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 173.169.139.115 (talk) at 21:17, 15 February 2016. 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


February 6

12:24:17, 6 February 2016 review of submission by Kjagan2

Hey, Yash. I've rewrote the article a couple of times, I am sure the information provided is correct and verified. And peacock terms have been removed, If yet any mark them for me or feel free to rewrite that part. Kjagan2 (talk) 12:24, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 7

Request on 18:21:15, 7 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Tannerslaught


Wikipedia deleted my article saying that I was plagiarizing copyright material when in fact I am the author of said material and the have the right to publish it in more than one place. In this case the work is a short biography and I am trying to publish on Wikipedia. Originally, Wikipedia said that I was illegally using copyrighted work so I sent in a rebuttal form but that only landed me here, having to do the same thing again.

How can I publish my work on Wikipedia?

Tannerslaught (talk) 18:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tannerslaught: Welcome to the Help Desk! The short answer is that if you are the copyright-holder of material that you wish to license for use on Wikipedia, you can follow the steps at our Donating Copyrighted Materials page. There is an email you can use there to get in touch with Wikipedia's OTRS team, who may be able to help you with the copyright issue. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

22:22:26, 7 February 2016 review of submission by 104.129.194.132

104.129.194.132 (talk) 22:22, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what the Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps.
/wiae /tlk 22:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 8

03:54:15, 8 February 2016 review of submission by Echiu888

Hi,

I am the Marketing Executive at MedicalDirector. There was a change of trading name and so I went into the page to update the information to content that I had written myself. I cannot understand why this content has been declined. As a representative of the company, I am a direct source for this information. I am unsure how else to reference the information.

Can you please advise how to proceed.

Kind regards Bianca Echiu888 (talk) 03:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Echiu888: Welcome to the Help Desk! There are several issues at play here. The first is that, as a party who is directly related to the company you are trying to write about, you have a conflict of interest. Conflict-of-interest editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia and I'd suggest you stop working on the subject entirely. That aside, the draft is entirely unsourced, it is written like an advertisement, and it uses informal language like "you" that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Finally, there is already an article about Health Communication Network, so if it has merely changed its name to MedicalDirector, there is no need for a whole new article. Changes should not be made directly to the article, but rather suggested on the article's talk page by using {{Request edit}}. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 04:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

06:53:35, 8 February 2016 review of submission by PaulJRogers

PaulJRogers (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hello PAGE NAME: Paul J Rogers I recently submitted content to be included on wikipedia. I am an artist/musician. I followed the profile of other artists however the cohelp me nent I supplied was declined. Can you please help me understand why the content was declined and how the content can be edited and adjusted so that it meets your criteria?

thank you

Hello @PaulJRogers:, I took a look at your draft, and unfortunately it does not at all meet the criteria for a Wikipedia profile of a musician. If you see any other Wikipedia page for a musician that only cites their Bandcamp and their own homepage, please bring it to any admin's attention, or paste the code show at WP:Request for speedy deletion and it will be deleted as an improper article.
Articles for musicians absolutely must follow the requirements shown at WP:Notability (music). Please take a quick glance at that, and it will clear up a lot. A musician article must show that outside, neutral, objective experts have written extensively about them. So coverage in Spin, Pitchfork, LA Times, Music Industry Quarterly, and smaller equivalents of such, that kind of coverage matters. Personal pages, Bandcamp, Discogs, CDBaby, Amazon, etc. absolutely do not help at all. We're not denying that a band exists, we're requiring that the article demonstrate that the band matters to outside observers. This is not at all a qualitative judgment, plenty of bands suck and are famous, and some great bands never get the media coverage they deserve, but we don't make judgment calls, we just use the documentation that exists.
The other big problem is it's pretty clearly ad advertisement written for yourself, which we don't allow under WP:Conflict of interest. Phrases like "These days you can find Paul creating original music..." are absolutely not phrases that a neutral, objective encyclopedia uses. Encyclopedias don't heartily encourage the reader to check out someone's Bandcamp page or talk about how visionary they are.
My big advice, if you want to contribute to Wikipedia, pick topics you're passionate about that are well-documented and write a short article clearly cited to those documented sources. Pick a less-known musician that has old news articles about him and mention in books but no Wikipedia article yet, for example. If your sole goal on Wikipedia is to advertise yourself, you're just going to end up getting disappointed. So, good luck with whichever course. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:24, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12:23:13, 8 February 2016 review of submission by Crawford88

I tried creating a page for a book, launched recently in Jan 2016. I tried submitting twice but got rejected. What more needs to be put in here for the article to get accepted?

Crawford88 (talk) 12:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

14:57:45, 8 February 2016 review of submission by Benm182

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Im writing a PHD on litigation funding and noticed hardly any firms have pages on wikipedia so thought I would chip in.

There is currently one firm which does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbour_Litigation_Funding

but I dont understand how notability has been shown in this article but not in the one which I wrote.

Thanks!!

15:41:48, 8 February 2016 review of submission by Tessthepuppy

Hi! Thanks for reviewing my submission. I'd appreciate any help you can give on how to improve it so that it can be re-submitted. It's my first attempt at a page so I'm sure I've got plenty to learn! Thanks!

Tessthepuppy (talk) 15:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 9

Request on 06:28:16, 9 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Vishal vengerala


Vishal vengerala (talk) 06:28, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12:51:17, 9 February 2016 review of submission by Mangofast

- can you tell me how to correct the position of the CONTENTS box? (I used the wizard to create this new page but with too much cutting and pasting I somehow changed the layout sequence). - thank you!

Mangofast (talk) 12:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mangofast: I fixed the layout for you. The lead section should not have a section header. That's what threw off the automatically generated table of contents. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:09:36, 9 February 2016 review of submission by Mandymlall

I need help with my article which has been submitted to Articles for Creation. I have been unsuccessful at having my article approved for creation. Kindly advise what steps I can take to prevent this from reoccurring? Mandymlall (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC) Mandymlall (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

17:29:23, 9 February 2016 review of submission by MrSmooth31


Article was substantially altered to read more neutral and reliable from WP:NPOV and WP:CITEKILL. Subject and subject's notable work has been included in several publications/sources and was instructed to use the "best" overall sources rather than 3 or 4 different sources with similar information. Do not want to resubmit without second opinion. The original drafts included some information (technological, lighting science, etc) directly withdrawn from sources about the subject, and therefore did not read encyclopedic in tone. Looking for WP:NPOV critiques.MrSmooth31 (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

17:54:44, 9 February 2016 review of submission by MichaelVJBeattie

How do I ensure that the next reviewer thoroughly read new citations? MichaelVJBeattie (talk) 17:54, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21:05:37, 9 February 2016 review of submission by Trogeadc

Trogeadc (talk) 21:05, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an article for Philip Clements which was rejected for more sources, but had at least 4. What can I do to make sure the entry is published?

February 10

04:36:23, 10 February 2016 review of submission by Rajasekhar1961

Rajasekhar1961 04:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC) I need help regarding Draft:P. Sambasiva Rao. He is a film director with good credentials. His Mrigathrushna has got international recognition by the critics. Can you let me know the defects and how to make a good article out of it. Thanking you.Rajasekhar1961 04:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11:55:33, 10 February 2016 review of submission by Bradrimm

Bradrimm (talk) 11:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand quotations need to be properly referenced to a reliable source. However I'm unsure if it's possible to reference an "unreliable" WP site that references "reliable" text? For example if a WP site references the Federal Reserve Bank, would the contribution to WP site be acceptable?

@Bradrimm: Welcome to the Help Desk! In general, you should use reliable sources as citations. Other Wikipedia articles are not considered reliable sources, so even if you see fact A about the Federal Reserve Bank at, say, Federal Reserve Bank, that doesn't mean you can cite fact A in your draft. Instead, you should go directly to the reliable sources for information about fact A—perhaps the references cited at Federal Reserve Bank#References, or references you find online or in print. You can use WP:RS to help you assess whether a source is reliable—usually, they are from places with editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking. I hope that answers your question; let me know here if I didn't understand it correctly.
On another note, it appears that the content of Draft:Kappak has been copied from another source—a copyrighted website. In the future, please avoid copying content directly or closely paraphrasing content from copyrighted sources. It's very important to always write content in your own words. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Wiae
Hi Wiae,
Thanks for your support, but I'm getting more confused with Wiki feedback.
My two contribution attempts were rejected,
(1) Kappak (game) was original content written by myself on voyiran.com. The content was from my own article on voyiran.com, and the any facts were retrieved from an interview I had with the Ministry of Culture and Heritage of that province in Iran. No English content exists for this article other than what I have published on Voyiran, as myself via original research. I cannot imagine violating my own work: How do you suggest I proceed as a contributor if I cannot reference my own work?
(2) I added to an existing article from "Iran Crown Jewels". The content was likewise sourced from my own WP website (voyiran.com), the information was written by myself. The facts (if any) already existed from the tourist information supplied by the "National Treasury of Iran" who are the propriety owners of the jewels. I had paraphrased the English into my own words as the original texts were poorly translated, and not published by Penguine/ Oxford etc. How do you suggest I contribute this information into Wikipedia? I can edit the article on voyiran.com if needed to include the source from IRAN TREASURY. Any advise to steps I need to take in the future would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks,
Brad
Bradrimm (talk) 15:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bradrimm: Hello again! In order to use text which is protected by copyright, the copyright-holder must license it for use on Wikipedia. I'm sure you are the author of the voyiran page, but as you may know, anyone online could claim to be the author of a site. (After all, on the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.) So Wikipedia will need some proof that you, the author, have licensed the text for use on Wikipedia. To do so, just follow the instructions at this policy page about donating copyrighted materials. (There's an email partway down the page that you'll use to get in touch with our our permissions team.) This process doesn't happen immediately, so it might take a bit of time. In the interim, the Draft:Kappak page may be deleted, but if the permissions and licensing details are worked out, the page would then be restored.
Another course of action would be to simply rewrite the content so that it is not a direct copy or close paraphrase of the voyiran content. However, when it comes to the Iranian Crown Jewels page, I'm not sure that voyiran would be considered a reliable source, as it appears to be a blog and I'm not sure about its fact-checking or editorial oversight regime.
I hope this helps. Let us know if you have further questions. /wiae /tlk 16:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Wiae: Hi Wiae, it's starting to make more sense re: copywrite. However the last aspect, requiring text to be from a reliable source, I have read local content doesn't need higher order edited works. Is this correct? For instance some cultural knowledge of a specific area cannot easily be referenced, but is nonetheless useful for public information. In this circumstance can 'qualitative' knowledge on Wikipedia reference a blog type website? Or is there no way of referencing small cultural websites? Eg: a blog says: "Aboriginal Australians have many different ways of hunting and gathering. The culture in the tropics around the Gulf of Queensland rely heavily on fishing, whilst the aborigines around Alice Springs generally eat grubs and reptiles.".. If Wikipedia references this with "Aboriginals eat different varieties of foods depending on the region of Australia they live." This is qualitative, yet cannot be easily disputed as it is a cultural fact. Would you suggest I not contribute to Wikipedia, or is there a way I'm able to support the community with missing cultural information via voyiran.com. Thanks
Bradrimm (talk) 17:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bradrimm: Blogs and self-published sources can be used in very limited circumstances, but they are generally not useful as general references. (Of course, trivially obvious, common knowledge statements like "different people sometimes eat different cuisines depending on where they live", probably don't need a citation. However, if you are going to discuss the actual cuisines in a region, that would need a good-quality reference.) As for Voyiran, it does look like a blog, and is thus not a great source for Wikipedia's purposes. On Wikipedia we're not so interested in one's personal encounter with a subject; rather, the focus is on recounting what reliable secondary sources have said about the subject. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 18:05, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiae It appears regardless of the style of writing Wikipedia does not want content from small website sources. I research cultural topics I'm genuinely interested in, not for profit, but because it's largely not already available on the internet. I would like to share useful information with Wikipedia as I add it to our website, but frankly there is no incentive to rewrite fresh cultural content for Wikipedia, especially when not easily verifiable as 'English citations.' You noted "Kappak (game)" would be accepted if I authorised it, then replied the source is not appropriate. If Wikipedia doesn't want contributions from small groups such as ourselves, then I should probably keep any content to myself. Have a good day and thank you for your help Wiae.

Bradrimm (talk) 05:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

13:58:10, 10 February 2016 review of submission by TwinZillyaOEM

I would like to inform you that the page Zillya! is not advertisement. It's just information about our company. We have very old page about one of our product (ru:Zillya! ) on russian language. We would like to add the page about our company to global Wikipedia and connect it with our old page.

If you think that our article is advertisement please specify which information we should to change?TwinZillyaOEM (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TwinZillyaOEM: Welcome to the Help Desk! Some of the content in the draft does seem promotional to me, including phrases like "the only antivirus laboratory... that successfully develops cyber security and antivirus software". That will either need an explicit citation showing that it is the only such company, or it will need to be rephrased more neutrally, like "Zillya! is a Ukrainian company that develops antivirus software", for example. Other text that seems promotional to me includes "recognized for high quality and reliability", "a range of certificates that proves the quality of the products and technologies of virus detection", and most of the Products section.
As you work on the draft, keep in mind that the proper encyclopedic tone is one that neutrally describes the subject, but does not make any attempt to "sell" the product. A "just-the-facts" approach is usually best. Also, keep in mind that if you are affiliated with the company, then you have a conflict of interest, which will make it difficult to write neutrally and objectively about the subject. That's one reason why conflict-of-interest editing is discouraged on Wikipedia. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 14:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:36:56, 10 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Kalujames

I'm in the process of trying to get an article on a musician approved and I'm having trouble keeping it from sounding too "promotional" and autobiographical. I've removed any peacock language and tried to keep it strictly informational based on the sources - any tips on how to alter verbiage to fit wiki standards?

Also, is it possible to still get an article approved if most of the sources are local/state based? Any help would be appreciated!

Kalujames (talk) 17:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:41:43, 10 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Jeromefl


Jeromefl (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19:37:57, 10 February 2016 review of submission by 2601:240:CC04:1700:9DE1:5C51:D39E:331D

My dad and I use KlowdTV to watch soccer and I was interested in getting into creating Wiki articles (assignment for high school). I was trying to figure out what language in the article is considered 'overly promotional.' All the information in here has been covered by publications; none of it comes from the brand itself.

I based my structure for the KlowdTV article on Sling TV, which reads very much like a promo piece for the brand. The 'History' section is seven paragraphs long. I have also come accross articles like Ducktv, which seems to have been approved despite having only one source. How is the approval process for Wikipedia articles kept consistent accross different articles? Again, I am a newbie just trying to complete a wikipedia page for a HS assignment. Thanks for your feedback! 2601:240:CC04:1700:9DE1:5C51:D39E:331D (talk) 19:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


February 11

00:11:35, 11 February 2016 review of submission by 184.153.44.229

184.153.44.229 (talk) 00:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC) Template:Subs: review of submission by 184.153.44.229[reply]

Hello, how I can add picture of person in this pending article? it submitted for your review. Thanks.

Hello @184.153.44.229:, please focus on getting the article published first, we can worry about photos later. In this case, photos can only be added after the article publishes. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02:15:55, 11 February 2016 review of submission by Bvered

I need some help, I'm attempting to write a page description for the website Repokar.com, have rewritten it multiple times in order for it to not sound like an advertisement and tried to even include a source just to see if it will be accepted just a very simple description first. What would a notable secondary source consist of? I tried a news article but that obviously wasn't a good enough source. When I check competitive descriptions such as Mannheim Auctions - they have yahoo (such as the one I exemplified) and their own website as sources. Confused as to what I'm doing wrong, help!

Bvered (talk) 02:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

15:33:01, 11 February 2016 review of submission by Webmasternshs

Hello,

I was wondering if you could help me with a biography that I have submitted in wikipedia but it was declined on multiple occasions. I reached out to another person and they told me that I need 42 sources to get a biography approved. I reformatted the references and added more in-line citations but the article was declined once again. The reviewer seemed as if they were very annoyed by the number of sources but I was just following what I was told. Can you please take a look at the draft and let me know what I can do to improve the article?

Thanks in advance! webmasternshs

Webmasternshs (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

15:34:17, 11 February 2016 review of submission by 174.114.194.127


Hello! Firstly, I'm sorry I'm not logged into my account pollykul, but I seem to have forgotten the password and cannot remember it for the life of me. But I just want to know why exactly the article I submitted was rejected while it has 7 reliable sources and two further links that also prove the museums 'notability.' Is there a particular part that should be edited or removed in particular? I've been going over many other fashion museums and they all have very few, if any, sources, so I'm exceptionally confused why this one for some reason is considered not 'notable' or 'reliable.' For example if you view the Bata Shoe Museum page, which is a good example as it is a museum in equivalent size to the FHM, it has only one source and two notes and yet an ample of information. What exactly differs that page from this one? I've already looked through all the wiki pages on learning how to make a good entry, so I'd appreciate if I can get some concrete advice and examples as to what can be changed and what is wrong.

Thank you!!

Request on 18:21:03, 11 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Streamizm

Hi, I am relatively new to Wikipedia contribution, and I need an advice why the draft article I wrote is declined. Any tips are welcome.

Streamizm (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 12

04:29:01, 12 February 2016 review of submission by Attrib75

Our submission for the page "Kadooge" has been declined based on guidelines of notability. I believe we have satisfied these guidelines. We have exemplified notability by charting on college radio, and receiving major press. Attrib75 (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 13

15:41:37, 13 February 2016 review of submission by Alone Rajput

Alone Rajput 15:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sir at this time I have not more time to write or to complete this page . I want to write this according to my time . I have given correct information in that article. So please accept and publish this . Thank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alone Rajput (talk • contribs) 15:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Alone Rajput:, you're the one who wants Wikipedia to have an article about Sazzar, so you must write a proper article. I know nothing about Sazzar and don't care about it at all, so why would I, or any of us, write it for you? We're happy to help you figure out how to write it, but you can't simply do two minutes of work and expect everyone else to finish your labour for you.
We don't care in the slightest if you claim the information is correct, you must provide clear citations to books or newspapers to prove the information is correct. If you would like to do so, please read WP:Referencing for beginners and that will tell you how to fix the draft so it can be published. But no, we will not do your work for you, that's your task. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:04, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


February 14

00:05:47, 14 February 2016 review of submission by Nathan Osman


In an effort to improve the article, I was wondering if someone could explain how I might go about making the article seem like less of an advertisement. It was (and continues to be) my goal to present the article from a neutral point-of-view and I had thought the article accomplished that. I fail to see the difference between the way my draft was organized and the way other similar articles (such as Gedit and Kate) are organized.

Any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated. Thank-you in advance.

Request on 11:59:07, 14 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by KDT73


This Draft: Maia Chung page has been revised and submitted by a few persons prior to my attempts and now the next step to achieve an approved page seems uncertain. I am hoping a one to one conversation where I may be able to ask questions and get feedback may help to get the page to the point of approval. KDT73 (talk) 11:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 15

Request on 06:33:57, 15 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Chinmaygupta28

Hi Team, I have submitted an article Draft: Flexing It which has neither been reviewed nor published as an article. Would like to know if there is some step pending at my end or reviewer's didn't have time to go through it?

I am keen to cover the active start-ups in India and this was first in the series as this start-up ha recently raised funds and getting increasing coverage in Indian & SEA media. Let me know when would it be published?

vrinda 06:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello @Chinmaygupta28:, your article is not currently submitted for review, please click the Resubmit button in the pink box at the top, and it will put your draft in the queue for next review. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11:47:42, 15 February 2016 review of submission by Stevemcquillin

I have images of the Vermillion Institute and would like to know how to load them; they appear under the heading Vermillion Institute on Facebook. thank you

Stevemcquillin (talk) 11:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Stevemcquillin:, please focus on getting the article published first, then afterwards let's add images. If the images are definitely, verifiable pre-1923, they are out of copyright and can be uploaded directly to Wikimedia Commons. If their provenance is unclear, or they are post-1923, you can only upload them if you yourself, personally, are the copyright holder, as in you yourself personally took the photograph. If you are the photographer, you can also upload them to Wikimedia Commons provided you check the box agreeing that you are releasing the photos under Creative Commons. You may not use any post-1923 photos taken by another person, government website, newspaper, etc. unless the copyright holder fills out a specific WP:OTRS form for Wikipedia (no, not just a "they sent me an email and said it's okay", they have to fill out the form).
Hope this helps, but the key takeaway is: finish the article first, then worry about photos. No point solving the photo puzzle if the article doesn't publish. I've left you comments on your draft to guide you to getting it finished, and I see no reason that it won't eventually publish once you get it properly cleaned-up. Cool article, looking forward to seeing it done! MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:17:25, 15 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by 173.169.139.115


173.169.139.115 (talk) 21:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=705157423"