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 Thehoaderr (talk | contribs) at 14:51, 1 April 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 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]
Courtesy link: Awlad Hossen Eshan -- speedily deleted for lacking a claim of notability thrice in mainspace and also speedied four times in draftspace, primarily for being overly promotional --Finngall talk 22:33, 30 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]

@Rihards.veters: because that draft is not only completely unreferenced with no evidence of notability, but it's also pure advertising.
Whether or not you can get this included in the Latvian Wikipedia, I've no idea, since that's a completely separate project; you'll have to enquire with them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so how should I rewrite it so it's not being deleted but added to Wikipedia? What do you mean there're no evidence? There are plenty of posts, articles around the internet about Dalder.lv.
For example here:
https://kursors.lv/2020/08/13/dalder-lv-sludinajumu-portals-ko-mes-jau-sen-bijam-pelnijusi/
https://talsi.pilseta24.lv/zina?slug=dalder-lv-jaunakas-paaudzes-sludinajumu-portals-pieejams-ari-talsu-iedzivotajiem-759247827d
https://zz.lv/nekustamais-ipasums-jelgava-ar-dalder-lv/
https://rekurzeme.lv/nekustamais-ipasums-liepaja-drosak-dalder-lv/
and many more. Rihards.veters (talk) 11:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And everyone is able to check Latvian company registry site to find out all details about company it self, like legal information etc. https://company.lursoft.lv/lv/dalder/40203006313 Rihards.veters (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rihards.veters: I meant there is no evidence of notability in the draft, because it doesn't (didn't; it has since been deleted) contain a single reference. It's not our job to go hunting for evidence somewhere on the internet; the onus is on you as the article creator to provide that evidence, correctly cited, and sufficient to establish the subject's notability per the general notability guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks for your replies and I promise that I'll add more precise facts with references about my future articles which could again include Dalder.lv Rihards.veters (talk) 19:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rihards.veters Be sure to read WP:REFB for some useful information. David10244 (talk) 08:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


March 29

01:34:35, 29 March 2023 review of draft by Owlz r radz

why cant i access my draft when im trying to write down the holiday tradions on google docs

Owlz r radz (talk) 01:34, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Owlz r radz: the reason why you cannot access this draft is because it has been deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:46:03, 29 March 2023 review of submission by Mathiasferre

I dont understand why Nordisk Film & TV Fond gets declined. Please see; https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordisk_Film_%26_TV_Fond

Mathiasferre (talk) 08:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathiasferre: it was declined for the reasons given in the decline notice – did you read it? That is, there is no evidence that the subject is notable, and because the sources are primary, they cannot be used to independently verify the information. (The fact that an article on this subject may exist in other language versions of Wikipedia is neither here nor there.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:06:00, 29 March 2023 review of submission by 118.211.45.84

118.211.45.84 (talk) 09:06, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:45:56, 29 March 2023 review of submission by DoctorDaleks

Hey, can I please get some clarification on why the article was declined(within seconds) I'm wondering what makes it not notable? is it the text, sources or subject matter?


Kind thanks for your help

DoctorDaleks (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorDaleks: it is the sources; notability is established by citing appropriate sources, from which it follows that lack of such sources is what makes a subject non-notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:12, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:29:56, 29 March 2023 review of draft by Dharable


I am looking for advice on how to ensure that this does not read as an advertisement and has a completely neutral point of view. Thanks for your help!

Dharable (talk) 16:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharable: the fundamental problem with this draft is that it gives no reason why this, seemingly ROTM business should be included in a global encyclopaedia. Just existing isn't a reason, nor is offering some services. Therefore, as it stands, this draft appears to just try to 'make people aware' of the company, which is pretty much the definition of promotion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:00, 29 March 2023 review of submission by GSH2023

GSH2023 (talk) 20:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:16:17, 29 March 2023 review of draft by Connex Global


Hello. I need help understanding the reasons why my article was denied. The message says it needs more links. How many links? Do you have a more specific suggestion?

Connex Global (talk) 21:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Connex Global It is not just the number of sources ("links") but the quality of the sources. The sources you have are poor, either not reliable and/or not independent. For example, Canada Homestay Network is neither reliable (no editorial oversight or history of fact checking) nor independent (they offer the service so are affiliated with them). Generally it is best to stick with mainstream media sources, such as reputable newspapers. I suggest thoroughly reading the the sourcing and notability criteria for companies. S0091 (talk) 21:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 30

My draft declined

Draft:Exim Bank of India

why my draft was declined and what it is there to improve? Please someone help me... DilipSpatel (talk) 05:16, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DilipSpatel: it was declined for the reasons given by the reviewer in the decline note and the accompanying message – did you read those? In any case, you have resubmitted it, so now you just need to wait for it to be reviewed again. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DilipSpatel (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DilipSpatel Something I noticed that you should fix is the long string of references you have put in the "Chronology" heading. Move them to apropriate places in the body text, or remove them if they are redundant. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok DilipSpatel (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:08:44, 30 March 2023 review of submission by EvolutionSOS

Hi,

I'm confused. I submitted my draft but at one point move it to the sandbox as it asked me to. But then I think it went back into drafts. I'm just trying to get the article approved, but I don't know the status of it or what I need to do.

Please help!

The article is a biography about Jonathan Richard Truss. EvolutionSOS (talk) 10:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EvolutionSOS:
You had created this draft in your user page, which isn't the place for developing article content, so it was moved soon after to its current location in the draft space. There is a redirect from your user page to that draft, which could be deleted. The draft is currently awaiting review.
You also created a blank sandbox at User:EvolutionSOS/sandbox, and for some reason submitted that for review on 10 March, but it was declined as we cannot consider blank drafts.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for your reply. To clarify, there's nothing I need to do now then? Apart from wait! Many thanks EvolutionSOS (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:17:33, 30 March 2023 review of submission by Laughingcloud917

I need help getting this page published. What, exactly do I need to include/omit in order to correct this page. Girl Named Nino is a legitimate working artist with releases, and tour dates along with collaborations as an indie musician. Thanks!

Laughingcloud917 (talk) 16:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need reliable independent sources, Spotify, Bandcamp and Wikipedia are NOT reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 16:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:18:36, 30 March 2023 review of draft by Franny Kelly


Franny Kelly (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Franny Kelly? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:41, 30 March 2023 review of draft by Nietabieta


Hi, I am working on responding to the comments provided and will edit the article accordingly. Thank you for the feedback.

Is there a way to link my English draft version of the article to one that was written in French: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polly_Ferman?

Nietabieta (talk) 17:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nietabieta, the interlanguage links can only be added after the article is published. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


March 31

00:01:56, 31 March 2023 review of draft by 122.53.46.31


my draft as 10 refs and done 122.53.46.31 (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question you wish to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This was discussed, on two different dates I believe, at the Teahouse. You have been given answers over there. Let us know if you have trouble understanding the info you have been given. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now at AfD. David10244 (talk) 08:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

01:08:46, 31 March 2023 review of draft by IrisSpine

Hi there! I am trying to edit the page Michael Alan Herman and I received a notice that the sources are not professional/all primary, but I included sources from Deadline and Fangoria. I'm curious about what I am doing wrong. Am I citing the sources wrong? Thank you for your time and help!

IrisSpine (talk) 01:08, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@IrisSpine: notability per WP:GNG requires multiple published sources that are at once secondary, published, reliable, independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage of the topic. The three sources you're citing in this latest version of the draft are all about the podcast, making only passing mentions of Herman, and they therefore fail the significant coverage requirement of the notability guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your help! I really appreciate your time and expertise here. I have more sources in there that discus Michael's career now. IrisSpine (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

02:00:46, 31 March 2023 review of draft by Kaunitzj


I am new to Wikipedia and thought I would submit an article on this topic of some popular interest not currently covered in Wikipedia. In light of reviews which declined the submission I have modified the article and/or otherwise responded to the issues raised by various reviewers on their talk pages. However the article was then declined by other reviewers who do not seem to be familiar with the topic or my previous responses.

I thought that Wikipedia would welcome such submissions providing user friendly explanations of technical topics in the public domain and their history. However, the predisposition appears to be to find reasons to reject articles and the whole process of publication to me is a bit mysterious. I feel like I am running an interminable obstacle course blindfolded. It seems any of many reviewers can decline an article, one after the other, but it is not clear to me who is able to or will eventually approve it. Can you please clarify this and point me to the review/approval process for draft articles?

I recognize that Wikipedia wishes to exercise quality control and have read and strived to conform to guidelines. However, this seems to be a case of throwing out the baby with the the bathwater. Had it not been for a finally realistic supportive comment on the talk pages of the article I would have already given up.


John Kaunitz (talk) 02:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaunitzj: besides voicing your dissatisfaction with various aspects of Wikipedia, do you have a question you wish to ask? The draft is awaiting review, and its talk page is already filled with debate, which I'm sure we don't need to repeat here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:32, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have not voiced “dissatisfaction with various with various aspects of Wikeipidea. If I did not think it was a worthwhile enterprise I would not have bothered to contribute and make donations and I did ask a question: can you please clarify who can and will approve articles and point me to the review/approval process for draft articles? John Kaunitz (talk) 07:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kaunitzj: When you submit a draft for review, any Articles for Creation reviewer is able to review it and accept, decline, or reject it. You have submitted your draft for review, which means that it will be reviewed at some point – that is really all that any of us knows, I'm afraid. --bonadea contributions talk 17:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information you provided, much appreciated. I have also discovered/read the tab at the top of this page Reviewing Instructions: Helper Script that was very informative and helpful in answering my question. I followed the approval flow chart and it seemed to me the article passed the tests therein. Hopefully the next reviewer will agree. Perhaps you can also tell me or point to information: How do the reviewers who can approve Articles for Creation qualify/selected? John Kaunitz (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:00:13, 31 March 2023 review of draft by Anupamashankarnewgen


My page that I have submitted has got rejected, need help with understanding the same. Anupamashankarnewgen (talk) 06:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anupamashankarnewgen: it hasn't been rejected. Reject means you cannot resubmit; decline means you can. Which you have. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Anupamashankarnewgen (talk) 06:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Anupamashankarnewgen The references are not properly formatted. Please see WP:REFB. David10244 (talk) 07:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:56:12, 31 March 2023 review of submission by Hemantpateria

Why My article is rejected, I wrote the content for someone else, Also shared too much resources, still it declined by wikipedia

Hemantpateria (talk) 06:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hemantpateria: it hasn't been rejected, it has been declined. And the reason for this was that it is poorly sourced and promotional.
When you say you "wrote the content for someone else", what do you mean by that? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please help me in approving that content Hemantpateria (talk) 07:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemantpateria: you will simply need to summarise, in your own words, what you can find about the subject in independent and reliable sources (which definition excludes many of the ones you are currently citing), and do so in a neutral and factual manner without any embellishments or 'spin'. Note that this will mean a fairly comprehensive rewrite of the draft.
First, though, you need to provide more details of your relationship with the subject of this draft. I have posted another message on your user talk page about conflicts of interest (COI), which judging by your earlier comments you may have, even if you're not being paid to write this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:58:03, 31 March 2023 review of draft by Emrekaracaoglu


Hello, the article I have submitted on the Turkish poet "Yavuz Özdem" has been flagged yet again. This is the warning from the editor: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." I reviewed this article earlier and did include online citations as required, by referring to "referencing for beginners" and other existing articles. However, the article has been flagged for removal again. I sincerely do not understand what is wrong with the article when it does include inline citations. Your help would be appreciated.

Emrekaracaoglu (talk) 08:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has only one source and that is not enough for a WP:BLP each substantive fact will require sourcing and you need to show how they pass WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 09:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Emrekaracaoglu: it includes precisely one inline citation, which is nowhere near enough to support the contents. Please see WP:BLP. Basically, every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details must be clearly supported with inline citations to reliable published sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:14:15, 31 March 2023 review of submission by Narwar001

I’m requesting for re-review it because I wanted to publish an article Narwar001 (talk) 10:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Narwar001: there's really nothing there to review. This is not a viable article draft. See also WP:AUTOBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:03, 31 March 2023 review of submission by Amol1332

Amol1332 (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Amol1332: you don't ask a question, but your draft, such as it is, has been rejected and won't be considered further. I say 'such as it is', because there is very little there, and certainly not enough to be a viable article. In any case, it seems you have attempted to write about yourself, which is very strongly advised against; see WP:AUTOBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

02:27:18, 1 April 2023 review of submission by 24.90.154.26

24.90.154.26 (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. And while I can see some sources have been added, they consist of candidates lists and social media accounts, none of which contribute towards notability in the slightest. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:36, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:09:54, 1 April 2023 review of submission by Diiinall

whhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy was draft declined? Diiinall (talk) 10:09, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Diiinall: if you wish to be blocked, just ask an admin. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Diiinall (talk) 11:08, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


14:18:24, 1 April 2023 review of submission by Earthianyogi

 Courtesy link: Draft:Catharine West

Earthianyogi (talk) 14:18, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Earthianyogi? You have resubmitted the draft, and it is awaiting review.
There are quite a few formatting and structural issues with it, which aren't a decline reason but need to be sorted out all the same. I'll post a comment there with more details. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for the message. that would be very helpful. Cheers. Earthianyogi (talk) 14:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Wiki reviewers have a minimum number of articles published to be allowed to accept/reject articles? thanksEarthianyogi (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't put your questions into the section headings. And please don't open a new section with each comment, just add to the existing thread. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:51:10, 1 April 2023 review of submission by Thehoaderr

Please tell me how to go about it, My intentions were not to promote the subject of my content Thehoaderr (talk) 14:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1147687104"