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 Sdunham6 (talk | contribs) at 20:41, 23 May 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


May 17

07:11:43, 17 May 2018 review of submission by Suri2550

Suri2550 (talk) 07:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suri2550 - Assuming you're querying why your article was Declined, it's because it hasn't got any sources at all. Reliable, independent sources are essential for Wikipedia, as they show Notability and let readers Verify the content. Without them, your draft won't be approved. Hope this helps. KJP1 (talk) 07:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:19:22, 17 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Mornetmarx

I am trying to load an article of our kids primary school on Wikipedia. However, it has been rejected - and asking for external refernces. Can you please help me to sort this out? Mornetmarx (talk) 07:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mornetmarx - Hi, primary schools aren't generally Notable such that they warrant an article on here. See Wikipedia:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. There's nothing in your sourcing that suggests this primary school should be an exception to that general rule. KJP1 (talk) 07:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:46:11, 17 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by WalkingTheWire

My article gets removed - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KeepSolid I need assistance. WalkingTheWire (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WalkingTheWire - Because it’s a weakly-sourced advertisement. What you need to understand is that Wikipedia’s an encyclopaedia, not a marketing platform. KJP1 (talk) 12:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:54:23, 17 May 2018 review of submission by Harris lauraashley

I'm looking to get the page published similar to other law reviews. For example, I modeled the GLTR page similar to that of the Berkeley Technology Law Journal, but our page was rejected. Could you help explain what more I need to add to the Georgetown page in order to get it published? Thank you.

Harris lauraashley (talk) 18:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you done a WP:COI disclosure? Legacypac (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:06:01, 17 May 2018 review of submission by JoanneFisher60

Why is Amazon not a good source? Can I use my publisher's website as a reference?

JoanneFisher60 (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon is a sales site with unmoderated user generate content and promotional discriptions provided by authors. Your own publisher has a big WP:COI publishig self servibg content. Really, you should wait until a disinterested editor writes you up - don't do an WP:AUTOBIO Legacypac (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:53:03, 17 May 2018 review of submission by Olivia Nabiryo


It has been over two months since i made the necessary corrections but my article has not been re-reviewed. I am completely certain that i followed all the guidelines that the previous editor sent to me for correction on decline of my article previously. What else do i need to do to have it re-reviewed? please help me Thank you Olivia Nabiryo (talk) 19:53, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Olivia Nabiryo: I did your previous review, but I'm afraid a lot of your changes have not addressed the issue. Part of the problem is you need to understand what footnotes are for.
  • For example, you say "He attended Kabalega Primary School" and then you have a footnote... to a GoogleMaps coordinates where the school is. That is not what a footnote is for. What you need to have is a footnote to a news article, mention in book, etc that says Kaheru attended this school. That's the whole point of a footnote: a footnote is to say "here is a source which proves this fact I say is true.
  • Similarly, you mention when/where he was married, but your footnote is to a site for the church itself. How does that prove that Kaheru was married there?
  • You have entire sections like "Hobbies" that have no sourcing at all. How do we know these claims about Kaheru are accurate? Because you haven't sourced them, we can't tell. You need to remove any fact that you cannot clearly source.
  • You have a large article full of claims about Kaheru, but almost none of your footnotes are about Kaheru. They're about things that his life is related to, but as a short summary: if I click any of your footnotes and search for the word "Kaheru" on a page, if I don't find his name on that page, that footnote should not be there.
You need to go through your article, and for any fact on Kaheru ask yourself "do I have a footnote, and does the footnote prove my claim about Kaheru?" Any footnote that does not prove a claim must be removed, and any fact about Kaheru that cannot be proven must be removed. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:14, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:30:17, 17 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Blair152



Blair152 (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've submitted two articles here about the Galactic Federal Union and they've been declined twice because I put them in the wrong place. Unfortunately, that was the only place I could find on both occasions. Where's the page for writing the article?

You are supposed to put the content in the article, not in the edit summary. Unfortunately, an examination of the content from the edit summary reveals that this is a hoax or something from your gaming blog or something, not an actual article on an actual subject. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. If you want somebody to host your fiction drafts, create a page in MySpace or LiveJournal for it. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:21:28, 17 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by MrBernardKendall


Hi, I removed the WSJ mention and Forbes contribution (*as suggested by the reviewer) and added a citation to a New York Post article which is a reliable source and provides more information about the company. Can you please review.

MrBernardKendall (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:24:14, 17 May 2018 review of submission by CarolinaCupcake

Just looking for feedback! Anything I need to add or change to get it approved? CarolinaCupcake (talk) 21:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Do you have any connection with the company which puts this show on? If so, you MUST disclose your connection and conflict of interest.
2. We need more from objective sources, less from the show's own website. We do not need material equivalent to what you'd find in the program book. For example: you link to an article about the free-admission APHA mess, but don't put any of it into the article.
3. You need to make it clear that this is not a fan-run, not-for-profit convention, but a for-profit "ticket show." --Orange Mike | Talk 01:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike! Thanks for the feedback. In response to your points:

1. I have no connection to this convention other than it being a local con I attend. I noticed it's one of the only cons in the area that doesn't have a wikipedia page and decided to make one.
2. I modeled the page after the approved pages of other locals cons including Oni-Con, RealmsCon and Ikkicon, all of which include multiple references to animecons.com, which actually is not a self-reported source. Animecons.com is actively managed by a third party who verifies the information posted there.
3. Tax status doesn't seem to be required information for any of the other con pages included in the List of anime conventions group, can you clarify why it's required in this case? I don't have any knowledge of the internal business structure of Delta H Con so I have no idea if they're for-profit or not. Many cons don't publish that info. --CarolinaCupcake (talk) 15:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

00:50:52, 18 May 2018 review of submission by Leo.Firestone.0810


Why was my draft titled "Siegel Select" rejected?


Leo.Firestone.0810 (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to me like a non-notable division of the not-particularly-notable The Siegel Group. But Draft:Siegel Select has not been deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:24, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

02:59:22, 18 May 2018 review of submission by The unrelated kinsman

My submission was rejected because:

“Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.”

So I’m asking, what copyrighted material?


The unrelated kinsman (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The unrelated kinsman: in this edit, editor Chrissymad removed content apparently copied from a historical marker with a url saying where they found it. That puts the whole draft into suspect territory, but — as the other two sources have not been found online — it may be a while before they can be verified. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 07:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@— jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) Ok, I can remove the other two sources, but why can’t I use a Texas Historical Marker as a reference? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by The unrelated kinsman (talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 06:38:27, 18 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by 86.150.194.165

86.150.194.165 (talk) 06:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

86.150.194.165 - as the two reviewers have indicated, your problem is sourcing. You've got three. The first is a mention in a list of 100; the second appears not to mention him at all. For me, the third doesn't work but, if it did, I doubt it would give detailed coverage. You need "significant coverage from reliable sources" to show Notability. I have to say that a quick Google search throws up very little. Also, none of the sources are inline, as they should be for biographies of living persons. KJP1 (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:45:17, 18 May 2018 review of submission by Caileam Raleigh

Hi All, I have been working on this article for a number of months now and I have been repeatedly told there are issues with either its notability or lack of quality sources. However, I believe that all these issues have been well dealt with and the article is definitely suitable for inclusion on the mainspace. I resubmitted the article about two weeks ago but I'm unsure what the status of the page is now. Maybe it is just waiting for review and I am being a bit impatient, which is definitely not my intention. If this is not the case however, I would really appreciate if someone could take a look at the article and give me some advice on where to take it from here, as I've put a lot of work into it. Thanks for any help. Caileam Raleigh (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not doneDeclined again by Chrissymad. Hi, please look into WP:NCORP for more details. Thanks --Quek157 (talk) 13:00, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:50:29, 18 May 2018 review of submission by TomStonehunter


GOAL: I want to improve this article, perhaps even have it accepted at its next AfC review. So...

  1. Gut reaction: what areas need improvement? Suggestions?
  2. Several references are frequently used during the article, like 20 times or more. Is this okay?
  3. In the History section, 2nd para, there is a quote. Is this proper format or skip quoting altogether?

TomStonehunter (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC) TomStonehunter (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

07:24:30, ഷാജു അത്താണിക്കൽ review of submission by Shaju Athanikkal

Shaju Athanikkal (talk) 07:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shaju Athanikkal - Assuming you're asking about your sandbox, the problem is that it's an unsourced resume with no indication of Notability. It would be fine for Facebook, but it's not suitable for Wikipedia. KJP1 (talk) 08:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:26:00, 19 May 2018 review of submission by Louis Larnas


Ia am refering to the following draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pierre_de_Lauzun

Submission declined on 17 May 2018 by Chrissymad. "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources".

I do not see what specific sourcing is not adequate. All the references are taken from the (accepted) French Wikipedia. This is only an adapted translation.

In anticipation thank you for your help

Louis Larnas

Louis Larnas (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:17:10, 19 May 2018 review of submission by Tmahendra


I am getting this message on "article or section is disputed." on my sandbox. So, Can I submit the article or what to do, can any please tell em your valuable suggestions. Tmahendra (talk) 12:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done I don't know who put the tag, content is never disputed, but it just sounds like an advertisement. The article needs a fundamental change and I had tagged for speedy deletion as such articles cannot be in Wikipedia. See WP:CSD under G11 for more details. Language must be neutral, and subject must be notable, see WP:NCORP for more details Quek157 (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 20

10:23:47, 20 May 2018 review of submission by SusanSoyinka


I am having a great deal of difficulty in amending my article on Albert Reuss to suit your requirements. My account was blocked for weeks on the grounds that I was using the same name as "a well known living person" i.e. myself. I have been accused of infringing copyright by quoting from the article https://artuk.org/discover/stories/albert-reuss-the-artist-as-refugee, and some of the wording which originates from that article has been deleted. In fact, I wrote the Art UK article myself, having been commissioned by Art UK to do so. Since that article and my Wikipedia article are about the same subject, it is inevitable that some of the content is similar or even identical. Following advice from one of your editors, I have been in touch with Art UK about releasing my text under an appropriate Creative Commons licence, and this has now been done, which should resolve the problem. I hope it will now be possible for you to restore most of the content which has been deleted, as it is essential to the Albert Reuss story. I have tried, unsuccessfully to do this myself, but have been unable to do so, as I do not understand your procedures. This has been dragging on for 2 months now, and we seem to be going round in circles. PLEASE PLEASE could you now undo these deletions and accept my article without further delay as this whole process is causing me great distress.

Should there be any further difficulty with my article, I would also like to say that my work is thoroughly researched and my sources are provided. I have carried out a great deal of original research on this artist which has included obtaining copies of much of his lifetime's correspondence from an organisation in Vienna called "basis wien", as well as his biographical information from the Jewish archives in Vienna (IKG). I have also interviewed many people who knew him, and have been in correspondence with his niece in the USA. My intention in writing this article is to bring to the attention of the public the life and work of a much neglected but important artist.


SusanSoyinka (talk) 10:23, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SusanSoyinka: Replied at length on Draft:Albert Reuss. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:27:46, 20 May 2018 review of submission by LaundryPizza03


–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Where do I request the creation of a template? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LaundryPizza03. See Wikipedia:Requested templates. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:55:04, 20 May 2018 review of submission by SusanSoyinka

Further to my question submitted earlier today, I have now been able to restore content wrongly deleted on the grounds of copyvio. (Please read my earlier submission). This has taken many months of hard work. Please could you tell me whether there are any other outstanding issues, or can my article now be accepted? SusanSoyinka (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SusanSoyinka - Hello - It's very clear you've put a lot of effort into the draft and he's an interesting subject. But I'm afraid I do see two significant issues. First, whole chunks of it, including whole sections, are still completely unsourced. Secondly, there is a lot of what looks like personal opinion/original research in the draft, and some rather unencylopedic prose. Take the, wholly-unsourced paragraph that begins "From a young age, Albert became estranged from his family; a frail, sickly and vulnerable child, he seemed neither to fit into nor to belong to the family into which he was born". Apart from the "dramatic" tone, how do you know any of that? More importantly, how will the reader be able to verify it? And a few lines later, "There can be few expressions of undying love and support made at the beginning of a relationship, which can be shown to have been fulfilled 55 years later." That's just too purple a passage for an encyclopedia. In my view, it needs a copyedit to tighten the prose and it needs more sourcing. I think the key problem is that what you are/have been doing is closer to original research than writing a Wikipedia article. We don’t do original research, we give an overview of what the secondary sources say about a topic. KJP1 (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:37, 20 May 2018 review of submission by 129.133.196.249


129.133.196.249 (talk)

Hi. I have created this article Otake Chikuha in late March. My submission was declined by Heliosxeros, due to lack of adequate citation. I must admit I only have minimal citation, but I also feel it serves its purpose, and should be considered enough. Could someone advise me on the kind of edits I should be doing? Should I be citing more? Should I be looking for English sources? What is the best choice if I can't find much English material to work with?

129.133.196.249 (talk)

 Done @129.133.196.249: @Lydianism: clearly meets Notability with many mentions in published works; any other issues can be sorted out now that it's published. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:47:44, 20 May 2018 review of submission by SusanSoyinka


-->}} Hello KJP1 and Worldbruce. Thank you for your quick replies to my questions earlier today. Setting aside for a while the question of my style, I can vouch for every single detail I have written about Reuss's life because I have read a great deal of his correspondence between 1938 and 1975, as well as many other of his papers. These papers originated from Reuss's voluminous written estate in Mousehole, but were sent to Vienna in 1984 to someone who was supposed to write a biography but died. I obtained this documentation from an organisation in Vienna called "basis wien", and had to pay to get copies of them sent to me (some 8000 pages), as well as paying for the translation of many of them from German to English, and other expenses. (I obtained some funding for this from the Austrian government, the Anglo-Austrian Society, and the Q Fund in Cornwall). I also obtained other details of his life from the sources I have listed in "external sources", and have explained this in my article, in the "acknowledgements" section. The problem is that anyone who wanted to access these sources would have to visit these places or go through the same process as me. The information is all there, just difficult to get hold of. There is a very small amount of information about Reuss on other websites, but much of it is inaccurate. Mine is the FIRST AND ONLY serious and detailed study of his life and work, therefore I can quote no other reliable source, apart from my original sources. I am his recognized biographer. For Worldbruce to say that "Wikipedia probably should have a biography of Reuss, and any number of volunteers will be happy to write one" is wholly inaccurate. In view of this, are you seriously saying that my article cannot be accepted and no article can ever be written about Albert Reuss? I have written all my findings in my book "Albert Reuss in Mousehole, The Artist as Refugee". I assure you that I am not trying to promote my book, but simply trying to bring to public attention a much neglected but important artist. Neither am I trying to memorialize him, as suggested by Worldbruce and neither is Reuss a family member. I am a recognized author, with a reputation for meticulous research. I give talks about my books at numerous festivals, and only yesterday spoke about Reuss at the renowned Fowey Festival of Arts and Literature in Cornwall (formerly the Daphne Maurier Festival). Surely in a complicated situation like this, there is a case for accepting the work of a well known researcher and author? SusanSoyinka (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SusanSoyinka - I'm afraid that the short answer is no, there isn't such a case. And the reason for that is summarised in this policy, Wikipedia:No original research. You're a published author, with your own Wikipedia page, although that is not without its own issues, but what you are endeavouring to do with the Reuss draft is put your own research onto Wikipedia. And that's not what Wikipedia is about. KJP1 (talk) 21:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:17:07, 20 May 2018 review of submission by SusanSoyinka

KJP1 Thank you once again for your speedy response. I forgot to say that there is an article on German Wikipedia about Albert Reuss which is entirely a summary and translation of my book, and my book is given as its ONLY source. So what do I do?? Ask someone else to submit my article, giving my book as its source, as has been done in the German article? This doesn't make sense. SusanSoyinka (talk) 23:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SusanSoyinka, Worldbruce - Worldbruce will know better than I, but my guess would be that the German Wiki has a more relaxed approach to sourcing than we do. That's actually quite common for foreign-language Wikis. KJP1 (talk) 05:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
SusanSoyinka: Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the German Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. de:Albert Reuss would not pass muster here.
We require multiple reliable secondary sources to ensure that we don't parrot one author's point of view. This problem is compounded when you are citing your own work, and you say that you are the only reliable secondary source. It's good to hear that you aren't trying to promote your book or memorialize Reuss. Wikipedia is not a promotional medium, it is not even for bringing attention to neglected artists. For these reasons, and because you've said that the process is causing you great distress, I suggest you leave the writing of a Wikipedia article on this topic to someone else. I would give this advice to anyone I encountered who was repeatedly banging their head against a brick wall while exclaiming "Ow, this hurts!"
I don't know what you mean when you write that my statement "Wikipedia probably should have a biography of Reuss, and any number of volunteers will be happy to write one" is "wholly inaccurate". Three requested articles about artists were written last month. Wikipedians are always looking for suitable topics. Requesting an article might not produce immediate results, and certainly wouldn't produce the same draft you've written (but that's the point, since that draft is unacceptable), but there's no reason to believe that "no article can ever be written" about him.
With five and a half million articles, there are literally millions of ways to improve Wikipedia. I think you would find it easier to help by working on topics you are less deeply invested in. Ultimately, what to do is up to you. If you think you can change your approach, and follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, you are welcome to continue working on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 21

00:49:52, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Melayat85

I have created an article about a new pastry in Egypt. I would like to know if the article i have wrote is good or needs improvement for approval. Could you please advise? Melayat85 (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Melayat85 - I'm afraid it's already been declined as lacking sources. KJP1 (talk) 05:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03:15:02, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Elvin mail


Elvin mail (talk) 03:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03:15:02, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Elvin mail

Elvin Baruah a social activist, a politician, member of some organisations like AASU (All Assam Students Union), AAROHAN (NGO), HAWO at AWBI (Animal Welfare Board of India), WTI (Wild Life Trust of india), Assam Science Society, PFA . He born on 16th December 1985, at Army Hospital, Beltola, Guwahati, Assam. His father name was late Pradip Kumar Baruah, Mother name Alaka Baruah, younger brother name is Enton Baruah (Sonu). He also had a younger sister name Babli, who passed away on March, 2007. He belongs to a precise family now..

He took his study from PanBazar Adarkha Prathamik Vidyalay (class-1st to 4th) at Panbajar, Guwahati. Panbajar means an area's name, Adarkha means IDEAL,PERFECTION. He use to go with his younger sister to that same school together, that school was co-ed. He was in Scout and Guide too when he was in class 3rd and 4th. He was also culturally active in Playing TABALA for Music in Same School. He had completed his secondary education from Sonaram Higher Secondary School, Bharalumukh, Guwahati. Then he got admitted to Xt. Xaviers Commerce college, Ulubari, Guwahati and he completed his class 12th from NIOS, Chandmari, Guwahati. He is also a Diploma Holder of Computer Hardware Engineering course from Epitom Computer Institute, Silpukhuri, Guwahati. He is now also pursuing his Graduation in Mass Communication from Krishna Kanta Handique State open University (KKHSOU) Guwahati, Assam. Its too interesting that from his schooling time he was socially active and so he join in All Assam Students Union on 1999 by class nine(9). After his Fifteenth years of Students Political Life in All Assam Students Union, he joined to AAP. He is working for Anna Hazare Agitation with India Against Corruption by online only from Assam by the suggestion of Raja deori, who is founder member of AAP. After completing Student Political life Elvin Baruah officially worked for AAP in Malviya Nagar with MLA and ex law Minister Mr. Somnath Bharti on 2015 election by the direction of AAP central office.Elvin mail (talk) 03:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]



@Elvin mail: You may edit Draft:Elvin Baruah and copy the above content to it, if you wish to develop it further, but nothing suggests that Baruah is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Also no draft will be accepted unless it cites reliable, independent, published sources, see WP:REFB for how to cite. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04:13:08, 21 May 2018 review of draft by Emoritz2017



Hi, I submitted

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

For review. The submission-received box IS NOT SHOWING UP the bottom of the page, so it seems like I missed something and the system is not recognizing my draft as ready for review. What should I change to make it actually show up as submitted for review?


Thanks

Elan Moritz

Emoritz2017 (talk) 04:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Emoritz2017: your Draft is displaying the Gray "not yet submitted" box at top; have you tried clicking the Submit button located on the Gray box? That should enter your article in the queue and turn the box Yellow. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed I submitted using your name on your behalf, be patient and we will get to you soon. now you have to wait for someone to review. Quek157 (talk) 13:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks,

much appreciated.

Elan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emoritz2017 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:13:20, 21 May 2018 review of draft by ChefNitin

I need to educate people about Eiscnlebkuchen, I may not be able to do this alone and I need more editors to submit to this article ChefNitin (talk) 05:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ChefNitin - It'll get reviewed in time but its chances of being accepted are close to zero as you've got no sources. KJP1 (talk) 05:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done do read the decline carefully and WP:RS are needed for it to be approved Quek157 (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:56:21, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Lide Magde

The article that I submitted for Louise Stanger was declined and erased ASAP. However, the text was 100% original because I worked together with Dr. Stanger herself. Could you explain me which part of the text was copied? Thank you! Lide Magde (talk) 07:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lide Magde: I can't see the page since copyvio pages are hidden, but the deleting admin said the page was copied from https://www.allaboutinterventions.com/about-dr-stanger/ ; does that seem to make sense? MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:55, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Suraj Chiluwal


Suraj Chiluwal (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Suraj Chiluwal (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC) please suggest me the necessary edits for the approval, i had did my best as per my knowledge. Thnak you help[reply]

Your username and the name of the article appear to be the same. Wikipedia discourages Autobiographies, see WP:AUTOBIO.Naraht (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:06, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Arunbandana


This is to request the editors/admin to guide me as to what more is required to improve the article.

arunbandana 16:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

no Declined for the reasons explained on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:03, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Nicolejolma

I'd like to understand why this was not accepted. If there is additional work that needs to be done to the article I'd like to make those updates. Thank you! Nicolejolma (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Nicolejolma#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:46:35, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Apricotnectar

The article was deleted as an unambiguous copyright violation, but its source code header is explicitly commented to identify the source, with note that (1) the article in question is a mirror of the original Wikipedia article (2) the entire site is covered under blanket C.C. BY 4.0 license. No copyright violation occurred. Apricotnectar (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Apricotnectar: To have a draft restored, begin by leaving a message at the bottom of the talk page of the administrator who deleted it, explaining why Draft:Christopher Altman shouldn't have been deleted on 21 May. That's usually enough to clear up any misunderstanding fairly quickly. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce: Thank you! Apricotnectar (talk) 05:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:17:27, 21 May 2018 review of submission by Wlindars


I'm trying to figure out why this article was rejected in order to change it to meet Wikipedia guidelines. I provided source material for reputable news organizations. Is it the content? What exactly do you require because I don't understand the rejection.

Wlindars (talk) 20:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wlindars: I've left a detailed comment on the draft. It may be impossible to make it meet Wikipedia's guidelines. If it is possible, it will take a lot of work. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 22

10:35:01, 22 May 2018 review of submission by Henrik Alfredsson Sweden


Hi, I've just added some references to external sources to increase the relevance of this newly created article on the Nordic Africa Days. And I've made some textual adjustments. I hope you will find it of relevance for the wikipedia community. Please let me know if there are any parts of the description that you would like me to develop further. Best / Henrik

Henrik Alfredsson Sweden (talk) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:24:12, 22 May 2018 review of submission by Pk.sofsem


Dear reviewers, I would appreciate your help with the draft of the entry on International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science (or SOFSEM for short). This was rejected yesterday due to the lack of other than primary sources. I believe that I have resolved this issue. Could somebody, please, take a look?

In addition to "official" sources listed in the draft, you might also like to take a look, e.g., at the first answer to a question at StackExchange, where a list of notable TCS conferences is given. You can see that the SOFSEM conference is listed among other conferences, many of which already have an entry at Wikipedia (see also the page List of computer science conferences).

Many thanks in advance.

Pk.sofsem (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:24:54, 22 May 2018 review of submission by Lkarpenk


Lkarpenk (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have a an entry on "Shirley Willer" that is pending review. I understand it will take up to two months. But I have a question as the entry is pending review. I have a photo of Shirley Willer that I have explicit permission from the photographer to include on the entry. But I don't understand how to include the photo on my draft? Please let me know what to do.

Thanks.

Hi Lkarpenk. Having the photographer's permission to use the photo in Wikipedia is insufficient, so start with Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. To further understand what they have to give up, you may find it useful to read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials as well. Once you have the correct permission, adding an image is a two-step process: first upload it, then use it in on a page.
Go to Commons:First steps and carefully step through the tutorial. When you get to "First steps/Uploading files", don't dive in too hastily. First follow the link on that page to learn about the different licensing options. Other useful advance reading includes Wikipedia:File names and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images, which will prepare you to answer important questions the upload wizard will ask you. If after that you have any questions or doubts, Commons has its own help desk.
Once you've uploaded an image, the picture tutorial can guide you through how to use it on a page. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:55:58, 22 May 2018 review of submission by StarReaper



My question is, will a link from a gaming publishing platform like Steam be substance enough to resubmit?

StarReaper (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined nope, see WP:RS Quek157 (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@StarReaper: There is also an extensive subject-specific guide to sourcing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
StarReaper - I don't think the game is notable. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 23

2018–19 NHL season by team

I Created 3 2018–19 NHL season by teams today Calgary Flames Carolina Hurricanes and Dallas Stars so now there should be 4 teams now. 169.55.19.144 (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:23:56, 23 May 2018 review of submission by Batjamesquita

Hello! I`m working on a draft about Batja Mesquita. I already tried to submit it twice, but then they asked me to do some changes to get the article to be accepted. After i changed everything i could find, now my question is if this is ok to submit? Or do you still have remarks or things you think that can be improved? Thank you very much already!Batjamesquita (talk) 13:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:48:14, 23 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Thatguy1987


Hello, a while back I created an article for Attack of Life: The Bang Tango Movie, and it was declined due to some kind of copyright issue regarding word usage in the article. I changed what needed to be changed so that it would be more acceptable but it ended up being deleted anyway. I was curious is it possible for this article to be brough back? I would love a second opinion about it.

Thatguy1987 (talk) 13:48, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:07:06, 23 May 2018 review of submission by MinskBel


Hello,

I asked the person who declined the article to help me editing the article based on the point described beneath. I have not received any response. I am asking any experienced editor to help me.

The submission was declined based on reason that there is virtually zero citation count on Scholar and it doesn’t meet criteria for reliable, secondary sources. Using citation counts from any west agencies for publications in opened societies cannot reflect significance of work which was done in closed societies (like Soviet Union) especially if the publications were done not on English and published in the Soviet Union. Please consider the following:

1. The author worked in Soviet Union where there were a lot of restrictions. Only government could decide what to publish on English for other countries. The criteria for citing on Scholar is hardly reliable for scientists who lived in communist countries and it does not reflect the importance of scientific work.

2. After Soviet Union collapse some information became available on Engllish.Thinking about reliable, secondary sources there is an evidence that such a scientist produced significant amount of scientific publications and inventions.

2.1. Some materials were re-published on English – Soviet (later Russian) Engineering Review - Scopus (please see independent source –https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=7004021962).

2.2. There is also independent source on German - Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology(please see https://www.tib.eu/en/search/?id=198&tx_tibsearch_search%5Bquery%5D=Abugov%2C+A.L.&tx_tibsearch_search%5Bsrt%5D=rk&tx_tibsearch_search%5Bcnt%5D=20).

2.3. There is an independent source on Polish - Institute of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies (please see http://www.ios.krakow.pl/sawios/expertus.php?KAT=%2Fhome%2Fwww%2Fsawios%2Fpar%2F&FST=data.fst&FDT=data.fdt&ekran=WIN&lnkmsk=2&cond=AND&mask=2&F_00=00&V_00=Abugov+A.L.)

2.4. The information about inventions can be found at European Patent Office (please see https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&ST=advanced&IN=Abugov%20Aleksandr%20L&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&PA=%5BSU%5D#!)

3. Since not all publications and inventions were available for different citing agencies and only small amount of publications were available for other than Soviet Union countries there is a full source of publications and inventions on https://independent.academia.edu/AlexanderAbugov This source contains scanned copies of original publications and author’s certificates for inventions on Russian which can be downloaded. Those copies reflect significant contribution to science which with Soviet Union collapse is available now for other researchers.

4. Please also take into consideration that in publications the name of author is written in Russian tradition as A.L.Abugov or Abugov A.L. There is a good amount of citations in publications on Russian which probably are not reflected on Scholar or other than Russian languages citation agencies. 

5. All described above mentions proves that subject is notable and worthy.

Please help me. Thanks!

MinskBel (talk) 20:07, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:41:36, 23 May 2018 review of submission by Sdunham6


There is a photocopy of the original press release from the announcement of the Ford Motor Company Fund in 1949. How can I upload to use as a reference?

Sdunham6 (talk) 20:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=842658809"