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 Routerdude (talk | contribs) at 05:45, 6 May 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
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


April 29

08:59:19, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Chagogervasio


I don't know who created this profile but I have found some details which I updated with sources for Mr. Lee which would be help them to make this profile successful. Now I hope it's fine. Chagogervasio (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Chagogervasio#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:19:36, 29 April 2019 review of draft by JoeMCooper2794


JoeMCooper2794 (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing my draft article. Can I ask which references are deemed inadequate? Is it because some are wikipedia pages?

Thanks, Joe

Hi JoeMCooper2794. It was declined because it contains statements that do not cite a source. In some cases they originally cited Wikipedia, which, being user-generated, is not a reliable source, so the reviewer removed the citations.
The subject appears to be living, so I've gone further and removed part of a sentence about his medical history and why he did something. Writing such things without citing a reliable published source is a violation of Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons. If you know the subject personally, be careful not to accidentally include things you know only from personal knowledge. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:45:36, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Hcs2019


we are an arts charity that would like to get listed on Wikipedia. We are similar to Artsangel charity, so please can you advise why they can have a page but we cannot?


Hcs2019 (talk) 12:45, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hcs2019: - well as a first critical point, the draft was a copyright breach - just duplicating site content without a suitable license on it. As a secondary aspect, there are articles in Wikipedia that should not be here and just haven't been identified yet, and so the existence (or absence) of one article doesn't justify the existence of another. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS explains why we have this viewpoint quite well.
As a bigger concern, please pay attention to your talk page - your account seems to be breaking at least 1 serious rule, and possibly a second.
If you are writing about an organisation due to a connection (especially any paid connection) you have to declare it - please look at the post and respond to its requirements to avoid the risk of your account being blocked. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:00:52, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Zenus103


Zenus103 (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC) I added the references just after the first review. How can I ask again for a review?[reply]

Hi Zenus103. The newspaper is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Revisit the topic in a few years, by which time its circumstances may have changed. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:11, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Rjdavies1994


Rjdavies1994 (talk) 13:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi,

I'm struggling to create this page as I'm following the likes of other companies that are similar and the content they cover on those pages. This company is as relevant as the other live pages and mentions similar topics and forwards to the same articles. (GoCompare, Simply Business, Hiscox)

I've also linked multiple sources, which are professional British publications used as sources across wikipedia also. Can I get some assistance on what is wrong with this page?

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Rjdavies1994#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:14:57, 29 April 2019 review of submission by 213.205.242.2

 Hi, could I please know when my draft will be reviewed? It’s been more than 2 months so I’m just wondering? Thanks!213.205.242.2 (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

213.205.242.2 (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly 400 drafts have been awaiting review longer than Draft:Pandey Ganpat Rai, with the longest wait currently being 14 weeks. You can monitor these numbers by checking Category:AfC pending submissions by age/Very old every week or so to see how many drafts are ahead of yours on the list. Volunteers are not required to work on the oldest drafts first, but some do, so the draft should gradually move up the list. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:44, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It has since been accepted by another editor. You should have received a notice, but if not, Congratulations on your first article! Please stay around and make further ones. I urge you to make an account--you don't hav to use your real name. DGG ( talk ) 17:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC) . DGG ( talk ) 17:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:37:36, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Liff182


Hello,

Can you please review this page. I believe that Edapt is a notable organisation as it is a national organisation for teachers in England and Wales. It has had substantial press coverage and offers an alternative to the teaching unions. Reputable press coverage includes:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/11/10/private-schools-now-taking-legal-insurance-teachers-amid-rise/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10289775/Teachers-are-tiring-of-their-old-unions.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24347235

Can you please provide further advice on how to publish this article?

Liff182 (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:08:35, 29 April 2019 review of submission by Emmanuelgzleh


am doing to know why David keep rejecting my post what is the matter with him on it..

  1. @4GE.KING LIMITED 17:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Emmanuelgzleh. User:Emmanuelgzleh/sandbox is not an encyclopedia article, so it cannot be accepted for publication at Articles for Creation. I've left a welcome basket of links on your user page that may help you get oriented and understand how you can contribute to the encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 30

09:02:26, 30 April 2019 review of submission by Morgangr


I don't believe that someone can diminish our work and reject our article in such a manner and comment. This is unacceptable and degrading. The fact that our charity is not well known does not mean that we cannot list it on Wikipedia or ANY other online list of organisations, events etc. Our charity is 100% voluntary and 100% grass roots. We help people that governments and large charities don't.

Thanks Andreas Papazidis Co-Founder and Trustee GRACEaid.org.uk

Morgangr (talk) 09:02, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Morgangr. The rejection of the draft is not a reflection on the quality of the organization or the worth of what they do. Many good organizations are not suitable for inclusion. Wikipedia is not a list of organizations, it is an encyclopedia. It aims to cover only those topics that are notable, ones that have gained significant attention from the world at large and over a period of time, as evidenced by significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. Being "not well known" means there should not be an article on the topic here. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:53, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:08:35, 30 April 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Anand raj singh Sisodia


My draft have own reference and contain specialist please check and success my work

Anand raj singh Sisodia (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anand raj singh Sisodia It would help very much if you could add some more informationand sources. This is a town, and we do include all tows if they are adequately documented. Peraps some regional magazines or newspapers have articles about it? They don't necessarily have to be in English . DGG ( talk ) 17:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:48:58, 30 April 2019 review of draft by Fatemiounwiki1


Fatemiounwiki1 (talk) 09:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC) may i ask to helm me how can i publish my article[reply]

Hi Fatemiounwiki1. Four sections of the draft: birth, life, education, and scientific trips, cite no sources. Also, the nature of the second reference is unclear. Is it a book, an academic journal, a magazine, or what? Who is the author, what organization published it, and when was it published? It is not clear from the two sources cited, one of which is not independent of Shams al-Din Mohammad Mojtahedi Najafi, whether he is notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). You may wish to consider alternative outlets for your work. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:06, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:55:10, 30 April 2019 review of submission by Jacqueline456


Someone has created this profile may he/she doesn't have the much more details so I have updated an account of a young entrepreneur and If I'm not wrong, this will be goes for live. Jacqueline456 (talk) 10:55, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:59:24, 30 April 2019 review of submission by Karan raghavan


i want to know why my article got rejected.i used good references too. Karan raghavan (talk) 11:59, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia and YouTube and Instagram are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:52:57, 30 April 2019 review of draft by Warriorwolfraven


Warriorwolfraven (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add photos/images to my article?

Hi Warriorwolfraven. Unless you took the photos yourself, start with Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. To further understand what the copyright holder has to give up, you may find it useful to read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you can't get permission, you can't use the image. Once you have the correct permission, adding an image is a two-step process: 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 explains how to use it on a page. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:07, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:03:23, 30 April 2019 review of draft by Juleskramer


Hello, I would like to update the title of my article to Miami-Dade County Commission for Women. So, just adding the hyphen. I also would like upload a logo but I am getting an error about owning the image. Is there any way to avoid this?

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

Juleskramer (talk) 19:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Juleskramer The fair use provision of copyright does not apply to drafts, so don't try to add a logo now. The presence or absence of images will have no effect on whether the draft is accepted. If it is accepted, then you can add a logo. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:31:15, 30 April 2019 review of draft by Dora's ice lolly


Direct link to Draft

Hello, I have written to you before but I wonder if my message got lost. Please see links below, I do not understand why you are allowing Wiki articles about other rabbit organisations but not Cottontails. If you compare my article to the others in the link, I don't see why theirs is acceptable and mine is not. Please compare and review your decision. Thank you for your assistance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Rabbit_Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rabbit_Council Dora's ice lolly (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dora's ice lolly. Your previous question was answered on 30 December, here.
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. British Rabbit Council, for example, is tagged for notability, which is often the first step on the road to deletion. So generally it isn't productive to compare a draft to other pages. 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.
If you believe that you have improved Draft:Cottontails to the point that it meets the oganization notability criteria, then you may submit it for review by clicking the blue button in the big gray box on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:32, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:14:15, 30 April 2019 review of submission by ICrimea


ICrimea (talk) 22:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:14:15, 30 April 2019 review of submission by ICrimea


On English language few sources. --ICrimea (talk) 22:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:25:14, 30 April 2019 review of submission by Marcela McLeod

I would like to ask for help fellow editors to see why is my article being declined. TMarcela McLeod (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)he reason stated on the review is the inline citation aren't used. As I am aware I've included all the supporting citations for the article and not sure which information is the editor refering to.[reply]

Please let me know which line exactly I need to fix as this process of creating article is being very exhausting and long.

Thank you.

Marcela McLeod (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marcela McLeod. I assume you're writing about Draft:Todd Hiscock. In response to the review, you've already removed masses of unsupported information, but there are still statements that do not cite a source. You write, "this process of creating article is being very exhausting and long." Yes, it is. Creating a new article is one of the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating things a novice Wikipedian can attempt. Reviewers may send you hither and yon to fix various problems, but no matter how much editing you do, Todd Hiscock and Draft:Essential Coffee are not notable. So there is no chance of either draft being accepted for publication.
You could reexamine the topics in a couple years. By then they may have been covered in depth by sources that demonstrate notability (think scholarly books, The Australian Financial Review, The New Zealand Herald, and the like). You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 1

Request on 01:07:40, 1 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Esolischi


I was developing this article as a stub and followed dozens of other medical stubs in doing so. Could you please help in identifying what I'm doing wrong to get this stub published? I didn't see other stubs require as much notoriety?

Esolischi (talk) 01:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Esolischi: - companies/organisations require at least 2 (preferably 3/4) high quality sources that are: "in-depth, secondary, reliable, independent". So while the company's website obviously is good for some basic stats, it doesn't help notability. The 2nd source is an interview with most of the content generated by the interviewee (so not independent). The third source is mostly on the fiscal split, but may or may not qualify as a source.
There are lots of stubs on plants and locations with lower notability requirements than companies, so you may be seeing that. There are also some company stubs that haven't been identified as needing deletion after we raised the requirements a few years ago, they will slowly be removed (or, preferably, improved). Nosebagbear (talk) 10:02, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:52:48, 1 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Michron777


Hello, I was confused at the reason why my article got rejected (Your Story Hour). Before submitting it, I got advice from other editors/contributors, and looked at several similar published articles as a guide to what is acceptable (which made it more weird because some of the other radio drama articles I've looked at didn't seem to have much notability based on the reasons given me).

Because notability is broad, is there something specific that I could have added to make more noteworthy (while at the same time not make it sound so biased)?

Michron777 (talk) 14:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@K.e.coffman and Michron777: - my reading of it (obviously, difficult due to the general lack of sources available online, at least of those cited) suggested that it may be notable, and certainly not warranting an immediate reject (as opposed to a decline). I may be missing something, so I've pinged the reviewer who hopefully can provide a bit more detail on their concerns. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In my estimation, this does not meet WP:NORG. It's also a form of WP:ADVOCACY and thus belongs on the group's website, not here. --K.e.coffman (talk) 15:05, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:55:49, 1 May 2019 review of draft by Skohl


Skohl (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:09:03, 1 May 2019 review of draft by SJND


I am correcting this article for Eyam Parish Church with suitable authority from the church. The current article on Wikipedia is sparse to say the least. The name is incorrect as the church is not now St Lawrence's Eyam but Eyam Parish Church (It has been St Helen's in the past too). As the church owns the copyright to the web site and John Clifford's book I find it strange that we might be breaching our own copyright - is this correct? Surely we can quote from sources where we own the copyright. Many items have been redacted and I do not know why. The church is in the process of undergoing a major reordering project so it is very important that people researching it can see the whole history not a tiny bit about the last reordering in the 1860s. Please advise how I should proceed or should we ask for the article to be removed from Wikipedia as it currently reflects badly on the church. Many thanks, Simon Daniell SJND (talk) 15:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We already have an article for that church here St Lawrence's Church, Eyam please add to that one instead of creating a new one. We require no authority from the church to edit the article and you should declare your conflict of interest if you have a connection. Theroadislong (talk) 16:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SJND: - just a follow-up as regards your copyright query - all text in Wikipedia must be either in the public domain or under our very broad license. The church can update its website to open up its text to be used, but that will have the effect of allowing everyone to use and alter it as they wish. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:06:46, 1 May 2019 review of submission by GlitchBJ


What can I do to make this page? What should I add or change? GlitchBJ (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is anything you can do, some topics just aren't notable enough for an article. Theroadislong (talk) 16:21, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:47:54, 1 May 2019 review of draft by Michael212427


I'm new to wiki and 40 out of school for some time and having trouble organizing this article to be approved, can you help or refer me to someone online who can help get this info together and approved?


Michael212427 (talk) 17:47, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Michael212427 Greetings. Theroadislong helped you tiding up the article, very kind of them (In Wikipedia, we use they/their/them when we dont know the gender of the editor). I have reviewed it and now is in the mainspace. The article is here - Howard Dill. For anything to do with editing - you would visit WP:Teahouse, there will be plenty of friendly and helpful editors to answer your question. Thank you for your contribution. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 16:26, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:19:30, 1 May 2019 review of draft by 64.124.122.226


If we made some additional edits will this push us back longer in the review process? Here is the link to his page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_R.W._Cracken

Thank you for your time.

64.124.122.226 (talk) 18:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? Wikipedia accounts are strictly for single person use only. Do you have a connection with the law firm? If so please declare it. Theroadislong (talk)

Request on 18:30:52, 1 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by AlishaTurner


Since his latest album produced by Jamie Foxx just came out and there isn't a lot of press yet, should I change his page to person or actor instead of focusing on his music? I can add his list filmography instead of discography for now. I could even link his most notable move to an existing wikipedia page where he is listed as cast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Eyez_on_Me_(film)

AlishaTurner (talk) 18:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:32:07, 1 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by AlishaTurner


Since his latest album produced by Jamie Foxx just came out and there isn't a lot of press yet, should I change his page to person or actor instead of focusing on his music? I can add his list filmography instead of discography for now. I could even link his most notable move to an existing wikipedia page where he is listed as cast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Eyez_on_Me_(film) AlishaTurner (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)AlishaTurner[reply]

AlishaTurner (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:54:38, 1 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Kpillai856


My article is getting rejected every time for notability but i have linked all relevant sources from media houses proving the article's authenticity. kindly help!


Kpillai856 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kpillai856 and Stevey7788: - while the original reviewer was correct about certain claims being OR, I have to disagree with their judgement on the key issue that it did not satisfy Political notability - he was a State assembly member, which would seem equivalent to a US State congressman (the usual example of "sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office"), his ministerial position would also count for this.
Kpillai, please take into account Stevey's points as regards memorials - this needs to be a neutral article. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:12:06, 1 May 2019 review of draft by Communna


Could I ask anybody to look on the page I created? "Boiling Steel". I'll be happy for the help from Wikipedia gurus.

Communna (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Communna: - hi there, your draft was submitted for review. I've done that for you. However, as the yellow box says, there is a large backlog (c. 9 weeks), though reviewers don't always review in order, so it could be done anytime between now and then. In the meantime, you can always make additional edits to the draft's content. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:14, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Communna: I would recommend fixing the plot and gameplay section to comply with MOS:YOU before a reviewer gets to it. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2

01:45:19, 2 May 2019 review of draft by INeedSupport


I'm having trouble finding a secondary reliable source that is outside the main location of the restaurant—which is Indiana. Based on what John from Idegon said, I have at least one reliable, secondary source in it. Is there a way to find more? Thanks! INeedSupport :3 01:45, 2 May 2019 (UTC) INeedSupport :3 01:45, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@INeedSupport: - depending on what your search issue is, you might try either adding keywords or blocking out others (e.g. "-KEYWORD"). Blocking out the local newspaper that you already have might make others come to the fore.
It's unlikely, but always take a look at google book search etc, not just the "All" and "News" options.
The chain may well just not have enough notability yet, at least to meet the higher requirements of corporate notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like I found a secondary, reliable source from Arkansas. Do I have enough secondary, reliable sources right now or I still need another one? Thanks! INeedSupport :3 02:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just post another review of draft instead of pinging the user instead. INeedSupport :3 13:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:41:33, 2 May 2019 review of submission by CruzBebe


I've updated the page addressing all the errors you've provided me. CruzBebe (talk) 02:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CruzBebe - The subject simply isn't notable. He fails wikipedias guidelines on notable musicians. Being nominated for the "Rap / Hip Hop Artist of the Year" in Western Canada simply isn't notable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:30:14, 2 May 2019 review of submission by Krutika Samnani


My draft Crave Eatables, had previously been declined included with following source: https://www.zaubacorp.com/company/CRAVE-EATABLES-PRIVATE-LIMITED/U15122MH2012PTC235346

Now in Haldirams, following source is included: https://companycheck.co.uk/company/03522846/HALDIRAMS-FOODS-LIMITED/companies-house-data

Just check this out,as both sources are similiar in nature; so why my draft was not accepted? And that's fine but please guide that my above mentioned source is reliable or not? Krutika Samnani (talk) 05:30, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are just routine listings and of no use, we require in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 16:48, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:51:36, 2 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Webplanet12345


Hello,

I need your assistance on getting my newly create page approve. The page is about David J. Maloney, and it's the second time that the page was rejected, the first time the editorial board cited no reference source & citation, which I've corrected but the second time nothing give for the rejection.

koya (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Webplanet12345: - it was rejected on notability grounds because none of the sources provided were suitable: The point streaks site (which appears to just duplicate the SPHL site) couldn't be independent because they're talking about a now-owner, and they also only spend 4 lines on Maloney himself, most of which are his quotes. The 2nd isn't about him, so doesn't provide notability (it's also a primary website, so Maloney's wouldn't count, though it might help with basic facts) and the 3rd is a press release, so is inherently non-independent.
Remember, sources have to satisfy all 4 of: "in-depth, reliable, independent and secondary" Nosebagbear (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:50:14, 2 May 2019 review of submission by Abovingdon

Thanks for your feedback on my recent submission for an Audiens page. This was needed to sit alongside the existing Bango page. I specifically wrote it as a factual, non business view of the company. I am looking to add more independent sources as requested.

I agree it should list my connection with the company - I have added that. Is there any way to have the words independently reviewed to ensure factual accuracy? We don't want to pay for someone to add these facts.

Looking for guidance.

Abovingdon (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abovingdon: - thank you for adding the connection.
With response to your factual accuracy, putting it through AfC means a degree of review will occur. I'm a tad confused - are you not satisfied with your own factual accuracy?
I would ask that, on the talk page, you state the four best sources that talk about the company itself that are "in-depth, reliable, independent and secondary". Please don't focus on the seed capital/VC ones, and remember that interviews without analysis aren't independent. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:01, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: - thanks for your input.
Yes, I'm very satisfied with the accuracy. I was simply wondering if an independent review would resolve any outstanding concerns about conflict of interest etc.?
I have added more citations, but not sure if they meet the criteria. I'm struggling a bit to gauge compliance. I will look to add the 4 best sources to the talk page. Abovingdon (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:37:03, 2 May 2019 review of draft by Barry Bernas

I received a comment to my submission that it needs to be wikified. I searched

for what that meant and found nothing of help. What do I need to do to wikify my submission?

Barry Bernas (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barry Bernas Wikifying is to format the article by using Wiki markup - see Help:Wikitext. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:47:00, 2 May 2019 review of submission by DanStallman


I have removed what I think the Reviewers are indicating is "Memorial". Please let me know if this is acceptable.

Thank you, DanStallman (talk) 22:47, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


May 3

Request on 07:17:47, 3 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by CCFBROWN


An article about Cambodian Children's Fund (CCF) Founder and Executive Director, Scott Neeson, has been declined on the basis of not having enough content. The article has much more content than other similar articles (i.e. Scott Harrison). It was suggested that more information be added to the CCF page instead. Can the Scott Neeson article get approval if more content is added? Is there a specific type of content that is missing.

The previous article (later deleted due to referencing) did not have as much content as this current one.

Thank you for your help. CCFBROWN (talk) 07:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


CCFBROWN (talk) 07:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:51:30, 3 May 2019 review of submission by LewisManz


LewisManz (talk) 08:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC) I'm trying my hardest to make it neutral and not like an advert, I thought my 3rd iteration as better than my first and second, but now it has been completely denied. Should I return to the 2nd iteration and try reworking again?[reply]

Thanks in advance

Hi LewisManz. No, stop working on the draft. The company is not notable. Any article about it could only be promotional. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. If you're here to build an encyclopedia, you're welcome to edit something else. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:21:28, 3 May 2019 review of submission by Badal Saboo - Connect the dots


We have made the required changes with the inclusion of appropriate references. Badal Saboo - Connect the dots (talk) 11:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Badal Saboo - Connect the dots: - there's a few issues here, both with the draft and with your username/activity.
Critically, your phrasing indicates that you have paid involvement/employment with the site. Please have a read of [1] which sets out how to disclose these links. Disclosure is obligatory if there is any paid connection, even if you aren't specifically linked (such as an employee or intern doing it in their own time)
You also have said "we have made" - wikipedia accounts need to be individual. So if you're in a team, each member who edits Wikipedia will need to have an account (e.g. Worker1@Badal Saboo) etc. (You can pick whatever you feel like)
In relation to the draft, it currently reads heavily as a press release, rather than a neutral generalised report on the subject.
The draft also only has 1 reference atm, and in almost all circumstances more are needed - 3 high quality ones is best.
Please let me know, or ask at the Teahouse if you are having difficulties with the first two aspects. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:08:30, 3 May 2019 review of draft by Gshallo


Hello - I'm just trying to get a feel for the status of the SNA Displays page submission. Thanks.

Gshallo (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Gshallo#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:28, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:28, 3 May 2019 review of submission by Makingeditsandwhatnot2018


Lotame is actually a fairly large global company with many big name publisher and brand clients. They also have the largest DMP in the world! I edited with more information to help justify that. Thank you! Makingeditsandwhatnot2018 (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:55:05, 3 May 2019 review of submission by OR Marine Reserves


I'm trying to update the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's page by creating pages for each of the marine reserves (they are listed, but say that a page hasn't been created for any other than one - Cape Falcon Marine Reserve). I tried to create one for Cape Perpetua Marine Reserve, but was declined because a page for Cape Perpetua already exists. "Cape Perpetua" is a general region, versus "Cape Perpetua Marine Reserve" is a place overseen by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Any ideas to help get these pages created under the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's page would be helpful. Thank you!

OR Marine Reserves (talk) 19:50, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:09:07, 3 May 2019 review of submission by 2601:280:4E00:23C2:2DA6:DEBD:1CBC:BEF4


Hopefully, the removal of the content has made the article acceptable? 2601:280:4E00:23C2:2DA6:DEBD:1CBC:BEF4 (talk) 23:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


23:50:04, 3 May 2019 review of draft by ShyhBCRaps


ShyhBCRaps (talk) 23:50, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it okay if you guys approve the article about ShyhBRaps PLEASE, PLEASE hes my favorite of all time can you guys?

May 4

01:09:21, 4 May 2019 review of submission by ShyhBCRaps


ShyhBCRaps (talk) 01:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Because i want it to get approved how do i make it better

Hi ShyhBCRaps. The musician is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable here. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:40:05, 4 May 2019 review of submission by Abnerclymer


Abnerclymer (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


08:26:43, 4 May 2019 review of submission by Swatians


Swatians (talk) 08:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that this topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:49:03, 4 May 2019 review of submission by Wordsfrombimpe


Wordsfrombimpe (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


What can I do to my article published on Wikipedia?

Hi Wordsfrombimpe. The musician is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable for publication here. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:18, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:12:12, 4 May 2019 review of submission by Adamszala


I have searched the relevant sources and made the hyperlinks and the account detail like company information (Wunwun) also updated in Hello Alfred Wikipedia page, and now I hope it's full fill the wiki terms. Adamszala (talk) 10:12, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:25:36, 4 May 2019 review of draft by HirmizM

The webpage keeps saying I need to add inline citations, however, I already have multiple citations in the page. Not sure what I'm doing wrong here.

HirmizM (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@HirmizM: - hi, as far as I can tell, you haven't been declined since January. At that point, your sources weren't inline but instead were general - that is, you had a list of sources at the bottom that applied to the whole page, but not linked to specific statements (which appear as the blue numbers).
You've now done that, so that decline reason wouldn't apply.
You do need to resubmit it, and then it will be reviewed in the fullness to time (there's currently a long backlog I'm afraid - the yellow box will indicate roughly how long, though some are done much more quickly). Nosebagbear (talk) 19:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


May 5

02:17:30, 5 May 2019 review of draft by Davismichira


Davismichira (talk) 02:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Blatantly advertorial page Nosebagbear (talk) 10:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:18:04, 5 May 2019 review of submission by Davismichira


Davismichira (talk) 02:18, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate Nosebagbear (talk)

04:30:51, 5 May 2019 review of submission by Lalisekhon


I tried to make it less a resume. I am working on it! Welcome any edits. Lalisekhon (talk) 04:30, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


04:32:06, 5 May 2019 review of submission by Lalisekhon


Lalisekhon (talk) 04:32, 5 May 2019 (UTC)i've re-edited it. working on it![reply]

13:27:06, 5 May 2019 review of draft by INeedSupport


Looks like I found a secondary, reliable source from Arkansas. This is also far away from the location of the main restaurant chain, which is Indiana. Is the business notable enough for me to submit for review or is it not notable enough? Thanks! INeedSupport :3 13:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:06, 5 May 2019 review of draft by 197.14.134.219


197.14.134.219 (talk) 14:41, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:51:11, 5 May 2019 review of submission by Webplanet12345


Am unable to over-ride previous draft post that was rejected by editors for new once. Kindly help out with correction... koya (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Webplanet12345. Sure, glad to help. I've corrected the draft by removing the masses of unsupported content, and have added a few sources that were missing, about his arrest on suspicion of DUI. That seems to be the only thing in his life that has attracted much attention from reliable sources. It probably isn't enough to justify an encyclopedia article about him. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:22, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:40:09, 5 May 2019 review of draft by WIKIrestrict


Hello, I was just wondering if someone could proof read a draft I have created and give me some advice about what to fix. Thankyou! WIKIrestrict WIKIedit 20:40, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 6

04:46:51, 6 May 2019 review of submission by Krutika Samnani


I had given this draft again for re-review? Why wasn't it taken for re-review?

Krutika Samnani (talk) 04:46, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:45:18, 6 May 2019 review of submission by Routerdude


Hello,

I've created a page a couple of months ago but it was rejected for insufficient information. I have since added more info and would like to request another review. The link to the draft is here. Routerdude (talk) 05:45, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=895735618"