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 Iapsingh (talk | contribs) at 23:44, 16 May 2020. 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 10

00:54:51, 10 May 2020 review of draft by GenreandPoliticsComplutence


GenreandPoliticsComplutence (talk) 00:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can you help me with the reviwing of the content and references placement in order to publish the article. Also i would have need some help with image for infobox template. Thank you.

09:37:57, 10 May 2020 review of draft by SahanaPrasad


SahanaPrasad (talk) 09:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I am still unsure about the feedback given. What other changes do I need to do[reply]

12:54:44, 10 May 2020 review of submission by Pappukhan2312


Pappu Khan 12:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Pappukhan2312: Wikipedia is not a social media network like Facebook etc. If your only goal here was to create an article about yourself , then I'm afraif that this is the end of the story. You might want to consider alternative outlets. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:18:19, 10 May 2020 review of submission by Georgeko


Dear Wikipedia,

The reasons given for rejection are extremely broad. In order to consider an appeal or a rewrite, it would be helpful to understand what specific criteria the reviewer relied on to conclude that the article must be rejected.

Thank you.


Georgeko (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Georgeko. To know what was in the reviewer's mind, you really would need to ask the reviewer directly, but I'll try to explain what may have factored into their decision.
Websites under sites.google.com are self-published, without editorial oversight. It is not clear who the author of the cited one is, what their credentials are, or whether they have any reputation for accuracy and fact checking. So it is not a reliable source and should not be cited by the draft. That leaves two sources: a page from a book, and a primary source research article in a journal. The general notability guideline advises that, "Sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." The reviewer indicated that the topic is not sufficiently notable to justify a stand alone encyclopedia article. They may have reached that conclusion because the draft cites a single secondary source of unclear depth.
Being unsuitable for a stand alone article doesn't mean the topic can't be covered within an article on a broader topic. It might be suitable, for example, to say something about the variety in Penny (Australian coin). How much emphasis to give it there would best be discussed on that article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numismatics.
Rejection is meant to be final, to indicate that reviewers do not intend to review the draft again, no matter how much you revise it. There isn't really an appeal mechanism, because Articles for Creation is an optional process. You are asking for the advice of experienced Wikipedians. If you don't trust that advice, then as long as you don't have a conflict of interest, you're free to create the article directly in mainspace. Of course if the reviewer was correct, it will more likely than not be deleted, but that's the risk you run. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Worldbruce,

Thank you for your very comprehensive explanation.

Please note that the draft article was based entirely on the arguments and evidence presented in a peer-reveiwed academic journal. The research underlying the journal article was also extensively footnoted. The google.sites reference (which also belongs to the author that wrote the journal article) was a minor point that referenced some further research that the author had recently conducted.

Within the very broad subject of numismatics there is a myriad of stand alone topics. For example, a search on "1930 Australian Penny" will generate more than 2.8 million hits on Google (including a plethora of academic sources) due primarily to its unique historical significance. There are hundreds of other similarly important coins that are likewise worthy of individual attention and cannot simply be scooped under a single general article on 'Australian coins'. That's like asking a historian to fit their article on Henry VIII under a single article on Kings and Queens of England.

While I appreciate the difficult tasks of reviewing new article submissions, I think the underlying problem here is that reviewers should not endeavour to apply policies and rules to subjects they are not themselves familiar with. I don't expect there to be an expert reviewer on every subject, but if you're not an expert then you should at least have the courtesy of offering the author the benefit of the doubt and asking for further information before deciding to reject.

Just a suggestion! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgeko (talk • contribs) 23:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgeko: I have no idea whether the reviewer of the draft is a numismatist or not. I'm not a professional one, but as a collector have a keen interest in the subject. The best place to get advice from Wikipedians who are involved in numismatics is Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics.
The backlog of Articles for Creation drafts awaiting review was kissing 6 months as recently as last September. Despite as many as 445 new ones dumped on our desks every day, the backlog is now down to 7 weeks. Typically, two-thirds of all reviews are performed by a cadre of 10-20 reviewers. So as a practical matter, the amount of individual attention that each can receive is limited. Any ideas you may have about how to attract additional reviewers, specialist or otherwise, would be most welcome. It would be more effective to discuss process improvements at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation rather than at this help desk. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:46:11, 10 May 2020 review of submission by Deepaksingh21


Deepaksingh21 (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepaksingh21: Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself. Further, according to the block logs, this page was a self written vanity page. Please note that Wikipedia is not for advertising or "spread the word" about anything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:18:03, 10 May 2020 review of submission by Shenayahewagama


Android Wedakarayo is a top-level Tech media in Sri Lanka similar to TechRadar, TechCrunch. Therefore I thought it is very useful to publish a Wikipedia article that will be very useful to people who will search about them. if you search them on google as Android Wedakarayo, Android wadakarayo, androidwedakarayo, androidwadakarayo the results will be on the top. Shenayahewagama (talk) 16:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alexa, Whois, blogs, Facebook, Twitter and YourTube are not reliable sources, you removed my comment from your draft, you asked for advice didn't you?. Theroadislong (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


if the sources are not reliable, then why TechRadar got the approval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TechRadar

Shenayahewagama (talk) 17:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

StoryJumper draft rejected May 10 2020

Why was it declined? 111.88.15.184 (talk) 19:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:44:15, 10 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Helen Puffer Thwait


Hello, I am a relative newcomer to Wikipedia, and have only completed one full article. I recently submitted a new article for review, and received a message indicating that another article with the same title (created by a different user) is waiting for review. That article was submitted about two months ago and rejected. (Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dewey_Johnson_(musician).) Given that the existing article has not been revised or resubmitted since being rejected, and since the article I am proposing contains the information in the existing article (plus a great deal more), what can I do to move things forward? If the person who created the existing article does not revise and resubmit it, does my article remain in limbo indefinitely? (Here is the link to my article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Helen_Puffer_Thwait/Dewey_Johnson_(musician)) Is there any way to communicate with the creator of the existing article in order to ask if they plan to revise it? Many thanks in advance for your help. I apologize for the "newbie" questions! Regards, Helen Helen Puffer Thwait (talk) 19:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I should re-submit the draft, your version is far better sourced. Theroadislong (talk) 19:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:16:31, 10 May 2020 review of draft by AlbastruMaria



So my article was first declined because it didn't contain enough citations, now it's declined because you can't use social media as reference even though that is where I got most of my information. Guess I'll just use the interviews, because what other people say about the band is better info than what the official band biography on their website says, but I guess yea, not my rules, this will have to do now. Am I wrong for thinking this doesn't make any sense?

I can give you a list of similar pages to the one I want to create that literally have 3 references, of the same kind as mine. I feel like my article is just dismissed because the reviewer is too lazy to actually read and inspect my changes. I would not be so insistent with this if I didn't put so much work in it. I just want to create good content and I feel like I am not taken seriously.

Thank you!

AlbastruMaria (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Other inappropriate articles existing does not mean that yours can exist too. See other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. It seems that this band does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable band. If it does, you need to demonstrate that by providing independent reliable sources to show it, and the article should only summarize what those sources say. Social media and interviews with the band are primary sources and not acceptable for establishing notability. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:18:34, 10 May 2020 review of submission by Moonraccoon


This article was rejected for not meeting WP:NACADEMIC criteria; however, Dr. Roberts meets #1 by creating the field of commercial content moderation (she is cited on Moderation_system), #2 by winning an EFF Barlow Pioneer Award[1], #3 as a Carnegie Fellow[2], and #7 for her work on commercial content moderation [3] (I have provided additional citations in support of #7 on the article draft). Thanks! Moonraccoon (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moonraccoon (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Pioneer Awards 2018".
  2. ^ "Carnegie Corporation of New York Names 31 Winners of Andrew Carnegie Fellowships".
  3. ^ Chotiner, Isaac. "The Underworld of Online Content Moderation". The New Yorker.

May 11

01:44:49, 11 May 2020 review of submission by RaisingAHand


Can you give recommendations on a Book's wiki page? I think it's normal to have a page talk about a book, why it's written, and who wrote it. Especially in a case where the book is raising money to help fight a children's disease, I think the more awareness there is the better.

RaisingAHand (talk) 01:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest to find out why this article is a bad fit for wikipedia. You should wait for someone else to naturally document your book/cause. If you hire or direct someone else to create this page, they will need to disclose it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#howtodisclose and of course include other https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research#Forms_of_researchsecondary sources to avoid a summary of primary sources constituting original research. --TZubiri (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:30:42, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 2400:1A00:BB10:7ECC:8C9C:A47B:F0F0:A463


2400:1A00:BB10:7ECC:8C9C:A47B:F0F0:A463 (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:57:24, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Molee4real

Hello, can I know why my article was rejected? because the reason is the information is not notable, while it is, I have provided even ref and I removed ref that are not needed as you asked, okay. so can you help what am supposed to do. Molee4real (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


06:38:38, 11 May 2020 review of submission by TZubiri


TZubiri (talk) 06:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TZubiri, What do you mean you'll be publishing it soon? If you mean you're going to move it out of draftspace, I must caution that the article is likely to be deleted or returned to draft. If you mean you're going to submit it back to the AfC process, it will probably get declined. The issue is that the subject does not appear to be notable, i.e. he's just an average dude, and thus we have no special reason to write about him. Also, the sourcing is insufficient. His own blog/website should not be used as a source, as it is not independent of the subject. Unless you can find multiple reliable and independent sources that discuss him in more than just passing mention, we cannot write about him. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll focus on improving the article on his most notable work, Requests. Thanks for the response. --TZubiri (talk) 02:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm going to be publishing this article soon. If someone has specific criticisim, please let me know.

07:12:50, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 223.176.67.2

Eumat114 please help me so that my article can be approved . 223.176.67.2 (talk) 07:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:24:34, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Romario mohanty

Please help me so that my article can be approved Romario mohanty (talk) 07:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Romario mohanty I think you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. This is an encyclopedia, where articles about people must summarize what independent reliable sources like the news say with significant coverage say about people shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves. It appears that you do not meet that definition, and no amount of editing can confer notability on you. It depends on the sources. In addition, please review the autobiography policy as to why writing about yourself is strongly discouraged here. A Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable as well. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:09:16, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Ankit Krs Pandey

Ankit Kumar Pandey is a inspiration for other player and a great personality through there biography i want to show the world to get inspired by his dedication. If there is any problem and error do let me know because i don't want delete this article and i can correct the error that are found by youAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 08:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of your 18 sources are reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ankit Krs Pandey Are you related to this person? If so, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare. Unfortunately, it seems that Mr. Pandey does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person, as the sources you provided are not independent reliable sources. If so, no amount of editing can change that. If you just want to tell the world about him and his good work, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

in this biography i had done something wrong like sources, codes or else please help meAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 09:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ankit Krs Pandey We can't help you provide sources that don't exist. Please review my comment above. If you have further comment, please edit this existing section instead of creating a new section. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sir, i have try so many time but then after giving my full potential and i am unable to submit it properly evrey time, i recorrect and checked the error but it doesn't seems working and declined again and again by wikipedia could you please suggest measures for these after opening tutorials i am unable to understand the matter within it so please help me out humble requestAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ankit Krs Pandey, Your article had no proper references or inline citations. It also was informal and had [[WP:NPOV[[. The article has been rejected, which means that a fellow editor felt there is no chance that notability can be established. I would second this opinion. As such, your article will not be considered further.

08:42:58, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Missinfinite19

I would like a re-review as I have improved my article and added multiple sources to my work Missinfinite19 (talk) 08:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no improvement, there are still zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:12:07, 11 May 2020 review of draft by SylviaatRSG


I wonder if you would kindly look at the article for creation submission I wrote a few weeks ago. I have tried twice communicating with the editor that rejected the submission, and have gotten no response.

I believe a careful look at these three sources will demonstrate the notability of the subject:

https://www.michigandaily.com/section/soccer/michigan-alum-mission-popularize-soccer-states

https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2018/10/01/daniel-sillman-relevents-29-year-old-ceo-has-bold.html

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/en/Journal/Issues/2019/03/25/Forty%20Under%2040/Sillman.aspx

The Michigan Daily source is exclusively about Sillman. Yes, it has some quotes from him, but those quotes do not make up the majority of the source. The Bizjournals source is also entirely about Sillman, with just a small number of quotes from him, especially compared to the length of the entire source. The source also contains quotes from other people that know Sillman, but not that many directly from him. The Sports Business Daily is a reliable source. Although it is short, it is entirely about Sillman, and only quotes him at the end with two short statements.

When these three sources are taken together, I believe there is a good case to be made that they constitute significant coverage from reliable sources. Please take another look. I hope you will agree with me that Daniel Sillman should have an article on Wikipedia. SylviaatRSG (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SylviaatRSG, None of those sources are compelling. The first source is a student newspaper of a school that the subject is an alumni of. The second is bizjournals which has questionable reliability as many of their stories are sourced from press releases and in all likelihood it's paid for coverage. The third source I'm not familiar with, but a sports business publication has a very narrowly tailored audience and wouldn't do much in the way of demonstrating notability on a wider level. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:59, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Matejmitev13


Hello,

I want to publish my first article and I have already made (what I think) is a good draft. The article is about Flavia Weedn, a famous US artist, illustrator, and poet. I am new to Wikipedia and many things are quite confusing for me in regard to the complicated processes.

I am writing here to ask for help on how I can improve my draft article? I would like some advice from experienced editors, I appreciate it!

Thank you. Matejmitev13 (talk) 10:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:07, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Bouhlechat


Bouhlechat (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bouhlechat: You can resubmit drafts by clicking on the big blue button labeled submit. I see that you made substantial additions to the Draft.. I'm going to ping @Robert McClenon: as the last reviewer if he has something I missed, but from what I see now it looks acceptable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Bouhlechat, User:Victor Schmidt - I have not reviewed the draft in detail, but I see that it has numerous footnotes and that the external links have been dealt with properly, which were two of the issues that I identified, so that seems to be all right. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:49, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 93.42.65.231

Burningwave Core
RepositoryBurningwave Core
Written inJava
TypeFramework for building frameworks
LicenseMIT License
Websitewww.burningwave.org

Burningwave Core is a fully indipendent, free and open source Java framework for building frameworks with functionality of:

  • criteria based classes search
  • scanning file system
  • generating classes during runtime
  • executing stringified code
  • facilitating the use of reflection

References

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

References

  1. ^ Burningwave Core official source releases
  2. ^ Burningwave Core official binary releases
  3. ^ Burningwave official forum
  4. ^ Stoffer Khan: Generating "Classes at Runtime and Invoking Their Methods With and Without the Use of Reflection"
  5. ^ Pink Academy: "Java Masters Generate their Classes at Runtime"
  6. ^ Edvard Orsalian: "Burningwave Core: a Java frameworks building library with an original classpath scan engine"

93.42.65.231 (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This does not explain notability. Unbroken Chain (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joaquim Guttierrez: Websites dzone.com, medium.com, and quora.com contain user-generated content, so they are not reliable sources. The remaining three sources are not independent of Burningwave Core. There are no independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of the topic, so it is not notable, and Wikipedia should not have a stand alone article about it. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:57:07, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Hope samantha

Added additional recent source from Fitch Ratings in the history section. https://www.fitchratings.com/research/insurance/fitch-affirms-cno-financial-group-ratings-outlook-stable-on-coronavirus-review-21-04-2020

Hope samantha (talk) 14:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope samantha Your draft has been rejected after several declines, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards. Please see the comments left by reviewers on the draft. Adding a Fitch Rating is not the significant coverage in reliable sources needed. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:39:17, 11 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Akaawase Teryima


I need guidance on content creation on Wikipedia.

Bernard Akaawase (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bernard Akaawase: That draft was deleted as is was untouched for six months. the "Draft"-Namespace is not for the infinite hosting of material found unsiutable for the encyclopedia. I are no administrator and can't see what was in there, aparently you didn't submit it for review. You can submit draft's for review by adding {{subst:submit}} to it while they are still existing. The good news I have for you that pages that are deleted from the Wiki are not technically deleted from the harddrive of the Servers Wiikipedia is running on, they are only marked as deleted in the underlying datebase, and as such, can be undeleted. If you want to have this draft undeleted, go to WP:REFUND/G13 or simply ask here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:50, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Aayushmamu04


Aayushmamu04 (talk) 16:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:12:00, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Nabila4535


The article I submitted was declined. But I think the subject is notable and qualifies for a Wikipedia article. I went through the notability criteria and I would like to highlight that Alexey meets both the basic and additional criteria: Basic criteria: Alexey has been covered in the following secondary sources: Printed and online press (In Arabic): https://www.sana.sy/?p=806199 https://www.arabstoday.net/498/013347-أليكسي-أول-سوري-يحصل-على-منحة-رودز-للدراسة-في-أوكسفورد http://pen-sy.com/?p=25053 http://esyria.sy/sites/code/index.php?site=latakia&p=stories&category=ideas&filename=201810151235121&fbclid=IwAR0puBfwc-WQVeTG2wOCHJVW3-ajjPlg_VkEwmfJvmqBvMLT3sunRqRQGAk http://www.alwehdaonline.sy/index.php/since/19308-2017-11-26-16-23-51 http://www.alwehdaonline.sy/index.php/news-2/17449-2017-04-05-10-40-16

Primary sources TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DZ0XpQNW-4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATxh6xGe4ac&feature=youtu.be

Articles, weblinks: https://www.rhodeshouse.ox.ac.uk/scholars/rhodes-scholars-class-of-2018/alexey-youssef/ https://rhodesincubator.com/blog/2020/3/2/rhodes-incubator-entrepreneur-highlight-alexey-youssef-founder-of-keea-inc https://europeansting.com/tag/alexey-youssef/ https://international.weill.cornell.edu/alexey-youssef https://www.imtj.com/articles/lessons-front-line/


Additional criteria Alexey fulfills the first criteria in the additional criteria list: ("The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times.") 1. He is the first Syrian to be awarded the Rhodes Scholarship, which is considered the most prestigious scholarship globally with previous scholars like President Bill Clinton and secretary Condoleezza Rice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Scholarship) 2. He has been granted an Exceptional Talent in Digital Technolgy visa from the UK (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Points-based_immigration_system_(United_Kingdom)#Tier_1_(Exceptional_Talent))

I have added more references and made some edits before asking this question I have also checked other Wikipedia articles about biographies of living people. This article for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivarasa_Rasiah doesn't have references for every single statement

Can you please tell me what other things I can do to get the article published?

Nabila4535 (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Nabila4535:, it looks like your submission was declined for two reasons, the fact that it reads like an advertisement and a lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. In addition, the article's formatting does not quite meet Wikipedia standards. (I've gone ahead and fixed that part for you though.) Phrases like "Youssef was genuinely interested in building the capacity of the healthcare and medical education systems" and "Youssef has always been driven by innovations." make the article sound like an advertisement, or like you're trying to promote the article's subject instead of stating facts about them. I personally don't see a huge problem with the sources, although external links are not sources. You should find a way to integrate facts from those pages into your article and then use those pages as sources just like you did for the others. @Lapablo: is a much more experienced AfC reviewer than I, however, so there may be a problem I'm just not seeing. Hope this helps. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 20:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Squeeps10:, thanks for the valuable feedback and for fixing the formatting. I made the edits you suggested, so I hope the article is ready for re submission now? Nabila4535 (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it's mostly ready for publishing. There are a few small things that still need to be fixed, like formatting quirks, but go ahead and resubmit it. I'm going to refrain from reviewing it, and I can't guarantee whichever of my colleagues reviews it will accept it, but I think it has a good chance of being accepted. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 18:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Squeeps10:, thanks for replying. I'm not sure what quirks are. Can you please explain or give an example? Nabila4535 (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nabila4535:, A "quirk" is a small, insignificant trait or feature. In this case, I'm using the word to mean minor issues with formatting, although after going back through the article, I was only able to find two small issues, both of which I fixed. You can probably go ahead and resubmit your article now. It may be some time before it's reviewed again, due to a large backlog at the moment, but we'll get to it eventually. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Squeeps10: Great, I'll resubmit. Thank you so much!Nabila4535 (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome! If you have any other questions feel free to ask here or at my talk page. Cheers! Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 22:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:02:58, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Tejaskapoor22


Tejaskapoor22 (talk) 21:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

help me

Hey @Tejaskapoor22:, what would you like help with? Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:15:38, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Evolarjun


Hi, I'm trying to revise and revive the AMRFinderPlus page. Editor Sam-2727 marked it for deletion some time ago. One of the criticisms was a lack of notability, and since it is (in my opinion) more widely used than several of the database pages I'm trying to figure out what kinds of citations to indicate notability. Sam-2727 indicated that the excessive use of the word "Curated" reads like a sales pitch, but to my reading it is a verb indicating who manages the data in the database. I changed one instance of the verb "curated" with "was created by and is maintained by", but it seems a bit awkward.

I'm also struggling to improve readability to a non-technical audience. I linked to wikipedia articles about a bunch of the topics. Suggestions would be appreciated.

I'm a newbie at this, so apologies for what are likely dumb questions, but for scientific databases I'm not sure how to improve the article to make it approvable.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Evolarjun (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Evolarjun:, your sources don't seem too bad, though I'm far from an expert in microbiology. My primary issue with the page is the excessive amount of "technobabble", we don't need to know every little thing the database does/can do. But keep in mind that I can only understand roughly half the article, and the rest in incomprehensible to me. I'd suggest reading WP:RF. Hope this helps. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Evolarjun: issues such as this can often be resolved by asking for help from a relevant WikiProject, in this case WP:WikiProject Genetics or WP:WikiProject Medicine might be able to assist. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help @Squeeps10: and @Dodger67: I'll try a more dramatic rewrite and remove some of the more technical detail.
You're very welcome. Feel free to inquire here or at my talk page if you have any more questions. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 18:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:46:34, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Smokethatskinwagon


Smokethatskinwagon (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I feel the moderator Surfboy, is being overwhelmingly difficult, rude, short and not seriously considering the articles real story. A ACM or CMA nomination of any kind is hard to achieve, let alone win. This is part of country music and country radio history, and is deserving of a Wikipedia article, highlighting a notable person. This individual has verified accounts on Facebook, Twitter, google and tiktok as well, which shows he is of high public visibility and notability.

Smokethatskinwagon (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smokethatskinwagon. The four major Academy of Country Music Awards: Entertainer of the Year, Male Vocalist of the Year, Female Vocalist of the Year, and Song of the Year, are significant enough music awards that winning one is a good indication that the winner may be notable. People who win them invariably have been the subject of multiple, independent, in depth, reliable, secondary sources.
You overestimate the significance, however, of the Academy of Country Music Radio Awards. Even winning "On-Air Personality of the Year - National" would be unlikely, alone, to convincingly demonstrate notability. Being nominated for "On-Air Personality of the Year - Small" (i.e. not in the top 100 markets) doesn't come close to making the nominee notable. And having verified social media accounts has nothing whatsoever to do with notability.
Sulfurboy is correct (as are the four previous reviewers) that your topic is not suitable for a stand alone encyclopedia article. You way wish to consider alternative outlets for your writing, ones that have different inclusion criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 12

Request on 06:39:19, 12 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by BelleRetouch


So, If I don't have any external articles written about my business I am not notable? I'm a sole proprietor. I work solo since 2006 with my business. Not sure what else I can do to fix this.

BelleRetouch (talk) 06:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BelleRetouch, I'm afraid that is how it works. We only write about subjects that have received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Generally, that means at least 3 newspapers or similar sources have written an article about said business. Wikipedia is not for promotion or advertising. If you'd like that, you should get in touch with an ad agency. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:39:34, 12 May 2020 review of draft by Alanisantamarina


Helo Admin, Greetings!

I am creating a web page named by Alani Santamarina which was declined by your review editors. So i need help to become live this page. Please send me further instruction.

Alanisantamarina (talk) 08:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user was assisted on the live help IRC channel. The user was requested to change their username as they are not Alani Santamarina and also advised on WP:N, WP:BLPRS and WP:PSCOI - - RichT|C|E-Mail 09:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:45:49, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Vinod ingle


Vinod ingle (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinod ingle: Assuming this is about User:Vinod ingle/Sandbox, please don't write an article about yourself. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, not a social media site like Facebook etc. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:25:07, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Premkumar7092


Premkumar7092 (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:31:06, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Rashidhosseini3


Rashidhosseini3 (talk) 10:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:34:03, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Rashidhosseini3


Rashidhosseini3 (talk) 10:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rashidhosseini3: Please see Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:42, 12 May 2020 review of draft by 지금행복한가영


I'm trying to add some discography information for Draft:Hello Ga-Young#Soundtrack_appearances. One of her song "For to be strangers" changed its name to "Estranged" when it was included into her first studio album. However, the only source that is still accessible is an album description on Spotify. Will that website be a good reference in this case? Thank you for reading the question. :) Sorry, I've just noticed that I misplaced questions. Now I know I should go teahouse. Thanks a lot. 지금행복한가영 (talk) 10:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:14:11, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Pt8340

This is 54 year old company. It has more than 2.5 million customers in all over world. It has gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time. I have taken all the information from independent, reliable and credible sources like Khaleej Times, Gulf News, Al Bawaba, Arabian Business, Emirates 24/7. All the words and sentences are written neutral point of view. This is following every policy and guidelines of Wikipedia. This should be live on Wikipedia

Pt8340 (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pt8340: what changed since the last time you asked here 5 days ago? Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this is following every policy and guidelines of Wikipedia. So there is no need of any change. If you feel any problem with this please tell me. I will improve that @Victor Schmidt:

11:57:10, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Arumugam pk

I'm requesting an re review because unwanted external link has been removed and better proof citation is added

Arumugam pk (talk) 11:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected, Facebook and YouTube are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 12:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:21:37, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Djkrav

I am working on dj remix. And people do not know much about my work and I want people to know more about my work, so I am trying for a review. Djkrav (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Djkrav: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. You may also want to read about Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:45:43, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Farzam.iman


Farzam.iman (talk) 12:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC) hi dears if you could please help us to create our wikipedia page, we are company holding on turkey named ECOHOS[reply]

Okay, I see a bunch of problems here

14:03:26, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Nerdbird89


Hello! The draft in question keeps getting denied for sounding too promotional, so I wanted to ask your advice on what parts sound promotional and what I can do to fix it. I drafted the page because I'm interested in Russian tech developments, and sourced my info from media reports and publicly available info. I also included criticisms of the company and allegations that it may be collecting user data, and am happy to expand on the topic.

Thanks in advance for your help! Nerdbird89 (talk) 14:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:24, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Vinoth Kumar Murthy


You don't need to copy the submission here. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Siva Kumar.S
Background information
BornChennai
India
OccupationChief Audio Engineer
Years active2006–present

S. Siva Kumar (Siva Kumar/Siva) is a sound engineer from India and known for his work with the Indian Musician A R Rahman, Harris Jayaraj, Anirudh Ravichander and other composers of south India.

Siva Kumar is the Chief Audio Engineer at Panchathan Record Inn and AM Studios Chennai.


REFERENCE: 1:[1] 2:[2] 3:[3] 4:[4]

References

  1. ^ https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1134350/
  2. ^ https://www.facebook.com/786amstudios/photos/audiographer-sivakumars-and-sound-designer-vijay-rathinam-with-director-balaji-k/524596790965398/
  3. ^ https://www.flickr.com/photos/arrahmanfans/464011301
  4. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panchathan_Record_Inn_and_AM_Studios

This page was created by huge fan of him. Vinoth Kumar Murthy (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:30:14, 12 May 2020 review of submission by Qtd1103


Hello, I would really appreciate if you could help me point out what I need to work on this draft to make it better.

Thank you,


Qtd1103 (talk) 18:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Qtd1103. There are a few issues with this draft. For one, it is not written in an encyclopedic tone, as described at WP:TONE. It is written in an essay-like style, and addresses the reader in second person, as in Therefore, if you are taking Ca supplements and eating calcium-fortified foods, you may get more Ca than what you need. It also gives the reader medical advice, like check the label and consult your doctor first to determine which form of Calcium supplement is more appropriate for your health condition, which is something Wikipedia should not do under any circumstances: see WP:NOMEDICALADVICE. Finally, much of the information in this draft is already covered in other articles, like Calcium_in_biology#Humans, Calcium metabolism, and Calcium metabolism disorders. If you are interested in these topics, I think it would be better to improve articles that already exist than to create a new one that contains a lot of the same information. You can check out WP:WikiProject Medicine for advice on writing medical articles. WP:MEDHOW and WP:MEDRS are very helpful. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:31:02, 12 May 2020 review of draft by Ekkie101

I would like this article to be accepted so I am trying to improve this article. The reviewer said I need to cite sources for the article. I need help with citations. I don't know how to attach a citation to a name or subject mentioned in the article.

Ekkie101 (talk) 21:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:08:07, 12 May 2020 review of submission by 2605:E000:1529:8653:C849:BEF4:9480:552F

Please reconsider. The stated reason is at best capricious, especially considering he is cross-referenced in other entries. 2605:E000:1529:8653:C849:BEF4:9480:552F (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:35:16, 12 May 2020 review of draft by Chrisc5234


Chrisc5234 (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have several sources describing coverage of the organization in question, one a long read from the independent, a long established newspaper from the UK, a Huffington Post article, along with others. Not sure why this doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability requirements.

May 13

01:37:10, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Qtd1103


Hello, if you could tell me why this draft was declined, and how I should fix it or your recommendations, I would really appreciate. Thank you Qtd1103 (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 01:45:27, 13 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Knowledgeispower9


I received a message stating I can’t use Wikipedia for soapboxing or advertising. That was not the purpose of the article I posted.. So why did it get rejected ?

Knowledgeispower9 (talk) 01:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:40:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by ArtAfg


ArtAfg (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:57:47, 13 May 2020 review of draft by JCCB1898


hello, i don t understand why my source is rejected. please advise. Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of. thanks Carsten JCCB1898 (talk) 04:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JCCB1898. To illustrate the problem, examine one sentence of Draft:James C. Critchell-Bullock: "In 1950, Bullock left England with his family to live in Kenya where he committed suicide on March 30, 1953 and was buried at the City Park Cemetery of Nairobi, Section 11, Lot 95."[1]
What the archives finding aid that you cite for this statement actually says is: "Around 1949/1950, Bullock moved to Kenya, living at Mbagathi Ridge, Karen, Nairobi, where on 31 March 1953 he died, aged 54."
The source says something similar to what you've written, but it differs in many particulars. You write that the move happened in 1950, whereas the finding aid says around 1949/1950. You say he moved with his family, but the source doesn't mention them. You say he committed suicide, but the source just says he died. You say he died a day earlier than when the source says. Finally, you say where he is buried, which isn't in the source. You must summarize the source in your own words to avoid infringing copyright, but in doing so you may not make statements that are not directly supported by the source.
When you write "Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of," do you mean that you got information from the primary source documents listed in the finding aid, rather than from the finding aid itself? If so, the accurate citation would be to the document, hypothetically: Daphne Critchell-Bullock (31 March 1953) Letter to The Explorer's Club, New York. James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive, Sherborne School. Box 2. Folder 4. "Yesterday my husband took his own life." Beyond the problem of accurate citation, there is the problem that Wikipedia articles should cite mainly secondary sources, they generally shouldn't cite primary sources. This is one of the major differences between academic writing and writing for an encyclopedia.
If independent, reliable, third parties have written newspaper articles, magazine/journal articles, and/or books about Bullock, you may be able to salvage the draft by citing them and rewriting the text to summarize what they wrote. Editors could give you more targeted advice if you explained in a few words on your user page why you're interested in writing about Bullock, e.g. I'm an archivist for Sherborne School, I'm a relative of Bullock, I've written a book about Bullock, or whatever the case may be.

References

  1. ^ "James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive" (PDF). The Old Shirburnian Society.
--Worldbruce (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:58, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Molee4real

Please specify what to improve, because the person I mentioned he is a musician in my country, he is popular not only that he has gaining a lot of respect through his company after helping young generation through sports, I have provided all references to prove my statements, but the answer is ur submission was declined. please help me to know why was declined, and if the reason provided is not really how can I know? because I don't see the reason there for the declination. Thank you. I love EnWiki Molee4real (talk) 05:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me on what to do guys? Molee4real (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I have noticed something, my English is not proper because we use Swahili in my country but, I am in English class ton improve my English. so please Team, if you consider my language to justify please consider the reason I provided. I might be right with my article by I have poor English. but soon or later I will be good. Molee4real (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Molee4real. The reason the draft was rejected is that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the English Wikipedia). Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing can improve the draft to the point where it would be accepted here.
If you wish to improve Wikipedia and your English, consider translating articles from the English Wikipedia to the Kiswahili Wikipedia. Biographies of notable people such as Charles Mangua, Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu, and Collins Ochieng are missing there. The English versions are short, and it should be easier for you to read them than it would be for you to write a new article in English. For more information, see Wikipedia:Translate us. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:59:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Sarupbanskota


I've re-written the article to take out the promotional tone. In April 2020, Next.js and its creator Vercel Inc. received a fair amount of press coverage in publications like Forbes, Tech Republic, The Register UK, etc. I've included links to these references within the article, and more can be found on a web search.

Next.js powers the React websites of companies like Hulu, TikTok, Starbucks, AT&T, Nike, etc.

I believe these reasons make Next.js noteworthy to be considered for inclusion into Wikipedia.

Sarupbanskota (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:19:14, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Bqurtas


Bqurtas (talk) 07:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(For the archive) 10:59, 13 May 2020 Materialscientist talk contribs blocked Bqurtas talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Using Wikipedia for promotion or advertising purposes). More at User talk:Bqurtas. Since the page was deleted as an advertisement in the meantime, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:46:41, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Nitinsainimp


Nitinsainimp (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nitinsainimp You don't ask a question, but your draft is a clear advertisement for what I assume is your school. If it is your school, you must review and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, that's considered promotional. If you just want to tell the world about your school, you should use social media or your own website. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:12:30, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Zagreb12345 (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zagreb12345 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards of having reliable sources and notability. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:04, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ivikaspanwar


Ivikaspanwar (talk) 12:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ivikaspanwar You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:11:52, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


I would like you to review the entire page.

Zagreb12345 (talk) 13:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zagreb12345. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can change that, so volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. Write about something else (we have over 6 million existing topics to choose from, see Wikipedia:Community portal if you aren't sure where to start) or write somewhere else. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zagreb12345 Wikipedia only reports on what reliable sources have said about a topic, your draft has zero sources let alone reliable ones, which is why it has been rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:21, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Hardi Parmar

Harshit Sheth is one of the most dynamic minds in Mumbai.In a town like Mumbai where one finds riches as well as poverty.He since a young age has been trying to blur the lines from educational point of view.I am a Journalist, I came to know about his story when I interviewed him for the portal , the youth.

Hardi Parmar (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hardi Parmar You offer no independent reliable sources with significant coverage(no sources at all, for that matter) showing how he meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone or posting a list of their accomplishments. These reasons are why your draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be sufficiently improved. You are welcome to edit about other topics in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:55:15, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ductus1619


Ductus1619 (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page currently has zero reliable sources. In addition, it reads more like an advertisement, which is contrary to the purpose of wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on =SAFESUBST==time:H:i:s, j F Y}} for assistance on =Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC=submission by 24.122.136.243



24.122.136.243 (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has currently zero reliable sources. All articles on Wikipedia must have at least three reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Note that many articles were created before we started the ridiculous AfC process, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS if you find one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:48:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by 212.103.243.120


There is nothing substantial wrong with the 'Graeme Baber' article. Every statement within it is referenced from web sources from which the truth of its content can be verified. Reviewers have been persistently critical on edits. The penultimate reviewer stopped the article on 1st May, and the final reviewer on 2nd May refused to re-review it and then delete if there is no change of view on the part of the then reviewers, as requested in the delete statement inserted after the penultimate review. One would think that one was trying to post this draft in 'The Lancet', rather than in the main on-line dictionary.

Please make the minor edits necessary to bring the current 'Graeme Baber' article into a suitable form for the draft to become a webpage within Wikipedia. With thanks.

212.103.243.120 (talk) 17:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you attempted to delete the article, but now want it added to mainspace? It sounds like you have some internal conflicts you might need to work out. In the meantime, a fellow editor has rejected the article which means they felt there is no shot of fixing the article enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. As such, it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


19:54:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Teamwizardmedia07

Please review it again we have updated the details about mr aditya belnekar we will keep on updating i requestwikipedia team to review this article once again thankx Teamwizardmedia07 (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

who is "we"? Since the filer has been indeffed, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:33:26, 13 May 2020 review of submission by SdearrSET

Hello I'm new: I'm trying to post an article about and for the company I work for as an objective answer to "who is Set Solutions". My rejection makes sense because the article was empty and poorly formatted, but I don't know what to compare to except for giant organizations like Optiv. Is there a minimum businesses requirement for references? I understand that I can't be impartial as an employee, but I thought that's what the community and moderators are for - how is the information verified which needs to be verified? The short statement on my submission is objectively correct, though I could just copy/paste from a press release on Yahoo if that's more helpful.

SdearrSET (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SdearrSET First, you must review and comply with the paid editing policy; this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. You should also review conflict of interest.
Your draft was rejected, not just declined, which means that there is little to no chance that it can meet Wikipedia guidelines. You seem to have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is; it is not a place to merely tell about a company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable company.(please read) Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it. Because of this, not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:59:40, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Zagreb12345 (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:15:06, 13 May 2020 review of draft by KplusWequalsU

We need help getting this article up to wiki standards to reach mainspace please give informative feedback and edits thanks appreciate your help

KplusWequalsU (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? You have been given advice by reviewers, is there something that you don't understand about it? 331dot (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 14

00:15:40, 14 May 2020 review of draft by Convoeur


Completely at a lost to understand how a submitted article fails the inline citation policy. The citations included are to sources like the New York Times and the Atlantic. From policy: "...they should be reliable; that is, credible published materials with a reliable publication process whose authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand."

Patterned this entry on about three dozen similar entries for other bishops in the Episcopal Church. Unclear what the substantive difference is.

Convoeur (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Convoeur I'm quite sure that decline was an error, it's quite easy for a reviewer to accidentally click the wrong decline reason. Please feel free to resubmit it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:27:57, 14 May 2020 review of draft by CTR117


I've been attempting to create a article on the company Merle Norman Cosmetics but it has been declined twice because of it being judged that it reads like an advertisement, but I didn't include puffery or use any non-cited material/statements that might cause that result.

When the article was declined the only feedback I received was that it "read like an advertisement" and not why or where it did. Could the article have a quick read-through to leave any recommendations or fixes to avoid it being declined for an advertisement again?

Thanks!

CTR117 (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CTR117 It's promotional because it just tells about the company. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:49:09, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Greg c1988


Can I please get someone to re-review this, in light of the additional reference that has been added. Thank you

Greg c1988 (talk) 01:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greg c1988, The additional source does very little. Also, the article has been rejected which means a fellow reviewer has determined there is no hope at this time of demonstrating notability (a decision I endorse) as such it will not be considered further at this time. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


== 02:19:49, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Nilabh Shivam 333


Nilabh Shivam 333 (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:18:47, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Jschwarz85

Added references as per requests. Jschwarz85 (talk) 05:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jschwarz85, The article has already been rejected which means a fellow reviewer has determined there is no shot at currently demonstrating notability. As such, it will not be considered further at this time. Even if it was, the added sources are not compelling and would not meet any notability threshold. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia refers to Bubbleblabber multiple times when making references as seen here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Bubbleblabber&go=Go&ns0=1

That enough should make notability threshold.

@Jschwarz85: No it doesn't, as sources need to be reliable to count towards Notability, and Wikipedia doesn't consider itself a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:11, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Richard12x


I request a review, as the editor may not think the article is notable however, in the Caribbean region and an entire country it is very notable. I refer to multiple examples of Hotels in the Caribbean with their own pages setting a precedent;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Lane_(resort) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairmont_Royal_Pavilion_(Resort) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belmond_Cap_Juluca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CuisinArt_Resort_and_Spa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carimar_Beach_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_Aruba_Resort_%26_Casino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_Rock,_St_Barths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheval_Blanc,_St_Barths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Le_Toiny

I believe this is enough reason to re-consider this article for publication

Richard12x (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Richard12x, The article has been rejected, which means it will not be considered further. Notable or not (probably not) the overriding issue is that the page is just a run of the mill advertisement for the hotel. If I had reviewed it I would have nominated it for WP:G11 as being unambiguously promotional. So, in essence, the rejection was probably a pretty friendly response. I would avoid using Wikipedia in the future for advertising. There's better outlets for it. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:52:41, 14 May 2020 review of draft by Daniel Hopwood


I am requesting help as I am not sure why Dhananjay Datar is not Wiki-able. It seems like in the Middle East business world he has had much more than a "passsing" reference. He has been noted by Forbes among other journals. Please explain further.Daniel Hopwood (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Hopwood (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:41:06, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Chetali11

Please help in publish the article as there are many glossary pages on wikipedia. Chetali11 (talk) 06:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chetali11 Feel free to point out these other inappropriate pages so they can be addressed. We can only address what we know about. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate pages to go undetected, even for years. See WP:OSE. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:02:19, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Hi, I added a reference for every single citation on the page. Can you please review and let me know if there are any changes needed? Thank you so much!

Zagreb12345 (talk) 07:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:42, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Techniees109


Techniees109 (talk) 13:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:07, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Trashfan


Nora Baldenweg is featured in the article Diego Baldenweg with Nora Baldenweg & Lionel Baldenweg. The purpose of this article is to have Nora Baldenweg added to the categories like "female film score composers" which apply only to her. Thank you for helping me finalise this article to meet Wikipedia standards.

Trashfan (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:06:52, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Doogierev


It would be really useful to know how I can amend the article further to increase the objectivity of the tone of voice. I have removed some additional information which could be interpreted as subtly promotional (i.e. reference to the low-income context of Seddon's background - even though this is well sourced across a number of broadsheet media articles). But it would be good to get any further advice on how to improve the article further. I have ensured I have commented my changes so it's easier for reviewers to see where I have made edits, which may been missed previously due to a dearth of quality commenting on my part.

Thank you,

Doogie.

Doogierev (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:34:16, 14 May 2020 review of draft by EricaVonnn


First Question: My chart was denied for "lack of context." If I am writing a page about the Hite Art Institute, what sort of information is needed to provide context for their department heads? Can I publish components as I go, or do I need to finish the whole page before I publish? I assumed the lacking context was that the page was submitted unfinished, but I wanted to make sure I understood before my content was declined again and deleted. Should I keep publishing items to my sandbox in order to keep them saved and then publish the page as a whole?

Second Question: I have drawn from a fair amount of unpublished historical information from first-hand accounts within the department. For instance, one professor wrote a log from the 1960s of how many classes were being taught, how many buildings we had, the local organizations involved, etc. This was kept as a record for the department, not published. How do I cite this? I have his name and the essay title, and I could find out the year that he wrote it, but again it was not "published" for the remaining portions of the citation.

EricaVonnn (talk) 19:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:54:27, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Umegbewe Nwebedu

I don't really understand why my article was declined i would appreciate if explained properly to me and what to do Umegbewe Nwebedu (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:58:17, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Naaomii9903


I would like to know why my submission was declined. The thing is Mooftsh is a social media news channel and it is bringing a lot of news (local and international) to the society in Kuwait through their accounts in different Social Media because most of the people are active in Social Media nowadays. In the respond I got for this page was that there were not that enough references for this page. Because of this page is focusing mostly on bringing news through Social Media, there are not that many articles about it. Expect for the one where they won the best news page. The only trustful references and information is their social media accounts that I have added in External links. You can check their twitter account https://twitter.com/mooftsh?lang=gu/

Naaomii9903 (talk) 20:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naaomii9903 If this social media channel does not have significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, it would not merit an article on Wikipedia at this time, no matter how well you write it. Facebook merits an article because multiple independent reliable sources have written about it. Wikipedia is not interested in what the channel says about itself, as Wikipedia exists only to summarize what others say about it. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot I have added references, reliable references that has been talking about the news agency. But still it was declined. The only reason I can guess why they were suspected as not reliable is because they are in Arabic. Can it be because of that? Naaomii9903 (talk) 12:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:36:50, 14 May 2020 review of draft by BGT1538


Hello, I am working on the article and I thank you for your collaboration to complement it mainly on the issue of references so that it can be approved, since the cachacos are an important ethnic group in Bogotá.

BGT1538 (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

03:53:25, 15 May 2020 review of submission by 2601:CA:C300:18A0:4CC7:8C08:D57C:4322

Don’t understand how the topic is not notable with a reliable source 2601:CA:C300:18A0:4CC7:8C08:D57C:4322 (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, networthpost.org is not a reliable source. Furthermore, a single source is almost never enough. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, second sources containing significant coverage of their topic. The rejection of the draft is meant to convey that no such sources exist, so no amount of editing will make the draft acceptable. Consequently volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:47:06, 15 May 2020 review of submission by HardiTalwani


HardiTalwani (talk) 04:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC) How do I delete a page on Wikipedia?[reply]

Hi HardiTalwani. See Wikipedia:How to delete a page. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:17:57, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Mintumondal24

Hello Helpdesk,

This is Mintu. I have been on wikipedia since last month. As you might have noticed my contribution on Wikipedia. I have been wondering to create an article that I know very closely. I have tried to modifiy one of the draft page in Wikipedia to enhance my skills. So, I got notification yesterday that my contribution has been declined again.

Could you please let me know why this page declined again? It would be great for me if you can guide me on how to create page or article on wikipedia? I have read all the guidelines here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_create_a_page) and (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Your_first_article) but still I am unable to publish aritcle. I don't know why... I have tried to give proper citation when I write any information.

Please help me!

Prompt reply is highly appreciable

Warm Regards, Mintu Mintumondal24 (talk) 05:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mintumondal24. The reason the draft was rejected is that the company is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Creating new articles is time consuming, frustrating, and overrated. There are millions of easier and better ways of improving the encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. After you've built up a few months or years of editing experience, you will be better prepared to create articles. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi (talk), Thank you for your response and I appreciate it to guide me. I will definitely enhance the editing experience from wikipedia communtiy portal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mintumondal24 (talk • contribs) 06:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:49:38, 15 May 2020 review of draft by Artemes


I am asking for help on references. I have as many or more as other people in this cateory, plus the subject was publishes in the Spanish Wikipedia site with many fewer references. Looking for some guidance

Artemes (talk) 05:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I need assistance on addition references. I added similar references from other peolpe in the category. Also the subject was published in the spanish wikipedia site with less references. Looking for some guidance

Artemes (talk) 05:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Artemes. 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 Spanish Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa.
The quality of references is vastly more important than the quantity. You cite AVN, which is reliable, but you also cite Iafd and Wikipedia, which are not, and should not be cited. It's unlikely that wallofcelebrities.com is reliable either. You may find more guidance on sources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography.
For a biography of a living person, it won't be enough to simply list the references you used in writing the text. You can assume that almost every sentence of the draft is likely to be challenged (reviewers are a skeptical bunch), so must be supported by an inline citation to the source that supports it. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:09:03, 15 May 2020 review of draft by 89.143.175.21


Dear Rewiever,

Thank you for fast and prompt response. However, Probably as many others, I am not familiar with the Wikipedia, since I am a new member. I received a negative response regarding green tribology, however, I would like to ask for help. How to link/merge the short content, which I proposed to the existing article Tribology? I would appreciate your time.

Kind regards, Marko

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

89.143.175.21 (talk) 07:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Markotint: Wikipedia:Merging explains the process. The reviewer has performed step #2 for you. Go back and do step #1: on Talk:Tribology create a new section explaining why Tribology would be improved by merging Draft:Green tribology into it. Wait a week for discussion to take place (step #3). If there is no discussion, or if the consensus is clearly to merge, continue with steps #4 and #5. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:09:35, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Aurélie MDZ


Hi, My page has not been improved by 1292simon, who doesn't give any reason. As I'm a a beginner in creating Wikipedia page, I don't understand how to contact him in order to exchange with him, although its page to contact him is mentionned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:1292simon

How to do that?

Best regards, Aurelie

Aurélie MDZ (talk) 10:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aurélie MDZ. Click User talk:1292simon, on that page click the "New section" tab, and type your question in the large editing window. Help:Talk pages explains in more detail. Before you contact him, it would be helpful to everyone if you wrote a few words on your user page explaining why you're writing about La Muse en Circuit. Perhaps you are a student there, or are employed there? --Worldbruce (talk) 14:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:51, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Poonamchatterjee


Poonamchatterjee (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help

11:40:04, 15 May 2020 review of draft by Pt8340


This article is written fully Neutral point of view all the information in it is from reliable , information and reputated sources like Times of India, Forbes India, Business Standard, CNBC TV18, Business World, The Economic Times, India Today. So this is notable topic. Anybody can check all the information in the article from reliable source as mention above.so this is verifiable This article has been written responsibly, cautiously and in a dispassionate tone without understatement and overstatement with all information from independent and reliable sources. All information in the article is attributable to reliable and published source. So there is No original research. He has received singnificant coverage in multiple published sources that are independent to each other and independent to the subject. And he has received India's young Achiever 2016, Included in the Forbes 30 under 30 finance list, He was mentioned in Forbes India maiden tycoons of Tomorrow list. So this is notable. This is following every policy and guidelines of Wikipedia. So this should be live on Wikipedia

Pt8340 (talk) 11:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of the three separate reviewers who declined it. The article is sourced from notices, press releases, and promotional interviews with the principals the the company, which also do not count as independent sources. The many 30 under 30 awards are basically promotionalism, and at most show the company might be notable someday in the future. The editor was asked about possible COI, and has not yet answered, DGG ( talk ) 16:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have improved this page after your review. And most of the references are reliable, secondary sources that are independent to the subject written by independent journalist. And his company and brother has already Wikipedia page.Please review this page and it live on Wikipedia @DGG:

Your only two articles are on a financial service and the proprietor of a financial service. You have now declared that you have no coi. My decline is not a veto. In fact, I think it fair that, if I decline to accept an article, another reviewer look at it the next time, to avoid any possible preconceptions or unconscious bias. So any other reviewer who wants to take responsibility can accept it. As advice, it's probably not a good idea for anyone to begin their wiki-career with an article about a er service or executive, or about a noncommercial organization or charity or school. Rather, start with something that will unquestionably qualify, such as a legislator or former legislator. DGG ( talk ) 19:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:09:40, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Tinkunath55


Tinkunath55 (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tinkunath55. Unlike Facebook, LinkedIn, or similar sites, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:45, 15 May 2020 review of draft by QueenSnicklefritz


I have been declined twice. I did add three reliable sources. I am not sure how to disclose my COI. Can you please help? I also would like to know what category to add on the talkpage Template:WikiProject TOPIC to speed up review process. Thanks!

QueenSnicklefritz (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QueenSnicklefritz: I've left more information on your talk page about how to disclose a conflict of interest. There isn't anything that can be added to the draft or talk page that would definitely speed up review, but I've added a Wikipedia:WikiProject Archaeology banner that might attract the attention of someone interested in the field. Don't hold your breath. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@QueenSnicklefritz: It was reviewed 4 days ago and declined. Theroadislong (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:12:35, 15 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by VarlamTikhonovich


A crafted an article in the English language wikipedia.

My article is a translation of an article in the Spanish wikipedia regarding a modestly prominent Uruguayan artist.

The piece was rejected with the statement:

"Wikipedia is not a resume service. Needs more external news sources to show notability for this person."

Yet since the Spanish article has been there for 4 years, why is an English language translation "a resume service" ?

Is there one standard for Spanish language articles and a different standard that excludes many artists who are more familiar to Spanish language users?

If the English language article must NOT exist, why is there a different view regarding the Spanish language article ?


VarlamTikhonovich (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VarlamTikhonovich. Yes, the standards may be different. 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 Spanish Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Another thing to consider is that existence of an article doesn't mean that it meets the policies and guidelines, or that it should exist. It could be just that no one has gotten around to improving it or deleting it yet. You can try to find better sources and rewrite your effort to be more in line with the English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (see WP:FA for examples of high-quality articles). Or you can move on to something else. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hey (talk) How does Wikipedia guard against unconscious bias ? Or does it ?

It is inevitable that editors will attribute greater value or significance to things that English language culture values, and derogate the value of significance of things that English language culture finds less valuable or important.

VarlamTikhonovich

If you think a page shows undue bias, you are welcome to tag it with WP:NPOV issues or discuss it on the article's talk page. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@VarlamTikhonovich: WikiProject Countering systemic bias is entirely devoted to the issue. Many other projects, such as WikiProject Uruguay and WikiProject Islam, involve themselves in guarding against unconscious bias against particular groups. One of the most effective targeted efforts has been WikiProject Women in red. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

00:37:22, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Alivia watkins


Alivia watkins (talk) 00:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

   why was my article declined? I had correct spelling and punctuation. I was not given a real reason why my article was declined. can you please tell me how to fix my article? Alivia watkins (talk) 00:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC) Alivia watkins[reply]
You were given a reason, are you not able to see the decline message at the top of the article?
more precisely, you wrote an extremely negative unsourced article about an organization--an organization about which we already have a properly sourced properly balanced wikipedia article. It would be better to start with some subject about which it is easier to write a neutral article, and to always add references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements DGG ( talk ) 19:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:33:33, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Thoufiq313


Greetings I have submitted 2 articles for approval however the articles can be found on google but I have not received any kind of message of approval requesting you to address my query.--Thoufiq313 (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thoufiq313 (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thoufiq313 The messages telling you that your drafts were accepted are on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Sir Some of the Drafts were accepted in my User draft page but for some, I did not receive any such kind of message. --Thoufiq313 (talk) 08:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thoufiq313 You have two drafts that have not been submitted for review. You will need to add {{subst:AFC draft}} to each draft(as you see it when reading this page, without the nowiki tags I placed in the edit window to suppress their function here) and then submit them. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:49, 16 May 2020 review of draft by 2405:201:C80D:27EA:3595:79EA:1F39:4106


Hi, This is my first article on Wikipedia. Can you please help me on what is required from my article to get it approved and get published. Or specifically on what information needs citations.

2405:201:C80D:27EA:3595:79EA:1F39:4106 (talk) 06:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is a clear promotional piece for Mr. Dhawan. It reads as a resume and not an encyclopedia article. Please read Your First Article for more information, as well as WP:CITE for information on how to cite sources. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:35, 16 May 2020 review of submission by HandR12

Would it be possible to let me know how I can change the article/ what I can change in it to get it approved? HandR12 (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:29:50, 16 May 2020 review of draft by Shivaghaneesh


Shivaghaneesh (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:40:59, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Knowledgenerd95

Hi, the article was declined because it says it not of notability and YouTube and IMDb are not reliable sources. There are other sources that are not blogs or social media links, they’re articles available on google news. From what I understand, these are reliable sources are they describe the life and career of the person described in the article and they’re present on the news. Knowledgenerd95 (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE READ THE ADDED REFERENCES, 11,12,13,14 to see if they qualify. thank you Knowledgenerd95 (talk) 19:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledgenerd95 Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that the reviewer feels there is little to no chance it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. Please heed the advice you were given by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 22:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:41:09, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Shahabtsh


Shahabtsh (talk) 22:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:44:03, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Iapsingh

I want to publish Ankit Prakash Singh page on Wikipedia because he's an Indian journalist and his page should be on Wikipedia. Iapsingh (talk) 23:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=957091797"