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 Wikikruste (talk | contribs) at 07:38, 14 June 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
June 2025
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


June 8

06:01:08, 8 June 2020 review of submission by Andy Phung 1992

Hi, I am writing about a new social network call "Empow" which I recently used and did some research about it to write my first Wiki article. This article has nothing to do with the old one, please take a look and tell me if my article can publish or not. Thank you very much.

Andy Phung 1992 (talk) 06:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Phung 1992 Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. You have offered no independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this social network, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable website. If it is new as you state, it may take time for such sources to develop meaning it is too soon for an article about it. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:10:14, 8 June 2020 review of draft by J.mins


My article was declined. However, i can't understand why my article was declined. Actuallly, my article is based on facts and has a reliable sources. I don't understand that my article was declined because it was neologism. 'Persons of distinguished service to science and technology' is official word in Korea and i don't creat this word. I just want to upload my article in English Wikipedia. So please let me konw how to upload my aricle as soon as possible. J.mins (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

J.mins Perhaps it is a translation error, but if you are writing about an award given by the Korean government or someone else, the article does not make that clear; it appears that it is just your opinion as to who notable scientists or technology experts are. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:13:16, 8 June 2020 review of submission by Joyceliloksee

The wiki page is declined by reason of references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article, if i remove all passing mentions articles and reference and insert only independent articles of the subject will this page be accepted? Joyceliloksee (talk) 06:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joyceliloksee: probbably, unless there is some other thing that will prevent it from getting accepted (which I am not going to predict now). Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:56:33, 8 June 2020 review of draft by Harshit00111

I want to know that what more changes do I need to make to make this page well enough to be published as an article. I would feel glad if get to know this. Harshit00111 (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Harshit00111: You need to provide reliable sources to support your edits and also must disclose if you have a conflict of interest per WP:COI. GSS 💬 07:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:52, 8 June 2020 review of submission by Trisha1983

Dear how should i move this page to article space, what things required to move Palak Sidhwani to article space?? Trisha 12:34, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Trisha1983 Your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further as in the opinion of the reviewer it has little to no chance of being able to be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about people; Wikipedia articles must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about subjects that meet the special Wikipedia definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable actress. It appears that this person does not meet that definition. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:12:06, 8 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by MarkEStanger

my first time making articles on wikipedia and the steps for publishing are confusing MarkEStanger (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC) y MarkEStanger (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

this article currently has one source. WP:NPERSON requires at least three. 17:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

17:57:07, 8 June 2020 review of submission by 167.102.136.34

Below this line, tell us why you are requesting a re-review. Take as many lines as you need.-->}} his is a notable musician. 167.102.136.34 (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:44:57, 8 June 2020 review of draft by Drashti R Joshi


I have edited the draft post the submission has been declined on 5th June. I would like to know when it will be reviewed.

Drashti R Joshi (talk) 18:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Drashti R Joshi, Well it still reads like an ad, and needs better sourcing to show notability. If you want it to be reviewed again, you will need to press the resubmit button CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


21:07:31, 8 June 2020 review of draft by Atlastucco66


Hi, I am trying to set up a Wikipedia page for a musical group from Montreal. My first draft was not accepted. The band is from the 80s and not very well known outside their home province. Although I have scans of their press clippings and photos etc, I have been trying for years to find online articles to link to make my page more credible. Is it considered appropriate to incorporate scans of articles in order to authenticate the information on the page?

Atlastucco66 (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Atlastucco66 Wikipedia has articles, not mere pages. You don't need scans of articles, you just need to be able to cite the publication and its information (author, page, etc.) so that a reader could locate it if desired (in a library). Sources do not need to be online, they only need to be publicly accessible. 331dot (talk) 21:32, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


23:49:25, 8 June 2020 review of draft by Malbrec92

Help me understand what else I can include to support Steven's notoriety, and how I can overcome the conflict of interest. Steven Beschloss has over 97,000 followers on Twitter, was nominated for a Pulitzer, has produced movies, written high-profile op-eds in major media outlets, and has had scholarly work published as well. Yes, I work with him -- and I took pains to keep to just the facts and dig up sources to support them. What's next, please? Malbrec92 (talk) 23:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Malbrec92 I think you mean notability, not "notoriety". As noted by the reviewer, Mr. Beschloss does not appear to meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional. The closest he comes might be being nominated for a Pulitzer, which would indicate he is "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors", but only if he had been awarded one. Most of the sources you offer merely confirm the existence of his work; what is required is independent reliable sources with significant coverage where the sources has chosen on their own to write about Mr. Beschloss. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 9

01:50:03, 9 June 2020 review of submission by David.11.2002

I have put a lot of certified references such as Wikipedia and many international sites (books and news) that have written about this company! I wrote this article with a good writer and this company actively participates in Egyptian society .. Please re-review this article because it does not contain wrong information or about a small company and it applies the conditions of notability! It is a popular company in Egypt and it participates in the community

David.11.2002 (talk) 01:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David.11.2002: Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will no longer be considered for acceptance. You are welcome to contribute elsewhere in Wikipedia. JTP (talk • contribs) 05:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:24:04, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Myfirsts

"This is advertising" and the reviewer has nothing else to say. what a vague response to an article with facts verified by adequate references. The purpose of wikipedia is to share information and that is what this article intends to do. Please suggest a proper way to improve the article.

Myfirsts (talk) 04:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Myfirsts Actually, you are incorrect; the purpose of Wikipedia is not to merely share information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case the definition of a notable person. Your draft merely told about the doctor and his services, with a brief mention of his brief appearance in a records book. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:31:56, 9 June 2020 review of submission by JonathanBrott

Hello there!

First time editor here. I've been working on an article for the Swedish indie band Mama Sonic. Article in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mama_Sonic My first submission was understandably rejected, as I at first thought I could piece together some first-hand information from my own experience with the band and just add a COI tag. After this, I've completely revised the article and it is has improved substantially.

I have worked with this band on multiple occasions and am an off-and-on member of it (non-profit artistic collaborations). I understand the COI policy is applicable in most commercial situations, but right now I'm confused, should I not have claimed a COI at all? The band has a growing following, yet information about them has yet to be collected in the form of a Wiki entry. The draft article is based on public interviews and reviews as well as record label listings. Some of the material was promotional biography from the band, and I can see that that needs revision.

Perhaps my question is: is this article suitable for Wikipedia? I've seen many similar listings of Swedish bands, such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Cone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Perro_del_Mar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Johansson_(musician)

Basically, I'm not sure if the draft is too unsubstantial or if the citation needs more work at this stage. I'll take another pass at it before resubmitting! Any suggestions are welcome!

Best wishes Jonathan

JonathanBrott (talk) 10:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JonathanBrott You need to declare a COI if you have any association with an article subject that could be perceived as influencing your work. You don't have to have a commercial relationship or be paid(being paid or any financial relationship would trigger the stricter paid editing declaration). In terms of the draft, as long as the band meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable band and your sources are independent reliable sources with significant coverage, the article will get past a review. I don't do many formal article reviews, but from a quick glance it seems like it is at least possible the draft would be okay. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:48, 9 June 2020 review of submission by AkleshJatavNSUI

dear wikipedia, please upload my article. AkleshJatavNSUI (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:53:26, 9 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by IqbalBarbhuiya10


IqbalBarbhuiya10 (talk) 10:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:25:13, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Joshua989898

So my article was recently rejected for not being a sufficiently notable topic. But I have now found the links to four newspaper articles that have been written over the years on the subject (one from the Washington Post, one from the Washington Times and two from the Deseret News). Would including these as references for the article help it become sufficiently notable? Joshua989898 (talk) 12:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to answer you without knowing what exactly the sources say. If they are independent of the organization and give it significant coverage(not just a brief mention, routine announcement, press release, staff interview, etc.) they could be sufficient. Any article about this organization should only summarize what independent sources say about it. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:49, 9 June 2020 review of draft by S09748

Hello, this is S09748 speaking. I am asking help about how to make a proper table in my article. See, there are four cells in a row, and the one under is about a summary. I would like for the cell under to take as much area as the four above. Can you please tell me how i could achieve this? Thank you. S09748 (talk) 13:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi S09748. It sounds like what you want is the colspan attribute. See Help:Basic table markup for more information, and see the climate table in Bern for an example. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:57, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:56:34, 9 June 2020 review of submission by 70.29.26.190

Hi, Looking for for ways to make this article seem less like an ad. I do work for a marketing company that represents signal hill whiskey and originally copied and pasted the copy they wrote for wikipedia, it was declined because it read like an ad. I read over the original and pulled a bunch of unnecessary branding adjectives, while leaving enough info to accurately describe the product. I'm thinking it may be the taste profiles getting flagged, but I would like to kmow which lines of text are reading too much like an advertisement. Thanks, Ben Buschke Morrison Digital


70.29.26.190 (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Before you do anything else you must comply with the paid editing conditions. Then to salvage the draft start by removing the entire "Product Description" section. The "History" section should be the core of the entire article. It should be largely based on independent sources. It might actually be easier to create an article about the company rather than its products. Don't even think about "brand". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:23:56, 9 June 2020 review of draft by Willairwin


Willairwin (talk) 16:23, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:11:40, 9 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Dr. GuptaDeepak

Extended content
Deepak Gupta
Born (1970-02-12) February 12, 1970 (age 55)
New Delhi, India
NationalityIndian
Alma mater
Known forStudies on skull-base surgeries and neurooncology
Awards
  • 2002 [[1. Best poster award: Recurrence in Pediatric Craniopharyngiomas: analysis of clinical and histopathological features (14th Annual conference of the Indian Society of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of MedicalSciences, Lucknow, India.2003]]
  • [[2. Best paper award: Recurrence in Craniopharyngiomas: Clinical and histological features, 2nd Indo Japanese Neurosurgery conference at AIIMS, DELHI, INDIA, 2004 ]]
  • Outstanding Paper Award
  • [[Split cord malformations: a new clinicoradiological classification in International society of pediatric neurosurgery CME course and 16th annual conference of Indian society of pediatric neurosurgery held at India habita Centre,New Delhi, India from 4th -7th November 2005]] Best Poster Award
  • ISPN Best Paper Award
Scientific career
Fields
Institutions

Deepak Gupta (born Feburury 12, 1970) is an Indian neurosuregeon, Prof Deepak Gupta is Secretary of Indian society for Pediatric Neurosurgery [ INDSPN] • Member Neurotrauma Committee World federation of Neurosurgical Societies • Faculty AO Spine, AO Neurotrauma, ATLS, Past Secretary Delhi Neurological Association ( 2015-2018)

Biography

Born on Feburury 12, 1970 in New Delhi, Prof. Deepak Gupta, MS MCH, MNAMS, PhD (AIIMS), is Professor of Neurosurgery, Faculty Incharge Neurotrauma-2, JPN Apex trauma Centre, AIIMS. He is also associated with IIT (Indian Institute of Technology ) Delhi as Adjunct Faculty. Also he serves the Pediatric Neurosurgery Fellowship Programme , AIIMS Neurosciences Centre & JPN apex Trauma Centre, Delhi as Faculty in charge.


Dr. GuptaDeepak (talk) 17:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:11:50, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Booklover35

Hi there, I would like to request a re-review for the article on TV personality and K-Pop artist, Oli London. Please let me know if I need to make any changes. I have updated his TV credits to include his most recent shows Dr. Phil, Botched and Daily Mail TV and added more reliable sources.

Thank you,

Jo

Booklover35 (talk) 17:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:16:04, 9 June 2020 review of submission by WikipediaNewContributor

WikipediaNewContributor (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:31, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Mckaylagrace

My article submission for GFA Canada was declined because it didn't show significant coverage. I appreciate the feedback from Sulfurboy and just have a few questions. My original intent was for this to be a stub and more of a work-in-progress sort of page. Is there a different procedure for creating stubs as opposed to full articles? If not, would my article be accepted if I were to submit more proof of significant coverage from news outlets like CBC and CTV? Thanks for the help! Mckaylagrace (talk) 19:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mckaylagrace, Notability needs to be established with reliable, independent sources. The length of the article, or whether or not it is a stub, does not change that fact. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:53:33, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Alyssattran

If I'm publishing a wikipedia page for my company is it okay if i source some of my information directly from my company's page or is that considered being biased.

Alyssattran (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alyssattran First, you must read and formally comply with the paid editing policy, a Wikipedia Terms of Use requirement. You should also review conflict of interest. Any article about your company should primarily summarize what independent reliable sources say about your company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself. Certain indisputable factual information like location, number of employees, prominent staff, can be sourced to the company itself, but that's all; please see WP:PRIMARY for more information on that point. 331dot (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:47, 9 June 2020 review of submission by Willairwin

I do not understand why the article was not able to be submitted. Perhaps because I copied and pasted from a Word document draft?

Willairwin (talk) 20:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Willairwin It isn't necessary to post text from your draft here, we can see it at the link I placed as well as in your edit history. You should be able to submit it by clicking the blue "Submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. 331dot (talk) 20:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


23:39:31, 9 June 2020 review of draft by AengusB


Hi!

I have two questions:

1- How do I change the name of my article-to-be? I submitted it from my sandbox and it did not let me input any title, and it seems that the user who reviewed my article knew how to do it and input the title with a typo.

2- After I reached out to Reddit for sources about Kyle Hill, the man himself saw my post and offered to answer my questions. How should I quote the information he will send me by email? (I know it is actually him because I sent the email through a form on his website).

Thank you

AengusB (talk) 23:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AengusB Don't worry about the title, as if and when the draft is accepted, the reviewer will handle the placement of the draft in the encyclopedia; you may want to leave a note on the draft talk page that the title is currently misspelled. As for the information from Kyle Hill, Wikipedia cannot accept information in an email; all information must be sourced to a publicly available independent reliable source for verification purposes(as Kyle cannot sit by a phone for as long as Wikipedia exists taking calls or emails from readers). Perhaps Kyle Hill can direct you to reliable sources where the information he has provided you with has been published.
Since you are in communication with Kyle Hill about your Wikipedia editing, you will need to review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for your swift answer. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I do not think I have a conflict of interest since I do not know Kyle Hill personally and will not receive benefits in any shape or form for the article. My article is still a draft, but could you give it a quick look and tell me whether there are already obstacles to the publication of the article, please? Thank you

June 10

00:09:03, 10 June 2020 review of draft by AviationFreak

I'm not sure what needs to be done to improve referencing on my draft. I received a AfC denial after submitting a draft for Holly Grove Christian School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Holly_Grove_Christian_School). I did what I thought was necessary in the way of reliable sources and adding inline citations. I tried not to overload the reader with inline citations and placed references that applied to an entire section at the end of the first sentence in that section. I'm not sure if I need more inline citations, more references, sources that are more reliable (though most of the sources are directly from the school's website), or something else. Thanks in advance for your help. :) AviationFreak (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 00:17:27, 10 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yankeejess


Yankeejess (talk) 00:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yankeejess: please don't post your email address on a public Wikipedia page. Most communication will happen on the website anyway. If you really want, you can check out Wikipedia:Emailing users for how to set an email address in your preferences. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

00:42:38, 10 June 2020 review of submission by MEMBER SG

artist name its naked on its own on goole without info,so i hope you could accept this as commom creativity cause the name is in use everywhere like play store music and now goole recognise it, just need to verify that name MEMBER SG (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MEMBER SG: this was an advert and will never be a part of Wikipedia in the form it was deleted. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

00:44:15, 10 June 2020 review of submission by MEMBER SG

MEMBER SG (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


03:30:58, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Sachi1307

Hello,

My submission is neutrality, which provides references, and no other same article existing. However,I find an article which is not reliable resource, it became an article. :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosto_Kingtee I am confused about the review of wikipedia. Please let me know how to do.

Sachi1307 (talk) 03:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:08:29, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Tbiw

I don't understand the references doesn't meet the criteria of article,please other reviewer help me to check. I am not the beginning writer of this article I just try an helping hand,please cross-check it again.review again, Tbiw (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:30:17, 10 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by RealIK17

Hi WikiProject,

Please help me understand the refusal for my submission. I just translated this page from the German Wikipedia. Surely the German editors were satisfied with the German sources of that German article. I also translated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aracillum, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Iplacea, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Askaukalis from Polish and Spanish Wikipedias. Thx.

Best regards, S RealIK17 (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RealIK17, You just need to add WP:RELIABLE sources in references. Visit WP:REFB to get acquainted on how to cite sources in references in English Wikipedia ~ Amkgp 💬 13:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:36:42, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Sbmnlaw

I am unable to understand why Draft:QuickX was declined when it is notable technology related topic has ios application for apple store and Worldwide operations and other pages of similar nature are there. Sbmnlaw (talk) 11:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:13:36, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Rasel Shahid Siddique

Rasel Shahid Siddique (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rasel Shahid Siddique: Wikipedia isn't your way to promote a buissness. Note that if you are affilated with the organisation in any way, you must read and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:40:01, 10 June 2020 review of draft by J stapling


Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the submission - is there anything I can do to help this get somewhere towards publishing. I appreciate the concerns about paid editing, but I think the subject matter does still pass the threshold for notability given that two other UK-based retailers of equivalent size have their own Wiki articles: Jessops and Calumet Photographic, the latter of which is actually now merged with Wex Photo Video (which is even mentioned explicitly in the Calumet article.

I appreciate that this is deeply not your problem, but if there's anything I can do to get this page publishable, please just let me know. Happy to add more sources etc

J stapling (talk) 13:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:39:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Juniorrohan

14:39:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Juniorrohan

Juniorrohan (talk) 14:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Juniorrohan: the draft currently lacks reliable independent sources. It therefore fails WP:NPERSON. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:02:09, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Lauratheschit

Hi, I want to know what kind of sources we need to give the show credability?

I have included a source where the show was advertised on BBC Radio 4 (a huge national radio station) which should be more than enough to prove it's real and credible?

The show is being published on Youtube, so will linking the Youtube channel help boost credibility? I can also link tweets and the individual Youtube videos for each episode to give each episode/guest credability. Would this be sufficient?

What else can be suggested to enable this page to be published?

Lauratheschit (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, for notability you are going to need at least three sources that satisfy all of the following:
I failed to find any such sources in the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


19:15:39, 10 June 2020 review of draft by ShadowBee

A submission of an article I've wrote has been declined - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mish-mash_(food) "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

Ok, first of, this is an existing article in Bulgarian (BG) Wikipedia - "https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%88-%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%88" and Hungarian (UK) Wikipedia - "https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%88-%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%88" that I have translated. It is also on this (EN) Wikipedia disambiguation page - "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mish_Mash"

Second, this is a very popular Bulgarian dish, like Banitsa - "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banitsa" - all the tourists try it, etc. It is one of the 50 most popular dishes in Bulgarian cuisine, according to some sources. But where is this dish referenced? Food blogs, local cooking shows (all in Bulgarian), local cook-books (that I don't have access to, all in Bulgarian, too), etc. Where can one find significant coverage of a local dish, if I might ask? Look at the Banitsa pastry article I've mentioned above - terrible references - one of a Russian dictionary explaining the origin of the word, and two local recipes on Bulgarian blogs, even not in English. No one would remove the article of this famous pastry, though. My point is, there are just no reliable sources when it comes to local cuisine, unlike many other topics.


ShadowBee (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ShadowBee Congratulations, Draft:Mish-mash (food) was subsequently accepted. To answer the mish mash of issues you raised:
  • 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 Bulgarian Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Thus arguing that the topic already has a Bulgarian version and a Hungarian version carries zero weight in the question of whether it should have an English version.
  • Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article doesn't mean it should exist, it could mean only that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines is not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why.
  • One of the pillars of Wikipedia is that it summarizes reliable, authoritative sources. If there are no such sources, Wikipedia shouldn't have a stand alone article on the subject. If there isn't enough material to write a whole encyclopedia article about a subject, there may still be enough reliable information to mention the topic in a broader context, such as mentioning a dish in Bulgarian cuisine.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Tools/sources gives advice on sources for encyclopedic writing about food (WikiProjects are good sources of subject-specific information). For help accessing sources, try The Wikipedia Library or a library near you (especially ones at major research universities). Significant coverage may not exist online or in English. If it isn't accessible to you, you may not be the right person to write about the topic.
I hope you find these explanations enlightening, and useful when you choose your next topic to write about. Wikipedia has over 6 million existing ones to choose from, 98% of which are rated less than "good" by the community, so there is much scope for improvement. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:38:10, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Svarshavsky

I am trying to get help with the page: "Draft:Georges Kugelmann" that I created. It was rejected for the lack of citations, which is quite logical, and it was my fault. I added citations and resubmitted, but now I do not see where is it and don't know if it has been accepted or not. Please tell what to do next. Thanks for your help. Sergei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Svarshavsky (talk • contribs) 19:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Svarshavsky (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Svarshavsky. Draft:Georges Kugelmann is in the pool to be reviewed. The current backlog is around 4 weeks. You may continue improving the draft while you wait, or see Wikipedia:Community portal for other ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:58:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Kconstalie

Hello, and thank you so much for reading! I believe that the article I wrote about Conduit Magazine has not been fairly evaluated. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Conduit_Magazine) This article seems to meet and exceed the objectivity standards set forth by Wikipedia. It is written in a straight-forward, matter-of-fact style. Yet this article was recently rejected because it contains links to Wikipedia's own pages for Best American Poetry and Pushchart Prize and these pages don't contain reference to the magazine. That these pages should mention Conduit Magazine is not a realistic expectation. For example, if an author has written for the New York Times, the Wikipedia article may have a link to the New York Times, but the New York Times article is not expected to mention the author. That would not be realistic.

This is an informative article about a literary subject. Please consider that it is fit to publish. Please notice that is plainly and objectively stated. If technical changes with the layout are necessary, I will be happy to make them if I can receive some guidance.

Thank you sincerely! Kconstalie (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kconstalie, to make it short: Your draft lacks tremendously of reliable sources, see over here Wikipedia:Reliable sources - lots of sections in your draft are totally unreferenced. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:13:31, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Jujiang


Jujiang (talk) 22:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:01:59, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Thespiansapien

Hello, I need help on adding verifiable references to the draft page above. The reason why it was denied was because "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". I added five references to the article. Where else would I need to ref?

Thespiansapien (talk) 23:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thespiansapien. Provide a citation for "A first-generation ... of seven children" and "When a knee injury ... passionate about pursuing acting" or remove them. More critically, replace weak sources with higher quality ones. IMDb, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. Wiles Magazine is so obscure it can't really be said to have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. It has an editor-in-chief, which is good, although it's that editor-in-chief (and publisher) who wrote the piece in question, so it isn't clear how much editorial oversight took place. The piece is also, like the one in Pursuitist, fundamentally a primary source interview, lacking in independent analysis by the interviewer. Deadline is a reliable source, but appears to be churnalism, and only has one sentence about the subject. Until he has had a couple major roles, it's unlikely enough will be written about him to make it possible to write an encyclopedia article. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 11

Request on 00:10:42, 11 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Malini Bhandaru


This is my first wikipedia article and I am trying to find secondary sources to address reviewer comments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dirk_Hohndel

How can I edit and save my changes without triggering additional reviews? Thank you!! Malini Bhandaru (talk) 00:10, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Malini Bhandaru (talk) 00:10, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Malini Bhandaru. You may click the edit tab, make changes, and click "Publish changes" (i.e. save) as often as you like. It is only when you click "Resubmit" followed by "Publish changes" that the draft will go back into the pool to be reviewed again. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:09, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:18:45, 11 June 2020 review of draft by Uedit45

I am requesting help on how to get the page I just edited, Flyime Music Festival, published. The notification box says that the source "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". However, the sources included are independent, reliable sources including some of the largest online news sites in Nigeria, where the festival is held. Furthermore, there is an article from the guardian, Nigeria, on the Flytime Festival - which shows significant coverage, not just a passing mention.

How can this article be improved? Thank you for your help. Uedit45 (talk) 04:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uedit45 The draft merely describes occurrences of the festival; it does not indicate how the festival meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable event. The article should summarize what independent sources with significant coverage state about the festival. If they only state that it occurred and its participants(which is what the sources seem to say) that is not significant coverage, such as in depth writing or analysis of the festival and how it is important. 331dot (talk) 00:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:53:56, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Hishamkhan87

I just want know what can I edit to publish my draft? Also how can I interpret the unique features they offer on the wiki page without it being labeled as promotion. I would really appreciate the help. Thank you!

Hishamkhan87 (talk) 05:53, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hishamkhan87 Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state about subjects that are shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. If you are associated with the subject of your draft, you must review and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. There are also special rules when editing about cryptocurrencies, which I will post to your user talk page in a moment. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:56:10, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Gealey97

I would like to know what I need to do to make this article publishable. I've seen other articles about qualifications that have been published e.g. early years professionals, so would like to be able to make the necessary adjustments.

Gealey97 (talk) 09:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gealey97 - I saved you some links and guidelines on your talk page which may help you to understand why your promotional draft will not be published in this format, the reviewer DGG summed it up in his Draft comment. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:20, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Zackolivetree

Why was this rejected? What can we change to make it acceptable to publish? Zackolivetree (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zackolivetree: First of all, who is "we"? Wikipedia doesn't allow "shared" accounts. If you are affilated with the organisation in any way, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID and make the required disclosures. As for your draft, it currently lacks reliable independent sources and therfore fails WP:NCORP. For your sources,
  • #1 appears to be a directory listing, which are generally not accepted.
  • #2 is the subject's own homepage and not independent.
  • #3 is the Start page of the other buissnes of this company, not independent either and therfore neither acceptable as a reliable source
  • #4 Is something written by someone associated with #3 and not independent either. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:43:42, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Trisha1983

Need Advice how should i publish this page in article space?? User:GSS Trisha 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Trisha1983:You need reliable independent sources that cover the subject in some detail.
  • ref # 1 is a Wiki and not reliable per WP:USERG
  • ref #2 appears to be more like an announcement and does not appear to be significant coverage, but It probbably not reliable either
  • ref #3 is one sentence about this subject so it is not significant coverage
  • ref #4 appears to be better than #2, but I don't have an opinion on the reability of that site, so im going to ping @GSS: as the reviewer. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The actor is not yet notable per WP:NACTOR and it's pretty WP:TOOSOON. Also, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arshifakhan61‎. GSS 💬 17:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:08:59, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Satyam12w

Satyam12w (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Satyam12w: Wikipedia doesn't want to be a vehicle to promote something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:36, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Jujiang

Jujiang (talk) 17:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jujiang - what exactly is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterfordHi, Can "Draft:Hu Zhiying" be moved into the article space now? Or do you think it needs to be modified? Thanks.--Jujiang (talk) 10:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jujiang, as far as I see your draft is already in the process of being reviewed, please be patient, this can take up to several weeks. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford:,Thank you so much! --Jujiang (talk) 11:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:51:52, 11 June 2020 review of submission by Mohitshaw11

my draft was not accepted as they cited the reason that it does not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added Mohitshaw11 (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mohitshaw11 - what exactly is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 12

00:39:57, 12 June 2020 review of submission by 108.16.96.108

108.16.96.108 (talk) 00:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simon,

I am the artist. From what I understand, a fan hired someone to have a Wiki page made without my knowledge. When the page was moved to drafts, I made a social media post asking if anyone knew what was going on and that person sent me a message explaining the situation. Apparently as the group had been written about extensively by publications deemed noteworthy by Wiki and played a number of festivals that already have Wiki pages, they wanted to surprise me by having one made. I guess they're as new to the creator's end of Wiki as I am, so they tried to hire a Wikipedia editor to do the actual making of the page. Apparently they simply gave the editor the cited publications and had them write everything from those alone. This explains the empty discography page, and my edits of incorrect information.

Please let me know what I can do in order to get this approved, as it would be really cool to actually have the page. I apologize if any rules were broken here, as I'm sure this person was just trying to be supportive towards this project and not malicious or disrespectful to the Wikipedia community.

Thanks a ton.

Please understand that your permission is not required or even relevant for a Wikipedia article to exist about you or your band. You cannot grant or deny permission for an article about your band, see WP:OWN. This is because Wikipedia summarizes what published independent reliable sources state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable band. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about a subject. If you hire someone to write an article about your band, they are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to disclose that, per the paid editing policy. They should also review conflict of interest. If your band meets the definition of a notable band, an article can exist about it if and only if the band receives significant coverage in independent sources, and the article should only summarize what those sources state. 331dot (talk) 00:50, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot -- I believe this page fits the criteria for the description of a "notable" musician, and therefore an article can exist about as the artist has received significant coverage in independent and reliable sources. These sources can be verified from the citations in the draft. Sources include full and nontrivial coverage independent of the subject by Decibel Magazine, Bandcamp Weekly, MetalStorm, The Wire, Uncut, Houston Chronicle, Vice Magazine, The Creator's Project, PopMatters, etc.

An abundance of additional citations note the frequent coverage in publications dedicated to the heavy metal and extreme music subcultures.

The article only summarizes what those sources state without bias.

In addition, this artist contains two members of notable bands Caina (band) and Ævangelist.

In addition, this artist has released multiple albums on major independent label Prophecy Productions.

In addition, this artist has been repeatedly recognized as one of the most prominent representatives of their genre as is evidenced by their multiple appearances at Roadburn Festival, Damnation Festival as well as other notable music festivals. This can be supplemented by the extensive coverage by independent publications indicating such as are cited in the draft.

It appears that the writer of the article did not disclose that they were paid for the creation of this page. I am unable to contact the creator of this page. Can this be fixed?

Thanks!

06:38:43, 12 June 2020 review of submission by Psbvinod

I am Requesting a re-review as i am trying to create a wikipedia page for my own company's application and this is my page I am submitting for wikipedia. Please guide me in rectifying the mistakes so that i can complete the page

Psbvinod (talk) 06:38, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Psbvinod - I am afraid but as the reviewer of your draft stated the subject of your article seems to lack criteria for being notable (see here Wikipedia:Notability, furthermore since you have a close relationship to the subject you would have to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Plain_and_simple_conflict_of_interest_guide. CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:21:13, 12 June 2020 review of submission by Yellow Fantail

I created a page about the Veterinary Osteoarthritis Alliance (VOA) and submitted it on the 6th May. I have been checking in every now and again to see whether it has been reviewed and hopefully published but nothing yet. I cannot find confirmation of its status anywhere, so does that mean the article is not in the review process?

Please could you tell me how I can check that? If for some reason it has not been submitted I obviously want to do so as soon as possible.

Yellow Fantail (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Fantail You created a draft, but did not formally submit it for review. I will shortly add the appropriate information to allow you to do so. However, if you were to submit it at this time, it would likely be rejected. This is because your draft just tells about the organization. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization(please review). Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

12:45:48, 12 June 2020 review of draft by Apriljennifer

I need help with editing the article that I submitted Draft:Chaim Sztajer. it said I didn’t have enough reliable sources, but I am not sure what counts as a reliable source. I included a full reference to a published biography including page numbers. I also included a couple other references where I could find them, however there is not a lot of information on this guy which is why I believe he needs a Wikipedia page so he can be more well known. most of what I know is from the Jewish Holocaust Museum in Melbourne Australia, not published material. is there a reason that the biography is not considered a reliable source? do I need to include online sources? I can’t find many of those. --Apriljennifer (talk) 12:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apriljennifer (talk) 12:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Apriljennifer. By "not adequately supported by reliable sources", the reviewer may mean that the draft makes too many statements for which there is no clear source. If so, the solution is not to add more sources, but to add more inline citations to the existing sources. Specifically, make it clear where the following information came from:
  • "He was immediately ... in mass graves."
  • "Some members ... shears and shovels."
  • "Sztajer encountered ... food with them."
  • "Sztajer married ... moved to Melbourne, Australia."
This should be fairly easy for you. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:08:20, 12 June 2020 review of draft by Samcosme

I need help with two things - 1) On Spanish Wikipedia, I need to move the title for it to say "Cesar Arevalo" instead of my username. 2) It says the page is to be deleted because of "the politics of the user". I wrote an english version but was told in a help chat that I needed to post the Spanish version on the Spanish Wikipedia. Thank you

Samcosme (talk) 18:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - well it is absolutely true what they said to you, a Spanish article needs to be published in the Spanish Wikipedia and if you need help you need also request it over there. They are completely different platforms/systems. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:34:25, 12 June 2020 review of submission by Kinman1996

I have added an additional reference link to my article to increase notability. Kinman1996 (talk) 19:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kinman1996, I do not see any question at all but let me tell you that both links are self-published references which do not prove at all any notability for Wikipedia. Please have a close look at Help:Your_first_article#Gathering_references before resubmitting your draft. CommanderWaterford (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:48:28, 12 June 2020 review of submission by Eeberbach

I request a re-review of my draft on Evolutionary Automata, because the rejecting editor was incompetent and biased - these are provable facts. Eeberbach (talk) 19:48, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eeberbach, I really have my doubts that all the four reviewers were incompetent, so perhaps you should better think about how to improve/modify your article like it has been suggested by them. PS: Insulting Users does not help you at all. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They also have made many help desk requests and have been told the same thing dozens of times. At this point, they are just wasting everyone's time. They have been throwing around insults since the beginning. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:27:46, 12 June 2020 review of submission by Beatanese

Hi! I tried reaching out to the person who reviewed my submission as well as Teahouse, but no one has answered me so far. My concern with this article being rejected is that there is another Wikipedia page just like this one, ShipBob. Both ShipMonk and ShipBob are fulfillment centers of similar size, so I'm not entirely sure why one would get accepted over the other.

In terms of the writing, I tried to remain as neutral as possible, despite my affiliation with the company (which I disclosed). I refrained from using glitzy adjectives or embellishing the article in any way — as you can see, it's very much factual.

I would really appreciate your help. Thanks in advance!

Beatanese (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Beatanese, the person who reviewed your draft is DGG but I have to tell you that there does not exist any page on Wikipedia for ShipBob at all and in the current state your draft is still simply an advertisement, which is not allowed here. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
information Note: ShipBob was deleted on June 2 under speedy deletion criterion WP:G11. JTP (talk • contribs) 01:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:50:38, 12 June 2020 review of submission by 108.16.96.108

108.16.96.108 (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this page fits the criteria for the description of a "notable" musician, and therefore an article can exist about as the artist has received significant coverage in independent and reliable sources. These sources can be verified from the citations in the draft. Sources include full and nontrivial coverage independent of the subject by Decibel Magazine, Bandcamp Weekly, MetalStorm, The Wire, Uncut, Houston Chronicle, Vice Magazine, The Creator's Project, PopMatters, etc.

An abundance of additional citations note the frequent coverage in publications dedicated to the heavy metal and extreme music subcultures.

The article only summarizes what those sources state without bias.

In addition, this artist contains two members of notable bands Caina and Ævangelist.

In addition, this artist has released multiple albums on major independent label Prophecy Productions.

In addition, this artist has been repeatedly recognized as one of the most prominent representatives of their genre as is evidenced by their multiple appearances at Roadburn Festival, Damnation Festival as well as other notable music festivals. This can be supplemented by the extensive coverage by independent publications indicating such as are cited in the draft.

It appears that the writer of the article did not disclose that they were paid for the creation of this page. I am unable to contact the creator of this page. Can this be fixed?

Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.16.96.108 (talk • contribs)

Noone has talked about notability ever. The only concerns that were raised were WP:POV and WP:UPE. Note that the creator of the page is currently under an indefinite block for UPE. I am going to ping the two reviewers, @DGG and 1292simon: if they have any specific advice. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:25, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 13

02:34:25, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Chaz86

I recieved an alert which directed me to this help section. Chaz86 (talk) 02:34, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chaz86, You were trying to make an article, but I'm not sure if the subject is notable. Do you have any more specific questions? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:36:34, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Sayonmessi

Sayonmessi (talk) 03:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:38:16, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Sayonmessi

Why my page was rejected? I just want to add the page. Please explain what went wrong? How can I improve? Sayonmessi (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sayonmessi, You had zero reliable sources. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


09:58:12, 13 June 2020 review of draft by BPMonk


Hi, I'm just wondering what more we need to get this going. I've seen numerous pages for theatre companies / theatre producers throughout Wikipedia with much less history, prolificness & citing minimal if any sources. With the history and success of the company I'm keen to get this up. Any recommendations would be incredibly helpful!

BPMonk (talk) 09:58, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BPMonk Please see other stuff exists. Other problematic articles existing does not mean that yours can too. 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. Feel free to point out these other article so action can be taken if you wish, we could use the help.
Regarding your draft, the reviewer informed you in their decline message of the issue- you need to show that your company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Significant coverage goes beyond brief mentions, press releases, or other similar sources. IMDB is not an acceptable source on Wikipedia as it is user-editable. If this company is not discussed in independent sources in depth, it would not merit an article at this time; not every company does(even in the same field). 331dot (talk) 10:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for getting back to me! I totally understand. We'll definitely be working on these issues to ensure more detailed coverage of our practice from independent sources - blame working in the background for so long! Appreciate it and best. BTW, here's the pages: lots of these or these have clear issues on a much grander scale, and ultimately provides problematic balance for theatre companies' profiles. All best.BPMonk (talk) 10:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BPMonk I've fixed the links you provided; to link to a category without making this page a member of the category, it should be typed like this: [[:Category:CategoryNameHere]]. Can you provide specific examples of problematic articles? Wikipedia does not have mere pages or profiles, it has articles. 331dot (talk) 11:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:59:38, 13 June 2020 review of submission by SONGEZO SA

SONGEZO SA (talk) 14:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SONGEZO SA - what is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What is left that i didn't do on that article that i created?

SONGEZO SA (talk) 15:16, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, honestly I do not understand your question but after having a look at your draft I have to tell you that it lacks of any realible sources - you will need to add references/sources which are reliable (if there are any at all, which I doubt after a short google search=, please study the following article Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:34, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:08:32, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Asif A K Durrani

Asif A K Durrani (talk) 17:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia Review Team, The world is celebrating many types of days in remembrance of the occasions and to motivate the humanity.

The current situation of Pandemic covid-19 forced kids to think and play Indoor physical games. That is not unusual practice for them. Kids might have not considered games to play at home other than computer games like playstation etc.

Therefore it is required to Celebrate atleast one day with physical Indoor Fun.

Thank you

Asif A K Durrani Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about something, even if it is a good cause. 331dot (talk) 18:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:19:36, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Asif A K Durrani

Asif A K Durrani (talk) 17:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Review Team Please advice what changes required in the subject. Thank you

@Asif A K Durrani: Your draft has been rejected, which means it will not be considered further. This subject fails WP:NEVENT. You dont have a single source in your draft. You may also want to read Wikipedia:Advice for younger editors. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:02:19, 13 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Zishi17

Hi. I do not know why the images I submitted are out of scope. And I do not know how to make my citations right. I read the instruction pages on Wikipedia and all the articles about scope and minimum of citations. Is it because the citation I used are too long?

Zishi17 (talk) 18:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zishi17: Its not about the length of the citations, its about using WP:FOOTNOTES for citing sources. Since this is a WP:BLP inline citations are required. You used them already in the comments section. BTW the "comments"-Section is indeed to long. In the country where I live (Where no WP:FAIRUSE is possible) I would probbably already commit a copyright violation. Long explanation, short meaning:Keep your quotes short. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:13, 13 June 2020 review of submission by 42.110.217.228

42.110.217.228 (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Fine Art Artist. Top on all social media sites


Apurbakantiroy22 (talk) 18:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for social profiles. Unless there are reliable independent in-depth sources covering you, we aren't going to publish such a profile or even keep it as a draft. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 18:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Apurbakantiroy22 Wikipedia is not for telling the world about yourself, that is what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 22:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:20:12, 13 June 2020 review of draft by Carrieruggieri


Carrieruggieri (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi can someone give me their opinion on whether my article has adequately corrected the problems that led it to being rejected. I implemented some good advice I got from the live help. I was asked to address the COV and I did that on the talk page (I was advised to put it in a box at the top of the talk page but I didn't know how to do that). The only problem I see are some page numbers and maybe its too long for some people? However, other editors didn't think the length was a problem. Ive tried several times to get someone from PSYCH to look it over but no-one has responded. Thanks for looking - sorry that its dry stuff for most people. Carrieruggieri (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:09, 13 June 2020 review of submission by Naijaactive

"This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." what can i do please??? Naijaactive (talk) 20:50, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naijaactive There is nothing that you can do, as your draft was rejected; this means it will not be considered further. It appears that this musician does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, and no amount of editing can change that. Perhaps in the future independent reliable sources will take note of his career and give him the significant coverage needed to merit an article, if he meets the notability definition. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 14

03:48:16, 14 June 2020 review of submission by 72.28.33.243

Not sure what this is promoting? It is bare minimum facts about an inventor and pro musician. 72.28.33.243 (talk) 03:48, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shredgod21: It is promoting Allen Van Wert, who is not a notable person (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 03:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I was under the impression that the worlds fastest guitarist who also invented the worlds first A.I. picking trainer would be notable. Weird. MANY wiki pages should be removed then. How does one go about having non notable pages removed? I can provide a large list.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.33.243 (talk)

Remember to log in when you post. What you say is entirely possible. 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. If you notice an article about a musician who does not seem to meet the definition of a notable musician, you are welcome to begin an Articles for Deletion discussion. 331dot (talk) 07:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:38:18, 14 June 2020 review of submission by Wikikruste

Thank you for reviewing. I've just resubmitted removing unnecessary informations and giving it a more encyclopedic tone of voice. I'm not a native english speaker so any advice is welcome

Wikikruste (talk) 07:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=962470741"