Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 597: Line 597:
<!-- End of message -->[[User:Chiara Milani|Chiara Milani]] ([[User talk:Chiara Milani|talk]]) 13:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
<!-- End of message -->[[User:Chiara Milani|Chiara Milani]] ([[User talk:Chiara Milani|talk]]) 13:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
:Yes more independent reliable sources are needed and a complete re-write, it reads like an advertisement at the moment, not a neutral encyclopaedia article. [[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]] ([[User talk:Theroadislong|talk]]) 13:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
:Yes more independent reliable sources are needed and a complete re-write, it reads like an advertisement at the moment, not a neutral encyclopaedia article. [[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]] ([[User talk:Theroadislong|talk]]) 13:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

== 19:33:11, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Loveisthevision ==
{{Lafc|username=Loveisthevision|ts=19:33:11, 28 April 2021|accepted=Lightchild}}


Hello, I have a concern about the most recent Wikipedia page of mine that's been published, called "Lightchild". I realize that the spelling is stylized, but with llghtchlld's film credits, website, and social media, in all of them her name is spelled with all L's, so is it possible to change the title of the page to reflect that as well? This is also because there is another artist named "Lightchild" and we want to keep both artists distinct. Thank you!

[[User:Loveisthevision|Loveisthevision]] ([[User talk:Loveisthevision|talk]]) 19:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:33, 28 April 2021

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


April 22

01:46:35, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Lmaher14

I was wondering if there were any specific suggestions or areas of the submission that need worked on to be approved. I felt as though I had cited a variety of sources and based it on other wikipedia pages about experts in the same field that it should have been approved. Look forward to hearing from someone. Lmaher14 (talk) 01:46, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft as written is a unsourced paragraph atop a cirriculum vitae. I should also note that, since drafting didn't exist in any serious form before 2011 and wasn't mandatory before 2018, not every article on Wikipedia went through the same process your draft has to. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:50:28, 22 April 2021 review of submission by LiyasA786


LiyasA786 (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


06:50:03, 22 April 2021 review of draft by Pyrolistical


I accidentally created the wrong name for a draft.

Please delete https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AST_%26_Science

I have moved the content and re-submitted it under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AST_SpaceMobile

Pyrolistical (talk) 06:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyrolistical I marked it for speedy deletion per CSD G7. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:56:30, 22 April 2021 review of submission by SK ITEZ

Hi admin, I am rewriting the article as per the guidelines, please give us some time to submit it for re-review.

SK ITEZ (talk) 10:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


11:56:23, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Musical Elisabeth

I added two reliable sources from Wikideia, however, my draft has not published yet. Would you explain the reason in detail? Musical Elisabeth (talk) 11:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have not added a single source yet? Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference either. Theroadislong (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:01:56, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Zkwong


Zkwong (talk) 12:01, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zkwong You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:29:32, 22 April 2021 review of draft by Gemma Persello


My entry was declined because I do not have reliable sources, how can I change this as no other sources besides our website would have any information about us - Rockwood. Gemma Persello (talk) 12:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This would indicate that the company is not yet notable, please also make the mandatory paid editing disclosure on your user page. Theroadislong (talk) 12:35, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:39:06, 22 April 2021 review of submission by 360human


360human (talk) 13:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


The artist is a public figure and his page is already being indexed on the search engine by wikitia and google. The article deserves to be on wikipedia. I have made all changes and adjusted the article to meet up with wikis requirement.

The artist is a public figure and his page is already being indexed on the search engine by wikitia and google. The article deserves to be on wikipedia. I have made all changes and adjusted the article to meet up with wikis requirement.

Your draft has been rejected it will not be considered further. Being a "public figure" and "indexed on the search engine by wikitia and google" confers zero notability. Theroadislong (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:29:13, 22 April 2021 review of draft by 173.188.130.24


173.188.130.24 (talk) 14:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's your question? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I declined the draft, then saw this help request. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:02:23, 22 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by X12visuals


I summited a page for approval but it was declined, and this is not the first time. i will like to know if there is a requirement or clause that am breaching im the terms and condition, if yes, please let me know what am not doing right. if you can show me a pointer as this is really important to me. but if you can assist in any other way that am not aware of please let me know, thank you for patience and kind assistancesX12visuals (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X12visuals (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

X12visuals The draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further, as the person does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of notability. None of the references you have offered are significant coverage of Mr. Nantomah. If you have been paid by Mr. Nantomah to create this article, I would suggest that you return his money. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:36, 22 April 2021 review of submission by BallenMohammed


BallenMohammed (talk) 17:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BallenMohammed You don't ask a question, but contributions need to be in English because this is the English Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:28, 22 April 2021 review of submission by OakkRaider

I edited this draft because I think this guy should have a page. I removed the section headings because they seem unnecessary. I also added in content about a book that featured him and his management style and removed the repetitive use of the same sources. Would you consider publishing it with the current changes or suggest how to improve it so that it would be approved? OakkRaider (talk) 18:51, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OakkRaider If you have a connection to this subject, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures.
Most of your sources seem to involve interviews with Mr. Assadi, which do not establish that he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person as interviews are a primary source. 331dot (talk) 19:10, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:54:21, 22 April 2021 review of draft by Bodega2019


I have created a new article for the film Tyger Tyger and would like help expediting the review proccess by properly tagging my submission.

Bodega2019 (talk) 19:54, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen the posted article above and need help on applying it, choosing tags, etc.

Hi Bodega2019. To start the review process, you would need to submit Draft:Tyger Tyger using the bright blue button in the large grey box at the top of the draft. I've already tagged it with the appropriate WikiProject. The current backlog of submissions is about 5 months, so expect it to be reviewed by the end of September. Drafts that clearly demonstrate notability and have few problems are perhaps more likely to be processed sooner, so study:
carefully to ensure the draft is as solid as you can make it. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:29:20, 22 April 2021 review of draft by Ezrawitsch


Hi there, ezrawitsch here, author of Draft:Wade Graham (writer). I've added a few dozen new references and external links substantiating the notability of the subject. Graham and his works have been extentisvely covered in US and international news sources, and Graham has made dozens of television appearances both as commentator and subject, including as a guest on The Colbert Report in 2011 and an interviewee in several PBS documentary series.

What if any additional sources I should add, and are there are needed formatting changes before I resubmit for review?

If possible, I would request review from a user familiar with Los Angeles/landscape design/environmental history so that further comments are as specific and actionable as possible. Thanks and happy editing.

Ezrawitsch (talk) 21:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ezrawitsch No one can guarantee that your draft will be reviewed by someone familiar with the areas indicated- and the way Wikipedia is structured, it is actually preferable that it be reviewed by a lay person. Users are under no obligation to reveal their physical location. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot No worries, of course. If anyone has time to review the draft submission, I would greatly appreaciate feedback, especially whether I should add additional sources. Ezrawitsch (talk) 21:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:38:54, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Inspiress

I have proceeded to revise my article from the first help I got, and I got stuck on improving a few points of my article:

  • I was suggested to write about the person focusing on academic notability guidelines. However, upon working on it, I have noticed that it would go in the direction of her academic work having notability rather than herself as a person having notability. That being said, she has been interviewed by various newspapers as a person who came up with her theory, an entrepreneur of a consulting company, and an expert in her field. I need more help in determining her notability criteria because I believe she has sufficient reliable sources to cover more than one notability criteria. Additionally, please read the article and determine if she falls into any notability criteria (roughly is fine).
  • I would like to have an experienced editor to take a look at my article thoroughly to suggest on the article organization, any irrelevant/trivial information and check for any advertisement-looking aspects of my article.
  • I am stuck with trying to mention she is a columnist because there is no independent source mentioning her as a columnist other than her own articles being published by newspapers. Writing columns is also a major contribution of her in her career, and it's a pity that I cannot prove it via independent sources when there are officially published articles (published on the news agency website) & archived articles (since many are from 2009 where many newspapers did not have an online platform yet) online. Is it really impossible to mention her columnist aspect? It takes away one of her major contributions of publicly advocating.


NOTE: There are some things I would like to clarify about the article before anyone reads it.

  • I have not written a full-blown article of her (aka it's a draft) because I do not know which criteria I should dig deep into about her, please DO NOT bother about the lack of information at this stage. However, for your reference, I have already written out her major contributions, thus at this stage, there is nothing that I have not mentioned about her, to say the least.
  • Although the list of columns I have written out about her looks long, it is NOT all the columns she has ever written (I have so far found over 80, and it seems like she still has more that I have not discovered yet). I have titled the section "Selected columns" from the first but some might think I have listed all of her columns, which is not the case.
  • The following sections I can consider omitting, if necessary:
Role in the United Nations section
Honor and Awards section

I look forward to any experienced editors' help! Thank you! (reference ping:@DGG:)

Inspiress (talk) 21:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:49:19, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Bodega2019

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kerry_Mondragon#Kerry_Mondragon

Bodega2019 (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I submitted an article about the film director Kerry Mondragon and it was rejected due to inadequate references despite the fact that there are 12 references from established sourcees which mention his name and work, including imdb, Rotten Tomatoes, Stanford and Duke University libraries (collections of poets Allen Ginsberg and Will Inman correspondence with Mondragon, Roger Ebert, etc. Please educate me why these references included are inadequate. Other wikipedia entries about living persons have far fewer references.

22:34:38, 22 April 2021 review of draft by 2603:8000:1802:E830:7932:20A:5F34:937


This guy is a film director if the google and imdv and amazon prime and Netflix are not the good resources then tell me what is the good resources there are some people who already got approved only With IMDB before making any decision please go and review about him first. 2603:8000:1802:E830:7932:20A:5F34:937 (talk) 22:34, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:58:17, 22 April 2021 review of submission by Uanime5


I have submitted this article for a novel multiple times. I have been repeatedly told it was unsourced even though this novel is a primary source according to Wikipedia's guidelines. I could not make any changes because an error was never identified and the people who rejected it were unable to explain what was wrong with it or how it needed to be changed.

Now for no reason I have been told this book isn't notable even though it's a book that can still be purchased and an episode of the TV show "Touch of Frost" was based on it. Something I did mention in this article. Just what criteria does a book have to meet to be "notable"?

Uanime5 (talk) 22:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uanime5 Primary sources do not establish notability. To merit an article, independent reliable sources with significant coverage must show how this book meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable book. The article should summarize those sources. 331dot (talk) 00:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:37:14, 22 April 2021 review of submission by ThanathornNamchan


ThanathornNamchan (talk) 23:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


23:40:36, 22 April 2021 review of draft by SXLA


As this was first attempt at a Wikipedia article, I followed a Wikipedia page from another notable art fair (i.e. Paris Photo) to have this article be written similarly in a neutral point of view. However, it was not accepted as "This reads like a promo for the exhibition"(?) ~ Do I need to edit by removing adjectives or certain words as to me it reads almost similarly? Also, the references are in question, yet I am mostly utilizing sources from art publications (yes, they may not be the New York Times (I do have a Los Angeles Times though), etc. but as this is a notable art fair, it is odd that major art publications are not considered as reliable?). Please advise ~

SXLA (talk) 23:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 23

Request on 01:39:16, 23 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Khogendrarupiniofficial1



Khogendrarupiniofficial1 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC) Why you are rejected me[reply]

Unfortunately, we can't have articles about everyone on Earth. We thus only allow articles about notable people, who generally have received coverage in reliable sources such as books, newspapers, and magazines. The lion's share of students, such as you, don't meet that threshold. You might prefer to tell the world about yourself through another forum, such as social media or a personal website. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:42, 23 April 2021 review of submission by Padma88


Alagar Ramanujam have contributed much to society through both scientific community and service streams. Please check all the references provided and accept. Padma88 (talk) 09:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Padma88 The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:13:34, 23 April 2021 review of submission by ZexTer9999


ZexTer9999 (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:21:29, 23 April 2021 review of submission by HroPhibrAd


You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 13:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:10:36, 23 April 2021 review of submission by Ethan Money Muter

Hi, I don't know what you're saying by the sources aren't good enough. Please could you specify what you'd like me to do! Ethan Money Muter (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You submitted several times without providing any INDEPENDENT reliable source so I rejected your draft. You will need to provide at least three independent, reliable Wikipedia:Reliable sources - the sources given right now are commercial, promotional ones. CommanderWaterford (talk) 13:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


13:28:08, 23 April 2021 review of draft by Ebenedara


I am trying to submit a page for the President of Christ Apostolic Church but being declined. I have seen other pages that are not as detailed as this and being approved.

What else do you want me to add?

Ebenedara (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:46:20, 23 April 2021 review of draft by Efakta


I've added my first draft article in English to wiki. My question is 1. whether the sources in the Reference list are reliable. 2. can I add the appropriate wiki article in Georgian as a URL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ISET_Policy_Institute

Efakta (talk) 13:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:57:46, 23 April 2021 review of submission by Mariappantuty


Mariappantuty (talk) 13:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mariappantuty You don't ask a question, but your draft was a blatant advertisement. 331dot (talk) 15:24, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:39:27, 23 April 2021 review of draft by Abhijit-Phanse


I wrote an article to help creating image for my company in Wikipedia, can you please share some insights why my article is declined.

Abhijit-Phanse (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abhijit-Phanse Wikipedia has no interest in helping your company's image. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where independent editors summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. If you want to tell the world about your company, you should use social media or its own website.
You will need to review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. (I see you declared a COI but you need to make the stricter paid editing declaration, a terms of use requirement) 331dot (talk) 19:51, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:47:37, 23 April 2021 review of submission by 2402:3A80:1836:F2E6:0:22:B722:3B01


2402:3A80:1836:F2E6:0:22:B722:3B01 (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further, because it is completely unsourced and does not indicate how the person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


April 24

00:37:21, 24 April 2021 review of submission by Michmiss4593


Michmiss4593 (talk) 00:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected and therefore will not be considered further. Please read our guideline on autobiographies. Thank you. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:38:52, 24 April 2021 review of submission by WHIP content


WHIP content (talk) 07:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello,

My submission for some reason is rejected. We would like to publish the musician called "Ll" on to Wikipedia. Please can you reconsider as it is just a simple musician wanting a wikipedia page.

Also unsure what User:WHIP_content/sandbox/Ll is for the required page for "Ll" the name for the musician. Please help revise and confirm.

07:41:12, 24 April 2021 review of submission by WHIP content


WHIP content (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WHIP content: Could you clarify what you mean by "We"...? Is WHIP content an agency or company representing Ll? Ian.thomson (talk) 07:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:41:21, 24 April 2021 review of draft by 75.6.199.184


75.6.199.184 (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what is wrong with this submission. There is an article for an almost Identical company called Japan Crate. The only information listed in the article covers the basic history of the company which the original instructions said was allowed. Considering this company has the exact same nature as Japan Crate, a company with a Wikipedia page what can be done to remediate the situation. The issue is that the founding information for the company is buried deep within its blogs and the company is based in Japan so there are no readily available resources. What can be done to fix this submission because I believe the decision to decline is unjust.Thedeadlyman1 (talk) 07:46, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can provide some additional resources which should the company is notable; however information mentioned in the essay only covered basic information from the websites and blogs. I simply wanted to lay the foundation for the article. If others want to expand on it in the future they should; however the denial seems odd. [1][2][3]Thedeadlyman1 (talk) 07:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)@Thedeadlyman1: Don't judge drafts according to existing articles, look at the actual "rules" for making articles (such as WP:NOTE and WP:RS). WP:42 is a commonly recommended explanation regarding article creation and I've written a guide to creating articles as part of a larger guide for new users.
The Japan Crate article is old enough that it probably did not go through the formal article creation process. It may need to be gutted of press releases, and it may not have enough coverage in reliable sources afterward to meet the notability guidelines (though the fact that there's a Kotaku piece about it is stopping me from doing this right now).
The Business Insider piece cited in the Tokyo Treat article would be a good start, buuuut there's this disclosure at the bottom of it: We highlight products and services you might find interesting. If you buy them, we get a small share of the revenue from the sale from our commerce partners. Yeah, that doesn't sound completely reliable, no matter how they try to spin it in the rest of the disclosure. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:39:51, 24 April 2021 review of draft by Ibn Fulan


I have written an article KDE Connect. My draft was rejected with a template[template] with generic causes of rejection. Can some one pin point which is the exact reason/reasons of the rejection? Then I can understand if it can be continued. Ibn Fulan (talk) Ibn Fulan (talk) 08:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The decline reason seems pretty clear to me? Unreliable sources in your draft include, Support.Google, GSConnect, addons.Mozilla, extensions.gnome, chrome.google, microsoftedge.microsoft.com, community.kde.org/, invent.kde.org, google-melange.com there are others too. Theroadislong (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:08:46, 24 April 2021 review of submission by Susanmorrall


Susanmorrall (talk) 13:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fear that I am struggling with trolls on Wiki who send me insulting and irrelevant messages to my talk page. It is upsetting and depressing that Wikipedia allows such trolls to operate. I request that the persons Jonsey95 and Ahmetlii be banned from sending any messages to my talk page. I was extremely distressed at finding messages from them and I request that Wiki delete these messages from Wiki. Perhaps the legal department at Wikipedia would be helpful with this. People who hide beind fake names like Jonesy95 and Ahmetlii should not be allowed on Wikipedia. Only bullies us pseudonyms and this policy should be rethought by Wikipedia in light of current online policies dealing with diversity and anti-racism. I have signed my complaint with my real name Susan Morrall.

Susan Morrall

Susanmorrall Please be aware of no legal threats. You may request that other users not contact you, but communication is an integral part of Wikipedia. The other users are only trying to help and are not bullying you. It is a standard practice for editors to use a username, for various reasons including avoiding government surveillance and censorship, or a desire for privacy. If you have questions about a draft, please ask. 331dot (talk) 13:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:49, 24 April 2021 review of submission by Inspiress

NO HELP RECEIVED!

Hello,

I need help but I have not gotten assistance for my request at 21:38:54, 22 April 2021. I do not want to duplicate my long text here, someone please reply to my post! Thank you.

Inspiress (talk) 16:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think part of the issue is that the sources appear to be in Japanese, limiting the people who can help to those who can read Japanese. Automated translation consistently returns word salad if used on South or East Asian languages. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano: Thank you for your reply, is the foreign language source a possibility for having my article rejected and mentioned t o "use independent and reliable sources" because no one could tell if it is reliable? (reference ping:@DGG:) —User:Inspiress 26 April 2021 (UTC)

18:52:17, 24 April 2021 review of submission by 27.56.133.70


This is a page similar to Zazzle which too has same information. If this is scheduled for deletion, why is Zazzle still live ?

27.56.133.70 (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. Each article is judged on its own merits Not every business in a field merits an article or is entitled to an article, it depends on coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:15, 24 April 2021 review of submission by Paraiso Pal

I need your help guys if there anyone can tell me what to do about my first article... or advice please. Paraiso Pal (talk) 19:18, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paraiso Pal My advice is to abandon efforts to improve the draft. You have been repeatedly told that it was rejected and will not be considered further, and as such your repeated inquiries are becoming disruptive. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:28:12, 24 April 2021 review of submission by GreySpottyTimelord

How can I make this seem less promotional? GreySpottyTimelord (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 19:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


April 25

00:39:53, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Mattedia


The term "cycloatom" was created in the US English as new and by original research published in the United States science journal and it is sufficient for the new term to be known through the encyclopedia. The term was never used before at the best of my knowledge and also there no any reason to hide the new word in the US English and that it was created .

That's an argument for not including it. We're an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, and if there's a distinct lack of sources we can't have an article on the topic. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:28:40, 25 April 2021 review of draft by 124.123.80.139


124.123.80.139 (talk) 06:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We do not accept material that has been plagiarised, full stop. This is not negotiable, as it potentially puts Wikipedia and any editors introducing the material in legal jeopardy. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:31:25, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Syedfardeen2929


Syedfardeen2929 (talk) 10:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syedfardeen2929 Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:27:51, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Ancy Cha


Ancy Cha (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

not in mind

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. We are not a personal webspace for you to attempt creative writing or pontificate on the meaning of things. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:42, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Bruhmaster15

Its not a hoax its a real thing based on my research theres many people having pantosexuality, (and im one of them). Bruhmaster15 (talk) 19:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bruhmaster15 Come back when this term is widely used and discussed in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruhmaster15 There exist absolutely 0 evidence for this term, this is (was) a hoax. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:35:09, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Leonardo Demi-God


Leonardo Demi-God (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Leonardo Demi-God It has already been explained by me and User:Theroadislong, please read the decline messages carefully. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my article declined?

@Leonardo Demi-God: its described in the large light blue box at the top of Draft:Browzan. For reference, I copy it here (without the explanatory links included into the original) This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:40:47, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Kaifraza786

How you say that this topic is not notable. This topic is notable because Muhammad Kaif Raza Khan Qadri is representing all over the world Sunni Muslim"s how can you say that shit. Kaifraza786 (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected, is at Miscellany for Deletion, and will not be considered further. What is your connexion to the subject? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:10:14, 25 April 2021 review of submission by Onlyyou1

Good day. This page is not fake, there is a link to watch the movie on IMDB. I can only provide you with Russian-language links to this film. What's the problem with publishing this article? I can also provide information about the director of this film (he is also an actor), he is a fairly well-known personality in Belarus as a theatrical figure.

Onlyyou1 (talk) 22:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Onlyyou1: IMDB is not considered a reiable source because it is user-generated. the existence of other inappropiate articles doesn't mean you can create another one. It means that those articles should either be edited or deleted. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To add to Victor's responce, article drafting was not a major part of Wikipedia until ca. 2011 and wasn't made mandatory until 2018; any articles created prior to those dates (the 2011 one especially) are unlikely to have been put through the AfC process. Our standards, and enforcement of same, have only toughened over the years, and what would have been acceptable even back in 2015 would be problematic today. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 26

00:06:42, 26 April 2021 review of submission by 103.141.158.210


103.141.158.210 (talk) 00:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Because this town is one heck of a climb, and secondly people are wanting and waiting to be recognised prior.

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Repeated resubmission of a draft without so much as a token effort to address its problems is grounds for rejection and may lead to a MfD debate. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:05, 26 April 2021 review of submission by Uniquepapi


Uniquepapi (talk) 09:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uniquepapi You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:29:23, 26 April 2021 review of submission by 219.92.68.150


219.92.68.150 (talk) 11:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


13:07:52, 26 April 2021 review of submission by Evgeniy Akimbaev

Hello! My draft was rejected cause references do not appear to pass notability criteria (by the way several popular sites mention the draft's topic, so I don't know what's wrong), and I have a question - can I use YouTube videos as references? It's important cause the game I writing about mostly known by visuals, so everyone tries to show it instead of writing about it. Evgeniy Akimbaev (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Evgeniy Akimbaev It is possible to cite a video, see Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Film,_television, or video recordings. However, that would only apply to a video from a reliable source such as a news organization which has editorial control and fact checking. It wouldn't apply to regular people posting on YouTube their thoughts or streams of themselves playing a video game. For this fan game to merit an article, it must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have taken note of the game, and chosen on their own to write about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. If few or no sources write or tell about this fan game, it would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 13:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:07:22, 26 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Coolvoltblaze


14:07:22, 26 April 2021 review of draft by Coolvoltblaze

Coolvoltblaze (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC) -->Coolvoltblaze (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coolvoltblaze (talk) 14:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)== 14:33:44, 26 April 2021 review of draft by Coolvoltblaze ==[reply]

14:38:54, 26 April 2021 review of submission by ManushriYoga


ManushriYoga (talk) 14:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I am Nutan a Yoga Therapist, Fitness Expert, Nutritionist & Naturopath. I give home tuitions for Yoga & Pranayama, Meditation, Stress free lifestyle, Medical Yoga etc. I am a certified person for Yoga from Pune and a Diploma holder in Naturophathy from Bengaluru.

14:43:30, 26 April 2021 review of submission by ManushriYoga


ManushriYoga (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted)

14:47:46, 26 April 2021 review of submission by Onlyyou1

I have added a link to Kinopoisk. This is a reliable source. Onlyyou1 (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Onlyyou1 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 14:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:25, 26 April 2021 review of submission by 74.51.196.146


74.51.196.146 (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC) I was just wondering why the article on Carlitosism was rejected. Although this religion is still very new it has been gaining a lot of traction in southeast Texas. This rejection could be perceived as offensive to some readers of Wikipedia. I eagerly await a more detailed explanation of why this article was rejected. Thank you, Please reconsider this decision.[reply]

Wikipedia is not for something created one day. When independent reliable sources take note of your religion and choose to write about it, it will then merit a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:35, 26 April 2021 review of draft by Mklarmann


Mklarmann (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC) Dear Wikipedia community, I was guided here to ask for help with publishing a new article on the organization Eaternity. It was declined with the following reason:[reply]

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 organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

I have added additional sources reporting on the societal significance of Eaternity's contribution, to help with the argument, that there should be an article (removed references for brevity) Specifically to the point, as it concerns a climate label that is being displayed in over 10'000 retail markets across Europe. Yet I do not think with all the references this makes for a qualitative article. Can you you help me proceed? I would be able to collect more sources if necessary...


Mklarmann (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mklarmann You've offered a lot of sources, (which oddly enough is actually kind of a negative here) but they all seem to be press release type stories or announcements of routine activities. Those do not establish that this organization meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Instead of 34 sources with brief information, try summarizing just three sources (to start) with significant, in depth coverage of the subject. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mklarmann (talk) 10:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC) thank you for the swift help and guidance 331dot. I might come back if there is further progress, if this is ok?[reply]

Mklarmann You are welcome to ask further questions. If this section is not automatically archived, please ask follow ups here. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:17:50, 26 April 2021 review of submission by Chevylaw2021

Im not sure why this page is being rejected? Chevylaw2021 (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chevylaw2021 First, please note that while not forbidden, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged per the autobiography policy, as people naturally write favorably about themselves. The reason for the rejection was given at the top of the draft- you have not offered independent reliable sources with significant coverage of you, showing how you meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Please see Your first article. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:46, 26 April 2021 review of submission by Zeik77


Zeik77 (talk) 17:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft speedy deleted per criterion WP:CSD#G3 as a blatant hoax. --Kinu t/c 17:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
“This criterion also does not cover content undeleted via a deletion review, or that was only deleted via proposed deletion (including deletion discussions closed as "soft delete") or speedy deletion.”
The article was re reviewed and the second reviewer did not state that it should be deleted. I’m not sure why it was rejected in the first place and have not been provided with an answer.
thank you. Zeik77 (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You have been provided with an answer: it is a blatant hoax. Unless you can provide any reliable sources that discuss this subject, please stop wasting our time and yours. --Kinu t/c 06:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:49:49, 26 April 2021 review of submission by TheSokks

Hello, I need a second opinion on the above listed draft article which was previously reviewed by User:Celestina007 who raised notability concerns which I addressed and replied to them on their talk page that these sources 1 2 3 4 5 show that the subject meets the GNG and that the number 2 source shows that WP:ENT#2 is met. I also asked that they leave the review to another editor but they went ahead and declined the post saying that I shouldn’t resubmit within 30 minutes of decline. Meanwhile the decline notice on my talk page only said You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved (which I did). They however kept insisting that I don’t understand WP:SIGCOV but my understanding of sigcov is that the sources cited are independent, reliable and address the subject in detail. This can be part of a list because the subject does not have have to be the main topic of the article. They however said number 4 (Pulse Nigeria) was not a RS because they don’t disclose sponsored posts. I however pointed out instances where Pulse NG tagged posts as sponsored and Celestina007 doubled down and said they don’t do so all the time (not sure how they were able to determine that). They went on to declare that having a large fan base hopelessly useless in establishing notability especially for Nigerians, (A country I have lived in for 20+ years and have become a citizen of btw ). Mind you, I've also been a Nigerian in Nigeria for the past 20+ years and making assertions such as these should not be based on my personal opinion as a Nigerian but community consensus. Nonetheless, I found it quite surprising that they stated in this AfD that the subject met ENT 2 and are here asserting that it can’t be used in the case of Nigerians.

Moving on to Draft: Uzor Arukwe 2 which they also declined for notability reasons but the subject is covered here, here and here and meets the GNG. The subject also meets WP:ENT#1 as he has had significant roles in multiple productions and was also nominated for two of his roles as best actor in a comedy.

Is there any avenue to tell a reviewer to avoid reviewing articles from a particular user because I don’t want this reviewer reviewing my articles to be very honest.

The Sokks💕 (talk) 18:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TheSokks You can request that a user not review your drafts, or you can heed the advice of the more experienced reviewer instead of shopping around to find someone to tell you what you want to hear. Getting different eyes on it will not guarantee you get the result you want. If you want to take the very real risk that your draft would be nominated for deletion, you can move it into the encyclopedia yourself, without a review. I strongly advise against that, as I think the reviewer has some good points. Better to heed them and get the draft accepted rather than move it yourself and become frustrated and angry when it is deleted. 331dot (talk) 19:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Raising the issue on the reviewer's talk page and on this help forum is hardly 'repetitive' but seeing as they've thanked me for my post here, I hope they'll leave my further submissions at AfC to other reviewers. I prefer an unaccepted draft to getting a created article dissected at AfD. Thank you. The Sokks💕 (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:34, 26 April 2021 review of submission by John Munuve


John Munuve (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Munuve You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for you to tell the world about your company. See WP:PROMO and WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:08:55, 26 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Filmbuff1234


Hello, I am in need of assistance in editing this article. I am not sure what additional resources or changes need to be made in order to publish this. There are 4 separate news articles detailing the person referenced. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much!


Filmbuff1234 (talk) 20:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Filmbuff1234. The draft cites one independent, reliable, secondary source, which contains significant coverage of Dargatis: the Abington Journal article. The other references are non-independent primary sources in which he talks about himself with no meaningful independent analysis, or are brief mentions (Scranton Times-Tribune) instead of detailed in-depth coverage. The Abington Journal piece is of the hometown-boy-makes-good variety, except that it makes clear that Dargatis hasn't "made it", he's scraping by in small roles and commercials. Clearly he is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). That may change as his career progresses, but for now it is too soon for an article about him. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:51, 26 April 2021 review of draft by Tinydwarfcat


I've been attempting to create a page for the Star Trek: Enterprise character Malcolm Reed. It has been declined twice for apparently not being suitable for a wikipedia page. I admit I'm a bit confused, because the wikipedia page for Trip Tucker (also a character from Enterprise) has only three references listed, and they're only what he was rated as in different polls. Compared to this, I don't see how creating a page for Malcolm Reed is considered not suitable. Reed is the only main character without his own page. I apologize if I'm missing something, or if I've done something wrong, and I'm wasting valuable time. Tinydwarfcat (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looking through the articles on the Enterprise main characters, the sourcing on all of them is pretty poor, with links to Memory Alpha, lists of "the best X Star Trek characters", and so on. The book source provided in the Travis Mayweather article seems to be the lone exception (which is ironic, considering the short stick he got in terms of character development on the show), but even that article is in poor shape, given the focus on in-universe content. The issues noted at the previous AfD would need to be addressed, so if there isn't anything substantive about, for example, the development of the character or sourced commentary that goes beyond just some subjective rankings, then it might not be worth attempting to resubmit this (and, quite frankly, the other articles in the set probably need some scrutiny as well). --Kinu t/c 20:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tinydwarfcat (edit conflict) Please see other stuff exists. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits. It could be that the Tucker page is also inappropriate(I haven't examined it), and I say that as a Trek fan. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, inappropriate content can get by us; we can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 27

08:11:46, 27 April 2021 review of submission by SamTheHam666


SamTheHam666 (talk) 08:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources and information was verified by the person who I was writing about girlfriend as I didn't want to have false information and everything was incorrect, I decided to correct that information. There aren't any articles on him at the current time - but he is starting to become bigger. This was a birthday gift for him and his girlfriend had asked me to try make and design a wikipedia page but everything is 100% factual on that page. I really do hope you accept my submission as I am willing to try my hardest to improve the page and get more information out there. I would really appreciate if you allowed to look into my submission one more time for 'The Darts Referee'. Following information has been shown as well, his YouTube channel holds some information about his YouTubing and Socialblade information - and that the other information comes from a reliable source.

I am afraid that personal knowledge is not accepted as a source because nobody can verify it - If I would tell you that I am Joe Biden (even though I am totally not) you also can choose wether you would believe that or (more likely) you don't believe that. The subject's youtube channel can be used in limited ways described by WP:ABOUTSELF. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The draft contains no content that is attributed to reliable sources, and is therefore not suitable for this encyclopedia. --Kinu t/c 17:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:25:15, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Shatbhisha6


Shatbhisha6 (talk) 09:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suffucient, independent, renowned media articles have been attached for notability, while no reason being given for declining on the grounds of notability. Is it possible to be reviewed by another set of reviwers. I would request a debate with more participant on the reason for declining the article and also removing the source links. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 09:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shatbhisha6 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Shopping around until you get someone to tell you what you want to hear does not usually work. As noted, the draft was rejected because it appears that the person does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You have a great number of sources and though it may sound odd, that's actually a negative and an indication that the sources themselves are inadequate(so you need a lot of them to make up for it) We would rather see a smaller number of reliable sources with significant coverage than a great number of sources with less significant coverage. The sources you offer are all brief mentions or quotes/interviews with him, that does not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources include news articles from leading dailies and are more than brief mentions or quotes/interviews. Does the following article not establish notability? PM Modi phones Swami Avdheshanand Giri, requests symbolic participation in Kumbh Mela amid Covid-19 scare". www.timesnownews.com. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shatbhisha6, since I was the reviewer, you should have contacted me first before raising your concerns in multiple noticeboards. Brief mentions in interviews are not sufficient to establish WP:GNG. Please provide atleast any one best sources giving him the enough sigcov and lets see what we can do. Regards. Kichu🐘 Need any help? 18:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:15:58, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Admusicnews


Admusicnews (talk) 10:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft deleted, user blocked. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:08:53, 27 April 2021 review of draft by Rednikki


Hello! This page has been flagged as not coming from a neutral point of view and using poor sources. I am not clear what is causing the issue and was hoping for guidance. I used pages such as Jesse Genet, Cindy Eckert, Emily Weiss and Estée_Lauder_(businesswoman) as models for this page, and I focused on sources from major, fact-checked publications such as BizJournal, People and The Miami Herald as well as industry publications. I did try to find negative things about her in order to make it properly balanced but there's not much at all out there that is negative. This is the first page in my effort to create pages about female beauty entrepreneurs, and I would like to get it right so that my future pages will be better! Rednikki (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Rednikki (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:45, 27 April 2021 review of submission by 105.66.5.210

Hello there, I'm creating a wiki page for my artist project and I got declined 2 times right away, I signed songs to major publishers like UMG & Sony ATV, I got played on major local radio stations, I got my music played on the biggest EDM festival in France, got supported by Grammy awarded and nominees artists did an official remix of the biggest EDM music label in Germany then got my remix featured on the biggest EDM CD compilation there.

So I wanted to know how can I get it done? At the beginning of the creation, i did the declaration thing that I'm doing it for my self and I need help so hopefully, somebody over here can help


105.66.5.210 (talk) 14:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:35:12, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Chiara Milani

I want to know where and what I have to change in the draft to see my article pubblished Chiara Milani (talk) 14:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:CAREL INDUSTRIES S.p.A. was declined because the few references there are do not show that your company passes WP:NCORP, it is written like an advertisement, see WP:SOLUTIONS for example. You also re-submitted the draft with no changes which is considered disruptive. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:19:31, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Giuseppe Ardolino


Hello, I already submitted this draft and it has been declined. I would like to know in which section I need to improve in order to respect Wikipedia's guidelines and try to publish it. I already followed some feedback but the draft is considered not in line with a neutral approach, and I want to understand the reasons. I am available to make all necessary changes. Really thanks for your availability Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:23:17, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Kohakinori


Kohakinori (talk) 17:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm looking at this article and trying to get it reviewed. Any changes that I can make (other than what I;ve already done) to improve?

Kohakinori The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability. 331dot (talk) 17:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:44:27, 27 April 2021 review of submission by Joey pounds

Fulton Art Fair: need to understand what i need to do get page publish. Also how can i improve page info while waiting for review.

Joey pounds (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joey pounds (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joey pounds Wikipedia article summarize what independent reliable sources state; Wikipedia articles cannot be used to cite other Wikipedia articles because Wikipedia is not a reliable source. The draft reads as a promotional text for the Fair, instead of summarizing what independent sources say. 331dot (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is also a copyright violation of [4] so I have tagged it for speedy deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:42:22, 27 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Coldmanviktor


I don't understand what i have done incorrect. Please help me. What need to be fixed?

Coldmanviktor (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


April 28

01:19:14, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Wbadawy


Wbadawy (talk) 01:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

why my post is declined

@Wbadawy: this is because Wikipedia is not the place to advertise your event WP:WHATNOT. TedX events are generally not notable, just like the majority of their presenters. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 01:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:55:23, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Coldmanviktor


I'm writing here because of wondering why my article submission was declined and how can I fix it.

Can you please specify the places in the article that should to be fix for making publication real? I've already delete the links which have wrong format. Now I want to know which specific places need to be changed to make the text more neutral and not looking like a promotion - can you tag places in the text?



Coldmanviktor (talk) 07:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:57:48, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Tecoinguamofficial

I am trying to create a page for the Consul General/Director General of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Guam. Mr. Paul Yin-Lien Chen is a public figure/diplomat for Taiwan (R.O.C.) recognized by the State Department of the United States. He is also the first Consul General/Director General for this mission on Guam since the office's re-open in October 2020 after 3 years of temporary close. The Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Guam was originally established in 1991. I believe this article should not be declined at the Articles for Creation. Unless there's a mistake in category. Please advise. Thank you! Tecoinguamofficial (talk) 07:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:34:58, 28 April 2021 review of draft by Schwartz Jeremy


Hello, you can help and point out errors in the article, since I'm a newbie as an author of Wikipedia, and this is my own world with its own rules. I would be glad for any help. Schwartz Jeremy (talk) 08:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Schwartz Jeremy Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. While not forbidden, autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged, as people naturally write favorably about themselves. Please see the autobiography policy. It is very rare for someone to successfully write an autobiographical article, I personally have never seen it done, though it has happened.
Please review the advice given by the reviewer. Any article about you should only summarize what independent reliable sources say about you, you need to set aside everything you know about yourself. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced personal credits will have to go, as well as personal life details that are not directly attested to in secondary sources. The early life section appears to just link directly to university homepages that do not mention the subject. Also the "Exploring" section in particular is entirely undue and unsourced. Please be aware that Wikipedia is not a venue for life stories or personal achievements, and writing from this perspective will result in content being declined per WP:SOAPBOX and other relevant guidelines. As pointed out, writing about yourself is highly discouraged in the first place - although there may be enough sources to qualify notability for an article in some form, here, so you might have more luck than some if you stick rigidly to what they say. BlackholeWA (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:33:06, 28 April 2021 review of draft by Mailteena


Hi, My submission for article was declined because it was not "supported by reliable sources". The sources I have used are the websites of reputed universities in Kerala, newspapers sites etc. from India. So I am not sure what more can be done. This is a notable person from a small state in India, so there will not be too many secondary sources that would be writing about her. However, she is well-known among academic circles and in the pubic sphere. There are many articles written by her published in prominent research journals and newspapers from India. However since these are not considered as reliable sources, the next option is only websites of colleges and universities in India, and articles in online and offline newspapers that mention her and quotes her, which I have added/used including, The Hindu, The Deccan Chronicle, The Newsminute. I feel that this is a problem with location, where only known "western/european university sites" is seen as reliable sources. Please leave a note as to what else can be done regarding this. Mailteena (talk) 11:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mailteena The publishers may be reliable sources, but the individual stories are not. 331dot (talk) 11:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:30:44, 28 April 2021 review of draft by Socialmediacreator


Hello, I have made an article on a very noted and reputed National Award winning Actor, Director in India named Arun Shankar. I have attached several references, links and sources from Independent, reputed, reliable publications in India. Please tell me what I can do to get this article approved. Thank you Socialmediacreator (talk) 12:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re your user name, please be aware that Wikipedia is NOT social media. Theroadislong (talk) 12:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:08, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Tareek Aaryan


Tareek Aaryan (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tareek Aaryan: Wikipedia is not a social network nor is it a place to advertise your services. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:32:39, 28 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Chiara Milani


I want to know if I have to search more sources about the company, it's a publicly traded corporations and i supposed it was enough to be published. However, I will chance "solution" inside the article, using other words.

Chiara Milani (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes more independent reliable sources are needed and a complete re-write, it reads like an advertisement at the moment, not a neutral encyclopaedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 13:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:33:11, 28 April 2021 review of submission by Loveisthevision


Hello, I have a concern about the most recent Wikipedia page of mine that's been published, called "Lightchild". I realize that the spelling is stylized, but with llghtchlld's film credits, website, and social media, in all of them her name is spelled with all L's, so is it possible to change the title of the page to reflect that as well? This is also because there is another artist named "Lightchild" and we want to keep both artists distinct. Thank you!

Loveisthevision (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1020380447"