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 443: Line 443:
:c) I also note that you haven't responded to the COI queri'''es''' on your user talk page. Please do so now.
:c) I also note that you haven't responded to the COI queri'''es''' on your user talk page. Please do so now.
:HTH, -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 17:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
:HTH, -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 17:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

== 17:56:04, 26 July 2022 review of submission by 2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705 ==
{{Lafc|username=2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705|ts=17:56:04, 26 July 2022|declined=Draft:Juned_Patel}}

[[Special:Contributions/2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705|2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705]] ([[User talk:2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705|talk]]) 17:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:56, 26 July 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


July 20

01:13:07, 20 July 2022 review of draft by Sportsfangnome


I would like for one of y'all to get more background information for my draft so that way it can be almost 100% completed, and if possible, can you also get the logo for the 2022 A7FL championship and the trophy?

Sportsfangnome (talk) 01:13, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the trophy and the logo and for good measure, can you use the latter external link to get the picture of the tournament bracket? Sportsfangnome (talk) 01:21, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it definitely needs more independent, reliable sources. Please read the WP:general notability guideline. QiuLiming1 (talk) 01:21, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sportsfangnome Citing the website itself is allowed occasionally but you need other sources too, see the list for reference. QiuLiming1 (talk) 01:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I messed up and I accidently cited the website. Sportsfangnome (talk) 01:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And I will do that! Sportsfangnome (talk) 01:39, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, here is not for requests of improving your draft. You could maybe go to the help desk instead. QiuLiming1 (talk) 01:26, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Sportsfangnome (talk) 01:39, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:44:09, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Blessy Antony


Blessy Antony (talk) 07:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC) Dear sir , now i have a fresh concept . kindly review sir regards , blessy[reply]

07:46:31, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Blessy Antony


Blessy Antony (talk) 07:46, 20 July 2022 (UTC) Sorry for inconvenience sir. kindly allow mw change my contant . i want to change it entirely . regards your faithful, blessy antony[reply]

Your rambling content has absolutely nothing to do with building an encyclopedia, WP:NOTHERE clearly applies. Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:07:30, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Cherry sxda

It got declined, why was it declined? Cherry sxda (talk) 09:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cherry sxda You were given a reason for the decline by the reviewer- the draft is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, which summarizes independent reliable sources, it isn't for merely telling about something. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:32:42, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Mtajeesh


Links: https://www.aihitdata.com/company/00BEADF7/credai-chennai/overview https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/real-estate/credai-launches-whatsapp-based-portal-to-connect-with-home-buyers/article35637374.ece https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil-nadu/2022/mar/06/tamil-nadu-minister-s-muthusamy-launches-insurance-scheme-for-one-lakhconstruction-workers-2426954.html

CREDAI Chennai is the apex body for the real estate industry of India. CREDAI works closely with all of its stakeholders: the Government, policy makers, investors, finance companies, real estate professionals and consumers Today, CREDAI is a recognized partner for the Central and State Governments, represented on several committees that work at policy formulations and various committees of the Government, including the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) and others.

CREDAI continue to make a conscious effort to bring transparency and protect the interest of homebuyers. CREDAI has established a Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF), where aggrieved buyers can register a complaint against member developers and get their issues resolved at the earliest.

As part of CSR activity CREDAI Chennai has taken the initiative of registering 1,00,000 labouers under the Tamil Nadu Construction Workers Welfare Board which was launched by the Tamilnadu Housing Minister S Muthuswamy.

Tamil Nadu Housing and Urban Development minister S Muthusamy unveiled the 'Real Estate Vision-2030' document of CREDAI was unveiled with a target to increase investment opportunities and woo bigger players into the city. The aim is to help Tamil Nadu be among the top investment destinations in this country.

Draft has been rejected, the topic is not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As it's clear you have no desire to listen to constructive criticism and are now just spamming this page, any further requests for this page will be reverted off. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 18:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:41:07, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Elstyleboutique

hello sir i m new for wiki please publish my data and i will update my all data and give me suggestion what can change in my article

Elstyleboutique (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Draft deleted as spam, user blocked) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:10, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:28, 20 July 2022 review of submission by 124.123.161.146


124.123.161.146 (talk) 14:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question? The draft has been rejected (after several declines), and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:51:09, 20 July 2022 review of submission by 151.242.122.247


151.242.122.247 (talk) 15:51, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question? The draft has been rejected (after several declines), and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:15:43, 20 July 2022 review of draft by Arl618


How does one change the title of an article in draft mode? Arl618 (talk) 18:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This would require a mage move and be completely pointless. Draft names are provisional, and a reviewer accepting the article will move it to an appropriate title when they do. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 18:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Arl618 by the way, external links are not allowed in the first word of the article. QiuLiming1 (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:24:47, 20 July 2022 review of submission by Loadtime


Loadtime (talk) 21:24, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a free place to advert. Don't place any external links in the body of the draft. By the way, your draft was rejected, meaning it won't be considered again. QiuLiming1 (talk) 22:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Loadtime QiuLiming1 (talk) 22:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 21

01:13:13, 21 July 2022 review of draft by Mlebowit

I responded to the points made in yesterday's rejection by adding citations [not included originally], removing opinions and presenting information in a neutral voice. I submitted these changes and immediately was rejected before anyone could possibly have read the new text. Why? Mlebowit (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the comment, no Secondary source provided. Youtube and wikipedia are not reliable. QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:54, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mlebowit. QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:55, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:44:04, 21 July 2022 review of submission by Prashant321


Prashant321 (talk) 05:44, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Dear sir, How can I come for the conclusion of the rule of an article content and the information source writing format, Trombidium grandissimum species till has no data, yet completion can resolve the Indian Specimen data by adding the existing article, but I have tried to complete it via article discussion, let me know the procedure of adding the open link source journals or else how can this specimen recovered by red highlight? Please inform me "how to create an article in Wikipedia ?".

09:00:48, 21 July 2022 review of draft by VaternAU

I have removed all wikipedia sources but it still displays. After the sentence - WhiteBIT is a centralized European cryptocurrency exchange from Ukraine with over 3 million users worldwide. The exchange features over 450 trading pairs with popular cryptocurrencies, 30+ of which are pairs with national currencies (fiat pairs). The average daily trading volume is $1 billion.[1] you can see reference [1] that is Unian website and in refference list it is Unian as well. but hoovering the source [1] I can see wikipedia link that is not visible in edit mode, please advice how to remove it

VaternAU (talk) 09:00, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VaternAU You have chosen to edit in a contentious topic area(crypto); there are special rules about this of which I have notified you of on your user talk page. If you work for this company or are otherwise associated with it, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. Declaring paid editing is a Terms of Use requirement.
Looking at your draft, you seem to have a common, fundamental misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to merely tell about a topic and what it does. Any article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. "Significant coverage" goes beyond the reporting of the company's activities and goes in depth about its significance or influence. Sources like press releases, announcements of routine business activities, staff interviews, the company website, or other primary sources do not establish notability. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation. I have added sources to governmental services that posted information about this company and also I have added many sourced of world's media that show how company helps Ukraine and sources that write about revolutionary things it invented. I understand that I am writing just 2nd article, but I have read all advice and still do not understand how to fix current issue with random wikipedia link that is not visible in the edit mode. Please, be so kind, advice me! VaternAU (talk) 17:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean when you say a link that is not visible in edit mode. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed all the wikipedia sources, they are absent in the references list, but hoovering the mouse on [1] after the sencence "The WhiteBIT ecosystem launched a new product, the Bitcoin Global peer-to-peer platform. Bitcoin Global allows users to exchange cryptocurrencies fee-free and with no verification." you can see the wikipedia link displayed in the left corner on the web page.And this link is not inserted in the article, that is why it is impossible to remove it, seems like it is a techical bug that I cannot solve from my side VaternAU (talk) 18:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have now checked other sourced in the text sources 7-13 are not displayed corectry after hoovering the mouse on the number of the source VaternAU (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:46:02, 21 July 2022 review of submission by Josephnjata


Josephnjata (talk) 09:46, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have cited these links and the person am creating and article about has a verified Facebook account with over 176,000 followers https://www.facebook.com/stycie/. I am not sure what exactly that I need to provide. Thanks

https://nairobinews.nation.africa/supa-modo-stycie-waweru/ https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/magazines/full-woman/meet-stycie-waweru-the-voice-behind-africa-s-newest-child-superhero-on-netflix-3604018 https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/daily-dispatch/20211002/281694027941457

https://www.dohafilminstitute.com/videos/meet-the-talent-stycie-waweru-supa-modo https://www.breakingkenyanews.com/2021/10/kenyan-netflix-teen-star-who-is-voice.html

Having a verified Facebook account with over 176,000 followers confers zero notability. Theroadislong (talk) 09:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:11:13, 21 July 2022 review of draft by Flow235

I'm new here and I wanted to publish my first article. Well I submitted it a bit too fast and it got declined. Now I need help and advices.

First, with choosing the right references. I have a list URLs as references but I doubt they will be accepted as reliable, e.g. can company's (Penat) own websites or blogs be used as references? Second, the text is not from me only, so I am "just" responsible for publishing the article. Is this still the category marketing/ pr or paid writing? If yes, how do I mark this? And the last thing, I need a feedback to the part about the product because I'm not sure if it's too much like an advert. Thanks :) --Flow235 (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC) Lydia[reply]

Flow235 (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flow235 First, as you seem to be an employee of the company, you are indeed a paid editor and must make the Terms of Use required paid editing disclosure. This is mandatory.
Any article about your company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about your company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the company choose on their own to say about it. So no, the company website, press releases, announcements of routine business activities and the like are not acceptable for establishing notability. You will also need to review how to make proper citations of your references. To be successful, you would need to set aside everything you know about your company and all materials its puts out- and only write based on what others chose on their own to say about your company. That is usually very difficult for those in your position to do, but it is not impossible. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:05:37, 21 July 2022 review of draft by Jeanne Angerie


Hello,

I tried to put new sources in my article. I don't know if that matches your expectations.

Sincerely, Jeanne Angerie

Jeanne Angerie (talk) 19:05, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeanne Angerie Your draft still contains many citation errors, and the sources should met our general notability guideline. QiuLiming1 (talk) 22:59, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


July 22

01:45:15, 22 July 2022 review of submission by Bennett Blakley


Bennett Blakley (talk) 01:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bennett Blakley: We don't accept unsourced articles, especially where living people are the subject (not to mention "Oddball" is generally a pejorative term and shouldn't be in the title to begin with, see WP:TITLE.). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:50, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

01:56:35, 22 July 2022 review of submission by Bennett Blakley

because I want the best for my article and it would mean a lot. Bennett Blakley (talk) 01:56, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, draft is woefully undersourced and the title is an insult. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:58, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:49:39, 22 July 2022 review of submission by Nuhimorina


Nuhimorina (talk) 14:49, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Nuhimorina? This draft has been rejected. Quite apart from any other issues this may have, it is a) unreferenced, and b) not in English. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:39:15, 22 July 2022 review of submission by Yuri "Yura" Dashevsky

I'm an official candidate for the US elections, see https://ballotpedia.org/Yuri_Dashevsky and FEC documents. Elections interference has no place in our country. Yuri "Yura" Dashevsky (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yuri "Yura" Dashevsky you are not notable unless you become the president of US later somewhat. QiuLiming1 (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Yuri "Yura" Dashevsky: The notability issue aside, Wikipedia is not a place for your campaign announcements or other promotions, nor is it a social media site where you can post information about yourself (not least because AUTOBIOGRAPHIES are strongly advised against) or whatever else you may wish. Even if you one day become notable per WP:NPOL as an elected representative, any article about you must still be written from a neutral, purely factual viewpoint, preferably by someone not connected to you. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, see Wikipedia:NOTSOCIALMEDIA. QiuLiming1 (talk) 17:22, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:53:48, 22 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Major Detail


My article that I submitted was rejected for being not notable, however the article located at Pressure Cooker (band) is similar to my article and is not mentioned for winning any awards and the notable tidbit is the band using a Kickstarter drive. NOTE: I do not want the comparison article pulled (I love both bands), I just want my article considered in the same light. Draft:Max and the Invaders (previously The Invaders) Thank you for your consideration, Major Major Detail (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Major Detail Beware in citing other similar articles as a reason for yours to exist, see other stuff exists. It could be that these other articles are also inappropriate. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, there are many ways inappropriate articles can get by us. We can only address what we know about. Indeed, the article you cited is marked as problematic. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those that are classified as good articles.
For this band to merit a Wikipedia article, you must show with significant coverage in independent reliable sources how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable band. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:08:21, 22 July 2022 review of draft by MusicWizard7


Would like to get all-clear to resubmit. I added newly written articles on the subject, which should meet the independent sources requirement, and Billboard charts ranking which should suffice the notability requirement for musicians. Thank you for your help.

MusicWizard7 (talk) 23:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MusicWizard7: as long as the draft hasn't been rejected, you don't need any permission to resubmit; you resubmit when you feel it's ready to be reviewed. The review will then determine whether it's ready to be published. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:29, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this draft do have the potential to be accepte. You could submit but I also suggest you add some secondary sources (for example a music review). QiuLiming1 (talk) 06:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:26:37, 22 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Mlebowit


I have tried to add citations [so many that I wonder if it is overkill] and to use more neutral language. Is it hopeless, though?


Mlebowit (talk) 23:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlebowit Wikipedia and Youtube are totally user-generalized source which is typical not usable. The TOP is inapproiate, links should be in the content of the article. QiuLiming1 (talk) 01:03, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@QiuLiming1 Actually, the term is "user-generated", not "user-generalized". 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:52, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! QiuLiming1 (talk) 23:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@QiuLiming1 You are welcome. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Creating a AUTOBIOGRAPHY is strongly discouraged in Wikipedia. QiuLiming1 (talk) 01:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments. I probably should but don't know what 'TOP' is. If Wikipedia indicates links to other Wikipedia entries itself, then my citation [eg., to Marta Harnecker] is unnecessary. The YouTube citations in this case were not user-generated and do provide information that in my view will support the understanding of readers. I should note there are short entries on the subject
on Spanish language sites [1]. 2001:569:5637:500:8CEB:8D52:C4DF:C99A (talk) 22:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:33:02, 22 July 2022 review of draft by Mc wolfy3


I was making a Wikipedia article about a game I found on Coolmath Games. Since it was a game and everything I put in article was in the game I thought that the game would be a good enough reference. If that is good enough please confirm the draft. If it is not enough please tell me what i need to put.

Mc wolfy3 (talk) 23:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mc wolfy3: We're not GameFAQs. We don't accept game manuals. What you need to do is show that the game has been talked about by reliable sources. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is likely not notable, since coolmathgames.com aren't even notable.--QiuLiming1 (talk) 05:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Mc wolfy3, it’s not the sort of think Wikipedia does. To learn what Wikipedia does, get some experience in improving existing content. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 23

08:21:12, 23 July 2022 review of submission by Amadathil


Amadathil (talk) 08:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amadathil You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to post someone's resume or list of accomplishments. A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:24:09, 23 July 2022 review of draft by Karissa 247


Hello there, I need help with my draft. I have had the draft deleted severally and this is my first work here. Mostly, it's been deleted because of the reference segment. Can I please get a review on the draft before I submit it for approval? Thank you.

Karissa 247 (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Karissa 247 Not to mention your tone, just an analysis to your sources:
1. Your name only appear one time in the article, and it's looks like an advertisement.
2. See above. It's also a primary source.
3. See above.
4. See above
5. Did not get the book on google book, I can't tell if it's good source or not.
6. Only one sentence coverage
7. Did not even cover the name.
A good essay for you to read is WP:109PAPERS. QiuLiming1 (talk) 16:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, no evidence of meeting the singer notability guideline WP:SINGER. I belive she is too young to be written in Wikipedia, unless you found some other really reliable, secondary sources which is not related to the singer. QiuLiming1 (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Karissa 247 The image is likely to be deleted, since it is not clear that the copyright holder is the person who uploaded the picture and licensed it under the Creative Commons license that is mentioned on the image's page. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:11:00, 23 July 2022 review of draft by Dark Angel23490


Hi, I would love to know if it's ok if I place links to the leading newspapers in Israel as a source of knowledge? Or does it have to be an American source...? Also, I would love your input how can I improve my article?

Dark Angel23490 (talk) 21:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dark Angel23490 See WP:NONENG. Non-English sources are allowed but they generally take longer time to be reviewed. QiuLiming1 (talk) 21:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you. I would love for your help if you can see the value I wrote "Shay Wize". It's my first time, and i would love to know what you think... ^^ Dark Angel23490 (talk) 21:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how could I help with this draft since I don't even know the language. QiuLiming1 (talk) 22:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 24

04:40:35, 24 July 2022 review of draft by Omichang


This article has been criticized as not neutral enough, can you help me to point out which part I can fix itOmichang (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Omichang (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

posted a comment on the draft Justiyaya 06:47, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:46:23, 24 July 2022 review of draft by Omichang

If there is a lack of English news sources, how to optimize it?Thank you.Omichang (talk) 04:46, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Omichang (talk) 04:46, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Omichang No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. I don't think an article is possible at this time without significant expansion of reliable, independent sources in the article. The problem isn't a lack of English news sources, we require reliable sources in any language. From what I can see, there is at most one reliable source in the article (ref 3, 5 are from the same organization, possibly unreliable per WP:XINHUA, rest non-independent). Justiyaya 06:57, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:30:59, 24 July 2022 review of submission by Kalpyre

How this can become a wiki story?

Thanks

Kalpyre (talk) 06:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kalpyre It can't. We don't have "wiki stories". We have articles, and those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with sigificant coverage have chosen on their own to say about- in this case- a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. The draft does not do that, which is why it was rejected and will not be considered further. Please see the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 07:24, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:43:10, 24 July 2022 review of submission by Hubdarbrohii


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 11:43, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected like most us, you are not notable enough for an article, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about YOU. Theroadislong (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:27:33, 24 July 2022 review of draft by SevenSisters1313


Hi there, thank you for your time. A draft of an article on the band The Otherness has been rejected in view of inadequate reliable sources and said references not showing that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. No doubt this is at least in large part down to (good faith) misunderstandings and failings to understand the Wikipedia system on my part, which I apologise for and can attempt to rectify. However, my question is: from my perspective, it does appear that the band would meet criteria 1 and 12 of the Notability guidelines for musicians and ensembles (I may be wrong about this, but would appreciate being set right if so): there is substantive coverage from what appears to me credible media publications (NME, regional and national newspapers of reasonable stature) and video coverage from national broadcasters across a national TV network (TN La Viola from Argentina, and another from German TV that I have stupidly so far failed to include, but would also include in a new edit). If I were to remove some of the sources deemed inadequate and draw more extensively on these sources that appear more credible to reshape the article, does it seem likely that this could help resolve issues with the article to a sufficient degree, or would this still seem like too little to ground an article of this nature? Thank you again for your time, and all the best.SevenSisters1313 (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SevenSisters1313 (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SevenSisters1313: the draft has been declined, not rejected, meaning you're welcome to resubmit once you've comprehensively addressed the reasons for declining. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the information - have attempted to rectify, and appreciate your taking the time to reply. SevenSisters1313 (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:50:27, 24 July 2022 review of draft by JackMags


How do I add my references?

JackMags (talk) 13:50, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have worked it out, BUT your sources do not show any notability. We require significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:Reliable sources WP:Secondary source. QiuLiming1 (talk) 20:58, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 25

03:47:27, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Hubdarbrohii


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 03:47, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:49:05, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Hubdarbrohii


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 03:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hubdarbrohii It will not get accepted now because your draft don't includes any source and the draft is a biography of a living person. QiuLiming1 (talk) 03:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:32:26, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Liptapp


Liptapp (talk) 04:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liptapp Please read this. "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use." Please declare your relationship to Puffy Mattress as soon as possible. QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:43, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:04:11, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Adithi 5599


Hi, I submitted my first article on wikipedia and my submission got rejected. the reason they gave me is that my article doesn't have reliable sources to back it up. but I added all the required information and also added reference links. I am looking for your help to help me publish my first article. thank you.

Here is the introduction of my article: VentureStudio is a startup incubator established by Ahmedabad University, a private, non-profit university in Gujarat, India, set up in 2009 by the Ahmedabad Education Society.

Here is the article link in my google drive: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6am0uc_ht-PpR_e8yzhynrA-smBczEs05MC13rIF94/edit?usp=sharing

Adithi 5599 (talk) 05:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adithi 5599: We never cite Wikipedia, and every other link has nothing about the company worth citing. You need better sources. If you have a connexion to VentureStudio, you are obligated to DISCLOSE that connexion publicly on your userpage. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:07:10, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Hubdarbrohii


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 05:07, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hubdarbrohii: you don't ask a question, but let me just say that your draft has now been rejected for the second time; please do not resubmit it again. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a social media platform or a free web hosting service where you can tell the world about yourself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:54, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:55:37, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Irfanmehmoodkhan


Irfanmehmoodkhan (talk) 08:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Irfanmehmoodkhan 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 their own works. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:15:03, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Madzengamabaso

I have updated the draft of Dr. Anele Hammond nee Mngadi, I've only used information that has readily available sources to backup the information provided. Madzengamabaso (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:19, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Oscarfelix.may


Oscarfelix.may (talk) 14:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


More basic details have been included about Steuart Padwick and hopefully it is in a more appropriate tone. He continues to create more and more prominent works since the last rejection he has created the UK' first 100% cement free concrete superstruture. This has reduced the carbon footprint of the concrete by over 70% - this is a major step in the path to reducing the carbon footprint in the built environment.

@Oscarfelix.may: There's still not enough about the artist, and the sources about his works are weak. There should be no blogs, press releases or primary sources, such as the link to made.com that you added. I made some improvements but the article draft has been rejected, which means without a major revision with better sources, it will not be considered further. Rejections come when an article is repeatedly resubmitted without the changes that are requested, to not waste future reviewers' time. See WP:NARTIST for artist notability guidelines. I think he's starting to get there with the coverage of his very visible public art, but the sourcing needs to be significantly improved before there will be any further consideration. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:22:02, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Roarkemoody


Roarkemoody (talk) 17:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC) I do not know how to correctly add references.[reply]

17:24:17, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Roarkemoody


Roarkemoody (talk) 17:24, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected, meaning it won't be considered again. QiuLiming1 (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to create page for a friend. Unsure how to cite

See Help:Referencing for beginners - but note that your sources are pretty much unusable anyway (we don't cite streaming sites, website homepages, or prose interviews). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:45:30, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Transcender.beyond

Hi Folks, am new and just not sure whether my draft is ok or not: I was requested to provide additional sourcing, I included two sources, but can't understand if those have been rejected too and that's why the page is dead?

thanks

Transcender.beyond (talk) 18:45, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:58, 25 July 2022 review of draft by 2601:18E:C300:5770:9D03:E433:2A17:190A


2601:18E:C300:5770:9D03:E433:2A17:190A (talk) 19:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Help Desk: I have submitted a query to the dispute resolution group but to my knowledge have not received a reply. Thus, I am writing to you now with my concern about my Leadership-as-Practice entry. First, I would like to say that I have been successful publishing other articles in wikipedia - such as Work Self-Efficacy Inventory and Leaderful Fieldbook (in wikisummaries). Thus, I know how to prepare and write encyclopedic entries. However, in this case, the first reviewer thought the draft to be overly essay-ish in form, and then subsequent reviewers, in particular, Nightenbelle and Rusalkii, have merely carried on this critique without sufficient scrutiny. Thus, the criticism has taken on a life of its own, effectively nullifying any chance for an objective review. It is with this concern that I asked for a dispute resolution. However, as the help desk, perhaps you can take a look at the entry, which has been corrected for style since the initial draft, and determine if you believe it has received a fair hearing. As you know, I believe it has not and that, as a result, Wiki readers have been denied the opportunity to learn about this emerging and potentially vital contribution to the field of leadership. [It is also possible that my concern raises an important criticism about the wiki review process.]

I thank you for your consideration. -Joe Raelin

You have been repeatedly told this looks like an essay. You have repeatedly failed to see the forest for the trees and have continued to submit the same damn research essay. We do not accept essays. We are an encyclopaedia project. Separate from the essay concerns, this is so full of buzzwords that it reads like a badly-drafted corporate memo written by someone whose only reference material was a book of Pointy-Haired-Bossisms. The buzzwords need to go and this needs to be written in much clearer English. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:39, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or, to put it in a much clearer fashion for you: The only problem with the review process here is the editor being incapable of accepting legitimate criticism. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 26

03:39:24, 26 July 2022 review of submission by AlphaWolf294

Put simply, draft denied due to company not being notable enough. I am contesting denial because in that case, one would have to become a deletionist and remove half of the companies under the relevant page. I am okay with a no, but want to shoot my shot. AlphaWolf294 (talk) 03:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AlphaWolf294: please refer to the WP:GNG notability standard, which requires significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. The draft currently cites no such sources, hence the failure to demonstrate notability, and consequently the decision to decline, is pretty clear-cut. If you can find and add such sources, you're welcome to resubmit — although I should add that you would also need to significantly redraft this so that it offers some sort of encyclopaedic value, not just promotional content.
As for your "one would have to become a deletionist and remove half of the companies" point, see OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:40, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable. As for Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, most of the category companies are almost unheard of (besides the obvious ones, and the few you'll know if you have anything to do with the space). One of them didn't even have its main source anymore because of how many years it has been, and a simple Google search couldn't find anything else on it. What are the requirements for notability in this instance, since the range is clearly between household name, google ranking, and a press release. AlphaWolf294 (talk) 15:36, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:04, 26 July 2022 review of submission by Senyar

Hello Dears, this draft has been edited multiple times based on recommendations made by users who declined this article, we can't see a clear reason to decline this article again. please advice as this took more than 5 months now. the figure which this article is about, is a well known person in Arab region. all sources and proofs submitted. Thank you Senyar (talk) 10:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Senyar: this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. Doesn't matter how "well known" the person in question is, they still need to satisfy the requirements for notability, and the information must be sufficiently supported by references to reliable sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:59, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:52:07, 26 July 2022 review of submission by JD at Syngenta Group

Following a requested move of Syngenta to Syngenta Group, consensus was to have a separate article of section written about the Syngenta Group. I've provided a draft in my user space, and seeked further consensus on separating pages. In May, the Draft:Syngenta Group was declined, as it was marked a copy of the Syngenta page, which isn't the case.

Since then, everything seems to be in limbo. I'm worried I've messed up the whole thing, and wasn't able to discuss this further with users involved, particularly KoA and Robert McClenon. So I am here asking for some help. I'd appreciate if someone could look at the pages/drafts and decide if I should withdraw the AfC proposal. Sorry if I did anything wrong with this submission.

As I am editing on behalf of the company, please be aware of my COI. Thanks in advance for your help. JD at Syngenta Group (talk) 11:52, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:43:34, 26 July 2022 review of submission by MilesAxlerod862


MilesAxlerod862 (talk) 14:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MilesAxlerod862:
a) You need to ask an actual question, which you haven't.
b) Your draft has been rejected and won't be considered any further.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:28:29, 26 July 2022 review of draft by Orange Sorbet


We're trying to get a page published and it's been rejected again. We've added more text, links and references so hopefully this will allow you to release this for us.

We're a little confused as another Welsh Choir, Morriston Orpheus Choir (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morriston_Orpheus_Choir) has only one external reference, the other 4 go to its own website.

We just want to get this right so thanks for your help.

Orange Sorbet (talk) 15:28, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Orange Sorbet:
Firstly, I have to ask who is the "we" you keep referring to? Wikipedia accounts are strictly for the use of one individual.
Secondly, why do you say this draft has been declined (note: not rejected) "again" — it seems to me it has only been declined once?
Anyway, to answer your question, with the additional sources you've added, this may (or may not) meet the notability criteria. However, if I were to review this myself, I would still decline it for insufficient referencing, as most of the content is unsupported by citations, so there is no way of knowing where the information is coming from.
As for the article on the Morriston Orpheus Choir (the so-called OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument), that has been there for many years, and may predate the current notability guidelines. You are quite right, it doesn't have sufficient sources to establish notability, and I have tagged it accordingly. You are of course welcome to take it to AfD, should you so wish.
Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:09:50, 26 July 2022 review of submission by FSurmi


FSurmi (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FSurmi:
a) You need to ask an actual question, which you haven't.
b) Your draft has been rejected and won't be considered any further.
c) I also note that you haven't responded to the COI queries on your user talk page. Please do so now.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:56:04, 26 July 2022 review of submission by 2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705


2409:4041:8E1E:658E:0:0:2389:B705 (talk) 17:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1100586921"