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
Emojiwiki (talk | contribs)
153 edits
Line 789: Line 789:
I have created an article titled as "Samuel Hwang". It is at Draft:Samuel Hwang. The thing is I don't know if the article got rejected or not and how I can improve this article. Unlike other articles at User:"my user name"/sandbox/"article title" which I know why these articles got rejected, I have no clue about how to fix this article Draft:Samuel Hwang. Can someone help me?
I have created an article titled as "Samuel Hwang". It is at Draft:Samuel Hwang. The thing is I don't know if the article got rejected or not and how I can improve this article. Unlike other articles at User:"my user name"/sandbox/"article title" which I know why these articles got rejected, I have no clue about how to fix this article Draft:Samuel Hwang. Can someone help me?
[[User:Leegiaphu17|Leegiaphu17]] ([[User talk:Leegiaphu17|talk]]) 10:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
[[User:Leegiaphu17|Leegiaphu17]] ([[User talk:Leegiaphu17|talk]]) 10:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

:{{reply to|Leegiaphu17}} Your article is being rejected. Don't worry, you can always improve and submit the improved version. Wiki Emoji &#124; [[User:Emojiwiki|Emojiwiki]] <sub>[[User talk:Emojiwiki|Talk~~]]</sub> 10:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:33, 19 January 2022

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)		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


January 13

02:19:12, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Ktrhny

Hi! Please review this article one more time. 2 links was removed. Ktrhny (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ktrhny, no references. search on google shows no usable articles for references thus notability unknown. assessment by reviewer is correct. – robertsky (talk) 02:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:01:01, 13 January 2022 review of submission by AnthonyWayne155


I don't know why Wikipedia rejected the articles I wrote about GDRP's history, what it is, and why it's vital to society. AnthonyWayne155 (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because we don't accept blatantly obvious advertizement. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:12, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:20:15, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Ktrhny

Please review changes. Thanks! Ktrhny (talk) 05:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ktrhny. The subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone article). Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:00:10, 13 January 2022 review of draft by Paul Peens


Hi, I am struggling to upload jpeg. pictures and our logo with this article. I have read the tutorials pages and followed the instructions very meticulously with no success. I have renamed the pictures to something very specific to our school but still nothing. I was really hoping to get someone to help me upload the pictures. It is 3 jpeg images I took with my own camera and would like to appear as Thumbs next to the article. The page that directs one to someone who will create the article for me also just takes me back to "create new article." So I am attempting to do it myself but am open to suggestions...


Paul Peens (talk) 07:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother until you get the sourcing for this page sorted. The images are not going to help the draft at all. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:50:37, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Rafa Garcia Aguado


I am requesting assistance because: - I tried to add some information on Wikipedia about CUE Podgorica. - On 18th November you texted me saying that the info was too commercial and needed to be more historical. - I adapted the text twice to make it as Wikipedia wish but got no answers and text is not published.

What should I do next? please I need your help. thanks,

Rafa Garcia Aguado If you feel you have addressed the concerns given to you, you may resubmit the draft. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:06:03, 13 January 2022 review of submission by 103.103.33.42

Hello sir. How can I make it perfect and get it approved? 103.103.33.42 (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been removed as advertising. There was no way in its present form that it would be acceptable to Wikipedia. See WP:PROMO. TechnoTalk (talk) 02:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:07:56, 13 January 2022 review of draft by Arthistorygirl202


Hello, I am assisting with creating a wiki page for a highly acclaimed artist and would like for the page to be taken out of the draft stages. It has been flagged as using non-reliable sources which is not the case, considering the information was gained from an interview with the artist that has been published online and is cited as a course. Please take down the flags for the citations and draft stage or let me know how to do so.

Thank You. Arthistorygirl202 (talk) 14:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arthistorygirl202 Interviews are not an independent reliable source, and not acceptable for establishing notability. The flag is correct. 331dot (talk) 15:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What you called a flag was the decline message from a reviewer, it must remain until and if the draft is accepted. "Flag" usually refers to a maintenance tag on an article. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:46, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Favour Enom

please revie w this i didnt make any mistake Favour Enom (talk) 15:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:33:38, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Calvinn1


I am posting here because the last variation of my draft was not accepted into the main space for supposedly "passing mention" in the sources. The article contains a review from a well-known critic, charts, and other media publications that describe the person and some nominations in as much detail as possible. Ranks 4th as the most followed Likee blogger. And this is also confirmed by an authoritative source in the article. Collectively significant as a blogger and singer.

Calvinn1 (talk) 18:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Calvinn1NewsMuz is the only source that shows any notability. Interviews, Awards (Unless a Grammy or equivalen), Bios do not confer notability. Also, while not a criteria here, she is 11, maybe let a kid be a kid without having a wikipedia page follow them for the rest of their lives.Slywriter (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Slywriter, what does age have to do with it? Letidor won the Runet Prize in 2013, which is why it is very authoritative. The owner of Letidor is a well-known company Rambler. 7 days is also a very famous media, they describe her biography in full. And in general, being in the top position in a well-known application is strong, and this is confirmed by the source. Calvinn1 (talk) 18:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Calvinn1I said that part was a personal opinion and has no bearing on the articles merits. No idea what Letidor and Runet have to do with this article. Back to the merits, 7 Day is useless for Wikipedia as its an unsigned bio page, not something ever used as a reliable source on wikipedia plus read heavily promotional and likely had input by the subject or her agents.Slywriter (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yet Letidor remains a fairly authoritative site. About 7 days, I can not answer anything. By the way, NEWSmuz.com also confirms the popularity of the blogger in Likee. Do you really not consider it significant to be one of the most famous in a global application? Also in the article there are charts from BandLink. Calvinn1 (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Its an interview with her mom, does not confer notability. Neither do charts.Slywriter (talk) 19:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But in the same place, after all, the article was not written entirely in the form of an interview :) Less than half of the article is an interview. And for some reason you sidestep the fact that Likee is famous and the charts. Calvinn1 (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charts DO NOT confer notability. No side-step. Third time I've said it now. And it's an interview and no its not half interview/ half article. Likee being popular also not really meaningful. Wikipedia cares about independent reliable sources. You generally can not create notability with primary sources. Finding better sources and resubmit is a much more fruitful use of everyone's time than trying to convince reviewers that your sources are special when they have already taken the time to look and found them lacking.Slywriter (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks :) Calvinn1 (talk) 19:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict, what I get for being long-winded) I don't see the relevance of a Runet Prize either. It was awarded to "SUP Media - Letidor project" in the category "Safe Runet". It isn't clear what the SUP Media - Letidor project was, or in what way it was safe (safe from hackers, safe for children, a safe space for expression?). Whatever the answers are, the prize clearly has nothing to do with whether Letidor has a reputation for accuracy and fact checking, in other words, whether it is a reliable source.
Some content in the magazine 7 Days may be reliable, but the draft cites their "Encyclopedia of Stars", a sub-section of their "Stars" section, next to "Gossip Column", "Private Life", and "Ratings". This looks like tabloid journalism of the sort that Wikipedia does not consider reliable. On all of ru.wikipedia.org, 7days.ru/stars/bio is cited only 2-3 times, suggesting that Russian-speaking Wikipedians don't think much of it as a source.
NEWSmuz.com is a blog self-published by "Guru Ken". If he's a subject matter expert, you may cite it for his opinion, but under no circumstances may you cite it for matters of fact about a living person, doing so is a violation of WP:BLPSPS. Popularity in a social media app such as Likee has nothing to do with notability. BandLink is not an acceptable chart on Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:35:33, 13 January 2022 review of draft by 103.199.69.109


103.199.69.109 (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but have you considered just adding this short draft as a new section to Internet Society? TechnoTalk (talk) 02:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:18, 13 January 2022 review of draft by JackCanada1970


Hello - I am working to get this page finalized and OK for publishing. I think we have now cleaned it up and ensured that it meets the burden needed to be considered to be notable, but I would welcome a look over by an experienced editor. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alexa_Swinton

JackCanada1970 (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JackCanada1970: - When you say we, if you're referring to working with RolfeSwinton, you may have to declare a conflict of interest. See WP:COI. WP:NACTOR requires that the person have significant roles in multiple shows. I've not watched the series And Just Like That so can't judge whether Alexa's role is significant, but hopefully others can. TechnoTalk (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hi - no I meant edits made by myself and by BD2414 - the last two people to edit this.

Thanks TechnoTalk! And re significant roles - having the lead of one ABC show, and then a key recurring character in another (And Just Like That) + leading role in a major feature film seem to more than meet that standard compared to other actors I looked up. For example - Robert Bailey Jr who was another cast member in Emergence. Thanks again for input and feedback - reviewed your edits and I understand what you did - very nice cleaning up - much tighter and removing of extraneous text! JackCanada1970 (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JackCanada1970. I see some real problems with that draft. For example, one of her roles is is described as "groundbreaking", an extraordinary claim that is cited to the headline (never a reliable source) of an interview of her (not a reliable, independent source). The "groundbreaking" claim is attributed to "the media", which is a plural term. A single headline is not "the media". Where are the reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to Swinton as a person and an actor? Please see WP:THREE and mention your three best sources. Cullen328 (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 14

08:18:58, 14 January 2022 review of submission by Nanou


Hello, I'm wondering why the submission has been so many declined. I have many times little correction on that, according to your request. For instance: As reliable source, I have put the reference - inline citations of "VOGUE JAPAN", "Deutsches Theater which is famous national theater in Germany","headheritage.co.uk by Julian Cope in UK", I would say it's properly proofed.

Could you kindly let me know what should I so further? i.e. I should use title "Satoshi Okamoto" instead of "sub-tle." (which is his solo project name) etc.

Nanou (talk) 08:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nanou, Is the article about a project or a performer? On sourcing, I haven't looked too deeply but the few links I did click look like passing mentions. Subject could be notable but would be best served by a short article with 3 quality in-depth independent references so a reviewer can more easily see notability. If you think there are three sources that clearly establish notability, include them as a comment or on the talk page of the draft.Slywriter (talk) 22:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:49:10, 14 January 2022 review of submission by Pryi1499

Please guide me as to how can I improve the draft Symbiosis Institute of Management Studies, Pune for acceptance. Pryi1499 (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pryi1499 You can't, rejection means it cannot be improved sufficiently. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Am I correct that this business school's most notable alumni are claimed to be a model, a snooker player and an actor, and that the assertion that these people are alumni remains unreferenced? If I am seeing things right, this draft has fatal flaws. Cullen328 (talk) 02:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:28:38, 14 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 2405:201:E00C:6106:2098:6F1E:B96E:617E



2405:201:E00C:6106:2098:6F1E:B96E:617E (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Riding 126 kilometers on a bicycle is not a plausible claim of notability. Having notable relatives is not a plausible claim of notability. Your draft completely fails to make a compelling case that this person is notable. Cullen328 (talk) 02:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:56:01, 14 January 2022 review of draft by Metz2020


I am being told that my references are not valid. It is unclear to me what the decision making process is because your protocols are not equitable. This is not the first time that this request has been denied. My understanding is that in the first request, the references used -linked back to the website of Mount Eden Vineyards- were not acceptable because they were listed on the site. Which is confusing because as I did my research for other California wineries listed on Wikipedia they used this same reference process. I on the other hand used the correct process in which sited the source from other websites. Since a source for a reference such as WineSpectator.com requires you to be a member to see the source you cannot actually see it, but it is housed on the wineries website but what I am told by Wiki from the last time I tried to get this published is that was not acceptable.

So how do I fix the reference issue and get this page published?

Metz2020 (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft was declined because company is not notable, the content is entirely promotional and copied and pasted from https://www.mounteden.com/ has been deleted multiple times before and should be salted to stop further attempts. Theroadislong (talk) 22:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Metz2020, I disagree a little bit with Theroadislong because I think this winery might possibly be notable. I have written and expanded several winery articles. However, the current draft is fatally flawed because it contains extensive copyright violations which simply are not allowed on Wikipedia. The quality of the referencing is poor. Sources written by former employees of the winery are of almost no value. Passing mentions of the winery are of no value. Major sections of the draft are unreferenced and written in a promotional style. These are not minor problems. They are severe problems. I recommend that you read and study Your first article and start fresh. Find several published reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to this winery. Figuratively "forget" everything that you know about the winery and everything that the winery says about itself on its website and in its press releases. Neutrally summarize what those reliable independent sources say, and do not include anything that is not verified by the cited sources. Then, you will have a fighting chance to have the article accepted. Cullen328 (talk) 01:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AFCH nominated at MfD

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/MediaWiki:Gadget-afchelper.js/core.js

This may be of interest to some. (If there is a better location for this, feel free to move)Slywriter (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 15

01:33:39, 15 January 2022 review of submission by JoshFromLetsGameItOut

Why did you reject my article? It's true and you can't prove otherwise.

JoshFromLetsGameItOut (talk) 01:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't up to us to prove it, it is up to you to prove it with independent reliable sources. If you just want to fool around, do it elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 01:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello , JoshFromLetsGameItOut. I assume that this is about the deleted Draft:The Hammeth, which was a hoax and a complete pile of crap. Persisting with stuff like this is disruptive editing. Change your way now or you will be blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 03:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:35:58, 15 January 2022 review of draft by AssumeGoodWraith


Do you guys also think I should wait until this game is released? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 02:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AssumeGoodWraith: Per WP:NOTPLOT, Wikipedia aims to treat video games in an encyclopedic manner, discussing their development, design, reception, significance, and influence in addition to giving concise summaries of them. That's almost never possible until the game has been released. Only occasionally does a creative work have enough independent sources published about it before release to justify an encyclopedia article (The Other Side of the Wind, for example, was notable long before it was finally released). Usually any pre-release information about a work originates with the makers of the work in the form of press releases, social media posts, interviews, etc., so it isn't independent and doesn't help establish notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:52:53, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Kaempff

Do I need to add more references? Or is the fact that this isn't an authorized album release the problem? Thanks! Kaempff (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)kaempff Kaempff (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:34:35, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel


Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel You do not ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There already seems to be an article about the topic you wrote about. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:11:52, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Rumesh D


Rumesh D (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rumesh D You do not ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:08:21, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Daniel.halkin

hello freind about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:DirectDL I add references for the article. please confirm the article. Daniel.halkin (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel.halkin The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. A Wikipedia article does not just tell of the existence of a topic and what it does; it summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel.halkin Please do not copy your submission here, it is linked to above. As you have been told, it was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered any more. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: daniel.halkin is an obvious sock of Special:Contributions/DirectDL.cc who was hardblocked (I opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DirectDL.cc before seeing this). Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:21:52, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Smithykit


Smithykit (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon! Can i ask how i move a page that i'm in the process of drafting, into the space where it won't be deleted if i don't amend it for a while? Smithykit (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:24:47, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Devansh.ds


Devansh.ds (talk) 15:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft I am working on, is my own great great grand father, he shaped the architecture of Bombay, my submission got rejected since I did not have enough primary or secondary references to support my article, well I have been collecting information from a long time and all that I could find since so many days were these, I thought to add it to Wikipedia so as to get it available to others as well. Please help me correct my references and also if you professionals do find any more references please do share so I can support my article in a better way.

Request on 15:43:38, 15 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 79.73.41.202


HI. PLease can you be clearly specific about why my piece is rejected ie: please point out the actual specific references for which back up proof is not provided in your view. As far as I can see I have provided references for everything that is written. Thank you Best wishes Melissa 79.73.41.202 (talk) 15:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:19:03, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Sherikoones


Sherikoones (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My entry was rejected and I'm not sure why. I was very careful to do my research and verify all of the references. I am a journalist so I always try to be very objective and not impose my personal feelings into what I write. I write about construction and came upon Trey Trehan while doing some research for a recent book. I was so impressed with his credentials I thought I'd take a stab at entering him in Wikipedia. I have not gotten paid by him or his company and am doing this because I am so impressed with him as an architect. I research many architects - but he stands out as a top architect in the country. I called his company to try and get some of the information I used in the piece about him. They were helpful in supplying some of the dates and info I used - however I verified all of it on my own. I also studied many of the most successful architects that are on Wikipedia to try and meet the same standards as on those pages. I also read numerous pages on Wikipedia on acceptable writing. Please let me know if there is someone I can consult with to make this more in the style that meets Wikipedia standards. In full disclosure, I am a successful writer and I like to pride myself on objective and honest writing - so this is quite upsetting to me. I would appreciate any help I can get in making this acceptable.

18:42:20, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Sherikoones

My entry was rejected but I don't know why. There is minimal personal information and everything written about is verifiable. I have tried to stay with the facts as I was able to find them in the literature. I have checked all of the references and only added information that I was able to check. I have reviewed other major architects' pages and tried to stay within the confines of what was written about them. There is no conflict of interest here since I don't know the architect and just received some info from his company which I was careful to check. I removed the table of contents which I see is not acceptable. Please let me know how I can get professional help to complete this page. As a student of all things involved with construction/architecture - I feel strongly that Trehan should be listed in Wikipedia. Sherikoones (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined not rejected, I have however tagged it for speedy deletion as a copyright violation, you cannot copy and paste vast chunks of text on Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:40:51, 15 January 2022 review of draft by JulietGrossman


Hi, I reviewed the "notability guidelines" and I do think this author who has written a detective series of 8 books would meet the criteria. I got the idea to do a Wikipedia page when I was searching and saw that one of his books has a Wikipedia page but there's no page for the author himself. I got interested in how Wikipedia pages are created and thought I'd give it a try. The books have all been reviewed, given awards and it's a series that is in libraries, bookstores etc. I don't know what more would make an author notable? Anyway I think I may just let the submission die out, just curious about it. And no I was not paid to create this page (I don't think that's why this was rejected but somewhere in the notes saw that about "undisclosed payment." Nobody is paying me.

JulietGrossman (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JulietGrossman Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This is a subtle but important distinction. What you describe might make the books notable, but not necessarily the author. There must be significant coverage in independent reliable sources of the author themselves, not their books, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional. 331dot (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this info. I guess my issue is I use Wikipedia often for book series where I want to see the order and publication date of the books. One of my really common searches is "so and so author books in order" and often Wikipedia will come up. So this is kind of what I think would be useful on Wikipedia. But I do get what you are saying and maybe I will add more articles etc to show notoriety. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JulietGrossman (talk • contribs) 23:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


January 16

00:10:37, 16 January 2022 review of submission by AssumeGoodWraith

Hello. My question from yesterday wasn't answered. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 00:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:57:54, 16 January 2022 review of draft by Ranchi321


Ranchi321 (talk) 02:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have given around 12 media coverages and proofs of the person Ashok "Ashq" and still the article is not live. Please suggest to me what kind of changes or proofs are required to get published this article on Wikipedia. Thank you

08:30:25, 16 January 2022 review of submission by 122.165.171.131


122.165.171.131 (talk) 08:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer left detailed notes. Nothing further to be said.Slywriter (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:30:35, 16 January 2022 review of submission by Anittya Kumar Singh


Anittya Kumar Singh (talk) 08:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:59:08, 16 January 2022 review of submission by Avi Sindhu

Earlier, the article was declined but now I have re-written it and improvised over many things. Avi Sindhu (talk) 09:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was rejected, it is blatant advertising and will not be considered further. Theroadislong (talk) 12:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:02:36, 16 January 2022 review of submission by 92.98.5.179


92.98.5.179 (talk) 11:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Gafour Khan Estate LBS Marg Kurla West Mumbai has not been submitted for review, it has no sources so would be unacceptable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:04:05, 16 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Jasimmahmud52



Jasimmahmud52 (talk) 14:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jasimmahmud52, You have no sources and wrote a profile. Wikipedia deals in verifable information supported by independent reliable sources.Slywriter (talk) 15:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:33:11, 16 January 2022 review of draft by Riley S Dawes


I'm trying to write a short bio of new writer Spencer McKinley. I am totally lost on how to do this. I cant even load some photos of the writer. can someone help me or refer me to an explicit tutorial. I am not technical at all. thanks. Riley

Riley S Dawes (talk) 14:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you given the draft about "Spencer McKinley" the title "Riley S. Dawes"? Theroadislong (talk) 14:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved the draft to the correct location for you, please read WP:YFA creating a new article, is the most difficult task there is here and some competence and experience is required. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:55, 16 January 2022 review of submission by FZW22

How to get rid of a 'misplaced article for submission' notification FZW22 (talk) 18:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:36:03, 16 January 2022 review of draft by JayMithila


JayMithila (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Hi created a draft on Pramod Kumar Yadav. Actually there is article on this name on other politician as well. Can I move this one to Pramod Kumar Yadav (Siraha) instead?[reply]

The draft has been moved to Draft:Pramod Kumar Yadav (Siraha politician) by Robert McClenon. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:51:54, 16 January 2022 review of draft by DKingWorldwide


Hi, I have an additional question. The draft that I submitted was declined due to a lack of notability. However, the artist in the draft (Kim Donghyuk) actually has his own Korean Wikipedia with the title in Korean Kim Donghyuk (Singer). Here's the link: https://ko.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EA%B9%80%EB%8F%99%ED%98%81_(%EA%B0%80%EC%88%98)# Will this be sufficient enough for him to be able to get his English Wikipedia approved as well? Or are those two completely different pages? Please advice. Thank you.

DKingWorldwide (talk) 20:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DKingWorldwide: Each Wikipedia is a separate project and sets its own rules, standards, and article criteria, so the existence of an article on one language's Wikipedia has no bearing on whether an article on the same subject on another language's Wikipedia will be acceptable. This is particularly so on English Wikipedia, where the notability standards tend to be more strict than on other Wikipedias. --Finngall talk 21:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:04:30, 16 January 2022 review of submission by DKingWorldwide


For my draft, I understand that the artist doesn't have his own solo debut yet, however, he has debuted as a main producer and songwriter for the group, as shown on the information below:

On February 6, 2020, iKON released their third EP, iDecide, which included five tracks with Dive as the lead single.[15] Kim Dong-hyuk debuted as songwriter and record producer of “Flower” ((너란 바람 따라; neolan balam ttala; lit. Follow the wind that is you), one of the sidetrack singles, in which he also choreographed their dance performances.[16][17][18]

Articles that have coverage of this news are as follow (all in Korean language): https://www.hankyung.com/news/article/2020020121764 title translated in English: iKON comeback D-5, YG said, "DK participated in producing and Bobby's involved in 3 songs" https://n.news.naver.com/entertain/article/469/0000466341 http://pop.heraldcorp.com/view.php?ud=202002121103029069392_1 title translated in English: "Donghyuk Kim of iKON “My first production challenge, the members responded well”

Will this be sufficient enough to prove his notability as he has enough coverage in the news regarding his debut as the music producer/songwriter? Please advise.

I apologize for asking a lot of questions but would like to get all information clarified in order to prove his notability for Wikipedia. Thank you so much for the help.


DKingWorldwide (talk) 22:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 17

00:36:51, 17 January 2022 review of submission by 2603:300A:99C:9800:1195:F2D5:2AF2:8D9F


2603:300A:99C:9800:1195:F2D5:2AF2:8D9F (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kale My Name is quite quite notable and popular. Probably most popular vegan business in America. It has huge African American fan base and closing eyes on that as "not notable" is disrespectful.

Popularity is not the same as notability, see WP:ORG. 331dot (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:13:09, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Bitsmedia


Can I check which sections in the draft needs to be edited?

Bitsmedia (talk) 02:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Bitsmedia#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:57:20, 17 January 2022 review of submission by GADGET0000


GADGET0000 (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GADGET0000: There is no way to fix this draft, when the subject isn't notable. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 04:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no one to make a pagefor me... I followed your help desk guildlines and because of my social media population was advised to make a page.

Help me fix it instead of denying me a chance

Why am I being bullied when I have no one to make this page for my works. I followed all you help suggestions and instructions. Please understand that some people are not privileged to have knowledgeable friends who can do this.

GADGET0000 (talk) 04:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GADGET0000: Please stop making new topics for every response. And what about the links? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DID YOU EVEN LOOK AT THE LINKS

@GADGET0000: Please actually read the notability policy. It isn't about whether I think they are famous or not. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This draft cannot be fixed. The subject isn't notable enough. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will not stop because it says to ask for advice and all you say is no because the subject is not famous in your eyes.

You are to help fix it not bully me.. Trust me if I could I would delete my account cause I see this site is not for someone like me and the subject.

We are here to help, not necessarily to help you fix a draft that has no chance of becoming an article. The subject is not notable enough according to our inclusion criteria. It may be best that you move on to other subject matter and learn more about Wikipedia before you continue to try to take on the most difficult task there is on the site which is article creation. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 05:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete all my accounts with your site now GADGET0000 (talk) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We can't. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
GADGET0000 What other accounts do you have? It is not possible to delete an account, but you may abandon your accounts. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:58:24, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Cmcmill


I am trying to correct my draft so I can insert it into an article to be added to my high schools sports notable alumni list. Please can you help me. Cmcmill (talk) 03:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cmcmill. If I understand correctly, you were drafted by the Kansas City Kings in the 7th round of the 1978 NBA draft, but never appeared in a game for them. So you don't meet any of the notability criteria of WP:NBASKETBALL. As talented as you were, you are not a suitable subject for a stand alone encyclopedia article. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:11:48, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Gvrpkumar


Phanindra Kumar.GVR (talk) 06:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:41:24, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Imcherokeedazz


Imcherokeedazz (talk) 08:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Imcherokeedazz You don't ask a question, but I declined your draft as a clear advertisement that didn't indicate notability. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:31:38, 17 January 2022 review of submission by VickyWiki247

Hi Team, I think we have added sufficient information and citation to each facts in this draft. All the articles are sourced from notable sources and are from reputed newspapers. Please do the re-review of the same and approve the same.

VickyWiki247 (talk) 09:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was rejected it won't be considered again. Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:05:02, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Nagasaikrishna2004

add my changes Nagasaikrishna2004 (talk) 10:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nagasaikrishna2004 As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:38:48, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Surya1012


My article recently got rejected for some reason. Being a new editor its difficult for me to spot the reason ,so a support from experienced Editor will help to catch the reason and remove it.

Surya1012 (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Surya1012: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia but your draft was written as a 'how to' but Wikipedia isn't the right place for 'how to' articles. Wikipedia already has an article about off-roading which you are welcome to improve, rather than creating another one. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:07:37, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Boringmikesmith


Thanks. An advert sells a product or service. I utterly fail to see how this entry can be classed by you as such. You are clearly unfit to veto Wiki pages.

Boringmikesmith (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Interim Spaces starts with a spam link to the business, it is clearly nothing but advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You need to declare your paid editor status, before editing further, undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI. Theroadislong (talk) 11:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there, I have had my entry for Interim Spaces declined by an editor for being 'blatant advertising' which it is obviously not. Could I please have this entry reviewed.
Many thanks
Boringmikesmith (talk) 11:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since this paid user considers me " clearly unfit to veto Wiki pages" would another reviewer please care to comment. Theroadislong (talk) 11:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Theroadislong: I would, but the draft has since been deleted. Boringmikesmith, Theroadislong is one of Wikipedia's most experienced and trusted reviewers. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Boringmikesmith I urge you to heed the advice of Theroadislong and instead of criticizing them because they did not tell you what you wanted to hear, learn from them so you can do the right thing. Please read your user talk page for important information. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:17:47, 17 January 2022 review of submission by LalKhan2022

Please help me in publishing my article. please

LalKhan2022 (talk) 11:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As explained on the draft, you need to find reliable sources and then re-submit. Theroadislong (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:36:12, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Sophron~trwiki

The remark about town of Bodrum (where the hotel located) has been deleted. NYT article was was about Bodrum town, not the hotel. It seems like it doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT so I removed all sentence. 5 star classification stated in a separated sentence with reference to Turkish Ministry of Tourism website. There is no direct link to the hotel's page but please do a search with "lujo" and you will see that state gave 5 star accreditation to the hotel. Please re-review. Thank you.

Sophron~trwiki (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sophron~trwiki. The hotel is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone article). Being 5-star is not a marker of notability, and the awards are meaningless. Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. Wikipedia may not be used for any form of promotion, publicity, of public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:49, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Sammyy07


My draft article was declined, it said that it fails WP:NSEASONS but I don't know what I need to do to get it accepted

Sammyy07 (talk) 12:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sammyy07 There is nothing you can do if the season does not meet the criteria laid out at WP:NSEASONS. If it does, you must demonstrate that with independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:05:31, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Bscglasgow


Hi there, BSC Glasgow is a professional football team in Scotland playing in the West of Scotland leagues. The club parted with part of the football team and they formed a new team called Broomhill FC. We had a wiki page, but for some reason our Wiki page went to Broomhill FC and we require a page for ourself. Broomhill FC should never had got the page for BSC Glasgow, and if you look at Broomhill FC wiki page you will see it points to the website for BSC Glasgow www.bscglasgow.co.uk

Please help Alan Hubner (BSC Glasgow)

Bscglasgow (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have no interest in what your organization "requires". Our only goal here is to write an encyclopedia; any other benefit is secondary. Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It offered no independent reliable sources with significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:52:27, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Alanhubner


I have now login through my personal account as did not know it could not be a username like bscglasgow. My username is now alanhubner. Please can you let me know how I can fix this page so I can publish it. Thanks Alan Hubner

Alanhubner (talk) 15:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is unsourced, promotion and has been rejected, it will not be considered further. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:41:51, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Digitalpankajsharma


Text of draft

Haider Raza (born 07 March 1980) is a prominent social worker of the state of Uttar Pradesh. He is also the President of Safipur Jan Vikas Sangh. He started his career as a cricketer. He was also a national player seven times and twice All India C.K. Also won the title of the best captain in the Naidu Championship. Personal Life- Haider Raja was born on 07 March 1980 in Safipur, Unnao district of Uttar Pradesh. He is the son of Late Syed Zeena Raza Naqvi. Father Gina is known to be a man of great perseverance. Raza is a Muslim by faith. Raza ji has four brothers. His elder brother Shri Mohsin Raza ji did M. R. f. Started his career with Pace Foundation (based in Chennai). and represented his state Uttar Pradesh in the Ranji Trophy. Later, on behalf of the Bharatiya Janata Party, in the year 2015, became the spokesperson of the party. In the year 2017, he became the Minister of Muslim Waqf and Haj Department in the Yogi Government of Bharatiya Janata Party. Younger brother Arshi Raza is a national player of cricket. Arshi Raza is playing an active role in politics since October 2009. He is also a better politician than the National Congress Party. He is also the chairman of the sports cell of Uttar Pradesh Congress Committee. The youngest brother of Haider Raza ji is Abbas Raza ji. He is a cricket coach and Ranji Trophy player. Early career Haider Raza ji started his career as a cricketer. He was also the national player of cricket for seven times. In which he represented the state of Uttar Pradesh. He was twice as C.K. Naidu was also a better captain in the national championship. He is also the Joint Secretary of Lucknow Cricket Association and President of Safipur Jan Vikas Sangh.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalpankajsharma (talk • contribs) 16:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Digitalpankajsharma. If you have a question about the draft, ask it. There is no need to post the content of the draft, just link to Draft:Haider Raza. Normally, rejection of a draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. If you believe the reviewer is mistaken, that Raza meets one of the criteria of WP:NCRICKET, then I suggest you discuss it with them directly. You will need to be far more specific than saying "The source ... is Internet and other websites". Most websites are self-published, so not reliable sources. In particular, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media sites; personal web pages; and Wikipedia are not reliable and should not be cited. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:45:43, 17 January 2022 review of submission by 172.58.4.62


hello i have been updating Ray Strachan page for a long time and t keeps getting declined and i need some help improving it so if you see anything that needs to be fixed please fix it because a lot of his fans are waiting to read this page. 172.58.4.62 (talk) 16:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:42:24, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Ethicsblogger


Many thanks to the hard-working reviewers who keep this site honest!

I just had a draft entry rejected, on the grounds that the citations "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject."

The person who is the subject of the draft article is an academic, one who has held a major "named chair" in his discipline. My understanding (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) ) was that that was a sufficient criterion. Is the problem simply the source cited for that fact?

Thanks in advance for clarification!

Ethicsblogger (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like he passes WP:NPROF (has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research) but would benefit from some reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ethicsblogger: You buried the lede. The first sentence or two should explain why Danielson is notable. At present it reads, "... is a philosopher and Professor Emeritus in the Centre for Applied Ethics at the University of British Columbia". The reason he's notable, that he held a named chair at a major institution of higher education and research, doesn't show up until deep in the first paragraph of the body. Consider changing the lede to, "... is a philosopher and emeritus Mary & Maurice Young Professor of Applied Ethics at the University of British Columbia". That will better communicate to readers why he is worthy of notice. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ethicsblogger: in the nature of WP:NOTBUREAU and WP:BEBOLD I've just made the correction myself and promoted it to mainspace, congrats Nosebagbear (talk) 11:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:46, 17 January 2022 review of draft by William E Ostrem


I'm currently looking for additional secondary sources such as books or journal articles that discuss the Marvin company extensively. After finding nothing further online so far, I've just contacted some librarians who might be able to help.

If you have any other advice, please let me know.

I do feel there are article subjects on Wikipedia that are less notable than this one, though, and, frankly, much more ephemeral.

Bill (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

00:12:22, 18 January 2022 review of draft by DKingWorldwide


Hello,

For my draft, I understand that the artist doesn't have his own solo debut yet, thus he is not qualified as a solo musician, however, he has debuted as a main producer and songwriter for the group, as shown on the information below:

On February 6, 2020, iKON released their third EP, iDecide, which included five tracks with Dive as the lead single.[15] Kim Dong-hyuk debuted as songwriter and record producer of “Flower” ((너란 바람 따라; neolan balam ttala; lit. Follow the wind that is you), one of the sidetrack singles, in which he also choreographed their dance performances.[16][17][18]

Linked articles that have coverage of this news are as follow (all in the Korean language): https://www.hankyung.com/news/article/2020020121764 title translated in English: iKON comeback D-5, YG said, "DK participated in producing and Bobby's involved in 3 songs" https://n.news.naver.com/entertain/article/469/0000466341 http://pop.heraldcorp.com/view.php?ud=202002121103029069392_1 title translated in English: "Donghyuk Kim of iKON “My first production challenge, the members responded well”

Will this be sufficient enough to prove his notability as he has enough coverage in the news regarding his debut as the music producer/songwriter? Please advise. Thank you so much for the help.

DKingWorldwide (talk) 00:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:17:07, 18 January 2022 review of draft by MyrellBW


I am requesting this draft to be approved for doing all the content that I did for a living person Biography as I already give all the citations possible that I needed to do it.

MyrellBW (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Why is my Draft always declined? MyrellBW (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MyrellBW The draft was finally rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by reviewers for future reference. It appears that the person does not meet the notability criteria for a notable creative professional. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 02:52:30, 18 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Axel20301000


Hi, I want to create a biography page of myself page within Wikipedia as is a Tweeter validation requirement, based on the previous resolutions, after reviewing my references,they are mainly on social media from my home country from TV shows that were nationally aired while I was on vacations (see links at the end of message). I also complete google validation process to be found by going ogle search (https://g.co/kgs/cGqUfz)

Web Tune https://web.tunecore.com/discography#.YeSQLGkUlSA


TV Show Exit from Grupo Megavisión El Salvador Jan 17 2019 https://m.facebook.com/stor y.php?story_fbid=2061294463950615&id=123113551102059

Feb 25 2019 https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2061294463950615&id=123113551102059

March 22 2019 https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=3823125911100786&id=123113551102059

Spotify Link https://open.spotify.com/artist/6k9a9Xe2FHkmYjYByDSm4n


I would like your advice about if any of the above reference meets the requested criteria

Axel20301000 (talk) 02:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Axel20301000:, you seemed to have misunderstood what Twitter requires for validation in regards to Wikipedia. It requires a stable article which meets our inclusion criteria of WP:GNG as validated by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. So far you have failed to show how any of these requirements have been met. Writing autobiographies is highly discouraged and having an article on Wikipedia is not always a good thing. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Axel20301000 Wikipedia has no interest in helping you get verified by Twitter or any social media, or how an article might help you personally(there are in fact good reasons to not want an article). What matters is if you meet our notability criteria; any other benefit is secondary. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Facebook and Spotify are not reliable independent sources, and the Tunecore link leads to a login page. Please take a moment to read the information that is linked from the decline notice, and from the posts above. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:24:32, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Bharattudu0987


Bharattudu0987 (talk) 04:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bharattudu0987: 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 people to tell the world about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. --Finngall talk 02:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:06:53, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Rambabuyadavnepal


Rambabuyadavnepal (talk) 05:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

please approve this article Draft:Milan Pandey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambabuyadavnepal (talk • contribs)

Rambabuyadavnepal As you were told by reviewers, it seems that he does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable politician or more broadly a notable person. The draft must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coveage have chosen on their own to say about him(and not based on any materials from him or his associates like an interview). 331dot (talk) 08:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:02:40, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Masry684


Masry684 (talk) 07:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Masry684 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:47:20, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Syedshoaib370


Syedshoaib370 (talk) 07:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Syedshoaib370 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 people to tell the world about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 08:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:12:35, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Verdidiazy


Verdidiazy (talk) 09:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:24:46, 18 January 2022 review of draft by BregtjeV


Dear moderator,

I made a translation of the existing Dutch article on this artist, which is now declined for the second time for reasons of not meeting the standards of quotation. I have a few questions: - Does this concern the parts which are red (people by whom Caspar Berger studied), who don't have a page on the English Wikipedia? Can I link to the Dutch pages on Wikipedia in these cases? - Can I refer to the site of the artist himself when making a quotation? - Is it allowed to cite the existing Wikipedia for the Sacha Tanja Penning?

At this moment I don't know where the problem lies.

Thank you for your help and have a nice day.!

Anne Vollebregt

BregtjeV (talk) 09:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BregtjeV.
  • It is okay to have red links, a draft will not be declined for that reason.
  • You may link to articles on the Dutch Wikipedia using template {{ill}}, which produces links such as Maja van Hall [nl].
  • You may cite the artist's own website, but only for uncontroversial information, and the article should cite mainly independent sources. See WP:BLPSELFPUB for more details.
  • Wikipedia is user-generated, so it is not a reliable source and should not be cited.
The draft's most obvious problems are that there are no inline citations in the "Life and work" section or supporting the museum collections. You use inline citations elsewhere, so you evidently understand the technique. I strongly recommend that you use inline citations throughout, rather than the current mix of mostly general references and a few inline citations. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:44:47, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Meshkati20


Mr. Panahi is an established artist, and we were hoping to get him included on Wikipedia to highlight his background and early life which made him the artist that he is today. There have been many exhibitions held in his honour, where he showcases his different works and explains to the audience what made him make the piece in question. Specifically his 'Musicalligraphy" pieces hold the highest regard because of their complexity yet fundamental idea, wherein he blends his love for music and calligraphy in one abstract piece of work.

If you could please offer us some guidance on how we should proceed in this venture of ours, we would be extremely grateful. Meshkati20 (talk) 09:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meshkati20 Who is "we"? The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. As noted by reviewers, the sources offered are either very brief mentions or associated with the subject. Wikipedia requires sources with significant, in depth coverage that are completely independent of the subject. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By 'we' I mean myself and Mr. Panahi. Please find below referenced pieces from magazines and newspapers supporting this submission.

Hadara Magazine - https://www.hadaramagazine.com/?p=3187&fbclid=IwAR3VlNIFWKt45h-ODyg53lSBnxBer6q6iJkoktwECI5tfYL-S4AtiXD0z60 Islamic Republic News Agency - https://en.irna.ir/news/83767758/Persian-calligraphy-art-of-balance The Sunday Times - https://www.sundaytimes.lk/970302/plus4.html The National - https://www.pressreader.com/uae/the-national-news/20191201/281921659906756

There are various galleries that discuss Mr. Panahi, along with curators - if there is something that is missing, guidance would be appreciated instead of just being given a "rejection".

Thanks

Meshkati20 (talk) 10:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meshkati20 For additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections for every comment. If you work with Mr. Panahi, you have a conflict of interest that you should disclose. If he is compensating you in any manner(not just money or even anything tangible) you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to make a formal declaration as a paid editor, see the paid editing policy. As the draft was rejected, there is nothing that you can do to improve it further. The sources you list here seem to be interviews with him, this does not establish notability as an interview is the person speaking about themselves. Wikipedia wants to know what others independent of him choose on their own to say about him, not what he says about himself. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:49:04, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Jaanus K


Jaanus K (talk) 09:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! The article was rejected for not answering the COI inquiry, however I have answered it on the Talk page and added the relevant notices.

Jaanus K That was the last comment by a reviewer, but not the reason it was rejected. It was rejected for being promotional. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves and what they do; an article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own(and not prompted by any materials put out by the company, like interviews, press releases, announcements) to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jaanus K (talk) 06:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC) Hello! I've submitted multiple drafts that have relied on independent and accepted sources per the wikipedia notability criteria - such as Bloomberg etc. However I do not see how the article is more promotional than say https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northvolt, which is a very similar company making similar products?[reply]

12:06:00, 18 January 2022 review of draft by CristeenaC


I cannot add photographs in the page I am creating. Please help.

CristeenaC (talk) 12:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CristeenaC Images are not necessary for submitting a draft; the presence of images is not usually considered by reviewers. Once accepted, you can begin to add images. You must be autoconfirmed to be able to upload images yourself(account is four days old with 10 edits or more). 331dot (talk) 12:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:24:49, 18 January 2022 review of submission by BarbaraLassen


BarbaraLassen (talk) 15:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Wikipedia friends, it seems that I need advice. When offering the entry on the poet Jurgen Theobaldy, I based it on the entry in the German language Wikipedia which is inadequately supported by referenced sources. (Perhaps because the poet is so well-known in Germany, it was not deemed essential.) I agree that my entry had to be rejected because there were few sources added in the form of references. Now, the entry is rejected because there are too many references and too many sources and I quoted at great length (in the original with added translation to English.) I have deleted some links to sources that are online. My experience is that sources that are available in few libraries are often rejected. Is it because some reviewers accept only resources that can be checked online with ease? I need help. Is it still too much I add to the initial, badly referenced text on Theobaldy? Or have I deleted details that I should not have deleted? I am certain that experienced Wikipedia editors can give good advice. Thank you so much for your help, dear friends. My best/ Barbara

20:54:00, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Masry684


Masry684 (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:42:58, 18 January 2022 review of draft by CopyKait


I'd like help with the notability of my article. It seems like a notable company, but it was declined previously for not having good enough sources. I'm hoping to find out if my updated citations meet the standard for a tech company before resubmitting, or if I should submit it. Thank you! CopyKait (talk) 21:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:47:21, 18 January 2022 review of draft by Swamp Greetings


Hi,

After submitting my draft I got the message "Need independent reliable sources".

So far I've included:

  • An official record from the Spanish Ministry of Justice re. the subject (direct link).
  • A direct mention from an official agency/foundation, directly connected to the Spanish Ministry of the Presidency.
  • 3 direct mentions from peer organisations from two different countries (also recognised by the State), acknowledging the subject (more available, but it'd be saturation).
  • 3 news from 3 different newspapers.
  • 1 radio program.
  • 1 TV special (Channel 5, UK).
  • Direct links to 2 relevant "wider" associations (one national, one international) the subject is a member of (thus fully acknowledged as a peer).
  • 5 examples of subject's involvement in a number of causes: 1 from a learned/research society, 1 from a local government (official), 3 from other established associations (more available, but it'd be saturation).
  • Ps. And a couple of published papers (university proceedings). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamp Greetings (talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Galician and Portuguese pages have already been published:

https://gl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irmandade_Dru%C3%ADdica_Galaica

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irmandade_Dru%C3%ADdica_Galaica

Obviously, for some actual info about the organisation itself I had to dig into its own website and social media (external sources are not going to explain how exactly it works).


Please advise. Regards.


Swamp Greetings (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:19:21, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Cakepops or bust

My article was declined, even though it is not finished. Please tell me why it declined so I can improve!

Cakepops or bust (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cakepops or bust Your draft is sourced to nothing but another wiki; Wikipedia articles must summarize independent reliable sources like news reports. If no one has written about what I assume is your micronation, it would not merit a Wikipedia article. Compare your draft to Republic of Molossia and Principality of Sealand. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


January 19

00:33:26, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Muamalq

Hello, I wrote an article about this person because he is considered one of the talented people in Iraq, and he is old In all the Spanish conferences in the name of Iraq He has many sources Muamalq (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:35:40, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Hgizemtas

Why my article was declined? What can I do to make it published? Hgizemtas (talk) 03:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hgizemtas: One source - especially a source from the subject themselves - is not enough to demonstrate notability as Wikipedia defines it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:48:16, 19 January 2022 review of submission by 122.186.82.18


the Content is Not Promotional and not even any paid contribution.. Please check the Content again and do whatever changes are required to get this Publish.. My Concern behind the article is only that they are providing Diagnostic Services and reaching to Rural areas very fast along with CRS activities, So would be good to read on this Company.

122.186.82.18 (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are employed by the lab, you are a paid editor, you don't have to be specifically paid to edit. The draft was sourced to nothing but press release type stories, or announcements of the routine activities of the company. Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources with significant coverage that are unconnected with the subject and do not write based on what the company tells them or merely what it does. Because the sources did not do that, the draft was rejected and will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:12:33, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Shakirullahsahir

We have TV channel to create wikipedia page for the reason of biography of our channel so this information will not use for illegal aim so please re-review and accept this,thank you Shakirullahsahir (talk) 07:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

it is important for us to have our tv channel information in wikipedia for clients so please re-review and i have completed the all requirements for the page i don't know where is my mistake kindly you point that area where is mistake. Thank you Shakirullahsahir (talk) 07:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shakirullahsahir Wikipedia has no interest in helping your clients, as that is a promotional purpose. Our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about(in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Any other benefit is secondary and not our concern. As your draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by reviewers and the policies linked to in the message. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:30:27, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Bahram2010


Since I started to edit the UArchitects page on Wikipedia, and it was my first edition on Wiki, so I requested for a review. The reason is that i would like to expand people s knowledge at Dutch architectural offices, who deliver or have delivered meaningful works.

Bahram2010 (talk) 08:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:31:02, 19 January 2022 review of draft by 43.248.153.213


I'm a newbie and have no idea on how to rectify the errors for this draft. I really wish to publish a wikipedia page for this celeb. If you can advise in particular what is missing in this draft, I'll try my best to work on it.

The draft has been prepared by another user and I've no link with them. I'm a fan of Pratik Sehajpal and came across this draft while trying to create a page for him. It is very crucial for him to have it in this point in time. 43.248.153.213 (talk) 08:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no interest in how the presence of an article (not a mere "page") benefits a potential subject. There are, in fact, good reasons to not want an article. Our only interest is in summarizing independent reliable sources with significant coverage. Wikipedia articles cannot be used to source other Wikipedia articles per WP:CIRCULAR. The other sources merely tells what the person has done and do not demonstrate how they meet the notability criteria. Please see the messages left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:00:01, 19 January 2022 review of submission by HYPER2011


HYPER2011 (talk) 09:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:27:46, 19 January 2022 review of draft by Leegiaphu17


I have created an article titled as "Samuel Hwang". It is at Draft:Samuel Hwang. The thing is I don't know if the article got rejected or not and how I can improve this article. Unlike other articles at User:"my user name"/sandbox/"article title" which I know why these articles got rejected, I have no clue about how to fix this article Draft:Samuel Hwang. Can someone help me? Leegiaphu17 (talk) 10:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Leegiaphu17: Your article is being rejected. Don't worry, you can always improve and submit the improved version. Wiki Emoji | Emojiwiki Talk~~ 10:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1066640661"