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 Prashanthpidimarri (talk | contribs) at 18:55, 23 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 17

02:55:10, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Reppop

Hello. I need advice on my draft for the Orthopaedic Hospital Medical Magnet High School. The draft was declined because the "Language has WP:TONE issues." Can anyone help me with rewriting the article or rewriting with some of the sections?

reppoptalk 02:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:27:52, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Mkjoshidcpl


Mkjoshidcpl (talk) 11:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:06:45, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Accurateinfoomg

Accurateinfoomg (talk) 12:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Accurateinfoomg You don't ask a question, but your draft has been declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, why has it been declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Accurateinfoomg (talk • contribs) 12:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewers indicated why in the draft. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:20:05, 17 June 2020 review of submission by VovATooL

Hello, I need some help with my first English article.

VovATooL (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:29:13, 17 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by VovATooL

Hello, I need some help with my first English article. I've already contributed a few texts in Ukrainian (different account). I didn't think this would be so hard to do in English. I've tried to find as much sources as I could. I also deleted all phrases that could possibly be considered as promotional. Can someone give me a few advices? What should I delete or add? Can someone make those corrections for me? This is a short article about the cloud gaming platform.

VovATooL (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:39:30, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2600:6C5E:177F:E1F0:79D9:EEF9:E4A1:F938

2600:6C5E:177F:E1F0:79D9:EEF9:E4A1:F938 (talk) 14:39, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:02:28, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Gautamakadrag

Gautamakadrag (talk) 16:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


17:37:16, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Pranayndv

Pranayndv (talk) 17:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is far from being an acceptable article. Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself and neither a social network. You may want to read User:Ian.thomson/Howto. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:15:56, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Kayla kas

I would like some help with my page! It was declined and I love some tips on how to improve it so it can be accepted into the mainspace. Kayla kas (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your talk page for what you need to do as an undisclosed paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kayla kas: Ignore Theroadislong. His comments aren't helpful and I've admonished him for them.
More sources would be nice (please follow WP:RS and WP:V) as you are writing about a school. You can never go wrong with having too many sources. You do mention the college admissions bribery scandal. Perhaps expand on that. Was anyone from the school involved, etc. Write more in-depth about the school, their services, what they offer. Look at other pages for other schools and see how they are formed. Look at the Shenandoah University page. This is a small university in Virginia. See how the page is laid out, there is a little more depth? The article tells the classes that are offered? That's what we are looking for.
Athletics are a staple of most schools, though some don't have them. Put that in there too. Are there any notable alumni that have gone to InGenius Prep? Can it be sourced? That last part might be tricky, but it is a new article, you will run into a little extra scrutiny.
Instead of listing the offices in a list, try writing them out. Something like "InGenius Prep has campuses in four countries, the United States, Canada, China, and South Korea, and branches in Toronto, Vancouver, Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Seoul, among others." Mentioning the larger cities and allowing the user to check the sources for the smaller cities. While I know Guangzhou and Shenzhen (had a friend who travelled there), some might not, and you will lose the reader's interest (read: they get bored) if you start listing too many cities. Remember, you want to keep your reader's attention, but be informative at the same time.
Expand on basically everything about the school. More sources for everything: make sure they are from reliable, third-party sources. Make sure everything is verifiable. Redo that section with the list of cities. You are off to a good start, keep going, don't get discouraged. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:06 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome
@Kayla kas: I strongly suggest you do NOT ignore my perfectly polite comments on your talk page about paid editing, you are editing using your own name, so it is clear for all to see that you have a conflict of interest which you are required to disclose by the terms of Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong: I strongly suggest you do NOT post another piece of nonsense like this again or I will find an admin and make sure you are blocked for unconstructive editing and violating BITE at the least. Multiple editors, some admins, editor under their own name and that shows no evidence of conflict of evidence or paid editing. Back it off now. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:53 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome
Question  On hold pending conflict of interest disclosure (one way or another), see User talk:Kayla kas#Paid editing?. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User has said "It is true that I do work for InGenius Prep. However I am not being paid to edit." Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure says "Users who are compensated for any publicity efforts related to the subject of their Wikipedia contributions are deemed to be paid editors, regardless of whether they were compensated specifically to edit Wikipedia." Meanwhile I am being threatened with this " I strongly suggest you do NOT post another piece of nonsense like this again or I will find an admin and make sure you are blocked for unconstructive editing ". Theroadislong (talk) 16:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that was picked and chosen very well. Let's try the entire text, shall we? "It is true that I do work for InGenius Prep. However I am not being paid to edit. I found creating Wikipedia articles to be enjoyable and so decided to create one for InGenius Prep since I was familiar with the primary sources and felt I could write it in an objective way. I am more than happy to change the tone of the article if it comes off as advertising or promotion. I am happy to work with admins and editors on this to make it the best article possible. But I am not being paid by this company to edit this article."
Theroadislong actually said this bizarre sentence "...you are editing using your own name, so it is clear for all to see that you have a conflict of interest which you are required to disclose by the terms of Wikipedia." So, we can't use our own names, lest we be considered paid editors or have a "clear" conflict of interest per Theroadislong's logic.
Theroadislong has also made it a point to tag articles that Kayla has edited in the past, claiming COI. This is not only BITE-y, but POINTed as well. It's clear that Theroadislong has an issue with Kayla, whatever it may be, he can edit with a clear mind and needs to be back off. I did take this matter to an admin, and while they didn't think it rised to the level of BITE-y I did, they suggested that I change the snarky COI templates to something more friendly.
Kayla has made it very clear that she is willing to learn and wants to learn. I believe we take her at her word and help a new editor with no more than 20 edits, who clearly shows she is willing and able constructively, and show her how Wikipedia works. We are always complaining that Wikipedia is one big "sausage fest", why push away a female editor who actually wants to learn. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:36 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome • #BlackLivesMatter
Oh, and one final thing. I ask people who think that someone can't work for a company and still edit that company's Wikipedia page and it not be considered paid editing or conflict of interest, to read my response to Theroadislong. It should give you a few lessons on how, yes, we can be editors and employees at the same time and seperately. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:38 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) • #StayAtHome • #BlackLivesMatter

18:29:05, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Mopbroomdustpan

I wish to add {{WikiProject Biography}} to the top of the talk page as directed but I could not find a definition of Talk Page. Is that the actual article that I wrote is that something else? In short, where do a put it?

Thank you Mopbroomdustpan (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mopbroomdustpan. Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines defines them and how to use them. The TP in question would be Draft talk:Kim Kraig Thompson. You may add {{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=|listas=Thompson, Kim Kraig}} there if you wish, but there isn't much point, except perhaps to help reviewers who want to steer clear of biographies, many of which are vanity spam. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:46:07, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2405:201:6C01:8FE3:21BC:2AFB:D4BF:DD21

2405:201:6C01:8FE3:21BC:2AFB:D4BF:DD21 (talk) 18:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


19:53:46, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Bestinshow1917

Bestinshow1917 (talk) 19:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my submission is rejected???

Hi Bestinshow1917 , well, it is clearly stated in the red Message box - "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." - your draft does not cite any sources at all. Please have a close look at Help:Referencing_for_beginners ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


21:21:57, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Livelovers

Good day, About 6 months ago, I translated the article “Draft:Jan Gezinyus Dunning” from Russian Wikipedia. In my opinion, the article complies with WP:BASIC because reputable Russian media (such as Kommersant, Interfax, Vedomosti, RBC, Regnum, Forbes, ТАСС, Financial Times) indeed write about Dunning. Besides, in the English Wikipedia, similar articles are published (e.g. “Sergey Galitsky”, “Oleg Zherebtsov”). I tried to ask 1292simon about what was wrong in the article with BLP, but did not get any reply. I would like to ask editors to review the article or point out specific blocking issues. Thank you.

Livelovers (talk) 21:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well Livelovers, no idea why 1292simon did not reply - but my question is: Why did you not resubmit the draft in order to get it reviewed again?! Your references are unfortunately all in Russian but this should in the very end no problem at all. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:06:11, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Rontl

The original decision on this page was that it did not meet the bar for notability, and I have tried to address this. The subject of the article, the Reverse Logistics Association, has since been profiled twice in leading magazines, including Supply Chain Management Review, which is considered by most to be the Harvard Business Review of the supply chain field. The standard for notability requires profiles in leading outlets. I have added citations for those profiles.

The RLA has also been cited numerous times as experts by the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. If the WSJ and Forbes reach out to the RLA as a source of expert information on issues, that would seem to me to be further proof of high standing and reputation. Although this is not part of the Wikipedia standard for notability, I think to most people, if the WSJ and Forbes reach out to you for your expertise, you must be considered a leading expert in a field that is of wide, general interest.

I hope that these inclusions complete the case that the RLA is a widely respected, influential association. Thanks.

Rontl (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:28:35, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:7BA4:8001:1DA2:B81C:6F34:2E4D

I have made more changes to make the article as 3rd party neutral as possible and I believe it is now sufficient to be published in its current form having studied many other pages about spinoff bands.

2A00:23C7:7BA4:8001:1DA2:B81C:6F34:2E4D (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you truly feel that this band now meets the special Wikipedia definition of a a notable band, and have the independent reliable sources to support it, you'll need to start from scratch. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 18

07:17:38, 18 June 2020 review of submission by TheBirdsShedTears

I recently moved sandbox to created a new draft, but it triggered filter 869, performing the action. I am still unable to locate the source(s) responsible for this action. Please help so that i can remove deprecated (unreliable) source from the draft in question. Thanks. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 07:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheBirdsShedTears. That edit filter number is Special:AbuseFilter/869 You can read the many parts to the filter, but I would first try removing sputniknews.com from your draft. WP:RS/PS says of it: "Sputnik is an unreliable source that publishes false or fabricated information ... Sputnik is considered a Russian propaganda outlet that engages in bias and disinformation". --Worldbruce (talk) 14:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Worldbruce Thanks a lot. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 12:06, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:10:12, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Kjogitha

Kjogitha (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


08:10:12, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Kjogitha


Please guide on how to make article better, your comment it sounds like a press release is not pointing out specific problems in the article. She has enough achievements as a local business and more people should know about her work. I have tried to keep the language-neutral based on the information available on her.

Here is a significant article about her which helped me piece together a lot about her work

[1]

Kjogitha (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Prabhakar, Harshita. "Tete-a-tete with spa magnate Rekha Chaudhari". femina.in. Retrieved 18 June 2020.

08:43:43, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Tahagoal

Tahagoal (talk) 08:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


09:02:40, 18 June 2020 review of draft by JosieJosie


Josie 09:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I am confident why I am receiving copyright alerts. I have written this article myself, in my own words and rewritten several times. I have provided articles, periodicals and more. I am coding references. At this point, I need help.

Hi User:JosieJosie - to be honest I do not understand your concern - your draft has been rejected because the musician lacks of general notability, not because of copyright alerts (?) - please read carefully the comments the reviewer gave you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JosieJosie: I've cleaned up the mess for you. The google docs links need to be replaced with reliable sources. From what I can see they appear to be newspapers, so you can cite the newspaper directly using the Template {{cite news}}. Offline sources are accepted as long as they are accessible. See Wikipedia:Offline_sources. @CommanderWaterford: I have seen you now serveral times confusing "declined" and "rejected". For AfC context, "declined" means "Ehr, this draft wouldn't survive an AfD if it were moved to mainspace but could be improved in a way it does" while "rejection" means "Sorry, but this draft cannot be improved to meet Wikipedia standarts" or sometimes "improving this draft so that meets Wikipedia standarts results in revwriting it from scratch". Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well Victor Schmidt, rejected is a synonym for declined in the English language so if I am using either of these words that doesn't mean that I seem to be "confused" :) but I got your point. Thanks anyway. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:19:23, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Beyonceluver99

I added sources and citations to the parts that weren't cited.

Beyonceluver99 (talk) 09:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Beyonceluver99, welcome to the AfC Helpdesk - what exactly is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:32:02, 18 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Aestheticorange

im wondering why my post was denied the reason given was that social media wasnt a good refrence and if that is the case what are good refrences?

Aestheticorange (talk) 12:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aestheticorange, to answer your question have a close study over here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:39:51, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Safwanfazil

Safwanfazil (talk) 12:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Safwanfazil - what exactly is your question/concern? CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:42, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


13:55:21, 18 June 2020 review of draft by Carrieruggieri


Carrieruggieri (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Is anyone willing to have a look at my revision of accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy before I resubmit? I would love suggestions before I resubmit. thank you. I sent a request before but I didn't get a response. I don't know if its because its in line waiting to be seen, or if there wasn't a person interested in reviewing this article. Thank you in advance. Carrieruggieri (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was answered earlier at #20:20:12, 13 June 2020 review of draft by Carrieruggieri. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Please see comment at the draft. Fiddle Faddle 14:44, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this request. I did get a nice reply, but I hadn't seen it. Thank you Carrieruggieri (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:00:35, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Safwanfazil

I created this page for my company, but it got rejected. please twll the reason Safwanfazil (talk) 14:00, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Safwanfazil. Wikipedia may not be used to tell the world about your company. You may do that on your own website. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:46:09, 18 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by RINCE ROY


RINCE ROY (talk) 16:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:53:46, 18 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Surface2016

I am request assistance with the submission for Droplet Lab. I am not sure what other sources need to be added to prove that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. There were Wikipedia links embedded into the submission as well as reference to scientific journals. I hope you can help us out, thank you in advance!

Surface2016 (talk) 16:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:REFB for help with correctly formatting sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:07:44, 18 June 2020 review of draft by Turningworldly


Hi. I'm trying to draft my first biography, for the urbanist Jonathan Manns, which is in the Articles for Creation section. It was recently declined with c.50 references, a mix of books/newspapers/websites, for unsubstantiated significance. I've had another review and increased the sources further to c.65, but worry I may not be heading in the right direction. I would really appreciate some assistance in suggesting where it requires further evidence or substantiation (or indeed if there's any merit in further sources at all, and it's about different sources). I've left a note for the reviewer, so look forward to feedback on that, but it's my first effort and I'd really like to think it's not been a wasted effort if there are some simple fixes....so any help from the wider community as well to help get me where I need to be would be a huge help....

Turningworldly (talk) 17:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to go, take care not to run foul of WP:REFBOMB, three strong sources can be enough to establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 17:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:14, 18 June 2020 review of draft by RINCE ROY


RINCE ROY (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined with rationale on the draft Fiddle Faddle 19:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:15:23, 18 June 2020 review of draft by Thekid114


I had this kicked back due to Twitter references, but those are the only sources of information outside of commentary from the actress herself. Furthermore, most of that narrative was edited by the actress prior to being submitted. I understand Wiki's policy on citation, but this seems to be a little unfair for voice actors who don't actively go out seeking press releases or websites to boast about their own deeds.

For filmography, I added an external link for the IMDB, where the data was all collected from. I have no problems doing a single-line citation note at the beginning of each section - but to constantly ibid the entire section for each role is certainly not valid in any writing manual or style.

Judging from similar articles scattered all over wiki, this page was hardly the worst in terms of citation. I find it oddly peculiar for this one to have been kicked back, regardless of the use of Twitter statuses as citation. I understand that Wiki has been attempting to repair it's image with academia, but this is ill the way to do so. I implore the editors to review the latest edition of their various writing style guides, as per at least the 2009 revision for Chicago Turabian, Twitter, Facebook, and other Social Media outlets have since been marked as valid citable primary sources for information. (See sec 17.7.3, Social Networking Websites in Author Date Bibliographical Data, Revision 8.)

So - if it's good enough for academia, then what is good enough for Wiki? Explanations would be appreciated, please.

Thekid114 (talk) 17:15, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy. Your challenge for this draft is to find references which cite the subject's notability. If the other pages you have found do not assert and verify notability then they are likely to be subject to one of the deletion mechanisms. The AFC scheme is intended to save article authors from false hopes. Fiddle Faddle 18:58, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


So is the implication here that the section isn't relevant or noteworthy because Wiki arbitrarily decides that Twitter posts are not valid sources? Your response doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You cite notability, but you ignore specific reach of individuals either by their choice or by their limitations. Again, the argument for shutting down the submission was the sources are not credible or valid - which is fundamentally false.

So, what I interpret here as the options are is: 1, Totally remove the section that references Twitter citation (which there-in-turn ignores an entire suite of primary sources), or; 2, arbitrarily cite a page that aggregates the social media content into a narrative statement - for Wiki to also turn down because it'd be a copyright violation. I understand Wiki being scared of having bad information out there, but this is going from one side of the spectrum of legitimacy to the other - neither are good.

I'm trying to understand the reasoning here, because it just does not make any sense to me. The feedback is excessively vague, and seems to be more stacked against people making contributions based on primary sources.

Thekid114 (talk) 19:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the perosn is notable then it is to to you or others to assert and prove that. Wikipedia is a collection of knowledge that is referenced from reliable sources. These are not primary sources, and never can be, though a certain amount of reference to those sources is permitted. Self generated sources fail that test.
That ine can be enthusiastic about a draft topic is wonderful, but there is a point when lack of reliable references means that the person is not yet notable in Wikipedia terms.
Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything may be more help to you. Fiddle Faddle 19:40, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then, what the implication seems to be here is that this specific set of information - The charity section in this case - fails Wikipedia's standards because it only exclusively references Twitter. Am I reading you right?

Thekid114 (talk) 19:44, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter is not, and will not ever be, a reliable source. There is a lot of hard work involved in establishing the notability of a living person.
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
There is a deal of reading matter here, all of which has been developed over many years. Fiddle Faddle 19:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate this eventual clarification, but the statement of Twitter *not* being a source is factually false. Again, I cite Sec 17.7.3 in Revision 8 of the Turabian style guide, and literally just about every style guide and academic profile that exists after 2010. Wiki does not set the academic standard for sources - it only does so within it's area of influence.

I'll consider revision of this, but at this point, I'd rather be contributing to other research opportunities that base their guidelines on research integrity, neutral composition of sources, and equal weight of resources that are recognized, rather than deal with arbitrary guidelines that are ambiguous at best - such as what Wiki seems to have.

What a frustrating and annoying experience...

Thekid114 (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Every project you choose to contribute to will have different rules. There are discussion boards where you may seek to change the rules here, which may succeed since the rules are built by consensus.
I stated that Twitter will not be a reliable source. It is most assuredly a source. But it can not ever pass WP:RS Fiddle Faddle 19:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:18:59, 18 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yankeejess

Here is the Update that still needs to get done right away On The Web Site at www.en.wikipedia.org On The WNET Page The Old Red THIRTEEN PBS Logo needs to be replaced with The New Black & White THIRTEEN PBS Logo MEDIA WITH IMPACT thats On The New Web Site at www.thirteen.org thats on the top left needs to get put on right away & Would you please keep that in mind & don,t forget to go On The New Web Site at www.thirteen.org The New Black & White THIRTEEN PBS Logo MEDIA WITH IMPACT is on the top left needs to get put on right away & don,t forget to take care of it right away & don,t forget to let me know when its all set & done with & don,t forget to get this problem fixed big time right away & don,t forget.

Yankeejess (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please use fewer words, add a link to the draft you speak of, and clarify what you wish to happen Fiddle Faddle 19:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:32:20, 18 June 2020 review of submission by Thamizhselvan007

Thamizhselvan007 (talk) 19:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Keprevos has been declined, with rationale given by the reviewer. What additional help would you like, please? Fiddle Faddle 19:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20:59:06, 18 June 2020 review of draft by Hllywd415


I would like to ask if the following entertaiment related article with Spanish references would have issues being accepted. The issue I face with this is my first article entry for entertainers and I am unaware of any challenges this may face. I have included as many articles I deemed necessary to establish a merit of entry. Please let me know what do you think and provide feedback on what it may need some consideration.

One article in which I found some good info has some type of subscription. Therefore I fear that part of the article may get some kind of push. But the rest has multiple. Luckily it has english and spanish articles in countless media outlets.

Thank you for your help. Any help or guidance is welcome or even alter the code if you want. You are welcome to.

Hllywd415

Hllywd415 (talk) 20:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done commented on the draft itself. Non English language references are not a problem, but do need to be validated by a Spanish speaker Fiddle Faddle 21:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 19

02:39:53, 19 June 2020 review of draft by Klamb70

Hello, I greatly appreciate the speed in which my article was reviewed; I was worried it would take weeks. I understand the policy for articles featuring political candidates not being appropriate for Wikipedia as that would clog the site immensely. However, I strongly disagree that the subject lacks notability. The subject is the first openly non-binary person to run for US Senate against incumbent Susan Collins. This is a race that has been highly publicized, watched internationally, and is funneling more money than any Maine campaign has ever seen. Bre's victory in the primary will thrust them into the global spotlight and will automatically grant their campaign millions of dollars raised by donors who were angered by the appointment of Justice Kavanaugh. Just using the term "non-binary," "queer," and the pronouns "they/them" have become widespread - albeit painfully - in the media publications surrounding their campaign. Susan Collins' campaign has taken notice and hopes to use Mx. Kidman as a spoiler, yet this is a race with an unpopular Democratic challenger and an election using Ranked-Choice Voting, another historic event in American democracy. Please refer to the page of Mike Broihier, another US Senate candidate in another highly publicized senate race in Kentucky. Mr. Brohier, like Mx. Kidman, has never served elected office; his history is in the Marines, followed by owning a farm and working as a substitute teacher. He is running for a party nomination, just like Bre Kidman. Given that his page is live and Bre's was declined almost instantly, I kindly request feedback as to how I can make Bre's page meet the same standards as Mike Broihier, otherwise I request that either my page about senate nomination candidate Bre Kidman be made live, or that senate nomination candidate Mike Broihier's page be taken down for the grounds that are keeping my page from being published. While Mike has clearly served his country and family well, Bre has worked in Washington, DC, formed policy, and is the first trans/non-binary US Senate candidate ever. I kindly request your reconsideration in this matter. Thank you!

Klamb70 (talk) 02:39, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:15:58, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Tickono5

I am new here to Wikipedia, & I am writing related to a company in Kolkata. Tickono5 (talk) 05:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tickono5 Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. I suggest you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial before attempting to write another article; you may also want to spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:40:05, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Goutamrazpurohit

khota el rahala is a educational tv series. people gets knowledge about cultures of different countries. more than 1 million people watching this show in every 2 days. the program is very popular in middle East. it spread Love. i think it should be published

Goutamrazpurohit (talk) 05:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


05:46:01, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Bhushankale093

Bhushankale093 (talk) 05:46, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia doesn't want to be used for promoting your youtube channel. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 07:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:34:36, 19 June 2020 review of submission by 197.48.98.129

The article expands , A famous tour guide in Egypt , Trusted sources , wikipedia for all. and have Fame And sources more than Ali Mansur . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.48.98.129 (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

197.48.98.129 (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, due to the reasons given by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:13:52, 19 June 2020 review of submission by 2A00:23C6:4080:6101:DD2:A3A1:AB52:5DE8

Avionic Support Group Inc is a well established, well connected company in the aviation industry in the US. We are looking at expanding our international footprint, which is the main reason behind this entry, as we seek to show other markets other than China and the US that we are a reputable, real company.

Please advise how we can best improve the page. 2A00:23C6:4080:6101:DD2:A3A1:AB52:5DE8 (talk) 11:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Wikipedia has no interest in helping your company "expand its footprint", solicit customers, or tell the world about itself. You are free to do that on your own website or social media. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia is only interested in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about your company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You should also review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you are required to make. 331dot (talk) 11:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:16, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Seongyunhong12345

I am unsure why the article was rejected from publishing. I based the format off the articles of the competitor companies in the same industry and theirs was fully accepted but ours wasn't (example: Betterhelp). I'd love to know what I should be changing for my article to be accepted.

Seongyunhong12345 (talk) 12:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seongyunhong12345. Please clarify what you mean by "our". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seongyunhong12345 If you work for this company, you must read and formally comply with the paid editing policy; you should also review conflict of interest. Your draft merely tells about the company and only has one source. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about your company(not press releases, routine announcements, etc.) 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, only in what others completely unconnected to the company have chosen to say about it.
Please note that 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 is possible these other articles you mention are also inappropriate. Please see other stuff exists. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:43:46, 19 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yankeejess

Here is the Update that still needs to get done right away On The Web Site at www.en.wikipedia.org On The WNET Page The Old 2011 THIRTEEN PBS Logo needs to be replaced with the New 2017 THIRTEEN PBS Logo MEDIA WITH IMPACT thats On The New Web Site at www.thirteen.org thats on the top left needs to get put on right away & Would you please keep that in mind & don,t forget to go On The New Web Site at www.thirteen.org The New 2017 THIRTEEN PBS Logo MEDIA WITH IMPACT is on the top left needs to get put on right away & don,t forget to take care of it right away & don,t forget to let me know when its all set & done with & don,t forget to get this problem fixed big time right away & don,t forget.

Yankeejess (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yankeejess You have not done as you were asked on your post yesterday(see above). There are no deadlines on Wikipedia, so what is the urgency? 331dot (talk) 13:46, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:26, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Caydin Martin

I wasn't finished editing the information on the page (I can understand why it was rejected due to lack of content etc but I thought I could go back and edit it before it was put up for publication) and I would ask for it to be reconsidered for publishing please. I have more content and references to link into the page.

Kind Regards

Graeme Martin

Caydin Martin (talk) 14:48, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to prevent your continuing to edit this draft. However, unless the young gentleman is exceptional and meets all the criteria in WP:BLP it is unlikely to be worthwhile. I note that your surname and the young gentleman's are the same, along with your username, usually more than coincidence. the WP:AFC process allows for such things, but not once an article has been accepted and moved to the main article namespace. Reading WP:COI against that eventuality will be useful for you.
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 15:00, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


15:58:55, 19 June 2020 review of draft by Drazan Jarak

Hi, Thank you for the opportunity to make contact this way. Please notice this is my first article, and as you can see my draft has been declined. I have tried to make my article by reading the Wikipedia instructions and as well as by observing similar Wikipedia pages as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDFTron_Systems, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPedal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_PDF_Library It would be great if you can provide more specific information about what would be needed (what is missing) to improve my page.

Thank you very much!

Drazan

Drazan Jarak (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Drazan Jarak Your draft just tells about the subject. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. "Significant coverage" is that which goes beyond brief mentions, routine announcements or technical descriptions, or primary sources. Please read Your First Article for more information.
Be aware that it is possible that the other articles you went by are also problematic; as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected and unaddressed, even for years. See WP:OSE. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:32:09, 19 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Surface2016


I have made in text citations and they are automatically supposed to show up at the bottom, but I do not see them. Does that mean I need to manually input them in or will they show up eventually?

Surface2016 (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Surface2016: because you diddn't fomat them as inline citations. To format something like a inline citation, surround the citation like <ref>Citation...</ref>. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:58:09, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Larry Royal

17:58:09, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Template:Nasim Scream Larry Royal (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC) Kindly review the page as its never meant for promotional purpose but to boost his online presence and be known world wide and it contains his social media handle like instagram and all others Template:Nasim Scream[reply]

@Larry Royal: To "boost his online presence" is what promotional means. Your draft was deleted for unambiguous advertising. JTP (talk • contribs) 18:12, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:44:04, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Vaqifnet

Vaqifnet (talk) 18:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vaqifnet::

Request on 20:01:01, 19 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Klamb70

Hello, I am still waiting on feedback for why my article was abruptly denied by "daniel arndt." He appears to be an editor not new to starting arguments with others. My subject meets the notability guidelines for breaking a barrier in LGBTQ history and for receiving national news coverage for their campaign and its controversial marketing. Please publish this article. If not, I advise you to review the pages of Mike Bouihier and Rosa Scarcelli, both candidates for office with less "notability" than Bre Kidman.

Klamb70 (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Klamb70, your draft has two problems in my opinion: First of all there are some grammar mistakes (Plural vs Singular in the lead), secondly most of your references are not reliable (with exception to the Washington Times). But you can ask Dan arndt also directly - for example on his talk page - why he thinks that it is not suitable for WK. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Klamb70, my assessment of your draft is completely objective. As I stated in that assessment the subject of the article fails the requirements of WP:NPOLITICIAN. It also, as indicated above by CommanderWaterford, fails WP:ANYBIO - in that it needs to be demonstrated that there is significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources and that almost all the references that you have cited are not considered reliable. Finally the argument just because another similar article exists does not mean that this draft should be supported. Dan arndt (talk) 07:34, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:00:41, 19 June 2020 review of submission by Monk 1987

Monk 1987 (talk) 23:00, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

A friend has asked me to make a Wikipedia page for his Dad as he had a successful career in the 80's from playing darts (reached international standard and beat the world number 2 on his debut) so has a good history. But the article has been refused. Granted, I don't have any idea what I am doing! What am I doing wrong?

Thanks

The comment left by the reviewer is helpful, but it might be expanded a little to help you. I'll leave an extra comment on the draft for you. Fiddle Faddle 08:46, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 20

08:43:17, 20 June 2020 review of submission by Rajeevrijal321

Rajeevrijal321 (talk) 08:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Rajeevrijal321 (talk) 08:44, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajeevrijal321: Do you have a specific question? The reviewer left a comment for you on the draft. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:51, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:40:49, 20 June 2020 review of submission by RINCE ROY

RINCE ROY (talk) 09:40, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RINCE ROY You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:24:03, 20 June 2020 review of submission by Vladjanicek66

Article rewritten with less obvious self publicism but no way to resubmit and despite asking the editor that rejected the page for help nothing more heard.

Vladjanicek66 (talk) 14:24, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vladjanicek66 The draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further as the reviewer felt that there was little to no chance it can be sufficiently improved to meet standards. 331dot (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just do not understand the issues with this draft, all the main points are covered by supporting links to references? I cannot see what is in this page that is so wrong? So basically a band formed of 2/3 of an original band that has its own fanbase, website, FB page and can verify its existence cannot have a wikipedia entry? In that case why are there so many similar very poorly created pages of other bands on Wikipedia?

Tell me what I have to do to get some clarity and fairness to get a page up on this band? It makes no sense.

Vladjanicek66 (talk) 14:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vladjanicek66 Please see other stuff exists. As Wikipedia is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected and unaddressed, even for years. Standards have also changed over the years so what was once appropriate may no longer be. This is why citing other articles as a reason for yours to exist isn't usually a good argument, as those other articles could also be inappropriate. Feel free to point out some of these other articles that may also be problematic or tag them for possible improvement.
The key with your draft is that there does not seem to be independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this band that demonstrates how it meets the definition of a notable band. Interviews with band members do not establish notability as that is a primary source. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:41, 20 June 2020 review of submission by Ashokreddy

Hi, this is regarding 'Dongalaku Donga' page. Unfortunately, for Telugu movies, particularly old ones, there aren't many references other than IMDB and You Tube. I did provide those as references. Not sure why this page isn't being approved. What else I need to do? I've seen many pages on Telugu movies, which are published with 'citations needed', why not the same rule apply for this page? Appreciate any assistance. THANKS

Ashokreddy (talk) 18:51, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ashokreddy IMDB is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, as it is user-editable. YouTube is not often considered a reliable source(for the same reason). Sources do not need to be online(it helps, but is not required) as long as they are publicly available, such as a book in a library. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:04:26, 20 June 2020 review of submission by Kconstalie

Hello. As requested, I have now added additional reliable references for clarity. Below is a link to the article. I have ensured that this informative article complies with Wikipedia's standards. I'll be grateful for your time in reviewing it and publishing it. Thank you! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Conduit_Magazine Kconstalie (talk) 19:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20:35:19, 20 June 2020 review of submission by 2604:2000:1382:B94:5493:CEAB:C22C:888

20:35:19, 20 June 2020 review of submission by 2604:2000:1382:B94:5493:CEAB:C22C:888

I believe that actor Jacopo Rampini has enough film, television and theatre credits both in the United States and abroad (Italy and France) to justify the creation of his wikipedia page.

2604:2000:1382:B94:5493:CEAB:C22C:888 (talk) 20:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Please see the comments from the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:24:08, 20 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sguo123


Dear Editor, thanks for your prompt review feedback. Please allow me to explain.

1) We have seen World Jutice Project which publishes "Rule of Law Index" online, which are carried in wikipedia. The global justice index is the first project in the world, which does not have presence in wikipedia. I hope you would believe it is a great valuable addition to the wikipedia.

2) This Global Justice Index is the first initiative and research project luanched by Fudan Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences (Fudan IAS), a non-western country, and it should enhance the diversity of profiles in wikipedia too.

3) This is an institutional effort to create a page in wikipedia, not by or for an individual. We are in a similar situation like the World Justice Project page created by the institution. If you look at the WJP page, you will see they also use their own material to publish the contents of the page, and equivalent to ours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Justice_Project

4) As the director of the Fudan IAS, I can assure you that there is no copyright issue of the website material created by Fudan IAS global justice project. We created this website for the purpose of offering our research results to all readers around the world for free, thus we have never applied for the copyright, as we do not want the copyright to restrict readers to download, use or reuse our material around the world. You won't find the fact that this website is copyrighted if you search any database around the world. Its contents are free for distribution, and free of copyright infringement. We can declare so in certain ways if you can tell us how to declare so on the page in wikipedia, and add a statement on the page. I hope you would reevaluate and reconsider your decision to release this page to the readers.

If you have any further question, please do let me know. Thank you so much for your reconsideration.


Sguo123 (talk) 21:24, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sguo123: The topic of copyright is huge. Generally material is under copyright by virtue of having been written. Text and other materials may be licenced to be used here by the owner of the material under one of many licences. Generally that onward licencing should appear on your own pages. We can't give you legal advice on the type of licence, but small research should solve that for you. Fiddle Faddle 21:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article may give you some useful background information. IT is by no means the sole mechanism. Fiddle Faddle 21:41, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sguo123. If you are the director of Fudan IAS, you should have the legal ability to release the text to us under an acceptable licence by contacting our copyright permission team, or by making such a release on your website. This will prevent your article from being deleted for copyright reasons, though you may still need to make further modifications to the article before it would be accepted. You can find instructions on how to grant such permission here. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:33, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 21

03:58:18, 21 June 2020 review of submission by Dhawanderer


Just wanted to know why the article has not been assessed on the quality scale. It would be wonderful if I could get a quality assessment which will guide me in further contributions. Thank you so much!

Dhawanderer (talk) 03:58, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have been done now. Deb (talk) 12:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:44:50, 21 June 2020 review of submission by Priyanka2984

The draft was deleted mentioning that the person is not notable enough for a Wiki Page. I was going through the Notability criteria for Sports Persons in football and it mentions the I-League (India) being a prominently accepted league. My subject, Dinesh Nair, has formerly played for 3 teams of the I-League before becoming a sports administrator. Could you please guide me on why this does not meet the notability criteria?

Priyanka2984 (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Priyanka2984 You seem to be writing about him primarily as an administrator, not as a player. If he meets the criteria of being a notable player, you need to write focused on that aspect and have the independent sources to support it. Also note that interviews with him, press releases, routine announcements, and similar sources do not establish notability. Wikipedia should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage(that goes beyond a brief mention) say about him. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:07, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:43, 21 June 2020 review of submission by 71.241.132.232

Notable football league 71.241.132.232 (talk) 11:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:20, 21 June 2020 review of submission by Sbd501

Sbd501 (talk) 13:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


i didn't know that if adding website links this might be counted as promotional work, so now i removed the links. Therefore, there is no other reason to delete my page.

It's promotional because it just tells about the person in the style of a resume. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Your draft had been rejected, meaning that if you truly feel this person meets our definition of notability, you will need to start from scratch. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:08:01, 21 June 2020 review of submission by Newlywo

Hi there, Mr Isaac is a well knwn reporter in Israel and he's an Israeli journalist and presenter in the biggest news Channel is Israel (HaHadashot 12). I have filed many sources and I cant seem to understand why his draft is rejected. Please help.Newlywo (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC) Newlywo (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Newlywo As noted by the reviewers, it appears that this person does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person, or at least the sources in the opinion of the reviewers do not support any claim to notability. I cannot read Hebrew so you may need to ask the reviewers directly what their specific concerns were, if you need clarification on their statements on your draft.
If you are connected to this person in some way, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot Thank you for this. first, I will translate the sources, they are actually good sources.. What can I do more? I wrote the reviewer over 20 dys ago and also just now Newlywo (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:22:58, 21 June 2020 review of submission by Iayaz

i have added two more references , please review

Iayaz (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:27:05, 21 June 2020 review of submission by TheBirdsShedTears

Hi, I have recently create two drafts such as Draft:Freedom of the press in India and Draft:Freedom of the press in Pakistan, however, i am not able to move any of the following into mainspace. It says "the name already exist". Please help deleting old redirects. Thank you. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done 217.68.167.73 (talk) 07:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 22

02:19:31, 22 June 2020 review of submission by 76.89.243.88

Updates have been added- including a new citation from a trusted news source for the entertainment industry in which Terissa Kelton is named. Her profile as a producer continues to grow and is being reflected in major entertainment industry trades like the ones cited.

76.89.243.88 (talk) 02:19, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


02:38:25, 22 June 2020 review of draft by 2405:204:1090:2164:38DB:9EE8:18D4:E3F4


It has many days since I created this page, kindly look into it.

2405:204:1090:2164:38DB:9EE8:18D4:E3F4 (talk) 02:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:20:07, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Pallis and Pakodas

Hi,

I wanted to know why my content has been rejected. I followed the process correctly. MAHAPRASTHANAM is our home production movie and i gave the source links as well. Please, tell me how do i get my content published. Pallis and Pakodas (talk) 06:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "our"? Youtube is not a reliable source. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:26:23, 22 June 2020 review of submission by UKArchaeologist

Despite my conflict of interest with this draft article, my goal has always been to create an archaeology-related encyclopedic entry that conforms to Wikipedia's high standards of quality (and I have enjoyed contributing my knowledge/references to other archaeology pages). I therefore appreciate all the rejections and subsequent helpful advice I have received.


I now believe the Draft:John_Moore_Heritage_Services page is ready for re-review.


IMPROVEMENTS:

I was advised that the article read like an advertisement:

  • I have made significant NPOV edits with the aim of achieving an encyclopedic tone.

I was advised that the article did not provide sufficient evidence of notability:

  • Added newspaper articles discussing work done by the company. The articles contain significant, independent coverage of John Moore Heritage Services (JMHS), some of which are also reliable, secondary sources.
  • Added reference to reliable academic journals which contain very significant coverage of JMHS. Many pieces in academic journals are primary sources and therefore do not prove notability. However, I have included the Oxoniensia chapter from Hugh Coddington and Richard Oram who are not (and have never been) JMHS employees, who provide a synthesis and interpretation of the work done by JMHS in 2013 (similar chapters appear in many of the more recent Oxoniensia volumes, but not all are available online so I thought this would be a nice one for reference).
  • The other references included in this draft are significant, independent, reliable, AND/OR secondary, and may or may not prove notability (I’ll leave that to you who has more experience than I do).


Thank you for your time and consideration. Regardless of your ultimate decision, any further help/advice/feedback is always appreciated.


UKArchaeologist (talk) 06:26, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:21:39, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Faatehsyco


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Faatehsyco (talk • contribs)

@Faatehsyco: I have fixed the question for you. instagram is not a reliable source. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 08:21, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:39:14, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Gogonowski

I can add more information to make this submission more notable. An example of what I can add will be:

HLS has the advantage over legacy streaming protocols in that it is more reliable, offers higher quality, and is less expensive to stream for both the content provider and audience. It does not use expensive conventional specialized streaming servers that legacy streaming protocols require. Instead, HLS segmented streaming uses either a simple web server or inexpensive cloud storage to deliver live or on-demand streams. This kind of traffic appears on the network to be the same as web browser traffic, which is what the Internet was designed for. All the major video content providers and streamers have moved to segmented streaming for these reasons, so it only makes sense that audio should follow to enjoy the same benefits and improve the audience experience, especially on crowded mobile networks.

Until fairly recently, there has been very little development in improving streaming audio protocols. StreamS provides both high performance professional encoders as well as the StreamS HiFi Radio App with full 100% Compliant HLS. GOgonowski (talk) 08:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:Notability for the special meaning of notable on Wikipedia. Your page currently has zero reliable sources. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the article is written like an advertisement. It is full of marketing phrases, and calling SHOUTcast or Icecast "legacy protocols" can be called outright lying at best. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion and every article must be written from a neutral point of view, based on verifiable facts from reliable sources. Furthermore, the conflict of interest guideline discourages editors from writing articles about themselves, their products or companies (and WP:SHAREDACCOUNT says that accounts on Wikipedia cannot represent groups).—J. M. (talk) 15:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:46:52, 22 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Charhurst

Hi I was wondering if I could ask for some feedback around why my Chalky Teeth page got declined due to referencing that does that comply with WP:MEDRS.

There are a mix of primary sources including journals and secondary sources within the sources list. I felt the thed3group.com was considered a secondary source as it has a summary list of all the research behind this subject to date. It is the only online site with up to date accurate and true information about the Chalky Teeth condition out there. We are aiming to educate the public more on this condition and therefore felt a Chalky teeth page was a way of doing that. I would be really grateful for some guidance on how to improve this page to be reconsidered for submission. Thankyou

Charhurst (talk) 08:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I've left what I hope you see as a useful comment on the draft itself Fiddle Faddle 16:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:51:27, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Faatehsyco

I had lack of information and links in previous article review. I have updated it according to the review faults. Please review it again.

Not yet. For the sources in your draft:

10:50:59, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Gogonowski

I have added more material to this as well as references. I intend to add yet more, but I think this should be sufficient for starters. Please advise. GOgonowski (talk) 10:50, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gogonowski Your draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further as in the opinion of the reviewer, it has little to no chance of being improved sufficiently to meet Wikipedia standards. Potential article subjects must have significant coverage (beyond brief mentions or routine coverage) in independent reliable sources showing how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability, and the article should almost exclusively summarize only what those sources say. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:35:53, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Faatehsyco

I am re requesting because the last time i did the article wasn't holding sufficient information and links. Now i have completely updated it. So please look on to it. ~~Faateh ahmed~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faatehsyco (talk • contribs)

See above. @Faatehsyco: There is no need to create a new section each time. There is an "edit"-Laink next to each header, which will allow you to edit that section. Add your comments to the bottom of it, intendating your comment with one : more than the previos one, and sign your post by typing four ~ at the end. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 11:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:43:10, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Muneralmafi

I am re requesting this article because previously it was rejected for having less information but i worked on it and did bit of edits. So please look on to it. ~munerMuneralmafi (talk)

Muneralmafi Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Were you asked to come here by someone? 331dot (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:33:15, 22 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Vishal.r.vaja

i need to create article on Baroda global shared services ltd

i added company profile and refrences.

still article got rejacted please guide me step by step for this. i am not able to find from your given sources

Vishal.r.vaja (talk) 13:33, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vishal.r.vaja Please read the advice you were given at the help desk. Wikipedia, frankly, has no interest in(what I assume is) what your boss or superiors have tasked you with doing here. This is an encyclopedia and not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. This is an encyclopedia, that is only interested in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about an organization, and only ones that meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. You are free to use social media or your company website to tell the world about your company. Feel free to show your boss or superiors this message. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bank Of Baroda is already availbe in wikipedia

and Baroda global shared services is subsidiary of bank of baroda

thats why i am asking for more detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal.r.vaja (talk • contribs)

Vishal.r.vaja Please don't remove prior messages that have been replied to. In order for a subsidiary to merit a Wikipedia article, it must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources on its own. Otherwise, it will need to be mentioned in the article about the larger company if it doesn't merit a standalone article. Please review the advice you have been given, and comply with the paid editing policy before you edit anything else; see your user talk page for more information. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:36:10, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Elemental Knight

I'm trying to bring this article's references up to snuff; however, I'm confused on the angle that the references I originally included did not meet the notability guidelines. The first reference provided is independent of the subject (IE not written by him), does not require additional research to understand its context, and directly references and explains the subject (it's a short biography, but one nonetheless).

I understand if that might not be enough; I've added two additional sources to the article. But I would appreciate further guidance as to how to make it very clear that this subject is, indeed, notable, and worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Elemental Knight (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi {u|Elemental Knight}}, in my humble opinion you need more sources of the quality like the first one at least. The two ones you added are just mentioning the poet or quoting him. Did you have a close look at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources ?! It might be of help. CommanderWaterford (talk) 13:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:05:12, 22 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Dereena

hello all, please help me to create an article for an organization named "Boopin". My submission is deleted and I need help from experience wiki writers.

Dereena (talk) 14:05, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dereena Your draft was a blatant advertisement loaded with opinionated promotional language("Boopin is one of the top 15 advertising agencies in the middle east"; " Boopin designs the ultimate digital experience,"). Wikipedia articles should be written very dryly and without opinions. Wikipedia articles should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have to say about a 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, either directly or indirectly- such as with press releases, announcements of routine business transactions, staff interviews, or other primary sources. Wikipedia is only interested in what others say about your company.
If you work for this company, you must read and formally comply with the paid editing policy before you do anything else here, you should also read conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:10:53, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Chris.cornerstone

It has been several months since I last edited my Wikipedia entry for Cornerstone International Group. This is because of the time needed to research and acquire supporting media articles to attest to the notability of the subject. (Members of the organization are in 37 countries).

I now have that material. I wish to modify the text, include the references and resubmit for consideration.

I am not sure whether I can do that. I no longer see any action to SAVE or PUBLISH new changes.

Please advise me how I may proceed. Chris Allan


Chris.cornerstone (talk) 15:10, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chris.cornerstone You would simply click the "edit" tab at the top to open the edit window, as you did previously. Before you get that far, I will point out that your draft was rejected, meaning that there is little to no chance that it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. Please review the comments left by the reviewers. If you truly think that you can address those concerns, you will need to start a fresh draft. If you are associated with this company, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:36:59, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Ehsan Nasiri Director

Ehsan Nasiri Director (talk) 16:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ehsan Nasiri article declined

I tried to be clear and direct to the point, plz review again my article and tell me where is the problem and how can I fix it. that is my brief biography and filmography. of course that I am a novice-guy and my article is not like a pro. thank you in advance

Had you persevered with Draft:Ehsan Nasiri and paid attention to the comment there you might have had a far better experience. Instead you launched an autobiography into article space. Do you pass our criteria?
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 16:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a pragmatic view, genuinely on your behalf, though it may not feel like that at first. I've nominated your main space article for a deletion discussion. It is likely to be deleted for lack of so much that Wikipedia requires to bring it up to standard. Ive asked that it can be recreated easily in the future
If you now work in the Draft: article to bring it up to standard there is a likelihood, but not a certainty that it will be accepted in the future. I hope you see the virtue in this. I'm trying to help you to learn how to edit and to create articles here Fiddle Faddle 16:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


16:58:26, 22 June 2020 review of draft by Legendofthebend


Hello!

I'm trying to publish a page for Blue Label Labs but it was tagged for speedy deletion and I believe removed. After was previously taken down and I worked with the editors SeraphimBlade and DragonFlysixtyseven who provided critiques on the language which I addressed in the current draft.

It's not a promotional page as it is as factual as any other business page and doesn't offer any leading statements that would qualify it as promotional. I did include "mentions" at the bottom as I was originally dinged for not providing notability. I also included a short bit about going to the Webby Awards which I feel is a notable enough experience such that any developer who makes a product that manages to get that much recognition should be enough experience for Wikipedia. For example, if a new artist were to make it the Grammy Awards, this would be viewed as a notable experience and enough to justify a page for such an individual.

It seems this is a highly subjective process so I believe this needs more than one set of eyes.

Legendofthebend (talk) 16:58, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You already had two, User:Amkgp and Jimfbleak. Please see WP:OSE for why it is not acceptable to use other articles as an argument for the existence or not-existence of your article. Note: You state that Blue label labs is a client of yours, but I cant find where you have complied with the mandatory paid editing disclosure. This is a Terms of Use requirement and not negotiable if you want to edit here. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Legendofthebend An article does not have to have "leading statements" to be promotional, nor does it have to actively solicit customers or sell something. On Wikipedia, merely telling about something is considered promotional. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about (in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a business wants to say about itself. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:38:19, 22 June 2020 review of draft by Bestinshow1917


Bestinshow1917 (talk) 18:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

please let me know what needs to be done to publish this page. this is a very renowned and famous person. all the links have been added to this submission. and, yet, it has been rejected multiple time. please HELP!!!


18:59:46, 22 June 2020 review of draft by Canirinyana


Canirinyana (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I am requesting assistance because the article I submitted for review was rejected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canirinyana (talk • contribs) 19:02, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That page was deleted as a copyright violation. Never, ever, copy stuff from elsewhere onto Wikipedia If that external page belongs to you, you could theoretically donate the Material to Wikipedia but in this case its probbably useless because the material was also promotional, and Wikipedia may not be used for promoting or "generating awareness" of something. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 07:57, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:20, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Tomusange

Tomusange (talk) 20:03, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20:22:42, 22 June 2020 review of submission by Gogonowski

What do we do next? This is our first submission. GOgonowski (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gogonowski: There is a difficulty here. The word "our" implies either that you are editing on behalf of an entity or that your account is shared use. Neither is appropriate under Wikipedia's rules. You need to clarify that, please.
Coming here for advice is the correct thing. In the first instance you may wish to ask the reviewer who rejected the draft for their rationale, and their direct comments. All reviewers are able to justify their rationale on request to those with an interest in hearing it. Fiddle Faddle 20:27, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would help if you could actually read and acknowledge what other people have already said. This is your third request on this page today, you have already received several relevant replies, and completely ignored every single one of them. You won't get the answer you want by repeating the question over and over.—J. M. (talk) 21:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:18:33, 22 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Gogonowski

We are attempting to get StreamS HiFi Radio article accepted. We have made numerous changes at your request. What do we do next?


GOgonowski (talk) 23:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gogonowski Your topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia and Wikipedia accounts are for single person use, whilst you keep referring to "we"? Theroadislong (talk) 07:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is a prime example of WP:ICANTHEARYOU and WP:NOTHERE. The user keeps spamming this page with identical requests, ignoring every single reply they get (no, they did not make any relevant changes to the article). This can be really considered disruptive editing, and, if it continues, the user should be blocked from editing.—J. M. (talk) 07:59, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 23

05:48:57, 23 June 2020 review of draft by Aston3421


The tone and references has been adjusted as per the reason of the decline. Please can someone have a look a the page and advise if the changes are good enough?

Aston3421 (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aston3421: Your draft is now awaiting review. Please be patient; there are roughly 2,000 drafts ahead of you. JTP (talk • contribs) 06:20, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


09:00:19, 23 June 2020 review of draft by Apurva1410

I have created this article referring the wiki pages of other approved journals (for eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Research_Letters and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fennia_(journal)) and the wiki pages on how to write the article on academic journals, but still, the article is rejected. Please help me on how can I improve the article so that it can be approved.

Apurva1410 (talk) 09:00, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As per the decline notice we require significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 09:24, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks talk for your response. I have mentioned its inclusion in Scopus, which as per the article help for academic journals is considered a notable source. I am not able to understand what other reliable sources for a scientific journal can be added. Shall i add its inclusion in some noted libraries or other indexing databases? Or should i add some list of most cited artciles published in the journal

09:34:10, 23 June 2020 review of submission by Renuss112

Renuss112 (talk) 09:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:36:31, 23 June 2020 review of draft by 2A02:2F01:6504:6200:D416:8655:233A:60DC

I hope that it will be implemented, as well. There is ongoing situation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic in Romania. You should look at Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic for more information. 2A02:2F01:6504:6200:D416:8655:233A:60DC (talk) 10:36, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The timeline section in the COVID-19 pandemic in Romania seems to be more comprehensive than this draft. Please see WP:SPLIT for guidance on how to properly create such a "sub-article". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:12, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree. 2A02:2F01:6504:6200:D416:8655:233A:60DC (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:34:11, 23 June 2020 review of submission by Hgrant1106

Hgrant1106 (talk) 11:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I just saw that this submission was denied for coming across too much like an advertisement. Are there specific examples of where the language sounds too biased? Because I'm having trouble seeing it. Thank you!

Request on 12:15:21, 23 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Konigboom

This is my first time creating an article for my agency. Could you guide me in completing the article? Thank you

Konigboom (talk) 12:15, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Konigboom If you are employed by this agency, you are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to review and formally comply with the paid editing policy and declare your status. This is mandatory, so please do so before you edit further. You should also review conflict of interest. Your draft has no independent reliable sources to support its content. Wikipedia is not interested in what any organization wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected to the organization say about it. For example, the United States Department of Justice merits an article because many independent sources have written about it. Articles are not typically written by the subject(or their representative). Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:19:01, 23 June 2020 review of submission by 2A01:799:81F:B600:A0D4:1FC6:C886:15B3

Hello! I am the drummer of a band Heimland, and currently trying my best of efforts making the band more available for a more international audience. Having a story about the band’s current 4 year still-going-strong journey is pretty much what all concert and festival organizers etc need to notice smaller bands giving their best of efforts in reaching higher a step at a time. Having a Wikipedia page about the story and progress I think is really important to use as a reference to the band’s potentials.

Hope you understand, 2A01:799:81F:B600:A0D4:1FC6:C886:15B3 (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for article subjects like bands to tell the world about themselves. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about (for example) bands, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable band. Wikipedia is not interested in what a band has to say about itself, what it considers to be its own history, or in helping spread the word about the band. That's what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 15:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:47:28, 23 June 2020 review of submission by Yogesh Ishant Sharma

Yogesh Ishant Sharma (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Night I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or post their resume. Please review the autobiography policy. You should use social media to tell the world about yourself. You would only merit a Wikipedia article if you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person , as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 16:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:47:55, 23 June 2020 review of submission by Anthony Night

Anthony Night (talk) 15:47, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I need help

Anthony Night I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please review the autobiography policy. You should use social media to tell the world about yourself. You would only merit a Wikipedia article if you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person or a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:55:30, 23 June 2020 review of submission by Prashanthpidimarri

Prashanthpidimarri (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Description & Introduction Network Highway Seven short termed as Nhseven is an online social media application which is tagged as THE BIG DADDY OF SOCIAL MEDIA based in Hyderabad, Telangana and a flagship service of the namesake company Rover infotech PTE LTD it is founded by P.Vinod Kumar along with the support of Tallam Family Group. It is social networking site which offers unique features.

The founders initially limited nhseven membership to Vignan Universities then various other universities. Since 2020 anyone who claims atleast 16 years old has been allowed to be registered user of nhseven, through this may vary depending on local laws. The nhseven service can be accessed from devices with internet connectivity, such as personal computers tablets and smartphones. After registering the users can create profile revealing information about themselves. They can post photos, videos, texts and multimedia which is shared with any other users that have agreed to be there friend or with a different privacy settings. Users can also use various embedded apps, join common-internet groups, buy and sell items or services on marketplace, and receive notifications of their nhseven friends activities and activities of nhseven pages they follow. Nhseven claimed that it had more than 7k+ users. History Nhseven was started on basis of make in India campaign by Vinod kumar Pentakota. NHSEVEN stands for Network Highway Seven. NHSEVEN name was derived from one largest highway in India NH-7 which connects from Varanasi to KanyaKumari. The development of the application was started in 2019 by Religate Technologies Pvt Ltd. In 2020 Rover Infotech PTE Ltd, a Singapore based company overtook the operations from Religate. The pre-release version was released in February 2020. Website Technical aspects -- The website of Nhseven is developed using technologies Java, Angular, MySQL, mango db, Android, ios. The application is hosted using Amazon. The website's primary color is yellow and green. On January 2019, Rover Infotech PTE Ltd. introduced nhseven a significant redesign of its user interface on selected networks.

User profile/Dashboard Each registered user on nhseven has a personal profile that shows their posts and content. The format of individual user pages was known as timeline a chronological feed of a users stories including status update's, photos, interactions with apps and events. The layout let users add a cover photo. Users were given more privacy settings. Nhseven launches nhseven pages for brands and celebrities to interact with fanbase. Dashboard appears on every users homepage and highlights information including profile changes, upcoming events and friends. Terminology used Post Any text, media that user wants to share with his friends is termed as post. Users can post any kind of multimedia or text on NHSEVEN. Users can post on his own account or create a group or page to share the post with group of people. Any user can react to a post using clap,respond or spread. Clap The clap button stylized as a clapping icon enables users to easily interact with status updates, photos and videos, links shared by friends and advertisements. A clap on a post shows interest users towards post. Users can earn more reward points for more claps on posts. Respond Users can react to a post by commenting through respond. An user can respond for a post unless there is a restriction used by the posted user. Spread Users who like others posts and want to post the same on their timeline can use post to share the post. Timeline Timeline is the one where users can be able to view posts from different users Features of NHSEVEN 1. Community groups 2. Professional Network builder 3. Event management 4. Job creater / finder 5. Video portal 6. Business promotion 7. Earning Rewards (monetization) Messenger NHseven boasts it's own messenging/chat application named as NHSeven+. It uses NHseven as its base application for users to communicate individually or for group chats. It is still under development. 

Growth of the company.

After its initial pre-release NHseven acquired nearly 7000 new users in just 7 days. NHSeven is yet to release a full version of the application to the public. Programs and appreciations NHSEVEN organised a digital literacy program from February 14, 2020 across all engineering and degree colleges in Telengana and Andhra Pradesh. Many praised the efforts of Nhseven on providing awareness on Digital Marketing to students. CEO Vinod Kumar many accolades from Vignan Group of Institutions Andhra Pradesh and also from other major colleges across Telengana and Andhra Pradesh. During the event on March 14,2020 in Vignan group seven best performers on NHseven were chosen and awarded with LED TV .


Short info Type of site: Social Networking service Type of Business: Private Area Served: Hyderabad, India Parent : Rover infotech pte ltd Founded: 1st January 2019 Founder : P. Vinod Kumar URL: www.nhseven.com Alexa Rank: Launched: Current Status: Active Users:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=964125640"