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 Toadalicious (talk | contribs) at 17:36, 3 July 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


June 27

04:51:59, 27 June 2020 review of draft by Brightlikethis


Brightlikethis (talk) 04:51, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My article was rejected for not being objective. I have since made edits and changes. Should I let the person who reviewed the article know I submitted new material. Thanks.

Hi Brightlikethis. There is no need to notify the previous reviewer. Any reviewer may do the next review. One advantage of having a different reviewer each time is that different people have different strengths and may focus on different aspects of the draft. If I were reviewing it, for example, I would tell you, among other things, that Discogs and IMDb are user-generated content, so they are not reliable sources, and should not be cited.
While you're waiting for the next review, it would be wise to address directly the question posed by the first reviewer. Do you have a conflict of interest regarding the topic? The best place to answer is on your own user page. You need not reveal your identity, but should disclose the nature of any connection you have, such as being a friend or relative of someone in the band, being in the band or having a professional relationship with it, or being in the business of promoting it. A sentence or two about why you want to edit Wikipedia and why you want to create an article on this topic in particular will smooth the collaborative process. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:51, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:04:18, 27 June 2020 review of submission by Princepratap1234

The Draft:Golden Petal Awards has been rejected as these are similar awards like Star Parivaar Awards, Zee Rishtey Awards and Sab Ke Anokhe Awards promoting shows of StarPlus, Zee TV and Sony SAB respectively. So how can others have there page but this can't. Isn't this a partialty.

Princepratap1234 (talk) 07:04, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Princepratap1234, If those awards don't meet Wikipedia:Notability then you may nominate them for deletion. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:50:12, 27 June 2020 review of draft by NeworleansR&B


I'm very new to the world of wiki postings. I recently tried to post a page on the music impresario and recording artist manager Selwyn Miller, but the submission was declined citing not being "adequately supported by reliable sources." The draft page can be found here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Selwyn_Miller#Selwyn_Miller

I'd really appreciate your help and guidance about how to edit the article so that it gets approved. I'm wondering if the format I used for listing my sources was not correct or if it was a matter of not listing enough sources. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

NeworleansR&B (talk) 09:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One of the main problems is that you've cited reliable sources that don't really tell us anything about Selwyn Miller, whilst in the draft article you've included all kinds of biographical detail for which there is no source. Read Wikipedia:Notability again for more information. Deb (talk) 10:01, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:57:07, 27 June 2020 review of submission by Pranavkumarking


Pranavkumarking (talk) 10:57, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pranavkumarking You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media to send personal messages to family and friends. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:19:03, 27 June 2020 review of draft by Femkemilene


I'm not entirely sure of the process here. User:Regular Evan recently wrote, after some urging from my side irl, an article on Bayesian History Matching. It was rejected with the question of whether some unrelated Bayesian techniques could be added/checked whether there is duplication. He answered these concerns on the talk page, but the original reviewer, RoySmith seems to have missed it (incorrect location?). Can I simply resubmit it with the current version? Integrating it with actually related statistics articles would be a daunting task, as those areas are now mostly missing.

Femke Nijsse (talk) 11:19, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Femkemilene, Hi, and thanks for the ping. Yes, you're right, I missed noticing the talk page comments. I can see why. The way our WP:PING system works, users don't get notified unless you sign your comment. My personal opinion is that this is quite broken in that regard, as this example illustrates, and you are in no way at fault for having been defeated by that.
Anyway, looking at the draft again, I'll go ahead and accept it now. My only concern was whether this could fit into another existing article, and you've explained why it doesn't. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS, our AfC process is also broken in that comments get scatter across multiple places. There's comments directly on the draft page, comments on the talk page, comments that get left on the reviewer's user talk page. If there was one single place that comments were made, I think it would improve communication and help the reviewing process. But, that's another soapbox. -- RoySmith (talk) 11:33, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :). Always forgetting to sign when I'm pinging. Should have learned it by now. Femke Nijsse (talk) 12:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:25:40, 27 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 2A00:4802:24C:BC00:E017:7986:E1CF:14BE


Hello, I wrote an article which was declined for some reason. I provided references for the page, smart links and the content was unbiased, however it still wasn’t accepted. Could someone assist me, please? Thank you

2A00:4802:24C:BC00:E017:7986:E1CF:14BE (talk) 12:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... @Amkgp and Theroadislong: While the citations are not technically correct, I would say that they are inline citations. I will invest some time now and attempt to correct them to technically correct inline citations. I think the decline here could be a bit bitey because you could be able to fix that in a few minutes. No comment on sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:06, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't decline the draft, I showed them where to find help with correctly formatting sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:08, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Victor Schmidt, No issues but it was never meant to WP:BITE Orlianrow from my side. I think the creator did not get the message that it was a formatting error only. Thanks for assisting and cheers. ~ Amkgp 💬 17:18, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:55:41, 27 June 2020 review of submission by Bernardboase

Acceptance of this draft article has been declined by editor User:Sulfurboy with the explanation that, in order to verify the information from reliable sources, he advises:

Please properly format your references including page numbers so that the information in the article can be verified.

Of the five References, three are web links, and two are books from which I can perhaps find a suitable page number, though the books in question would not be at all easily available to a Wikipedia editor to verify.

I think the list of Publications provides a good indication of why the subject of the article should be recognised as a Notable Academic but I am, of course, open to susggestions for improvement and Wikipedia's specific requirements.

Many thanks for your help.

Bernardboase 17:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

19:30:46, 27 June 2020 review of submission by Dlb2321


All the references and sources are of my own YouTube channel and or other videos that I'm in. I don't understand why this article isn't notable. I'm am trying to submit my own article of myself under my entertainment presence.

Dlb2321 (talk) 19:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no interest in what the articles subject wants to say about himself, only what reliable sources have reported.

The article should be limited to a summary of what such independent sources have said about them. If there are no sources then we don’t have an article.Theroadislong (talk) 19:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:17:24, 27 June 2020 review of draft by Roareye


Roareye (talk) 20:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm publishing a page on a short film, Human Cargo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Human_Cargo_(2019)

I have followed all of the guidelines and it has wrongly been denied again. On my previous submission, it was declined due to a lack of reviews being on the page. I added a verifiable, independent review and someone called Calliopejen1 has declined it on absolutely zero grounds at all, adding false information by claiming no independent review was linked. What is the point in having strict guidelines to follow when your team/whoever that person is, can just deny them? They clearly didn't read the note I left on the page, the additional references added and the section added to refer directly to the independent review that was linked AND Wayback Machine/Internet Archive linked.

I'm furious at this, as the one prerequisite for it being accepted was met and declined for zero reason. The note left shows a lack of reading and actually doing any of the editorial work I assume they are supposed to do before a rejection.

If there is a reason for a further declined I'd like to know it, I have no issue working within the guidelines and I suggest the people given the privilege of editing the site also learn to follow them too.

Thank you.

It is VERY poorly sourced, Amazon and Twitter references need to be replaced they are not reliable, if it was in main space it would be sent straight to WP:AFD where it would struggle to survive. Theroadislong (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Roareye (edit conflict) This is a volunteer project, with tens of thousands of editors from around the world participating. As with any large organization, its members have different interpretations of policies and different viewpoints. There is no need to be angry over this or to be overly critical of the reviewers who choose to spend their available time here. I note that you have claimed a conflict of interest; if you worked on this film, you are a paid editor and must make the stricter paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement.
I would concur with the reviewer; one review is not sufficient to demonstrate that this film meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable film. If you have additional coverage of this film in independent reliable sources, please offer those sources. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Roareye. I hope you didn't pay UK Film Review for one of their "queue jumps". When Wikipedia:Notability (films) talks about "full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics", it means reviews by James Christopher of The Times, Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian, or similar professionals. Reviews by unknown reviewers on a random website that solicits submissions to be reviewed are worthless for the purpose of demonstrating notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). The encyclopedia may not be used for any form of promotion, marketing, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:57:39, 27 June 2020 review of draft by Don Battee


I have substantial articles but was not accepted can you help with the problem I am having ?

https://www.dallasweekly.com/articles/dallas-native-don-battee-co-stars-in-the-sapphires-film/

21:57:39, 27 June 2020 review of submission by {{SUBST:REVISIONUSER} Don Battee (talk) 21:57, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don Battee (talk) 21:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have come here to ask about a declined and very sparsely referenced autobiography. Generally it is unwise to write one became it can be disappointing to have it criticised for not falling pithing our guidelines.Fiddle Faddle 22:41, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

this is a full article please can you explain why this article does not meet the qualification to create a page ?https://www.dallasweekly.com/articles/dallas-native-don-battee-co-stars-in-the-sapphires-film/

Don Battee (talk) 22:55, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don Battee Please do not create multiple discussions. To respond, simply edit this existing discussion by clicking "edit" in the section header, or "edit" at the top of this page(if you are using a phone, you may find this easier to do in the desktop version on a browser). Your article is almost completely unsourced to independent reliable sources. Any article about you should only discuss what independent sources state about you, not what you want to state about yourself. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, and autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged, please read WP:AUTO. 331dot (talk) 00:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Don Battee. The Dallas Weekly is a start. It reads like PR material distributed by the film's promoters, or perhaps the actor's publicist, and its home town boy makes good puff-piece nature makes it less than ideal, but it is significant coverage. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. User:Don Battee/sandbox's other two sources are IMDb, which, being user-generated, is not a reliable source, and a company managing the actor, which is not an independent source (they have an incentive to promote him).
Another factor reviewers will consider in judging whether the topic is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia is how big the actor's roles are in notable productions. WP:NACTOR says entertainers are likely to be notable if they have had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. The Sapphires is a notable film. Don Battee's role as Myron Ritchie is more significant that that of the actors portraying Government Official or Desk Clerk, but it's closer to them than to the stars like Chris O'Dowd on the spectrum of significance. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 28

00:15:19, 28 June 2020 review of submission by Satoshimoto


Partnership with 7-Eleven, CVS, Rite Aid seems notable. Satoshimoto (talk) 00:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Satoshimoto (talk) 00:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Satoshimoto. No, the partnership is not notable. Notable has a specific technical meaning in the context of Wikipedia. Also be aware of Wikipedia's general sanctions on all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:41:15, 28 June 2020 review of draft by Wikitrumpets


Hello, my user sandbox keeps getting deleted as an article. The comments in the review say to use the sandbox for test editing. However, I am trying to use my sandbox. Wikitrumpets (talk) 03:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitrumpets, you shouldn't submit your sandbox unless you've written an actual article there. Submitting means a reviewer has to review it, which is a waste of time if you're just testing things. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:04, 28 June 2020 review of submission by JJ10OFFICIAL

I AM JJ10 JATIN JAYAY I AM RAPPER & LYRICIST FROM GWALIOR CITY, MADHYA PRADESH, INDIA I AM HIPHOP AND COMMERICAL RAPPER LYRICIST PLEASE APPROVE THIS REVIEW TO KNOW EVERYBODY ABOUT ME BECAUSE SO MUCH OF MY FAN FOLLOWING WANTS TO KNOW ABOUT ME AND I TELL HIM ONE BY ONE THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE SO PLEASE APPROVE THIS REVIEW FAST BT WHICH MY FANS GET INFORMATION ABOUT ME THANK YOU JJ10OFFICIAL (talk) 09:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JJ10OFFICIAL Wikipedia has no interest in helping you reach your fans or in helping you tell the world about yourself. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for promotional purposes. Autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged, see the autobiography policy. If you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable rapper or musician, an independent editor will take note of your career and choose to write about you. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or a website owned and operated by you. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:37:27, 28 June 2020 review of submission by Raunak singh (rajputboy)


Raunak singh (rajputboy) (talk) 09:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Raunak singh (rajputboy) You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. Please also read the autobiography policy to learn why writing about yourself is strongly discouraged here. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or a website owned and operated by you. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:58:44, 28 June 2020 review of submission by Siprama Komunindo


Siprama Komunindo (talk) 10:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Siprama Komunindo: The submission currently lacks reliable independent sources. Wikipedia and other user-editable sites arent considered reliable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:46:12, 28 June 2020 review of submission by S.a.bilal86


S.a.bilal86 (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

is there an easier way to communicate... an email ID maybe

@S.a.bilal86: assuming this is about Draft:Syed Salahuddin, it was deleted two years ago because it hasnt been edited in 6 months. If you wish to restore it, please ask at WP:REFUND/G13. Note that most communication will happen on the wiki. I for instance only have the Email this user function enabled for things that need to be discussed private. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:08:46, 28 June 2020 review of submission by Victorinoxy


Hi. I just cleaned up the draft of the "Zhubin Rahbar" page by removing the autobiographical parts and revised the rest with an objective point of view. Should I now resubmit?

Second question is, when I tried to resubmit, the next screen just says "click publish now" button, although my draft is not shown in the text area at all. Am I still supposed to just click Publish Now regardless?

Thanks for all your advice!

Victorinoxy (talk) 22:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Victorinoxy "Publish changes" should be understood to mean "save changes". It does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". It used to say "save changes" but was changed to emphasize that anything saved to Wikipedia is potentially visible to the public. 331dot (talk) 00:19, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 29

04:38:31, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Lohenge


Lohenge (talk) 04:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC) How can I improve this article? I know that the content of an article needs to be supported by effective references. My objective is to put in writing the information regarding Mooto village. The difficulty is to get books, articles or other written materials to support what I know about this village. Can you assist me to make my article effective. Thanks[reply]

@Lohenge: assuming this is about User:Lohenge/Hilaire Mambe Engobo, it was deleted 4 years and 6 months ago because it hasnt been edited in a while. If you wish to retieve it, ask at WP:REFUND/G13. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 08:15, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:26:28, 29 June 2020 review of submission by 102.89.2.212

There is a recent independent report about the group 102.89.2.212 (talk) 06:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning it will not be considered further. You will need more than one independent reliable source. A Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources state about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable organization. As noted by the reviewer, you had no independent reliable sources to support content in the draft. Interviews with staff or spokespeople for the organization do not count. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:07:33, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Dinesh Singh (DOP)

I don't know what is the reason for not publishing the article which I've submitted a couple of hours ago. Dinesh Singh (DOP) (talk) 08:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Singh (DOP) You have no independent reliable sources to support the content of the article. This is especially vital for any biography of a living person. Please read Your First Article. If you are attempting to write about yourself, please read the autobiography policy as to why that is strongly discouraged. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:19:31, 29 June 2020 review of draft by 73.162.180.160


Hello, what additional information would be required to get this page approved? I see that the wiki article for Yale Literary Magazine has a similar amount of information and article length—with less citations—and it is already a published page. What makes that listing more legitimate? Thanks so much.

73.162.180.160 (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:24:40, 29 June 2020 review of submission by 80.193.62.107


Hello,

Thank you for reviewing this article. I am Amy and I occasionally do voluntary work for Mr Newman. I am the person who wrote this article. After following the guidelines your predecessors gave me, submitting as many links to my sources as possible (and omitting the ones I could not trace back), after including the information (as per your predecessor's guidance) that I was doing this article for Mr Newman, this article has been rejected again, this time for a reason I cannot comprehend.

Please advise as I'm willing to make the necessary changes once again... and add that Mr Newman has recently been a guest on BBC's Your Money And Your Life as well as BBC Radio Ulster as a retail expert, should his notoriety still be unclear.

Kind regards,

Amy

80.193.62.107 (talk) 08:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but the draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that in the opinion of the reviewer there is little to no chance it can be sufficiently improved enough to meet standards. Please review the comments left by the reviewers. Any article about a person should not just tell what they have done; it should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Significant coverage goes beyond brief mentions or mere announcements of things the person does. It usually has in depth analysis and fact checking. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:56:21, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Gaurav8D pixer

Please tell what i do Gaurav8D pixer (talk) 08:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gaurav8D pixer Wikipedia is not a place to tell the world about yourself, especially if the information is not accurate. Please read the autobiography policy as to why writing about yourself is not advisable. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:44:48, 29 June 2020 review of submission by 212.159.72.195


Would it be more acceptable to post references to online metadata records about this service - like this: https://www.spatialdata.gov.scot/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/8212ae76-9f58-4e3e-b486-2d6e930e30f6

How about another case study about the project: https://www.agi.org.uk/news/case-studies/1459-spatial-hub-turning-local-government-data-into-self-sustaining-assets

I'm at a loss to propose anything else that can prove this is a justifiable project for inclusion to wikipedia!

212.159.72.195 (talk) 10:44, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:49:45, 29 June 2020 review of submission by PyWiXard

Hi!! I've written an article for Dhhyey Desai - this page is full of results from him, please tell me what other details are needed, there is a lot online as he is an influencer, please let me know what others are needed, thank you very much. PyWiXard (talk) 10:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:58:07, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Malachand


THEN TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING ASSISTANCE BELOW THIS LINE. Take as many lines as you need. -->}}

Malachand (talk) 10:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Template:LankaPropertyWeb[reply]

Hi this is my first time writing an article on Wikipedia. The reason I chose to write about this company is that I recently came across their posts on social media that said they were hosting Sri Lanka's first virtual real estate show. I looked back on their history through the company page to get an idea about it and collected my information from there. However, since it is not allowed to write on wiki without citing I also included third party news sources that contain information on the company to support my work. But it was taken down. Can I know what exactly I need to correct for it to be approved?

11:04, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Akiva100

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Akiva100/sandbox

I would like to know if I formatted this article correctly for publication on Wikipedia. Thank you to all the editors who have assisted.

Akiva100 (talk) 11:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Akiva100 (talk) 11:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Akiva100:, since your message suggests it wasn't just a test edit but intended to progress, I've done some basic clearance work. However, I'd take a look at the Saul Berlin article you've linked to. You either need to have significantly more content (with more references) on the work, or you'd be better off putting in a dedicated section in Saul's article rather than create a new article. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:14:08, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Malachand

  • [[User:{{SUBST:Malachand}}|{{SUBST:Malachand}}]] ([[User talk:{{SUBST:Malachand}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{SUBST:Malachand}}|contribs]]) ([{{safesubst:fullurl:User talk:{{SUBST:Malachand}}|action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&summary=You+have+a+new+reply+on+the+%5B%5BWikipedia%3AWikiProject+Articles+for+creation%2FHelp+desk%7Chelp+desk%5D%5D%21&preload=Template:AFCHD/u/preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=&preloadparams%5B%5D=11%3A14%3A08%2C+29+June+2020+review+of+submission+by+%7B%7BSUBST%3AMalachand%7D%7D}} TB])


Hello, This is my first time writing an article on Wikipedia. I chose to write about this company because I saw their posts on social media that they were hosting Sri Lanka's first virtual real estate show. I found information about the company through their website and created the article. however since wiki's policies don't allow an article to be written without crediting I made sure that I cited third party news sources in Sri Lanka that contained information about the company. But it was taken down.

Can I know what exactly should I change in this article for it to be accepted? I really want to have my first article published on wiki. -->}}

Malachand (talk) 11:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC) Malachand (talk) 11:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:16, 29 June 2020 review of draft by Arganflu


Hi - I put up this page on George Cazenove months ago and it is still waiting for review. A couple of changes have been suggested and I have actioned them. I am not a very experienced Editor on Wiki, so would hugely appreciate some help on getting this page live. In 2016 I did this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzannah_Harvey and it was up almost straight away...

Many many thanks Arganflu (talk) 11:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suzannah Harvey is actually very poorly sourced, I'm surprised that it was ever accepted. Your current draft still has inappropriate external links as I mentioned on my talk page, [1] [2] [3], [4], [5]. Theroadislong (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:07:18, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Laura at vjoon-gmbh


Hi out there, my article got rejected and I would like to ask for some advice on how to get the article online with further adjustments? I have added some more relevant customers of the company and changed the wording here and there, not sure if that will do? The software is of highest relevance for a lot of customers and especially the connection to Adobe and cloud providers such as Amazon Cloud Services shows the significance of the software. I would appreciate any tips you might have that could help me to provide and add relevant information for the article to be shifted to the Wikipedia main site. Thank you very much and best regards, Laura at vjoon-gmbh (talk) 14:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


14:25:17, 29 June 2020 review of draft by Arganflu


Hello - I have had some help with trying to get this page to a point when it can go live. I have made the changes suggested. Can anyone else help me to get this page published please? I am not an experienced Editor, so all help is gratefully received. This has been in draft awaiting review now since early May and I am keen to get it signed off and live. Many thanks!

Arganflu (talk) 14:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:44:09, 29 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Topy Lozano


Hi. This is my first time to create a Wikipedia page. Published articles to support the article came from a copy of newspapers/magazines in the 1950's and 1960's that are no longer in business. Some came from research articles online that also confirms claims in the published articles. Its about the life of Alfredo A. Lozano who influenced Philippine music culture back during the American regime and in the Japanese occupation and got awarded by two Presidents for his efforts. Any suggestions on how it may be improved or necessary changes needed in order to be granted publication at Wikipedia is appreciated. Would also be happy to delete statements or passing mentions to meet Wikipedia standards. Thank you. Topy

Topy Lozano (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Topy Lozano: Wikipedia requires multiple reliable independent sources with significant coverage. Wikipedia isnt considered reliable. The subject's own homepage fails the independent part. blogspot.com and wordpress.com are neither considered reliable. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 05:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:22:02, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Siriandstuffs


Siriandstuffs (talk) 16:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


16:54:10, 29 June 2020 review of draft by Nantucket60


My submission "the Hamilton Mathematics Institute TCD" was reviewed on June 7 and rejected. Since then I substantially updated the submission which now demonstrates that this is the renowned mathematics institution in Ireland, in Irelands oldest and prestigious university, which was founded by arguably some of the most distinguished and famous mathematicians of 20th century and that this institute plays major role in world's mathematics community as exemplified by awards and support it receives. Unfortunately my edits have not been yet reviewed so I am hesitant to make more updates until I see the response from Wikipedia in regard to my previous updates. Please advise what shall I bee doing in order to make sure this page finally is published. Sincerely, Nantucket60

Nantucket60 (talk) 16:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nantucket60: WP:GNG requires significant coverage (My interpretation is at least 1 lengthy paragraph) in multiple independent, reliable sources. Out of the 8 sources, 4 are from the college itself (definitely not independent). Out of the other 4, at least 3 appear to not have significant coverage. Due to this, I don't think the article would be accepted. I'd recommend trying to find more independent sources about this institute, or redirect to the college article. Username6892 19:11, 29 June 2020 (UTC) I'm not an actual reviewer, but if I saw this as a new article, I would probably PROD or redirect if I didn't find any additional sources.[reply]

17:45:18, 29 June 2020 review of submission by Siriandstuffs


This page is dedicated to Indian model and TV personality Asim Riaz who rose to immense popularity after participating in Bigg Boss 13. After the show Asim has worked as a model in quite a number of music video which allows him to be notable.The article Asim Riaz was deleted and protected on 16th February 2020. I request to be provided with the Administrator Access to edit further.

Siriandstuffs (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Siriandstuffs, the article was protected after repeated attempts to recreate the article after it was deleted. Your best option is to continue to work on the existing draft article and improve it to where it will meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Read the WP:NACTOR page for what's needed. Appearing in a reality show and some music videos do not meet the notability requirements. The reviewer comments on the draft article also give you some useful advice. Ravensfire (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 30

06:45:44, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Vishak Vijayan 05


Vishak Vijayan 05 (talk) 06:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:27:02, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Li-reg

Hello, this is the third time I am reqesting a review. Ori Isaac is Israeli journalist, editor and presenter in Channel 12 News (HaHadashot 12)!! its unheard of he wont be on wikipedia and that I will write and write and be ignored. I find myself in this loop for the past few months and this is now ok, who can help please and give it a review that is just? thanks, Li-reg (talk) 07:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC) Li-reg (talk) 07:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia, it has been rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 09:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:15, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Paraleluni123


I have made some changes to this draft for a final review. The article has been rejected once for more references and then for unclear nature of the musicians role and activities.

I have added more references but seems like I have been unclear on the music role part.

Can someone review one more time as what exactly should be mentioned regarding the music ability or role to be accepted as a separate page?

The singer I ave made the article with did have some activities with another group VIVidiva outside GIDLE so I think she qualifies for a separate article about herself in the singer musician category.

I'm still very new to this and this is my first article , so I need help. Paraleluni123 (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Paraleluni123: Please indicate which criteria of WP:NMUSIC is met, or if we should use the more general WP:NPERSON. @Robert McClenon and Sulfurboy: any aditional advice? Note that the draft has been rejected, meaning that we probbably waste our time here. You may want to read WP:AMOUNT. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 09:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paraleluni123: Since I could not find significant media coverage of her individual musical activities, is WP:NPERSON in the entertainer category suitable? since she has a sizable fan following as a kpop idol, is praised for her individual dance performances and is recognized as a celebrity by the media and peers? I'm sorry if this all comes to nothing.

User:Paraleluni123 - I asked for an explanation on the draft talk page of how Seo Soojin is individually notable. I did not ask you to provide more references. It is also possible to provide more references. You weren't answering the question. I am not saying that she is not notable. I am saying that you are not explaining how she is notable outside of her group. You did not answer the question. You were wasting your time and our time. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Paraleleuni123 - There is a myth in Wikipedia that adding more references is the way to get a draft accepted. Sometimes it is better to answer the reviewer's question. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Paraleluni123 - Do you have a conflict of interest? Are you being paid by Seo Soojin? If so, work on her own web site or the group's web site. Wikipedia has a concept of neutral point of view. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Paraleluni123 - You might try letting someone else write the draft. Or you might try starting over. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ @Robert McClenon:

Paralleluni123: I have no connection to the singer whatsoever, just a kpopper who was surprised that there is no article about Seo Soojin

As I have explained before it's my first time here hence I could not understand what you meant by music notability. I didn't know I was replying to the editor when I mentioned I added references part. I thought that was just a timeline entries part of draft history. I thought editors just recheck the draft of the article for an explanation. Anyways, I did redo the draft and I tried to be neutral as possible. So can you review it once again?

Again, I ask for help as in the first place I don't understand what music notability should be exactly>>>>>>> As a singer she did have some pre-debut activities with another group VIVidiva outside GIDLE maybe she could notable be in the singer musician category but as I could not find significant individual musical activities other than that MAYBE NOT????

In that case, maybe she could be notable in the WP:NPERSON in the entertainer category suitable? since she has a sizable fan following as a kpop idol, is praised for her individual dance performances without the group and is recognized as a celebrity by the media and peers?

If both these are invalid, I guess the article should be dropped for now till someone tries again in the future.

Request on 10:55:14, 30 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 87.239.222.240


Hello and thanks for reviewing the article

You mentioned that he reason for not accepting the article was "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". I have looked through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, and found that the sources I provided match your criteria. The links to the festival are mentioned in the major online Polish and foreign portals, such as:

[1] [2] [3] [4]

I will be grateful for further and more indepth answer why the following in your opinion does not match Wikipedia Reliable sources policy.

Looking forward to hearing from you

Regards

Dawid

Dawidnovak (talk) 09:36, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

87.239.222.240 (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://sport.onet.pl/rugby/krakow-rugby-festival-juvenia-krakow-wraca-do-domu/w27pby
  2. ^ https://punditarena.com/rugby/thepateam/the-craic-is-mighty-in-krakow-local-rugby-tournament-thrives-in-city/
  3. ^ https://www.radiokrakow.pl/od-was/rugbisci-zagrali-charytatywnie/
  4. ^ https://sport.interia.pl/inne/news-zabawa-z-jajem-dla-twardzieli-na-krakow-rugby-festival,nId,2597009

12:22:02, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Priyanka2984

Thanks for the clarification earlier on 21st June. I have included specific details in the playing career section. Also in the summary I have highlighted Dinesh's career as a player first. The reference list has been populated as well. Earlier the links were incorrectly provided in the External links section. Please let me know if this suffices the notability & inline citations criteria.

}}

Priyanka2984 (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:20:51, 30 June 2020 review of submission by 216.174.75.9


I did as best as I could to write an objective article on this unique monastery that is one of the most serene and spiritual Eastern Orthodox monasteries in America, one of only eighty in the United States.

216.174.75.9 (talk) 14:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are asking why it was rejected. Have you asked 1292simon on their talk page, to assist you with their reasons for rejecting it? It is the best place to start. They will see this message, too and may respond here. All reviewers are able to explain their reasons. Fiddle Faddle 14:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Content like "It is one of the most popular and welcoming monasteries visited by people from all walks of life" doesn't sound very objective? Theroadislong (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:15, 30 June 2020 review of draft by Msftbebe


Msftbebe (talk) 16:56, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Msftbebe: you have provided zero reliable sources and therfore the draft currently fails Wikipedias verifiability policy. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 06:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:41:38, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Lipav123


Lipav123 (talk) 18:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My draft article Draft:Anthony Radetic was rejected for using copyright material. Could you please let me know what was the copyrighted material? Most of the photos came from Anthony or Wikipedia. Please advise.

Lipav123 (talk) 18:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We dont talk about the photos. As i can infer from the page history, we talk about text that was aparently copied from elsewhere. This stuff is simple: Do not copy stuff from elsewhere. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 06:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:01:46, 30 June 2020 review of draft by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 19:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

How do you mark them off, so that my tormentors, who've sent each of my recent entries to the draft area, can read them?Glammazon (talk)

19:20:40, 30 June 2020 review of draft by Olgabukhalova


Hello,

please be more specific: why do the references I provided not qualify for a Wikipedia article? which of the sources I've listed do you consider unreliable? I came across countless Wikipedia pages of other jazz musicians and didn't see how their references are different in terms of reliability.

Also, the previous reviewer said that I couldn't use any hyperlinks in the article. But there's plenty of Wikipedia pages that use hyperlinks. How is this possible?


Olgabukhalova (talk) 19:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apple Music, Spotify, IMDb, Allmusic, Discogs and Amazon are not reliable sources for establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:27:10, 30 June 2020 review of submission by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because l consider lnferno to be an important character in the MLJ Universe, especially as he is the only one to have been a criminal in his original appearance.Glammazon (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Glammazon: literally everyone of your sources return HTTP 404 when I access them. Please try to find the correct ones. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 06:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:27:22, 30 June 2020 review of draft by Bernie berno


Bernie berno (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


can you edit the page for Bernice burgos?

@Bernie berno: I could theoretically edit the page, but I am unwilling to do the mayority of the work for you. Note that creating a new article is one of the absolute hardest tasks one can undertake on Wikipedia. You may want to read WP:YFA for some guidance 217.68.167.73 (talk) 06:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:17:41, 30 June 2020 review of draft by JayHotals


Hello, I have been working on the article (Draft:FastFig) about a notable math writing tool. It keeps getting flagged as not having having enough significant mention, but there are multiple articles, published by reliable and independent sources, that focus solely on this software tool, and many additional articles from reliable sources that include additional information about the tool. Looking for help on what more would be needed to have article published. Thank you for your help. JayHotals (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JayHotals, the main problem with your draft that it is an advertisement for a software product masqueraded as an article, have a look over here: Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles - furthermore the majority of your references are not directly referring to this product, those which are referring to the product are self-published ones. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:26, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick answer. Three articles, those from Region's Business, Lafayette Magazine, and Keystone Edge, are all lengthy articles 100% about FastFig and published by neutral organizations. Many of the review sites are also quite large organizations as well. What is the differentiator between this article about FastFig and the published articles about similar companies in the industry, particularly: Desmos (graphing) and MathType?

July 1

Request on 03:17:21, 1 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by LiliyaBulgakova


Hello, First of all, thank you for your willingness to help! I'm writing about the submission of my article "Digital Finance" for review. It was not accepted because of the following reason: "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". However, "Digital Finance" article has a reference #4 to an independent, reliable source (Washington Business Journal), which published an article about Digital Finance and its invention - floating rate debt instrument linked to the Bitcoin performance. Besides that, Wikipedia article "Digital Finance" has references to the SEC website, where you can see that Digital Finance was actually registered as investment advisor in the digital assets space and that it filed with SEC its innovative financial product. Besides that, Wikipedia article about Digital Finance mentions efforts of the firm with regard to Bitcoin advocacy. They organized a Blockchain forum with SEC Commissioner (it was the first time SEC Commissioner participated in the blockchain forum!) and educated American lawmakers on the Capital Hill.

That being said, I believe Digital Finance deserves a coverage in Wikipedia, as it was: 1) one of the first, if not the first investment advisor registered with SEC in the digital assets space; 2) invented a first of its kind financial product, which performance was linked to the Bitcoin performance; 3) organized blockchain forum, where SEC Commissioner participated, and educated American congressmen about digital assets.

The company is doing really important things in terms of the digital assets industry development, advocacy, and regulation. I firmly believe it would be great if people are able to find this information in Wikipedia. Thank you for your time and I look forward for your feedback!

Sincerely, Liliya LiliyaBulgakova (talk) 03:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LiliyaBulgakova (talk) 03:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Please see this discussion. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:58:03, 1 July 2020 review of draft by Agneslesti1


Hello, I have attempted to create the above page - Draft:Hopster - for Hopster, the preschool entertainment platform, however, it got rejected. I believe I've met the guidelines at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Common_sourcing_mistakes_(notability) but if there's anything specific I'd need to change/add, please let me know so I can make these changes. The company is recognised in the children's media industry, hence the industry-recognised article citations, and it has been nominated for the Children's BAFTA in 2018 and 2019 so I believe the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. I am keen to make any necessary changes to allow for its publication. Thank you in advance for your assistance, Agnes

Agneslesti1 (talk) 09:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well Agneslesti1 , best would be to ask the Reviewers DGG and CommonsDelinker directly - for example on their talk page - what you furthermore need to modify. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:17:14, 1 July 2020 review of submission by Olumide.Sobande

Thanks for the feedback, it is much appreciated. Could you kindly advise on what can be done improve the quality of this article. Olumide.Sobande (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Olumide.Sobande - I am afraid but as you can see your draft has been rejected and will not be taken into further consideration since the subject of your draft is not notable for Wikipedia. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:17:24, 1 July 2020 review of draft by Tabrez290


Tabrez290 (talk) 11:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tabrez290: your draft currently has exactyl zero reliable sources and therefore fails the verifiability policy. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:40:42, 1 July 2020 review of submission by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What must l do to correct that problem?Glammazon (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:55:45, 1 July 2020 review of submission by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have corrected the mistake in the link to Comics Plus, where scans of Inferno's first appearance are located.

16:20:46, 1 July 2020 review of draft by BabsW


Thank you... My article on the Niagara Jazz Festival was declined twice. The second draft I edited substantially, and thought I had removed any 'tone' of marketing or advertising. But it was declined for the second time. Could you give me some advice? Many thanks. Also, I havent had any luck uploading photos (that I own). I've certainly read articles on 'how to' but again, I don't seem to be very lucky on getting it to work. barbara

BabsW (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:47:51, 1 July 2020 review of submission by Sirob75


What about any of these links? Would any be acceptable and allow for this page to be published?

https://www.improvementservice.org.uk/case-studies/improvement-service/spatial-hub https://www.ukauthority.com/articles/improvement-service-aims-to-extend-spatial-hub/ https://digit.fyi/spatial-hub-unleashing-local-government-data/ https://www.improvementservice.org.uk/news/november-2019/spatial-hub-wins-scottish-award-for-quality-in-planning https://mailchi.mp/571baf205337/spatial-information-service-spring-newsletter https://www.agi.org.uk/news/agi/1473-the-language-of-geospatial-are-we-missing-a-trick https://www.spatialhub.scot/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/infographic.html


Sirob75 (talk) 16:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 19:46:28, 1 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Beth Wimmer


I would like to continue working on my article that has been moved to Drafts, but I can no longer find the "Edit" button. On June 18th, Rich Smith moved my beginning/attempt at article of "Manfred 'Little' Konzett" (recording engineer) to Drafts. [[6]] I appreciate that, and his feedback that on June 18th, I had not included enough references. I now have four active, full cover references I wish to add to my Draft/Article. On my talk page, Mr. Smith and Wikipedia Team mentioned I can continue working on my Draft, but i can no longer find the "Edit" button at the "top of the window", as mentioned specifically in the directions written to me: "If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window." In fact, I no longer see the 'edit' option on any page i visit? I have logged out, cleared caches, logged back in. I can no longer find the simple "Edit" tab anymore. I see "Edit Source" at the head of each section, but this is not how I have edited/contributed to other articles. Can you please help? Thank you very much Beth Wimmer (talk) 19:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Beth Wimmer Beth Wimmer (talk) 19:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "Edit source" button is the one to click if you want to edit. Theroadislong (talk) 21:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:31:15, 1 July 2020 review of submission by FrankWS875

Hello, I am trying to submit the Draft:Straight Talk Wireless|Straight Talk Wireless]] draft for review. I have edited the page to comply with Wikipedia's standards for neutrality and verifiability, and have declared all conflicts of interest in keeping with Wikipedia's guidelines. I believe that the page is now up to standards and is a useful article.

My previous attempts to submit the page failed, because I didn't understand Wikipedia's guidelines as well as I thought. Getting feedback from New Page Reviewers helped some, since I was not fully aware of the errors I had made the first time around.

I have taken the time to contribute to the project by creating and editing unrelated pages about history and the sciences, and I think I have a much better grasp on how to edit and write for Wikipedia now.

Now that I have edited the Straight Talk Wireless page draft, I am ready to submit for review again. How can I submit the draft for review by New Page Reviewers? FrankWS875 (talk) 21:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:46:37, 1 July 2020 review of submission by Christinedkg


Hi, could you provide more details regarding why this is not approved? I see many people with less impressive breadth and reach on Wikipedia. I will appreciate specific feedback please.

Christinedkg (talk) 23:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


July 2

01:17:35, 2 July 2020 review of submission by EmpyreanOrb


Hello everyone here,

I am a bit piqued at the reason given for the decline of the article. I'm actually not contesting the decision, but I would like to point out a possible innocent omission. There are 40 references in the article, apart from the notes. Of this 40, 13 are from what should be reliable sources: 7 is from the BBC, 1 from a NASA publication, 1 from the New York Times, 1 from The Independent, and the other 3 from nhbs, hachette and the Witney Gazette. The other citations are from book publications, the international whaling commission, and co and in all these, the subject was well-referenced.

In all these journals, newspapers, books, and websites, the subject is mentioned but the reason for rejection states the following: "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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people)."

So, I am a bit discombobulated by the "they do not show significant coverage about the subject." I'm not making a case for this article, but while researching Dr. Dobbs, even though I was paid to do this which I declared, I was convinced that it was a great disservice that there was no chronicle of his contributions in the field of dolphin research in this online encyclopedia resources that has helped and continues to help researchers and seekers of knowledge with ready materials of research.

Maybe there was something fundamental that I missed while drafting this article and I would like suggestions that would be helpful in improving it before re-submission.

Thank you for taking out the time to read this blab from an insignificant earthling like me.

May it be well with the earth and all who inhabit this revolving empyrean orb. HTML Serial Killer (talk) 01:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HTML Serial Killer (talk) 01:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies it looks like I missed the references at the bottom, only seeing the notes, fee l free to re-submit. I admit my first thought was that it was a hoax, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 09:44, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:41:45, 2 July 2020 review of submission by Guddu176


Guddu176 (talk) 04:41, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Guddu176: Neither Wikipedia, Facebook, LinkedIn nor Instagram are considered reliable sources because they are user-generated (and as far as I can see, the Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram sources also fail WP:INDEPENDENT) Therefore, the Draft currently fails WP:NPERSON. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:03:42, 2 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by MAPPLab


A Wikipedia page I created was rejected because the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Does this mean that the content of the page could have been delivered in a way that would have made the topic appear notable? Or does this mean that the topic of the page was not notable enough, regardless of the contents of the page? To provide some context, the reviewer said the following: "Subject does not meet WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. I think it's a case of WP:TOOSOON. She seems to be on an upward trajectory." Thanks.

MAPPLab (talk) 07:03, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The AFC template containing the rejection was subsequently removed from the draft by Rich Smith. Presumably they plan to guide the author on how to resubmit, or intend to review the draft for them, after improvements. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce: MAPPLab came on IRC asking about this, after a discussion, I advised they continued to improve the draft as they had copied a version to a user sandbox, they agreed they would hence I removed the AFC rejection template to allow re-submission at a later date - RichT|C|E-Mail 15:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC) [reply]

15:08:25, 2 July 2020 review of submission by Samdomx

The page has been marked for speedy deletion, I have contested this and would like to further exercise that fact that the page is mainly to provide a user info about what the platform is about. Samdomx (talk) 15:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Samdomx Wikipedia is not for merely telling about a subject. A Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, demonstrating how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:49, 2 July 2020 review of submission by 110.143.254.79


110.143.254.79 (talk) 15:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, could you please help explain why my edits on the Australian Railway Signalling Wikipedia page are being changed or reverted by someone else?

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Edits at an existing page are outside our scope. If you find yourself in a disagreement with another editor, discuss it on the talk page of the article, in this case Talk:Australian railway signalling. For more information see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:02:07, 2 July 2020 review of submission by 216.174.75.9


I feel that this monastery is worthy of mention because it is one of the most popular and welcoming Christian monasteries in Indiana visited by people from surrounding states from all walks of life and of different nationalities. There is no charge whatsoever when entering the pristine grounds and no one there would even think of asking for donations. Also, it is unique in church architecture and beginning to be a landmark in Indiana. They do not advertise and they do not promote themselves they only exist for prayer.


216.174.75.9 (talk) 16:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:38:07, 2 July 2020 review of draft by 2409:4073:2E97:C19E:77F7:FE00:942:978F


How to upload a photo in a draft

2409:4073:2E97:C19E:77F7:FE00:942:978F (talk) 16:38, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

get a user account and then upload it here. come back when you're done. If you have additional questions, you can respond in this section (click the "Edit" link next to the section title) or ask at the teahouse. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:47, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:59:09, 2 July 2020 review of submission by Thebrotherhoood

I am trying to publish this page for review and acceptance because it got declined the first time. Thebrotherhoood (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thebrotherhoood. The draft was not just declined (which allows resubmission after improvement), it was rejected (which does not offer a way to have it reviewed again). Discogs, Everipedia, and everybodywiki, being user-generated, are not reliable sources, and should not be used as references. The musician's website and interviews in which he talks about himself, such as on stopthebreaks.com, are not independent secondary sources and do not demonstrate notability. Nor has he accomplished anything that suggests he would be a suitable topic for an encyclopedia. No amount of editing can overcome the problem. Perhaps as his career progresses, more will be written about him in independent, reliable, secondary sources, but for now it is too soon. Reconsider the topic in 3-5 years. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:39:15, 2 July 2020 review of submission by 216.174.75.9


He is an important figure in Serbia and Bulgaria. Worth a review after line citations that I made to give it more credence.

216.174.75.9 (talk) 19:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


21:11:44, 2 July 2020 review of submission by Nkosiyaphamollllly

i need my article to me published now

Nkosiyaphamollllly (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nkosiyaphamollllly: I presume you're referring to Draft:Nkosiyapha Dube? That draft is completely lacking in independent reliable sources. We need something, like a newspaper or magazine article, to back up the claim for the Golden awards (and to determine what those awards are). Without independent sources, the article will not be published. —C.Fred (talk) 23:14, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 3

03:30:57, 3 July 2020 review of submission by MichaelDubley


MichaelDubley (talk) 03:30, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello,

I have edited the references to show that the organisation the page 'Hemmersbach Rhino Force' covers is reputable and worthy of a wiki article. Further, I have edited the language to be less promotional and more in-line with the Wiki language. I look forward to publishing or further comments on how to improve the article.

Thanks,

Michael.

@MichaelDubley: First of all, please put your signature at the end of your post. Secondly, since the original article was deleted after an AfD, we will have to start a Deletion review. I dont have the time to clearly estimate the sucess propability, but on the first view it looks like it could succeed. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:34, 3 July 2020 review of submission by Teddos1989


Teddos1989 (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:14, 3 July 2020 review of draft by Lpancrazi


Hi, I am trying to create a Wikipedia for Jane Ray. She has a very limited online presence. I have some archived photos of newspapers clipping with additional information and testimonials from various people. How do I deal with the reference issue? I modified the tone of the article. But I don t know how to deal with the references... Could someone please help? Can I submit the archives she has?


Lpancrazi (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently have zero reliable sources, all the Linked in sources will need to be replaced with reliable sources, sources do not have to be online, but they do need to be in-depth and independent. Theroadislong (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:36:59, 3 July 2020 review of draft by Toadalicious


Thank you for the review! Yasmeen Williams is a significant figure in African American women's music and gospel, but like many marginalized people, there are not a lot of published secondary sources published on her contributions. I did try to link to Washington post articles that I could find that help document the music scene in DC as well as a primary source oral history that she did with Roadwork, which is available online. If I have paper copies of primary sources, can I digitize those and upload them as "evidence?"

It would also be helpful to know what exactly was seen as too promotional. I tried to put things in the entry that were factual like listing her discography, etc. The label in DC that put out many of her recordings is no longer in existence so the only record, so to speak, are of music videos on youtube of some of her recordings, which is why I linked to those. When I did use language that evaluated her singing, I tried to use secondary sources like the washington post.

Yasmeen is dying of cancer and I would love to get this approved before she passes away. I know it would mean a lot to her. I would appreciate any additional guidance you could provide to help me meet the criteria.

Toadalicious (talk) 17:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=965832929"