazeshIran


AhuraPardazeshIran (talk) 07:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AhuraPardazeshIran: what is your question? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:36:28, 22 March 2023 review of draft by BrightUK

Hi, Our Cumnor House School wikipedia pages keep being declined. As both schools are small they have limited secondary sources to use. I was wondering if you had any suggestions on getting an article accepted if they have very limited secondary sources, and how the school https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glendower_Preparatory_School got accepted with only 1 reference? We have added additional sources to Cumnor House School for Girls and sent this for re-review however these are the only sources they have. BrightUK (talk) 09:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BrightUK: by definition, Wikipedia only summarises what reliable sources have previously published about a subject. Moreover, in order to justify an article, we need to see significant coverage of the subject in multiple independent sources. From this it follows that if there are no, or not enough, such sources to cite, then it is not possible to create a Wikipedia article. (As for the Glendower article, that was created 15+ years ago when the rules on notability etc. may have been different; it has now been flagged as possibly non-notable. In any case, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.) Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rejection of article about the board game Freedom

I have already read the requirements for new Wikipedia before submitting the article, so the generic information didn't help me to understand the concrete reason for the rejection of the stub/draft. In particular, there are uncountably many similar articles, which are deservedly on Wikipedia that are incredibly similar to the proposed draft, see Kruzno_(board_game) as an example. And all of these articles are very valuable to have in Wikipedia, and exactly what I would expect to be in an encyclopedia. I want to add the article about the board game Freedom, because of my work on the page Games played with Go equipment, where I want to add this game. However, it does not yet exist on Wikipedia. It would also be an interesting addition to the List of abstract strategy games and enrich Wikipedia as an encyclopedia as a whole. The cited source is definitely independent and secondary, and I made sure to reformulate everything, so that there is no copy/paste. It is also reliable, because it matches with other checked sources. So please reconsider or advise what exactly needs to happen to get the draft accepted. Arminius4 (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised on my talk page, your single source is not reliable as it appears to be user edited. Theroadislong (talk) 13:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Arminius4: this draft was declined (not 'rejected', which would mean you're not allowed to resubmit it) because it fails to demonstrate that the subject is notable. Notability is shown by citing multiple independent and reliable secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject. The one source cited in this draft meets none of those criteria, and even if it did, it alone wouldn't be enough.
Moreover, that one source is cited only once, near the start of the draft, begging the obvious question –where is the rest of the information coming from? You need to support every material statement with a citation to a reliable source – or put it another way: your article should only be summarising what reliable published sources have said, citing each source against the information they provide.
And finally, there may well be other articles out there which don't meet our notability etc. standards, but that is no reason to create more of them. All new articles must comply with the guidelines and policies as they stand today. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:57, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Arminius4: I'm afraid the draft has been tagged as a copyright violation of the source you cited. It is a very close paraphrase of the source text – please follow that link to see why that is not acceptable. --bonadea contributions talk 14:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is paraphrased; For one, it is difficult to phrase some things very differently in this instance of a very short and concise text (try to say "the car is blue" in different words..). Additionally, some words had to be the same, as these are the officially used terms (e.g. "live" stones). I read the close paraphrase article (that I admit I hadn't seen before).
I can definitely add more citation marks within the text to make it clear that the information is taken from that reference. I can also add [1]as another source - please note, how the cited secondary source (igg) is also just a paraphrase of its primary source.
I do not think, that it should be a problem in this instance, as there are no creative expressions; all statements are facts ("the car is blue", not "the car glowed a soft blue, reminiscent of the azure of the sea."). There is no single sentence copied; only the structure of the article is similar (this is confirmed by the automatic analysis in the report).
A few rephrasings could also just remedy the problem. I do not believe that there is a moral or a legal issue. Especially now that I have found out that there was an apparently very similar Wikipedia article before and that the rules spread in very similar language across multiple sites.
The fact, that a third party web site took the effort to provide rules and implement the game on a game server is a clear indication of notability for me. Arminius4 (talk) 16:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem was not the use of specific terminology ("live" etc). That is, as you point out, not something that can be changed. It is also sometimes the case that there is only one possible way of phrasing a very short statement of fact, but that is irrelevant here; I can't see the deleted text, but the entire draft was in fact a copy of the source with some noun phrases and verbs replaced by near-synonyms, and a few other very minor changes. I'm afraid that is not acceptable. Plagiarism isn't something that can only happen in a particular register, and has nothing to do with whether the text states a fact or expresses an opinion, nor with how many adjectives there are. Ditto for copyright violations.
If you decide to create another draft about the game, do not try to rewrite a source text. It's very difficult to free oneself from the phrasing of the original text – instead, read the sources carefully, noting down key facts, and then write a draft based on your own keywords, afterwards checking the sources again to see that they are correctly represented. --bonadea contributions talk 09:44, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:20:13, 22 March 2023 review of submission by Manny Manatee

I am requesting a review, because this person is notable, and everyone keeps saying he is not. He has more than 2 million subscribers on YouTube, and is the most popular Madden/FIFA/2k YouTuber. Manny Manatee (talk) 16:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Manny Manatee: he could have 200 million subscribers, and that still wouldn't make him notable, because notability in Wikipedia terms is not measured in follower numbers or other such metrics. What we need to see is significant coverage of him in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources, and you've failed to provide those despite several opportunities; this is why the draft was rejected. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Manny Manatee What have others written about him, in-depth, not including interviews? That is what you need. David10244 (talk) 06:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

Request on 11:41:22, 23 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Alexisgaechter


Why my article has been rejecterd? Alexisgaechter (talk) 11:41, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexisgaechter: because it's bovine excrement. And unreferenced and non-notable bovine excrement, at that. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request on12:53:40, 23 March 2023 review of submission by Rukkha1024 for assistance on AfC submission by Rukkha1024


Rukkha1024 (talk) 12:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Rukkha1024? Your 'draft' consists of nothing but a single wikilink, hence why I declined it as a test edit.-- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:56, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:10:28, 23 March 2023 review of submission by CrunchyPixels

It was denied mainly due to sources, but the sources I picked are nearly the exact same as the Japanese version of the page on Wikipedia. It's also been labeled (from what I can tell) as a conflict of interest. I don't understand what the issues are here.

CrunchyPixels (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CrunchyPixels: each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own policies and requirements. Therefore what may be acceptable on the Japanese Wikipedia, may not be here on the English-language one (or vice versa, although usually the English one has the higher bar for acceptance).
It hasn't been 'labeled as a COI', the reviewer just drew your attention to that, reminding you that if you have a COI with regards to this subject, you need to declare it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:05:27, 23 March 2023 review of submission by Wikicontributor1993

I was wondering if anyone can review my draft Wikipedia page for The Ocean Foundation and let me know if it looks ok for re-submission. I had submitted it a few months ago and it was declined, but I hopefully addressed these issues and would appreciate any feedback. Thank you so much! :) Wikicontributor1993 (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wikicontributor1993: you're effectively asking us to review your draft now, and that's not how it works, I'm afraid. Submit your draft when you feel you've addressed the reason(s) for the earlier decline, and a reviewer will pick it up in due course. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:27, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, meant to post this on Teahouse! Wikicontributor1993 (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikicontributor1993 The Teahouse will probably give you the same answer. David10244 (talk) 06:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They didn't... they helped a lot actually and were much kinder on that page Wikicontributor1993 (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, good. David10244 (talk) 07:24, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

Request on 06:22:08, 24 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Catboy628

Hello, I had written this article with lots of sources and references but then, it is being declined for many times, this director is awarded in films festivals truly, I DID used the newspaper and many websites from internation films associations to prove it right... I really don't know why it's still not reliable... looks I need to give up writing in wikipedia, I am exhausted and really frustrated... can anyone give me a hand please? 🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺 thank you, much appreciated.

Catboy628 (talk) 06:22, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Catboy628: if you read the comments the reviewers have left, they're saying that there is too much unreferenced content: the first three paragraphs and the the infobox don't have a single reliable source (note that IMDb is not reliable, as anyone can edit it) yet they contain private personal details such as DOB which must be clearly supported. It's not enough that you cite some reliable sources in some parts of the draft – in simple terms, everything you write should only ever come from reliable sources, and should be referenced to tell us what those sources are. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hi DoubleGrazing,thank you for your advice, but i don't know what else could Catboy628 (talk) 12:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hi DoubleGrazing,
thank you for your advice, but i don't know what else i could do except giving up, since Catboy628 (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Catboy628 The issue is, "where did all of the other information come from", or "how do you know all of that?". Cite where the info came from. David10244 (talk) 06:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:29:53, 24 March 2023 review of submission by Alessandrogribaudo

Hi I'd like to know how to add external links for the italian wikipedia, because the english template for it is not supported on italian wikipedia and how to add sources also on that italian wikipedia

Appreciate

 Courtesy link: Draft:SKLERO (presumably?)

Alessandrogribaudo (talk) 15:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alessandrogribaudo: sorry, I'm not sure I understand... what exactly is it you want to do?
I notice that the draft is in Italian. Just to clarify, this is the English-language Wikipedia, and we can only accept articles in English. If you're trying to submit to the Italian Wikipedia, you will need to go to https://it.wikipedia.org/ -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:54:44, 24 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Ventura R. Alves


What is the main reason for my page to be delated and can it be fixed ?

Ventura R. Alves (talk) 15:54, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ventura R. Alves: because there is nothing there, but the title of a paper and an external link; these do not add up to a viable article draft, and could be seen as promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What can i do to see my " in risk of deletion page" being published ? can it still be fixed ?

Ventura R. Alves (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't start a new thread with each question, just add to the existing thread.
And please don't put your questions inside the section heading.
Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ventura R. Alves If, as experienced editor DoubleGrazing says, your draft is just a title and a link, then it cannot be published. And it's hardly worth retrieving either. David10244 (talk) 06:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:35:19, 24 March 2023 review of draft by Alfa137

My submission was rejected with the only negative comment being, "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes." I had references for anything I claimed to have done in the way of a publication. It would help me if you could give one example of a citation or footnote that should have been put in. I do not know of any statement I made that would need a footnote. Please help me with one example.

Alfa137 (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alfa137: the purpose of references in Wikipedia is to make it possible for the reader to verify the information in the article. A list of references is not a list of a person's publications, but a list of the independent, reliable sources used to support the content in the article. An example of a statement in the draft that has no footnote is "Jerrold Franklin graduated in 1948 from Stuyvesant High School, where he was awarded the algebra award." All information in a Wikipedia article, especially a biography about a living person, should be supported by a citation, although if the same source supports multiple claims that are presented together in the article, there is no need for multiple citation markers.
In addition, adding citation markers manually with square brackets doesn't follow Wikipedia's Manual of Style; you need to add the inline citations in a way that creates footnote links to the reference list, like this:[1] The blue text in the comment you quoted is, as you probably know, clickable links, and if you follow those links you will find more information about the relevant policies, as well as guides to how to insert inline citations in the text. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:53, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Alfa137: You may want to see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for more help. As editor Bonadea said above, "the purpose of references in Wikipedia is to make it possible for the reader to verify the information in the article." Putting numbers in square brackets like this [2] doesn't create a citation. To do that, you can use the "cite" button in the VisualEditor or use <ref> tags in source mode. Here's a basic source mode example:
<ref> {{Cite web |url=https://www.example.com |title=This is just an example |date=25 March 2023}}</ref>
That code generates a citation and a formatted reference, that looks like this: [2]
I hope this helps. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Reference text
  2. ^ "This is just an example". 25 March 2023.

Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC) [reply]

References

19:25:12, 24 March 2023 review of submission by 90.255.61.154

Do not reject this draft page. Or decline it. Just accept it. 90.255.61.154 (talk) 19:25, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been rejected. David10244 (talk) 06:49, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:35:51, 24 March 2023 review of submission by Twodonotsimply

I submitted this article and it was marked as being 'under review' about 11 days ago. The banner at the top of the page says to contact the live chat for help if it has not been reviewed within 12 hours which I did and I was redirected here. Just wondering what's going on with why it's the review still hasn't finished yet. Thanks! Twodonotsimply (talk) 19:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping to Robert McClenon who marked it as under review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize, and have marked it as no longer under review. I evidently was planning to review it, and was then distracted, and have forgotten about it, so I will leave it to another reviewer. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

Request on 06:46:28, 25 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Faran315

I am trying to add an article for a local social club that has historic significance. Multiple references have beeen provided but have failed to get the article approved. This is a venue that has city wide significance. Hence, the references available are also local and average sized websites. Please advise best course of action.

Faran 06:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

@Faran315: for notability, we need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources; this draft cites no such source. Also, too much of the content is unreferenced, and has been tagged as such, yet you have resubmitted without addressing the matter. Accordingly, I have had to decline this again, and I should warn you that if the issues highlighted aren't rectified, this is starting to run the risk of outright rejection. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:34, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. I will rework the language and try to find more reliable sources.
Thanks for your help. Faran 07:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faran315 (talk • contribs)
PS: And don't copypaste from external sources; the entire 'History' section was lifted off the club's website which is under copyright. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:41, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:33, 25 March 2023 review of submission by Its-unused

red-outlined triangle containing exclamation point Warning:This page was rejected.

/

comment

21:36:07, 25 March 2023 review of submission by Fredner1

Fredner1 (talk) 21:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Fredner1:, it looks like your draft has two problems right now: it's almost completely unsourced, which is especially problematic for a biography of a living person, and there's no indication of notability- that is, it doesn't seem that the subject merits its own article: the subject needs significant coverage in reliable sources. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:22:44, 25 March 2023 review of submission by Mdeditpro

You don’t have any proof I submitted good article about this person and I had many press to it so why declined it cause your reason is not genuine Mdeditpro (talk) 22:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay...
Not declined, though; rejected. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:51, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:29:18, 25 March 2023 review of submission by Mdeditpro

Please can anyone advise me what they actually mean here “Sources are PR pieces and nothing suggests subject can meet the notability guidelines” I submit a draft and this their reason why they declined it please tell how will solve this Mdeditpro (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Allpedia, press releases and wiki bio are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 22:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:50:17, 25 March 2023 review of draft by Jayneelyn

Hi, I have made revisions on the citations/references based on the comments given by contributors. Also, how do you disclose paid contributions in the aFC? I was only able to edit it in the user page.

Will highly appreciate your comments and suggestions. Thanks!

Jayneelyn (talk) 23:50, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayneelyn see WP:PAID; you disclose either on your own user page, or on the talk page of the article(s) affected, or both. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:49, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I already disclosed that the article is a paid contribution under the user page, as advised. Please see the revisions made. Thank you! Jayneelyn (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jayneelyn: thank you for disclosing that; however, please don't post the entire article draft on your user page (see WP:UP for advice on what content is allowed on user pages). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing noted on this. Thank you so much! Is there anything else I need to improve or revise? Thanks. Jayneelyn (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jayneelyn: yes, you will need to significantly improve the referencing – three sources, each only once cited, is nowhere near enough to support the article, as most of the content remains unreferenced. Please see WP:BLP for advice on writing and referencing articles on living people. TL;DNR = every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal and family details must be clearly supported by citing reliable published sources, or else removed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 26

00:09:39, 26 March 2023 review of submission by 24.45.0.66

I want to include a wiki page for Toy Story 3 in real life because I was inspired by the live action toy story wiki page.

24.45.0.66 (talk) 00:09, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Find three or more reliable and independent secondary sources that have covered that subject in significant depth and extent, and report back. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:25:14, 26 March 2023 review of draft by Snorlaxjen


Hi 

can you please help, I have submitted this page a couple of times but been told that the sources aren’t reliable, but I have reference back to major UK newspapers and websites such as the BBC which are trustworthy sources. This person also has sources related to Cambridge university and various mainstream media.  When I was told there were too many web sources I removed some to avoid confusion

Can you provide some further guidelines on what is acceptable source material in order to get this page approved ?

Thanks Snorlaxjen (talk) 11:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Snorlaxjen: the statement not adequately supported by reliable sources can mean two different things, either some or all of the sources aren't reliable, or the sources don't adequately support the draft. At a quick glance, I'd say both are the case here. Firstly, although there are indeed some reliable sources cited, others are distinctly non-reliable. Secondly, far too much of the content is unreferenced, incl. some private personal details (see WP:BLP about why this is a particular problem).
On a separate but related point, the sources may also not be sufficient to establish notability. Please see the general notability guideline for details of what sort of sources are needed for this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:40:40, 26 March 2023 review of draft by Rajmama


Rajmama (talk) 17:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Rajmama? The draft has been submitted and is awaiting review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 27

Biography Missing

Awlad Hossen Eshan biography was missing. He is an actor, author and musician. Itseshan (talk) 04:12, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Itseshan What do you need help with? David10244 (talk) 07:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:22:43, 27 March 2023 review of submission by Palangappa

Palangappa (talk) 13:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Palangappa: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]



13:44:07, 27 March 2023 review of submission by Palangappa


Hi, I am new to Wikipedia writing, I recently drafted a short article about PointCross Life sciences. Could you please tell what went wrong with that article? and what can be done to improve the article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PointCross Palangappa (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Palangappa: the draft is entirely promotional, with no substantive encyclopaedic content; also, the sources cited don't come even close to establishing the subject's notability per WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:14:27, 27 March 2023 review of submission by Chaimaa.M

I would love to hear some advice on how should I correct the draft, without being cancelled. Thank you for your time.

Chaimaa.M (talk) 16:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaimaa.M: sorry to say, but I think that's pretty much unsalvageable. Firstly, it is promotional. Secondly, it is almost entirely unreferenced. And thirdly, you say on the talk page that it is a translation of some website, which means that as a derivative work it is also quite likely a copyright violation. You should expect it to be deleted shortly. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I am requesting a re-review, because I want to understand my draft keeps being rejected and what can I do for it to be approved. Thank you Chaimaa.M (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaimaa.M: please don't start a new thread with each comment, just add to the existing one.
If it's a copyvio, there is nothing you can do to get it approved. We have an legal duty to prevent violations.
If you wish to write a new article, please see WP:YFA and WP:REF for advice. Oh, and you should also familiarise yourself with WP:CV. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:59:50, 27 March 2023 review of submission by Coldfire 1776

I submitted a poem, and a couple seconds later, it got declined. I would like to know the reason why!!!!

Coldfire 1776 (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Coldfire 1776: because this is an encyclopaedia, not a platform for publishing poetry. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So what?! This isn't fable and/or fairy tale publishing platform either! And guess what?! I STILL SEE TJOSE! Coldfire 1776 (talk) 19:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So what if it's not a poetry platform?! There's poetry on it!!!! It's also not a fable and/or fairy tale publishing platform, and I STILL SEE THOSE!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coldfire 1776 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Coldfire 1776: There are articles about notable poems, and about notable fairy tales, on Wikipedia. If your poem has been published and discussed by scholars or other people who are not connected to you, then there can be an article about it. But none of us can use Wikipedia to publish our own poems or stories. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but I'd like to know, why not? I mean, why do you have to become famous to share a poem with the world?! Coldfire 1776 (talk) 19:07, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you don't, but this isn't the platform to share it. Speak to a publisher or post it on social media. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:10, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're kidding me. Coldfire 1776 (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, enough now, please. We have 3,500 drafts to review. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're not welcome. Coldfire 1776 (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 28

09:32:47, 28 March 2023 review of submission by Auk lak

I am professional handball player with many years experience in leading European handball leagues. Have so many articles on Google about me (interviews, transfer news… ) so hope can help me to remove some mistakes in article and share it.

Auk lak (talk) 09:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Auk lak: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further.
Also, please see WP:AUTOBIO for all the reasons why you should not be writing about yourself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:10:22, 28 March 2023 review of submission by Rihards.veters

I'm wondering why I can't add my companies description to wikipedia? I understand that there are not many searches for it in English, but we're one of the largest marketing platforms in Latvia. And we're only getting bigger. Constantly adding new features and updating them. Should I add this article in Latvian instead? Rihards.veters (talk) 11:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1147021835"