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 ACPMPRF (talk | contribs) at 15:42, 2 April 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
June 2025
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


March 27

07:41:47, 27 March 2019 review of submission by 2605:E000:214B:E700:B11E:E8CE:27FA:BFE4


2605:E000:214B:E700:B11E:E8CE:27FA:BFE4 (talk) 07:41, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@2605:E000:214B:E700:B11E:E8CE:27FA:BFE4: - as the comment of the reviewer says (next to yellow !), we have requirements for an artistic professional to be included including directors. Currently he (you?) do not satisfy these requirements. Future films additionally don't count until they've had a couple of reviews.
While it may well change in the future, the bar on notability has not been reached. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:54, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:28:59, 27 March 2019 review of submission by Ziawccinowshera

this is our business and what i wrote is completely correct. so why rejected? Ziawccinowshera (talk) 08:28, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ziawccinowshera: - hi there. Several things mean this could not become an article.
Most obviously, organisations require multiple high quality secondary sources (newspapers, books etc) that cover them in-depth. As such, a government website doesn't count for demonstrating what Wikipedia calls notability.
We also write a neutral encyclopedia - so talking about "we" is definitely incorrect.
The fact that it is the business you work at means that you are currently violating our rules on Paid Editing. On your personal user page, you need to state that you are an employee/contractor /volunteer for the organisation and editing it for them. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:30, 27 March 2019 review of draft by Praneet.gundepalli


Praneet.gundepalli (talk) 13:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:25, 27 March 2019 review of draft by Aflantwo


Aflantwo (talk) 15:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:12:12, 27 March 2019 review of draft by GMontgomery2

I just submitted an article for review. This is an edit on an article I originally published as user: GEMToo In October of 2018. The article was moved to draft space with this note" Hi, I came across this article while reviewing new pages.The article had no citations and also looked like a personal essay. Please continue to work on the article in draft space and then submit it via Articles for creation". I was uncomfortable with some of the information available in the first edit of that article and did not want that available along with the user: GEMToo. This is why I have created a second account: GMontgomery2. The original draft of this article still exists in draft space and I request that it be updated with the current version I am submitting for review.

I would also like to include that I am acquainted with Don Binkowski. He was a colleague of my late father and a public official where I reside.

GMontgomery2 (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:14:56, 27 March 2019 review of submission by Walkyo

I know the article is noteworthy, as it's the tallest building in the state. There are other articles like this (for example, the tallest building in Montana), but mine got declined for not being noteworthy enough. What can I do? Walkyo (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

hi Walkyo Greetings. You need to read the grey panel message on top of the draft page as well as the comment from the review under the pink panel on the draft page. Pls click on the blue highlighted texts for further details. If you have further question AFTER you have read the mentioned, then pop back here. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:22, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I know. But it is noteable and has secondary source articles about it, I’ve cited a bunch in the article. The tallest building in Montana has an article, and only has sources on emporis. I have more than that, yet mine was denied. Walkyo (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Walkyo: The fact that an article about First Interstate Center exists doesn't mean it should exist. It might only mean that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
WP:GEOFEAT doesn't grant automatic notability to the tallest building in each U.S. state. You say "it is notable", but it's up to you to prove it by citing significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The reviewer's objection is that the coverage cited is not significant, it fails WP:SIGCOV. Find better sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the fact that there is an article for the tallest building in EVERY state except Wyoming, pretty sure WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies in this case. It sticks out like a big soar thumb on the page for tallest buildings in each state. Walkyo (talk) 19:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:45:09, 27 March 2019 review of submission by MagicLemonade18

I have a client who is very well known for the work they've created and yet the sources I've provided before were not viable. Their career began on YouTube and other social media sites which makes it a bit difficult to find articles that will verify the information i've typed up. However, I was able to find some other sites that may be able to validate the information. MagicLemonade18 (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. I'm not volunteering here to help you earn a paycheck. Legacypac (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:19:49, 27 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Jeffcoso

I am requesting assistance because I have submitted an article about the Jefferson County, AR sheriff. I have received a message stating that the article has been denied due to copyright. The information was obtained from the sheriff himself and I listed his campaign website in the reference as well as a local newspaper article that was submitted by the sheriff's office as well. What can I do in this situation?

Jeffcoso (talk) 19:19, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeffcoso: - citing a source isn't sufficient to avoid copyright issues. The issue is the duplication of text. Instead you need to paraphrase it for it to be permissible. Avoiding Plagiarism
While the Sheriff could probably alter the copyright of his website, that would mean anyone (including any political opponents) would also gain a license to use and amend it. In any case, it would be a complicated hoop to jump through and you'd still have to re-paraphrase the newspaper content. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:26:16, 27 March 2019 review of draft by Proximo-en


Hello, with all your signs ({[*$#:|, I dont succeed to put a simple reference, could you show me? Thank you.

Proximo-en (talk) 21:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Proximo-en. I've left a welcome basket of links on your talk page that you may find useful, particularly Help:Referencing for beginners. There are many acceptable ways of citing sources, so I'm reluctant to impose on the draft a citation style that may not make sense to you. But if after reviewing the help pages you're still having difficulty, let me know and I'll format one reference for you as an example. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:32:14, 27 March 2019 review of submission by 2604:2000:8247:DB00:C6B:569:55E9:E14A

This is the first time I have attempted to submit an article. I am trying to create an English entry for Dr. Montag, who has a page in the German Wikipedia. Dr. Montag does work for Siemens, but is also considered an expert in the expansion of digitalization into the medical industry. He oversees the creation and implementation of medical technology which has literally changed the way medicine is being practiced. As an industry leader he is invited to speak at medical conferences and consults with the EU in regards to digitization of medical records and the interoperability of the records systems.

As I said before, this is the first time I have attempted this. I apologize for the duplicate copy.

2604:2000:8247:DB00:C6B:569:55E9:E14A (talk) 22:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest first learning how to edit Wikipedia, and editing from your account rather than logged out, for a while before trying to edit for your employer. Many of the volunteer editors have little patience with paid editors and also little patience with editors who don't try to learn how to edit correctly. You are trying to practice Wikipedia editing while developing a draft on which you have a conflict of interest. You won't get a friendly welcome that way. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 28

02:36:37, 28 March 2019 review of draft by Kmccook


Kmccook (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have a draft submitted on a photographer, Jason Thrasher. I was working in my sandbox and somehow it got declined in the sandbox but I think I have done the work needed with inline citations for the actual draft. can you help me? I am not asking for early review of the draft--I know you are busy but my sandbox work might have mixed things up. Thank you here is the draft 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jason_Thrasher   Kmccook (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kmccook (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article not published

05:27:50, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Template:ShwetaSmenon

  • [[User:Template:ShwetaSmenon|Template:ShwetaSmenon]] ([[User talk:Template:ShwetaSmenon|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/Template:ShwetaSmenon|contribs]]) ([{{safesubst:fullurl:User talk:Template:ShwetaSmenon|action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&summary=You+have+a+new+reply+on+the+%5B%5BWikipedia%3AWikiProject+Articles+for+creation%2FHelp+desk%7Chelp+desk%5D%5D%21&preload=Template:AFCHD/u/preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=&preloadparams%5B%5D=05%3A27%3A50%2C+28+March+2019+review+of+submission+by+%5B%5B%3ATemplate%3AShwetaSmenon%5D%5D}} TB])
    • No draft specified!

shweta singh 05:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

06:55:20, 28 March 2019 review of draft by Platipusica

Hi there! I have no idea where to find "reliable sources" which mentioned Jam.py framework, other than this two in references, and this ones here: http://codegeeks.xyz/category/jampy/ https://devrix.com/tutorial/35-best-html5-and-css3-responsive-frameworks/

This is creating impossible situation for me which I can't resolve. Please advice.

Thanks

PS

29 March 2019 Thank you for reviewing and pointing "More like #5 needed.". I added one more and hope this will help in making a positive decision.

Btw, I do not see any references for this framework https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottle_(web_framework). Or this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornado_(web_server)

refereed in here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_frameworks

No comments.

Kind Regards

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Platipusica (talk • contribs) 03:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Platipusica (talk) 06:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:35:27, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Convo Agent One

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to review my draft. However, I would like to request a re-review because I believe that the subject is notable enough to be included into Wikipedia. I base this belief on several substantial news and mentions in several independent publications available online about the subject, some of which have been utilized to create the content. Both this quality of being covered by media publications frequently since the subject's foundation and its active status in the online marketplace in the country (India) makes me feel that an inclusion in Wikipedia is valid.

I should add that I have a conflict of interest on this draft, which I have declared on its Talk page.

Any more clarity on this would be greatly appreciated. I thank the community again for its time and consideration. Convo Agent One (talk) 07:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are differing opinions on this draft. AfC is an optional process. If you want the page, move it yourself Legacypac (talk) 12:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding, Legacypac. I wouldn't want to do that because I have a conflict of interest with the subject. And as per WP:PE point #5, I would request the AfC community to regard it and publish if it meets the criteria, which I believe it does. Please do let me know if there's anything more I could add/edit. Thank you for your support. Convo Agent One (talk) 07:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:27:25, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Hottfitnsexy

How he is not notable when he is being published by major media websites and the sites have all been sourced in the page? Please have someone else review this article again because you are not reading the material and sources. Hottfitnsexy (talk) 08:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

you will have to discuss with User:RHaworth who has made this page impossable to create without Admin tools because it has been created so often problematically. Legacypac (talk) 12:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:18:23, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Chris7turner

Hello. Comments made by editor K.e.coffman regarding the notability of AFDP Global have been taken on board. The notability guidelines require that 'each source needs to be significant, independent, reliable, and secondary. Then, there must be multiple of such qualifying sources.'

More of these sources covering the social enterprise's launch have therefore been added, including MSN, FOX Sports and Reuters, as have subsequent significant mentions of the organisation, including in The Guardian, CNN, Reuters again and Inside World Football.

Overall, sources now include these above plus the Washington Post, the BBC, Eurosport (owned by Discovery Communications)and Associated Press. Is this enough to establish the notability of the organisation? Chris7turner (talk) 12:18, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris7turner, I've taken a look at the draft. The only current content that might be worth keeping is the "History" section, all the rest is fluff at best or even simply irrelevant. I have not evaluated the sources as it's close to bedtime for me. Trim it down to only what's in the History section and resubmit it for another review. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:29:53, 28 March 2019 review of draft by Paul Wynter

newbie to editing pages for WIKI, I had been blocked because I use a VPN I am based in Bangkok and have to use a UK vpn for company reasons and privacy abroad reasons how can I clear this block, I am now using my HOME IP address (3BB ISP) which is not VPNed, thank you.

Paul Wynter (talk) 13:29, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:46:24, 28 March 2019 review of draft by Bigchip

Hi, In 2010, I created the article Dog Is Dead. I last edited it in 2016 (although others have since then). This February (nearly 9 years later), I received a message on my Talkpage headed: "Submission declined on 22 February 2019 by Legacypac (talk)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bigchip/Dog_Is_Dead

1. Does this refer to my original creation of the article (9 years ago)? Or to my latest edit to the page (nearly 3 years ago)? Or to more recent edits by other users?

2. What is the process for responding directly to this reviewer's message, so I can resolve this issue? I believe the article, with 24 references including the BBC, should qualify for inclusion on Wikipedia without further editing by me.

Bigchip (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bigchip Greetings. Reviewer Legacypac declined the article 'Dog is Dead' in 'your sub page' which you created on 17:19, June 13, 2010. You then created Dog Is Dead article in the main space a few hours later on 20:05, June 13, 2010 and this article is not declined and is in Wikipedia (In another words you have nothing to worry about) - see your contribution history HERE. Kindly place {{Db-G7}} on top of User:Bigchip/Dog Is Dead and state "request deletion from creator" so your sub page of Dog is Dead is deleted. Pop back here if you need further assistance. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:38:00, 28 March 2019 review of draft by WJG222

I am trying to submit a draft for review, and it will not allow me to do that. It keeps telling me it's a draft and not reviewed, but will not go into review mode.

WJG222 (talk) 15:38, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:47:48, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Renlock

Could you please elaborate on the non-notability opinion for Vasudevacharya. Vasudevacharya is a noted scholar on the subject of Advaita Vedanta in Australia, India, other parts of Asia and the USA. He has been interviewed by the government run Australian Broadcasting Commission and the national Indian broadsheet newspaper “the Hindu”. What do you consider would make this noted scholar more noteworthy. He is not a household name but in the area of Indian Philosophy and particularly Advaita Vedanta he is considered a world authority. Renlock (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC) Renlock (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Renlock Greetings. I didnt go through the draft page, but I am here to help answer your question above. For a article to be merit a page in Wikipedia, the subject needs to be notable and the content need to supported by multiple independent, reliable sources which the sources talk about the subject in length and in dept and not only merely passing mentioned. Pls note home page, official site, interviews, press releases, user generated sites, sources associated with the subject and etc can NOT be used to contribute/demonstrate the notability of the subject. In addition, the content needs to be written in neutral point of view and free of WP:COPYVIO and WP:PROMOTION tone. Pls read WP:NACADEMIC and WP:AUTHOR for notability guidelines and forWP:GOLDENRULE additional info. (note: pls click the blue highlighted texts for details info) cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CASSIOPEIA for your assistance. Renlock (talk) 07:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:57:52, 28 March 2019 review of submission by Pivotcyclesron

I am wondering why my content was rejected. I am happy to edit but I am not sure what I need to do from here. Pivotcyclesron (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft fails WP:NCOMPANY, we require significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources and this reads like an advert, not surprising as you seem to have a conflict of interest being a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:42:19, 28 March 2019 review of draft by OfficerMeowMeowFuzzyFace


Hi, can you please help me. Wondering what other sources I can add that would help the article be approved. I'm looking at various articles for indie level artists and the sources seem on par with what I've provided.

Also, what can I use for notability criteria in addition to them being signed to a well known and historied electronic label?

Thank you for your assistance.


OfficerMeowMeowFuzzyFace (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OfficerMeowMeowFuzzyFace Hi good day. First of all, you need to re-read the comment left by the reviewer, and secondly pls click on the blue hightlited text for they willl bring to you other pages for details information of the topics. Do pop back here AFTER you have read them (including the info of links) then come back here if you have specific questions. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@OfficerMeowMeowFuzzyFace: Being signed to an important indie label is not one of the notability criteria. If you're saying the band has released two or more albums on one of the more important indie labels (and thus meets criterion #5 of WP:NBAND), then you're burying the lead. Bands aren't a dime a dozen, they're a penny a gross. Tell the reader in the first sentence or two why they should read an encyclopedia article about this band, why they are notable. If you're using other articles as examples, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best work. There's a lot of junk in Wikipedia that you don't want to imitate. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:45:15, 28 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Sapphire099


Sapphire099 (talk) 21:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:41:27, 28 March 2019 review of submission by IJD3NN3I


I am asking for a re-review as this article is similar to already published articles such as the ones that are stated as in the surrounding areas. Any further issues to whether this article can not be published, please identify for myself to alter accordingly.

IJD3NN3I (talk) 23:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJD3NN3I. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article does not mean it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or that it is welcome. It is not a good excuse to create similar articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best.
The draft has been declined for reading like an advertisement and rejected because it fails to demonstrate that the topic meets WP:ORG. Four of the draft's references are the league itself, and the fifth is the governing body of the sport, hardly arms-length sources. The bulk of any article should be based on independent, reliable, secondary sources, but the draft shows no significant coverage in such sources. If it were resubmitted as is, I would decline it for failing to demonstrate notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:52, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 29

05:54:29, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Usernameisentered


The company, whom this page is about, is a major property developer in Bangalore India. With over 50 properties to date. I was going to expand on this with more information from more sources when i found them, but it was removed before i had the chance. I think this is notable enough to be included on wikipedia, as their direct competitors such as Sobha Ltd. have a page of their own.

Usernameisentered (talk) 05:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameisentered: - articles require multiple high quality secondary sources. Company articles require the highest level of sourcing quality (corporate notability). Currently the draft has 3 sources all from the company's website.
It shouldn't be submitted to AfC until you think that it meets our various requirements for being an article.
With regard to Sobha Ltd., have a look at the sourcing list. Obviously you don't need anywhere near as many good sources, but 4 in-depth, reliable, independent secondary sources would be good. Some additional content (would also be beneficial. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:04:27, 29 March 2019 review of submission by MSWR07

Hi, I have a question about the declined draft of my article. The reviewer said that there are not enough independet sources to prove that the article is relevant. In his opionion the mentioned sources are rather like advertisement for the company. In the German wikipedia the same article was accepted. Could you help me plesae to improve the content so that the article will be published? Thanks in advance. MSWR07 (talk) 09:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MSWR07 Greetings. See below
  1. Sister Wikipedia sites - Please note all sister Wikipedia sites (different languages) operate independent from from each other, thus each has their own policies and guidelines. The article which has been accepted in DE Wikipedia might not be accepted in EN Wikipedia.
  2. Proper attribution - Majority of the content in your draft page is copied in translation from the DE Wikipedia artcle - see HERE and you are not the original creator of DE article for such you need to pay proper attribution to the editors in DE article - see WP:PATT for info and instruction.
  3. Write article in your own words - Pls write the article in your own words.
  4. Neutral point of view - Article needs to write in neutral point of view, in other words, simple factual info which summaries the info in your own words from independent, reliable sources. Pls read WP:Your First Article for further info. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:38:15, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Blixoo

Hi,

I submitted this page yesterday, and it got rejected for not passing the NCORP criteria. I'm wondering how I could improve that, because the sources used (I think) are independent and reliable. In addition, the person reviewing said it was "somewhat promotional". But in comparison to another company in the same industry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimperium) I can't really tell where I'm promotional.

Thanks for the help Blixoo (talk) 09:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:50:08, 29 March 2019 review of submission by 43.231.57.160

43.231.57.160 (talk) 09:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

i want to ask to you tha who is an steniographer and what is the work of steniographer and the range of the salary 

if i am making desigion towards an steniographer is it right.

Please guide me sir

11:01:07, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Ratnesh1

I am a beginner to Wikipedia community and want to build Wikipedia profile of my company. Ratnesh1 (talk) 11:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ratnesh1 pls keep your questions in one message thread - see next section for the answer. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:04:26, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Ratnesh1

I want to learn about submitting article on Wikipedia. Ratnesh1 (talk) 11:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ratnesh1 Hi Greetings. Pls read WP:Your First Article and referencing and pls click on blue highlighted text for further info. Pls note that if you want to write about your company then you would have a conflict of interst and is highly discourage by Wikipedia. You need to WP:Disclose your COI in your user page and article talk page. One you HAVE READ them and if you still have questions, then pop back here.Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:06, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Abhay adaka


11:09:06, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Abhay adaka Abhay adaka (talk) 11:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


An Ad Legacypac (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:56:25, 29 March 2019 review of submission by Logamuthu

My Submission of Your Brain - Use it lose it was rejected by the moderator saying, "I personally like it but it is more an essay than an encyclopedic article and contrary to Wikipedia Policy!". How do I improve my submission. Mine is a non-altruistic effort to reach netizens with Brain related advice and I feel Wikipedia will be the right forum. Please advise me ASAP. Logamuthu (talk) 15:56, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a house for essays, but for encyclopedic entries on various topics. Please do not continue to work on your submission. JTP (talk • contribs) 19:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:55:45, 29 March 2019 review of draft by Mshiwolich

I'm not sure this was re-submitted correctly. I worked on it in the Sandbox and the put in these words to resubmit at the top. Please let me know. I have spent a good amount of time on this. Thank you. Mark Shiwolich


Mshiwolich (talk) 18:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mshiwolich: - looking at the timing of this message and the edit history I believe the answer is "yes it was submitted properly, it was just reviewed and declined rapidly". You submitted at 18:53, this message was at 18:55, and it was declined at 19:01. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:16, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


March 30

01:25:34, 30 March 2019 review of submission by 119.92.13.175

Hello, after my fail of my draft, I would like to know 5 reasons it has been declined. I wanted it accepted by my term just to share a review of the official gme. I want to know. 119.92.13.175 (talk) 01:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for random game cruft. Topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Sources are not reliable. Sources do not show significant coverage. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not particularly Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE. Theroadislong (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:10, 30 March 2019 review of submission by 2405:204:200B:DB8:4519:B0AE:AD3A:9526


2405:204:200B:DB8:4519:B0AE:AD3A:9526 (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:27:31, 30 March 2019 review of submission by Heubergen

Hi, my very first article on the en_wikipedia was just declined as it appears to "read more like an advertisement". The review didn't go into details about which sentences or paraphrases need to be re-written so I'd like to have some help here. I tried to include different sources and make the article as neutral as possible. I didn't include any (negative) critics because I didn't really find one. As to my motivation for this article; I listen to her music and was looking for a Wikipedia article but didn't find one so I decided to start one. I contacted the management of her during the article process but ask them to not intervene with the article writing. Heubergen (talk) 09:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:10:29, 30 March 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Wmwgriffin

felt that the intent for creation of information on the von braun rotating space station had merit 
 and should be searchable on wiki..  open to responses on how to accomplish that ??? regards. and thanks in advance


Wmwgriffin (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft is fragmented sentences and so is this question. Please learn to write coherently. Legacypac (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:05, 30 March 2019 review of submission by WikiWiki5678

WikiWiki5678 (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why Zee Keralam page has been rejected? Zee Keralam is a newly launched Malayalam language television channel in India. But in Wikipedia, no page are alloted for Zee Keralam. Kindly reconsider it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zee_Keralam

Needs to pass WP:BROADCAST Legacypac (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:10:51, 30 March 2019 review of submission by X3Kemono

I believe that this band deserves more recognition for what they do. Also, I believe that people should be able to learn about the history of The Coils, along with learning about their origin and possibly having people discover a new type of music genre that they might love. Thank you in advance. X3Kemono (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence this band meets WP:NBAND Legacypac (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:48:08, 30 March 2019 review of submission by BletchleyPark

Would an article about Nataal web site and it's associated Magazine (circulation circa 3,000) be of interest / acceptable? The Web site has been published since early 2015, the magazine was first published a year ago and the second edition is due out in May this year. Nataal is concerned with Black fashion, music and culture and is primarily aimed at the Afro-American, sub-Saharan African and Afro-Caribbean reader. The Web site has nearly 600 articles spread across all 3 categories. Pages in the web site are cited 8 times in the reference sections of various Wikipedia articles.

I have 3 potential conflicts of interest

  • My daughter, Helen Jennings, is the editor and a major share holder.
  • I am a minor (5%) share holder.
  • I do not make contributions to the actual site contents, but I have been responsible for creating all of the pages from raw copy and images for the past 2 years and other technical matters.

If deemed suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, who should write the article? Obviously my daughter, as a journalist, could do a good job, but also obviously she has a major CoI.

BletchleyPark (talk) 18:48, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Likely not suitable. Needs to have multiple reliable sources discuss the topic in detail. Don't write about stuff you are closely connected too. If some independent user determines the topic is notable they will write it up. Legacypac (talk) 20:16, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 31

05:15:40, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Tonyjaimy


Tonyjaimy (talk) 05:15, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:11:26, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Tonyjaimy


Tonyjaimy (talk) 06:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Stanicmi (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:13:58, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Stanicmi

Stanicmi (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:21:51, 31 March 2019 review of draft by BahrdozsBulafka

Hi there, can any admin/someone please review the recently submitted article here for approval. Thanks a lot! : - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rahul_Akerkar

BahrdozsBulafka (talk) 07:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BahrdozsBulafka. The draft is in the pool to be reviewed, which at the current rate is likely to happen within the next two months. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:41, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:23:35, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Salmanqureshi1967


Salmanqureshi1967 (talk) 14:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Respected Sir,

I wrote an article that I think is notable for the world to know. You see I am in process of writing it and it has great significance to bringing tourism back to Pakistan. I have given the article my name but it does not mean that I am projecting my self. As the target is to tell the world that Pakistan is a wonderful place for tourism, this article relates to my work in the field of hospitality & tourism. Please reconsider it & allow my article to publish.

Hi Salmanqureshi1967. You are mistaken about the notability of the topic. The draft was correctly rejected as non-notable. Furthermore, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it is not a platform for content intended to promote something, such as "to tell the world that Pakistan is a wonderful place for tourism" or "to bringing tourism back to Pakistan." --Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:36:25, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Aditya332

I have submitted my talk on "sequences those take other sequence terms as difference,ratio". It was declined and mentioned a suggestion to improve sequence page instead. I tried editing sequence page by adding some part of my above work. But the updates are not lasting long. Help me how to edit wikipedia as an author Aditya332 (talk) 16:36, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aditya332. I've left a welcome basket of links on your talk page. They may help you understand the behavioral norms here and find the best way for you to contribute to Wikipedia. In general, I advise against creating new article or making large changes to existing ones until you've built up some experience by making many smaller changes. A good way to find things that need doing is through Wikipedia:Community portal. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:50, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:19:57, 31 March 2019 review of draft by ColorTheoryRGB

I am requesting help to add sources and re-publish this article because it has been noted by major news sources recently as a stand-alone single from the album. ColorTheoryRGB CMYK 19:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

tell me

19:56:53, 31 March 2019 review of submission by Hazel2398454

Hazel2398454 (talk) 19:56, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

16:33:25, 1 April 2019 review of submission by AnnSimoens


Dear friends at Wikipedia Thank you for having reviewed my article. I do feel really disappointed that it was rejected cause I spent days writing it, gathering all kinds of external references (as per Wiki's guidelines) but still: my article was rejected (for a second time) with reject reason: "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Does not meet WP:NCORP."

Do you think there's a way to adjust my article in order to get it approved? Or is it simply not worth investing any more of my time in it? I am so disappointed cause I love Wikipedia so much (I even wired money to you in the last few years, which I normally only to for animal organizations, so I broke my own rule for Wikipedia :-)

There are companies providing similar services compared to the ones that SIGOS is offering, they're called Araxxe and Wedo technologies for example and they are on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Araxxe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeDo_Technologies) so I don't understand why their articles got accepted and mine didn't.

I'm hoping you could give me some tips/tricks on how to improve my first own article (cause I'm still quite proud of it.)

Thank you in advance for your help. Ann


AnnSimoens (talk) 16:33, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:AnnSimoens this may be a borderline case of meeting WP:NCORP. I'll leave notes on the draft for you. Legacypac (talk) 09:37, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

08:52:53, 2 April 2019 review of submission by 93.43.35.73


Dear @K.e.coffman

Before writing this page, I took the following page as an example: <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintiq<ref> .

Can you please let me know what can be done (added, removed, modified) in order to have this page respecting the rules of Wikipedia.

Thank you

93.43.35.73 (talk) 08:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Read the note on the draft, read the linksd policies. Legacypac (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:06:56, 2 April 2019 review of submission by Roxana Leonte


Hello. Saw that my request was rejected and I would really love to know why. When i did my research i did notice that nicknames are a part of Wikipedia’s archive. The same Gabriel Iglesias as this nickname and it can be found here. All I really want is for people to be able to know where the airplane got its name from as many people claim nowadays thta they called him like this. I am not breaking any rules of this page all i want is to inform people of the origins of the nickname Fluffy for the airplane A380. If i can change something about it, please let me know. Roxana Leonte (talk) 09:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly a joke - which is vandalism. Legacypac (talk) 09:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:16:17, 2 April 2019 review of submission by D574h

This article was declined for a comment stating that not enough sourcing was provided. The article links several sources from South Bend, Indiana's Municipal Code, in addition to a link to the official .gov website for the flag of South Bend, Indiana with identical information. This article and the official website were created in tandem, which is why information sourced is from the Municipal Code, not just "local papers".D574h (talk) 11:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC) D574h (talk) 11:16, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:30:02, 2 April 2019 review of submission by Igor Kachevskyi

Kindly review the article. I added more information and some references. Thanks Igor Kachevskyi (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


12:37:27, 2 April 2019 review of submission by MarionPB

{{Lafc|username=MarionPB|ts=12:37:27, 2 April 2019|page=

MarionPB (talk) 12:37, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Editors,

I am a professional author, technical writer, and feature writer. So far I have no clear direction about an entry I have created on Peter G Demers. The subject has made notable contributions to the field of sports medicine and professional hockey. My approach and sourcing have been criticized and yet my submission meets and exceeds the approach and caliber of other pages on Wikipedia. Moreover, an image I have full copyrights to continues to be deleted.

I am appealing these changes, and requesting that the page on Peter G Demers be published, along with the image. I am glad to continue editing as needed but there has been zero clarity on what is expected. In addition, this page is modeled after existing Wikipedia pages and meets or exceeds that model.

Thank you,

MarionPB (talk) 12:37, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MarionPB: I can refer you to WP:NHL, the ice hockey WikiProject, for sourcing and formatting advice, but I disagree with your claim that it "meets or exceeds" the page model; the section about his time with the Kings in particular seems quite WP:PUFFy. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:42:27, 2 April 2019 review of draft by ACPMPRF

Should we add more detail to our article, e.g., History, Mission, Goals, Research Grants Awarded, Images, etc.? Do we have enough external/reliable links? Any other advice to improve our article is appreciated!

ACPMPRF (talk) 15:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=890634779"