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 TCVCJ (talk | contribs) at 17:12, 31 August 2015. 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


August 24

09:51:41, 24 August 2015 review of submission by 121.223.187.37


Hi, which sources in particular seem unreliable and are worth resourcing?

121.223.187.37 (talk) 09:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue I'm seeing with the draft is a lack of coverage from non-PRIMARY sources. All of the awards lists are from the groups that give the awards, and while this does not mean that they're false, it means that no notability can be established from them. The other issue is a lack of coverage - there are only two articles (the Miami New Times) that talk about I-Dee in any great detail. As I said on the draft itself, if only one source has ever bothered writing about him, then he doesn't seem to have been noticed. Primefac (talk) 13:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:08:58, 24 August 2015 review of draft by Smartartone100


I don't know how to insert an image to the page I created Smartartone100 (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Smartartone100, please see WP:IMAGE for the syntax of putting an image on the page. Please keep in mind that (a) images are not required for drafts, and (b) the image must be released for free use by the original author (in other words, if you didn't take the picture and you don't have permission, don't upload!). Primefac (talk) 13:15, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:40:05, 24 August 2015 review of submission by Ktsekos

Greetings, first of all excuse my poor use of English, so to the point,

this is the 3rd time my draft is rejected, mostly because the references are not that good and the dont show why my draft is notable.

Actually Athinorama, is probably the oldest Athens city guide and probably the most-trustworthy one, so i cant find many references due to similar/competition sites do not publish articles relevant to Athinorama. On the other hand, because Athinorama target mainly Greek audience is also hard to find references from sites abroad.

Could you please give me some guidance?

Ktsekos (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ktsekos - if you can't find good sources in English please use Greek sources, such as mainstream news media or magazines. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:24, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:38:28, 24 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Isuzufin

 I need help adding references as my original submission was rejected.  Do you recommend working with someone who can help my company get their submission improved so that we can resubmit for approval?Isuzufin (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Isuzufin (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:51:33, 24 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Lancelot54321


Lancelot54321 (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this article DOES NOT already exists in Wikipedia

Lancelot54321, your "Notable Knights" section is directly copied from Knight, and I found much of the remaining material in Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom. A summary of a summary does not a valid article make. Primefac (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Copying from other articles without attribution is a copyright violation. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:25, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:19:01, 24 August 2015 review of submission by Cbdig


Cbdig (talk) 17:19, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added numerous resources that appear valid to me. Please advise as to exactly what I need to look for. The sources that I've added include manufacture about us pages, news posts, etc.

Wikipedia already has an article on W. C. Bradley Co., so all the pre-1925 stuff is irrelevant to this article and should be deleted. But you do need to explain what Char-Broil is. Is it a division of Bradley? The article ought to say. Maproom (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:26:51, 24 August 2015 review of submission by Lisajanrose


This is my first attempt at creating an article. To date we didn't pass the notability test, and I can understand why that is. I believe I have collected enough citations to support notability but I don't understand the "Help:Referencing for beginners" page. Can you suggest easy to understand instructions for creating references?

Thanks, Lisa Rose

Lisajanrose (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lisajanrose, in looking at your draft, it seems you have a fair number of references that mention The Lighthouse specifically, but not the documentary film itself. Having been released in 2005 there should be a fair number of online sources which can be linked to. If there wasn't any press about this film, then it cannot be considered notable and thus does not merit an article on Wikipedia. Primefac (talk) 10:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 25

08:36:13, 25 August 2015 review of draft by Jainmohitpvtltd


Mohit Jain (talk) 08:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jainmohitpvtltd, do you have a question about your draft? Primefac (talk) 10:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:09:29, 25 August 2015 review of submission by Fwisniewski

I have asked to name sources, but there are no direct quotes and all other information is in the public domain. Also, I have beenb asked to remove {db-afc} and {db-g13} but I do not know what these are. Many thank, Nigel Leach I have submitted this article a few times now and it keeps getting declined. I would like to have to assistance on how I can make this adhere to all of the Wikipedia rules to setup this page. If someone could get in touch regarding this it would be much appreciated.

BAFE (talk) 12:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fwisniewski, in looking at the references, none of them actually talk about BAFE; they simply say "we use BAFE accreditation" without giving any significant detail about the organisation itself. Notability is determined by how much coverage the subject receives, and receiving only single-sentence mentions does not pass the threshold. Primefac (talk) 12:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:15, 25 August 2015 review of submission by Doe Ko Ko


Doe Ko Ko (talk) 12:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doe Ko Ko, do you have a question about your draft? Primefac (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:27:15, 25 August 2015 review of submission by Joebattimelli


Can you please give more information/specifics as to why the article has been declined? There is mention of the subject not being noteworthy enough but examples of others in his field are on Wikipedia. From what I can see, the sourcing/referencing is within Wikipedia guidelines.

Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks

Joebattimelli (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joebattimelli, half your references are from Unilever itself or its press releases, which are PRIMARY sources and thus not usable for demonstrating notability. LinkedIn is not a reliable source at all, and I have removed those references. You'll need more sources that are not directly connected to Weed or his companies. Primefac (talk) 15:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And just as a general rule of thumb, while directors and CEOs of public companies are probably notable, I would suggest that other corporate executive rarely are.--ukexpat (talk) 13:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:14:21, 25 August 2015 review of submission by 72.26.166.84

72.26.166.84 (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only contribution 72.26.166.84 has ever made to en:Wikipedia. It is impossible for us to guess what submission it refers to. Maproom (talk) 16:33, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:06:38, 25 August 2015 review of submission by GemmaSuyat

Hi there, I've recently submitted an article on my company's CEO, Marc Nohr: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marc_Nohr. I just wanted to get some advice on why it's been rejected three times for not including enough substantial coverage and demonstrating his nobility. If you look at the article you can see whilst some references are just mentions in passing, I've still included a fair few that speak specifically about the individual. Is there a certain number of articles specifically on the individual that need to be included for it to pass?

Also just looking at other profiles of advertising CEOs, some don't seem to include many references discussing the subject and instead link out to several Wiki pages so just want to understand how this works? I'd really appreciate some detailed feedback on how I can improve the article, for example I've referenced this article which directly talks about Marc's hire as Fold7's CEO (http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/nohr-named-fold7-chief-executive/1338786), and also another about him leading an agency 100 poll (http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/803761/nohr-heads-power-100-agency-leaders) can you explain why this material isn't valid?

Thanks in advance, GemmaSuyat (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:52:11, 25 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by TodayTix

I would like assistance with making the content as verifiable as possible so that my submission does not get rejected again. I need help with the citations and references as my first submission got rejected.

TodayTix (talk) 18:52, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Giving your submission a quick glance, I see two main issues: 1) it's non-neutral and ad-like; 2) it's deficient in references. As for the first point, this is easily fixed. Try writing the article as an objective overview of the topic and not an advertorial; provide facts, not interpretation. Secondly, we are looking for extensive coverage from independent and reliable sources, such as magazine or newspaper articles, books, reviews, etc.; most of the paragraphs are currently unreferenced, so I would look into that if I were you. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:47:11, 25 August 2015 review of submission by Invisiboy42293

I would like to cancel my AfC submission and instead just move the article to the mainspace, as I feel the article is finished and the AfC process is taking too long. Can I do that and, if so, how?--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 21:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invisiboy42293 (talk) 21:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invisiboy42293, it's been 12 days, and there are over 500 pages to review (and we only have about a dozen reviewers active at the moment). We're doing the best we can, and your page will be looked at soon. Please have patience. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 07:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, and I don't mean to seem rude or suggest anything negative about the editors at AfC. I know that my article is just one of hundreds you guys are working hard to get through, and I don't want to minimize that at all. Truth be told, this was something of a misclick; I usually just move my drafts straight to the mainspace when I'm done with them. In other words, I'm probably just used to these things happening instantaneously. Anyway, keep up the good work, and hopefully my article will be reviewed fairly soon.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 20:12, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 26

08:52:16, 26 August 2015 review of submission by Images138

Hi, there are not many verifiable sources on the internet about the awards, except a few articles which i have referenced. What shall i do?

Images138 (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images138, if there are no more verifiable sources for the award, then it does not meet The Golden Rule and therefore cannot have a page on Wikipedia. Primefac (talk) 08:56, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Images138 Have you looked for sources that are not online, such as architecture or photography magazines? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:59, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:15:44, 26 August 2015 review of submission by Samsmith48


Hi, I have been trying to upload this article on Vinay Varma for a long time now. The article is ready, the sources and external links are ready, but for some reason I can't figure out how the citation works. Can someone please please help me out with this?

Samsmith48 (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are placed by moving the details of a reference within <ref> ref tags </ref>, such as here. For more help see WP:REFB. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:39:45, 26 August 2015 review of submission by Amunagi

I want to find out if my revised draft, submitted 21 August 2015, will be accepted. The previous draft was rejected on the 14 August 2015. Then I addressed the criticism by including independently verifiable facts about my subject's notability in the form of additional references. Amunagi (talk) 13:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He passes WP:PROF. I'll accept shortly. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:04:06, 26 August 2015 review of submission by Kenbloom01

I am requesting assistance for my submission of Blue Monday: Kickoff for National Men's Health Week 

https://www.google.com/search?as_eq=wikipedia&q=%22Blue+Monday+-+Kickoff+for+National+Men%26%2339%3Bs+Health+Week%22&num=50

It keeps getting rejected for notability and I can't figure out why. I've added references from several independent media sources in multiple states that have promoted and covered the event. Blue Monday is recognized by several states and state governments with multiple media outlets promoting Blue Monday. I am respectfully requesting assistance to improve this submission so that it is published. Thank you in advance for your help.

Kenbloom01 (talk) 14:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC) 14:04:06, 26 August 2015 review of submission by Kenbloom01[reply]

Hi Kenbloom01 I still think your draft would be best suited as a section in the already existing International Men's Health Week article, which really needs to be improved anyway. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 27

06:01:20, 27 August 2015 review of submission by Sanidhya.jain78

Hello,

I have tried creation of a wiki article for Koovs which got disapproved because of advertorial reason,I understood the concern and after going through wiki guidelines again I have submitted the content written with a nuetral point of view with good reference links,

can you please help me creating a better and valuable content,

Thanks Sanidhya Sanidhya.jain78 (talk) 06:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:55:46, 27 August 2015 review of submission by 151.225.135.69


151.225.135.69 (talk) 06:55, 27 August 2015 (UTC) 06:55:46, 27 August 2015 review of submission by 151.225.135.69[reply]

06:55:59, 27 August 2015 review of submission by 131.152.197.58

131.152.197.58 (talk) 06:55, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is my first time trying to post something on Wikipedia. I have input an article about a professor at the University of Basel which already exists in German. This should just be a translation. I don't quite understand why it was declined.... can anybody help? Thank You

Different Wikipedias have different standards of notability. Lack of notability is the most usual reason for a submission being rejected. But as you have provided no way of identifying what it was that you submitted, that must just be a guess. Maproom (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:48:31, 27 August 2015 review of submission by Opteamix LLC

My submission got declined due to notability issue. please suggest which portions I need to edit and how can I make the content notable. It will be great if you can give an example in my content. Also is there any other issue that I need to fix? Thanks for your help. Opteamix LLC (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC) Opteamix LLC (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:26:59, 27 August 2015 review of submission by Pochoaa

Hi i have submitted the page twice and gotten denied both times. I work for the company and i am trying to make a wikipedia page for it but i am not sure why i keep getting denied! Thank you! Pochoaa (talk) 14:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! If you're referrning to Solis Energy, I see it's been declined once before, due to lack of notability. If you read WP:GNG and WP:CORP, you'll see you need to provide extensive coverage from independent and reliable sources. I did a quick search myself and couldn't find much, so I honestly don't think this has good chances of being accepted at this time. Regards, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 01:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:50:51, 27 August 2015 review of submission by Rebeccaartsarmy

Hello, Wikipedia team! I would like to know more about why my article was declined so that I can make appropriate changes. I recently submitted an article about PlayPenn, a theater organization that holds annual conferences to develop and perform new plays. I was careful to use a variety of impartial sources, including several newspaper articles. In several cases I did cite the PlayPenn website as a source, but that was only to attribute basic information about the organization, such as the names of the people in charge, organizational history, etc. In addition, I was careful to use non-promotional, impartial language. Any praise of the organization or of the theater scene in Philadelphia came from outside sources such as newspaper articles. So I am unsure why my article was declined for being written like an "advertisement."

Thank you very much for any guidance you can provide! I appreciate it.

-Rebeccaartsarmy

Rebeccaartsarmy (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know quite what to say. If you can't see how promotional the writing is, all sparkly with "new" and "vibrant" and other promotional terms, then I am inclined to suspect you're more used to writing press releases and advertising copy (no insult intended, honestly). Our expectation here is that the tone of an article should be clear, clean, and matter-of-fact, without a bunch of fluffy pull-quotes only tangential related to the topic of the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


August 28

06:49:47, 28 August 2015 review of submission by Tjbones88

I'm kinda new with wikipedia. I'd love to write some articles about photography that is my passion. So, I noticed that one of my fav photographers out there was not yet in the english version of the wikipedia and I decided to start with him. But I'm doing something wrong. Could you please tell me how to improve my article to get it published? Any help will be appreciated. Thank you so much.

Tjbones88 (talk) 06:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

10:18:25, 28 August 2015 review of draft by Fashionworld 2015


Hi, I need your help. I create a draft on account1, and paste it to account "Fashionworld_2015", but article is deleted. Now i reedit the content, which is very similar to the previous one, is it alright? Areticle is "EDressit".

If there is still some matters, plz tell me some. Yours sincerely, Fashionworld_15


Fashionworld 2015 (talk) 10:18, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is to be deleted as a copyright violation. Wikipedia drafts must use 100% of your own words. Fiddle Faddle 10:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

11:13:39, 28 August 2015 review of submission by CockerellDerm15

The article on Clay J. Cockerell was declined. I'd like to know why it was declined and how to rectify this so the article can be approved. Please advise. The login is CockerellDerm15. Thank you.

CockerellDerm15 (talk) 11:13, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blatantly promotional, no evidence of notability, no inline references, probably an autobiography. Is that enough reasons? Maproom (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:11:08, 28 August 2015 review of submission by Paracel63


Hi! It seems this article draft doesn't adequately show the subject's notability. I've come to be involved with it's development through my occupation as a mentor at Swedish Wikipedia, where the article Mattias Bärjed is developed in parallel. I've looked through the notability criteria, and I do find things there that match the article draft in its current state. The draft deals with a Guldbaggen winner (sourced, criterion #8 for musicians/ensembles?). Is it a problem that he hasn't made an international solo career (despite him being amply known from his years with The Soundtrack of Our Lives)? Much of his musical career has been with TSOOL, and then he has done lots of session/concert work with notable groups such as Refused, Broder Daniel, The Hellacopters and the like. His later years as a film score composer has been quite successful as well, and that is sourced in the article draft. But maybe there are notability problems that I cannot detect right now. Many thanks for enlightening me on this. Best of wishes.--Paracel63 (talk) 13:11, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paracel63 (talk) 13:11, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:37:59, 28 August 2015 review of submission by Riitam

We need to get listed on wikipedia.

Riitam (talk) 19:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Riitam, sorry but Wikipedia does not care what you need, this is an encyclopedia, not social media or a marketting site. See the notability standard for bands and musicians to check if the band qualifies for an article (not a "listing"). If it does, you need to provide the sources that prove it; if not, there's nothing that can be done, sorry. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19:46:57, 28 August 2015 review of submission by AndrewCorser

I am requeting assistance after the following advice: "Sulfurboy has not edited Wikipedia since August 11. There's no way of knowing whether he is merely offline for awhile or gone for good. I'd suggest reposting the foregoing inquiry at the Articles for Creation Help Desk. Go there, click the big "Click here to ask a new question." link and carefully follow the instructions at the top of the next page which pops up. Good luck and thanks for helping to improve Wikipedia. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)" It is to the following that TranporterMan was responding: "Sulfurboy rejected my draft article about Mary Spiller (see ref above) on the same basis of Mary Spiller not being notable enough as Worldbruce had rejected an earlier draft. I believe that I had included a number of independent references showing notability in the latest draft, and tried to rasie this matter with Sulfurboy through his talk page (see below). I have not had a reply, and my comments have now been archived on Sulfurboy's talk page - I assume this is equivalent to a rejection of my comments by Sulfurboy. I would appreciate some response on my comments. Thank you. Mary Spiller submission - 11 August 2015 

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mary_Spiller

(From Sulfurboy talk archive 5) In response to your rejection of my article about Mary Spiller, siting insufficient "notability" SulfurBoy, you have repeated WorldBruce's assertion (why is it, by the way, that you aren't willing to talk to the world as who you are? I am Andrew Corser from Cornwall in the UK, and don't need to hide behind some nom d'ordinateur!) that "notability" is the issue regarding Mary Spiller. Could I draw both of your attentions to: 1. The Oxford Times says: “Miss Havergal's regime was tough but thorough and the gardening school (1932-1971) produced several famous lady alumnae including Mary Spiller (who has trained huge numbers of gardeners in Oxfordshire).” I suggest this expresses “notability” - or perhaps you don't consider “famous ladies” to be notable? This is an independent, secondary source – whether you consider the Oxford Times as reliable may be up to question, but it answers WorldBruce's “one good source” jibe!! 2. WorldBruce says "The other BBC page only says Mary was the first woman to present Gardener's World." So, apparently, it is not significant that Mary was the first female presenter on the BBC TV's Gardener's World. At the time (1980 - 35 years ago: do either of you remember the prevailing culture at the time?) there was concern amongst the producers of the programme about having a woman in what had been a traditionally male role. Of course, there is little chance of finding any independent reliable secondary evidence of this. Again, it happens to be something to do with the success/progress of women - I hope this is not a problem for you to take on board. It is clear to me that this is something of note (viewing figures of Gardeners World were 2 million plus in the UK - not quite "Coronation Street" figures, but a significant figure for a "niche" subject). 3. There is another reference early on in the article to Shirley du Boulay's book. Mary appears in this book about the gardens of 12 expert gardeners. The chapter about Mary rubs shoulders with chapters about Alan Titchmarsh, Percy Thrower and Geoffrey Smith (and 9 other eminent and notable gardeners). In the world of gardening, this rates as notability in my book! That's 3 references. Then there is the BBC TV programme: WorldBruce says "The BBC apples piece doesn't mention Spiller at all." No, the snippet from the whole programme doesn't. Elsewhere, the programme does say a lot about Mary. So how does Wikipedia cope with this? I have a [pirate] copy of the programme, but it isn't currently available on BBC iPlayer...so is this independent secondary source not relevant because you can't view it? And, of course, Mary "was awarded the RHA Associateship of Honour in July 2008 [13] [14]" - this is an honour limited to only 100 living gardeners in the UK. I wonder why she was awarded this by the Royal Horticultural Society if Mary Spiller isn't notable? Now, if you can explain your assertions about notability, I would be interested - and if you retain your views that Mary Spiller is not shown to be notable by these multiple independent sources, then your influence within Wikipedia suggests that Jimmy Wales' idea has become shallow and obsessed with only the Interweb era. Andrew Corser — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewCorser (talk • contribs) 10:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC) AndrewCorser (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC) Andrew Corser andycorser@gmail.com" AndrewCorser (talk) 19:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have several comments:
  • Sulfurboy is normally extremely active, but has made no edits at all for two weeks. It seems likely that he is in holiday.
  • You are encouraged to try to improve the article, and resubmit it. It will probably be someone else, not Sulfurboy, who assesses it next time.
  • It is usual for Wikipedia editors to avoid revealing their real identity.
  • The above wall of text will deter almost anyone from reading the whole thing – I certainly haven't.
  • I have added a BBC citation to the draft, maybe it will help. I suggest you try to find one or two more good sources for citations, and delete most of the unacceptable or marginal ones. If you resubmit, the article will be judged on quality of sources, not quantity.
  • In my (irrelevant) opinion, the draft is already good enough to be accepted. Maproom (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@AndrewCorser: Mary Spiller may well be notable. The draft has been declined because in the reviewers' judgment the draft failed to establish that Spiller is notable. Articles for Creation is an iterative process: a submitter asks for a review; a reviewer evaluates the draft and, if it doesn't meet Wikipedia's minimum standards, provides advice; the submitter improves the draft, and the cycle starts again.
I will gladly explain my review, but if a draft I have declined is resubmitted, I do not review it again at AfC. I follow this practice so that submitters get the benefit of a fresh look from a reviewer who may judge the same material differently.
1)The Oxford Times article you quote was added subsequent to my review, so I have no comment on it.
What I wrote when I reviewed the draft about the other article in the Oxford Times (the one by Linora Lawrence) was not meant as an insult, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was attempting to show you what sort of source you should be looking for to demonstrate notability. Lawrence would be a good source for demonstrating Havergal's notability because it discusses Havergal in some depth. What is needed are sources that cover Spiller at a similar level of detail.
Non-triviality is a measure of the depth of content of a source, of how far removed its content is from a simple directory entry or a mention in passing that does not discuss the subject in detail. A 200-page biography of a person is non-trivial, whereas a mention in passing ("John Smith at Big Company said..." or "Maria Gomez replaced Fred Jones") is trivial. Lawrence is not a good source for proving notablity because it's coverage of Spiller is well down at the trivial end of the scale.
2) The problem with the BBC web page is again one of depth of coverage. It has a bare eight words to say about Spiller. Being the first woman to present Gardener's World is a credible claim to importance, and suggests that it's worth looking for sources that demonstrate notability, but it does not in and of itself prove notability. I find unconvincing the assertion that there is little chance of finding any independent reliable secondary evidence on this point. Wikipedia has numerous well-sourced articles about things much further back than the 1980s. Hence my suggestion that research at a library might be more productive than limiting oneself to online sources.
3) The book by Shirley du Boulay is another source added subsequent to my review, so I have no comment to make on it.
4) With regard to the TV programme, sources must have been published, but there is no requirement that they be available online. Each citation must provide enough information to identify the source. In this case, a sensible minimum would be the title of the episode, the name of the series, the network, air date, and time at which the event occurs in the source (e.g. "5:12 minutes in"). When a source may be difficult to access, it's good practice to include a direct quote in the citation as well, so long as the quote is not excessively long. If the programme says a lot about Spiller, you may need multiple citations, each to a different point in the programme.
5) I don't know why Spiller was awarded the RHA Associateship of Honour, and the draft doesn't enlighten the reader. When I reviewed the draft, the only source cited regarding the award was one that is not independent, her employer. If an award is significant, winning it will be covered in depth by independent reliable sources such as newspapers and magazines, and the problem of meeting WP:BASIC will be solved.
P.S. It was only by chance that I saw your posting here. Generally if you wish to communicate with an editor you need to either leave a message on their talk page, or use a template, such as Template:Ping, as this reply does. Worldbruce (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:58:59, 28 August 2015 review of submission by Christineink

Hi! I believe this subject is notable and am working with him personally to get the page online. Can you advise as to how (and specifically which) references can be improved so this page will be approved? Thanks. Christineink (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Christineink, you have a few good quality sources, Forbes, Washington Post and so on, but you have far too few references; there are whole paragraphs and even complete sections that have none. For a biography of a living person the referencing standard is particularly strict - every disputable fact or claim must have a proper reference. Generally we expect to see a minimum of one reference in every paragraph (if the paragraph is about only one topic/issue of course).
It is actually unfortunate that you are working directly with the subject as that almost inevitably leads to the inclusion of unverifiable information - stuff he knows about himself but has never been independently written about and published. It is far easier to write a Wikipedia article about people and things you know nothing about - then you are completely dependent on only the published sources you find. Throw out everything he told you that is not also specifically backed up by a published source. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 29

Request on 14:42:24, 29 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Lucalove2

Hello, I'm trying to make a Wikipedia page for my Frisbee team Long Hill in Cambridge. I've put a lot of work into the page and as most of our references our in Facebook witch Wikipedia cant accept there is little else I can reference. Ive very annoyed/fustrated as I have done all I can to make the page look well made and it keeps getting rejected for what I think is no good reason. Once it is published there are other people that can add more to the page and make it better but they can't do that yet.

I'm annoyed as I think that anyone who knows enough about a subject should be allowed to write a Wikipedia article about it and I think the rules are a little strict and learner unfriendly.

Many thanks

Luca


Lucalove2 (talk) 14:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lucalove2, the issue is that your references do not prove that the team is notable. Basically if no mainstream newspapers or magazines (not the school newsletter, Facebook, personal blogs, etc.) have ever published an article about the team - or at least a few paragraphs about the team within an article about the sport - it is simply impossible to write a proper Wikipedia article about it. There are many things in the world that are just too unknown to ever have an article in Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:27, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:18:48, 29 August 2015 review of submission by Halls4521

Thank you for allowing the creation of the article for "Just One Last Look". Is it alright for me to free up my sandbox now and "de-link" it from the article? Also, the article's history actually starts at August 14 2014; the dates before it are sandbox stuff.--Halls4521 (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Halls4521 (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed I have cancelled the redirect from your sandbox to the newly created article for you, so feel free to use it again. For future note, if a draft has been moved out of your sandbox to draft-space, you can cancel the redirect and start using your sandbox again straight away. - Happysailor (Talk) 18:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:30:38, 29 August 2015 review of submission by PjP007

I'm the official publicist of professional (youth) football player Mink Peeters (of Real Madrid). I've been asked by him, and his manager, to write an article on him for Wikipedia. I've done so, and have tried to post is, but it's declined! I think that's ridiculous. I'm wondering how we ever can get an article about Mink Peeters on Wikipedia. We anyway will not accept any article on him by an outsider!

PjP007 (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have a conflict of interest in creating this football players page, and as such, should step back from creating the article in question. For note, you may have also violated Wikipedia's Terms of Use for Paid editing as you were asked to create it as his publicist.
Articles can be created by anyone, on anyone, and you don't have the right to not accept an article created by someone else.
To clarify the decline, your draft was declined because you failed to show significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to show notability. Specifically for a sportsperson, he must pass the notability guidelines for footballers. Lastly, youtube is not a valid reference. - Happysailor (Talk) 18:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You claim that I may have violated Wikipedia's Terms of Use, since I would have been paid for writing it, but I haven't been paid for it at all, and I blame you for suggesting that, without any proof! (It was merely a kind favour.) I just wrote that article, and tried to post it, to prevent that someone else writes, and posts an initial article that's based on incorrect information. Anyway, if Wikipedia doesn't appreciate my eventual contribution, let's just forget about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PjP007 (talk • contribs) 12:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 30

06:46:15, 30 August 2015 review of submission by RachR310


Hi, I would like some advice on how I can edit my article to better address the reviewer's comments. Would appreciate help on identifying lines that have peacock terms or do not have a neutral tone and any advice you can give on how to change these. I have looked at other pages linked to SMU such as the page on 'Lee Kong Chian School of Business' and I feel like the tone and sources I've used are similar so I'm not sure why my draft has been rejected. I'm really new at this so any help would be appreciated. RachR310 (talk) 06:46, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:21, 30 August 2015 review of submission by 86.8.28.175

I submitted a draft about my brother but I'm not sure why the page rejected as unsuitable?

Ex-Wikipedian, Ian McAllister, told me that a Fellow at Cambridge University was notable enough for Wikipedia due to his academic achievements. He asked me to include links to all his hundreds of publications so that's what I did.

I also included a paragraph about my brother repeatedly being World Tiddlywinks champion, but am happy to delete that if it's off topic.

Please would you advise if there is any other information I should provide? Thank you

86.8.28.175 (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is he notable for? The article says nothing about his work in chemical engineering, though it has an excessively long list of his publicatiions. Maproom (talk) 08:11, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:35:38, 30 August 2015 review of submission by Jtdailey

Good afternoon. My name is John and I was wondering if the aforementioned page is in the queue for being re-reviewed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:C.O._Simpkins,_Sr 

It isn't clear to me if it either needs additional edits or perhaps it wasn't correctly resubmitted for re-review and  approval.

The submission has gone through two reviews and I addressed the reviewers concerns - the first was about the possibility of copyrighted material and the passages and references were deleted. The second reviewer was concerned that it wasn't sufficiently encyclopedic and had "peacock" phrases. Those were reworked as suggested.

My last edit was two weeks ago and the page doesn't seem to have been re-reviewed • 23:44, 16 August 2015 (diff | hist) . . (+22)‎ . . m Draft:C.O. Simpkins, Sr. ‎ (Some minor stylistic changes were made. They were made on top of the more significant edits submitted after the previous review.) (current)

When you have a moment, could you let me know what next steps I might need to take at this time? Thanks for your time and assistance. Jtdailey (talk) 22:00, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Jtdailey (talk)[reply]

Jtdailey (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This question is about Draft:C.O. Simpkins, Sr., with a final period. (It is very helpful to people here if you give a correct link to the draft that you are asking about.) It is not currently in the queue for review. It still needs a lot of work, including (but not restricted to) correct formatting of the section headers. Look at any other long Wikipedia article to see how section headers and a reference list are done. Maproom (talk) 08:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:32:34, 30 August 2015 review of submission by TwoQuarters


Hello. I am a first-time editor. I saw many leaders I wanted to develop pages for. This has been a humbling experience and I'm still working on my first one!!! Lots of respect for those who have mastered this!

The Andre Taylor draft is in much better shape now thanks to the help of a couple of experienced Wikipedia editors. Thanks again. Now, I'm trying to figure out how to improve the footnotes/references. The references are all listed but I cannot find details on how to insert reference numbers into the article, when the references have already been listed. Making this even more complicated for me is realizing that I have to change the order slightly to comply with your effort to gives readers an ordered list of references that coincide with the article. For example:

Andre Taylor is an American entrepreneur... (first reference is correct...Business Guru story.)

Early Life and Education... (this is really reference 12 - Graduation-Day Say...)

Career...(after Taylor Insight Worldwide should be reference ) After "sports content and sports related websites" should be references 21. After access to the sports industry should be reference # 16 and 17. After Business Innovator of the Year should be reference # 20 and 21)

In Other Publications... Taylor became a columnist for Community College Entrepreneurship in 2009 and for The Shriver Report in December 2013 (http://shriverreport.org/people/andre-taylor/)

He contributed an article called: "Three Principals for Top Performers," to Medical Tourism Magazine in 2015.

http://www.medicaltourismmag.com/medical-tourism-three-principals-for-top-performers/

In Public Speaking.... Taylor has delivered speeches to conferences.... These are references...1,2,3,4,5, 8,9, 10, 11,

Please help. I think I am almost done with this short and basic page. Just need to understand how to make these kind of edits going forward. TwoQuarters (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TwoQuarters (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:36:15, 30 August 2015 review of submission by Victoria S. Creed

Victoria S. Creed (talk) 22:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC) 22:36:15, 30 August 2015 review of submission by Victoria S. Creed {{Lafc|username=Victoria S. Creed|ts=22:36:15, 30 August 2015|link=[reply]

Victoria S. Creed----

Request on 03:16:14, 31 August 2015 for assistance on Draft:Psychology of eating meat by FourViolas

It appears the draft I've written gives off SYNTHy "vibes", and reads like an essay or research paper. Per my reasoning on the talk page, I believe the specified problems are stylistic rather than substantial, but I'd love fresh eyes and evaluations either way. If you have spare time, you could look over some of my non-AfC submissions to check for similar problems: Graham technique, Hedareb people, Giordano Dance Chicago, Mary Cannon. Thanks! No need to {{talkback}}, or to wear your usual kid newbie gloves. FourViolas (talk) 03:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:28:08, 31 August 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Chy syl

Hi Articles for Creation Team! Early August, I submitted an article Draft:TeachPitch to the Wikipedia Community. I was happy to get feedback from TimTrent that I had wrongly used the references and external links and encouraged to try again. I resubmitted the article- now referencing in the appropriate way - and was wondering two things: 1) Is it better now? 2) When it comes to the use of of sources you mentioned that they need to be notable, independent of each other and be present in abundance - I did some research and found a lot more on the topic some in English but also articles in Chinese, Spanish and French - are those valid as well? Or do they all need to be in English? Thank you very much for helping me out here. Any advice you can give me is very much appreciated:) Chy syl Chy syl (talk) 07:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC) Chy syl (talk) 07:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chy syl, while we do prefer English sources, you can use other languages too if English ones are lacking or of lesser quality. (It's quite easy for us to find reviewers who know languages such as Chinese, Spanish or French, if necessary.) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:03:14, 31 August 2015 review of submission by Medicalphyls


Medicalphyls (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC) What is the problem with this article? I think it is simple, point to point and easy to understand.[reply]

Hi Medicalphyls - the style is not like a Wikipedia article, I strongly recommend that you ask the subject specialists at WikiProject Medicine for assistance. The format and layout issues are easy to fix so don't worry about that at this stage. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:12:16, 31 August 2015 review of submission by NeviRom


NeviRom (talk) 14:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC) I need assistance concerning Draft:AVS Video Converter. My article was declined due to lack of notability and reliable sources. I have added more sources such as books and articles in scientific journals, please review my article and references on the subject of notability, if it needs more editing.[reply]

14:22:03, 31 August 2015 review of submission by Medicalphyls


Medicalphyls (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC) I have rewrite the article and I will like to kindly inform you that all the sources mentioned here are quality references like Scott-Brown's Otorhinolaryngology. it is one of the best book available on ENT surgery and medicine. so please kindly check reviews and reply.[reply]

Hi again Medicalphyls, the problem is not the sources, it's the style of your writing. You've also been advised to request help from WikiProject Medicine - please do so. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:29, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

helloRoger (Dodger67) thank you for your reply and advice. I appreciate that. Medicalphyls —Preceding undated comment added 16:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:06, 31 August 2015 review of submission by Cortknoxx


I would like to get my wiki page approved. Made some changes..I want to get the user: taken off of the name when searching in google.


Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cortknoxx (talk • contribs) 16:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:12:28, 31 August 2015 review of submission by TCVCJ

I wrote an article on the Coal Miners' Memorial in Richlands Tazewell County VA and saved the page so I could go back and work on it some more before I submitted it - now I cannot find it! Can someone help me? Thank you!TCVCJ (talk) 17:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC) TCVCJ (talk) 17:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=678791655"