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
Line 280: Line 280:


:@[[User:SumitVerma18|SumitVerma18]]: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered again. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 07:31, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
:@[[User:SumitVerma18|SumitVerma18]]: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered again. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 07:31, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
::Hi i saw the ask for help link in the rejection and i just clicked it [[User:SumitVerma18|SumitVerma18]] ([[User talk:SumitVerma18|talk]]) 07:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:39, 19 December 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


December 13

08:23:34, 13 December 2022 review of submission by Hairmer

I would like to point out that he meets WP:ANYBIO, which states "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times;" He has received awards from well known industry publications (Ad Age, AdWeek and Fast Company) as well as Distinguished Alumni Award from Ohio State University. The awards are from premier publications in the Ad industry as well as a top University. Note that the award providers also have Wikipedia pages, so they are well known publications.

He is known for developing campaigns featuring company brand icons such as Progressive’s Flo and Progressive's Dr. Rick and the Aflac Duck. Also check Dr. Rick page, he is mentioned in there, as he helped develop this idea.
Also check several articles about him, from various credible publications such as Wall Street Journal, bizjournals 1,bizjournals 2, AdAge, OSU.edu and more.
It would make sense if this article was declined due to its content, but it won't make sense that he is not notable, so please have another look and tell me how it can be improved for another consideration. He meets criteria for notability of WP:ANYBIO as well as WP:BASIC.

Hairmer (talk) 08:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hairmer Awards don't typically contribute to notability unless the award itself merits an article(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). He may be notable, but the sources offered are inappropriate for establishing that, as noted by the reviewer. This is why the draft was rejected, and will not be considered further at this time. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hairmer: None of the sources you link to in your post is secondary, and it doesn't look like any of them is independent, either – I can't be sure about the adage one which is behind a paywall, but the others are based on press releases (the wsj one and the second bizjournals one is the same press release, minimally rewritten), except for the osu.edu one which is an "old alumnus profile" type text based on quotes from Cherney. --bonadea contributions talk 12:36, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ANYBIO says "well-known and significant award or honor"... All 3 awards are well known in the industry.I do not see that it says that it needs to be Nobel or Academy award. If there is such policy, please send the link here. In addition the "Distinguished Alumni Award from Ohio State University" is an honor. Your reasoning that these news are press releases are not valid, because if it was a press release then it would say so, specially when it is a major publication such as WSJ. Major publications often write based on a press releases. i.e if Tesla is launching their latest model, they put out a press release and publications would write about it. As long as the article is unique and not copied from a press release, then it is not a press release. Often times also publications rewrite popular stories from their competing publications, that doesn't mean it was a press release. If you look at this way, any corporate news is a press release. If there is any relevant policy about this, please send the link as I have not seen anything like that.
Also take a look at these fastcompany, thejournalonline, Adweek, .cleveland.com/
Also note that Wikipedia:BASIC States "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" .. currently there are 24 citations used, but there are many more out there. Hairmer (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could I get some additional comments on my question above? tagging @David10244 @Theroadislong @lettherebedarklight @Slywriter Hairmer (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hairmer, Press releases are useless, alumni awards are worth nothing for notability, being mentioned in the NYT as spokesperson doesn't mean anything, and awards that have no independent coverage and are only mentioned by the issuer are not notable. No idea if that leaves any credible sources because I stopped looking once it was clear there were significant issues. Slywriter (talk) 05:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hairmer I don't have anything to add... David10244 (talk) 10:29, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:34, 13 December 2022 review of submission by Hickeygamez

This page was originally declined due to a lack of independent sources. It has since been cited in multiple news articles particularly due to a recently published antisemitism article. The page has been updated to include these sources. It was also simplified to reduce unnecessary info. I am asking for it to be removed from the "reject" pile so I can submit it again in the future. Hickeygamez (talk) 16:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:38:09, 13 December 2022 review of submission by Stts02

My page is for a cult-classic Indie Game created recently, and I'm requesting it for review, fix with the tables allignment and public visibility. Stts02 (talk) 16:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Stts02: the draft won't be reviewed, until you submit it for review.
If you submit it as it currently stands, it will be declined for lack of referencing and any evidence of notability (plus possibly other reasons as well).
'Public visibility' comes after it has been published; that's pretty much the definition of it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and by 'table alignment' you probably mean that you want to do an infobox (which, among other things, aligns to the right). In which case you need Template:Infobox video game (not that it matters in what comes to your draft's chances of being accepted). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the infobox for you :) Hairmer (talk) 17:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:14:39, 13 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Sriram6419


Request on 17:51:01, 13 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Journalcontributor


My entry keeps getting rejected, I have used the 'live chat' for help and they went through a lot/ checked the sources with me, so I'm not sure what else i can do.

Journalcontributor (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Journalcontributor: what else you can do is, you need to rewrite this in a neutral tone and content, as explained in the decline notices. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:59:39, 13 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 46.244.90.165


I created a new article about an interesting restaurant, but it was not approved for publishing claiming that it's more like advertisement and that I didn't use any reliable sources. Even though I used around 10 different news articles/videos (none of them was written or published by the restaurant owners), as they are all published by different news agencies.

So, I am seeking your help in improving the article and getting it published. Thank you

46.244.90.165 (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, taking the question about sources first: among the 10 sources are three copies of the exact same text from 21 March this year ([1], [2], [3]), and two copies of another text from 2015 ([4], [5]). All these are clearly press releases, which means that they are not independent of the restaurant. (Surely you must have noticed that they were identical?)
Secondly, the tone in the draft is promotional. I'm afrait it reads exactly like an advert. --bonadea contributions talk 21:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, this sounds like a run-of-the-mill restaurant. I cringe at thinking that an encyclopedia needs articles on restaurants. That is the purpose of travel guides and search engines and sites like Yelp. We don't want to put those sites out of business by taking over their functions, do we (humor)?
There are millions of restaurants in the world, and they come and go, sometimes quickly. David10244 (talk) 06:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. the first three resources you mentioned are about the same news article that was published on 3 different news agencies. I don't know if you can read Arabic, but it is a feature story and not a press release. As for the 2 other sources, they talk about the same event, but they are published by 2 different news agencies and are not the same, even though they talk about the same event. They are covered differently.

Again, none of the sources are press releases as you claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.244.90.165 (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3 (or 2) identical texts = 1 source. That the same text was published in different places does not turn it into different sources. Again, you cannot possibly have missed the fact that these texts are identical. What purpose does it serve to have multiple copies of the same text? As for "not press releases" – that's incorrect, the first one is clearly labelled Wafa (and one of the places it's published is wafa.ps, which is kind of a giveaway!). I know it can be tricky to spot this kind of thing, but once you know what to look for, it gets easier. --bonadea contributions talk 22:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a big deal or discredits anything is the same story was published on 3 different news websites and all three of them were mentioned. At any rate, we can remove any 2 of them and keep the third.

As for the "Wafa", I am 100% that you are mistaken. It's a feature story and not a press release, and I assume that you know the difference. Maybe because you do not know Arabic, so you don't know the content, but try to translate it on google, to see that it's a feature story and not a press release.

Thanks for you comments though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.244.90.165 (talk) 11:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I translated it, and I agree it's a press release- but for the sake of argument let's say you're right- it's still largely an interview with the founder, which is still not an independent source. 331dot (talk) 11:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2603:8001:2902:64F4:C4D9:5800:5165:74D2 review of submission by CNMall41

22:35:57, 13 December 2022 review of submission by 2603:8001:2902:64F4:C4D9:5800:5165:74D2 2603:8001:2902:64F4:C4D9:5800:5165:74D2 (talk) 22:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]



Request on 22:52:19, 13 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Shobin karimzadeh



Shobin karimzadeh (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @Shobin karimzadeh? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:09:04, 13 December 2022 review of submission by PressgirlV


I have edited the Wiki again, added in a No. 1 Chart position for the track 'Rejoice In Righteousness' which was from Echoes magazine January 1989, I have the scan, but as it's an offline copy I cannot submit the URL. I have also extensively added citations for every single track on the Discography where you can see Bukky Leo played. I have scans of all the offline content and as Paul W said when I asked for advice, he can accept offline citations in good faith as long as they are notable. Bukky Leo is a respected, prolific artist with decades of work, but sadly as is the case with black musicians, they don't get the notable mentions, but as you can see there is a Guardian review in there, again an offline citation as it was published before The Guardian went online, there are lots of citations. Some very notable ones! Sorry for the errors in the code here and there, I don't know how to tidy that up, I hope you can help on that? Please review this submission. Less prolfic artists with fewer citations can make it and get their Wiki pages published, I know several examples of this, please do not make an old man jump through more hoops to get verified! I can't think of anyone more deserving.

PressgirlV (talk) 23:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PressgirlV We don't have "wiki pages", we have articles. This is an important distinction. Please read other stuff exists. Other inappropriate articles existing does not mean that more should be added. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to identify other inappropriate articles you see so we can act on them. As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. Please see the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 23:41, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added another Guardian article as citation, this is notable surely? There are now 2 Guardian citations and 1 Telegraph citation, as well as an Echoes Mag No. 1 chart and various other citations from Southbank Centre, Ronnie Scotts, Resident Advisor, London Jazz News, Mr Bongo, Rhythm Passport and more.

Please tell me which of these articles are not notable enough?

PressgirlV (talk) 22:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PressgirlV For additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating new sections. It's not the notability of the sources that is the issue- it is the notability of the person you are writing about. From what I can see, The Guardian piece doesn't even mention this person, never mind that it isn't significant coverage of him.
I notice that your name is "PressgirlV"; do you have an association with this musician? 331dot (talk) 23:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 14

11:56:20, 14 December 2022 review of submission by Geo Edu

Dear Team of Wikipedia, We handed in an entry on “Geography Education” and our latest version was declined because it “is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia”. For us it is difficult to understand because the entry fits to the five pillars of Wikipedia. We wrote the article for the purpose that people, who do not know anything about “Geography Education” can inform themselves with the help of the Wikipedia article. We think “Geography Education” can best be described/defined by answering the fundamental questions: What is geography education? Why is geography education important? How do we learn and teach geography? and consider “Research in Geography education”.Our Geography Education article has been written with help of more than 10 professors in geography education from countries all over the world. The process of writing started in september 2021 under the auspices of the IGU-CGE and a draft version has been discussed at our 2022 IGU conference in Paris.

We are happy to change, amend and adjust the article, however we do not know how to proceed. Is it possible to E-Mail or zoom with somebody or receive a more precise feedback?

Geo Edu (talk) 11:56, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geo Edu Who is "we"? Your account should only be operated by a single person. Do you represent a group? It appears that you have a conflict of interest in this topic area.
As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. You did not write an encyclopedia article that neutrally summarizes the topic, you wrote a piece to sell it and tout its benefits. There are places to do that, this isn't one of them. Please read the comments left by reviewers, and discuss further concerns here, for openness and transparency. If you want more of a chat, please see WP:IRC. 331dot (talk) 12:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Wikipdia articles never ask questions like "What is geography education?" "Why is geography education important?" and "How do we learn and teach geography?" Theroadislong (talk) 12:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If that draft is a copyvio, shouldn't it be deleted? David10244 (talk) 05:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Geo Edu: this is contrary to Wikipedia's purpose, in that we don't include essays, advocacy, how-to manuals, etc.; just straight-up encyclopaedia articles. And while a suitable article conceivably could be written on the subject of geography education, it would need to be approached differently. For that, I would like to refer you to WP:YFA and various essays found eg. at WP:NUTART. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

08:04:28, 15 December 2022 review of draft by Dheeran vamsam


Dheeran vamsam (talk) 08:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dheeran vamsam: you don't ask a question, but I have rejected your draft and requested that it be deleted. This is not a suitable title or approach for an article, to say nothing of the fact that it was pretty incoherent and completely unreferenced.
We welcome your contributions, but I would suggest that you start by editing some existing articles first, until you become familiar with the way articles are put together and how the site works generally. When you feel ready to create your first article, please see WP:YFA and use the article wizard. In the meantime, you can ask for help at the TEAHOUSE. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:38:58, 15 December 2022 review of draft by Wolfgang Radecke

Error: Invalid time. I try but is results in an error {displaystyle…

Wolfgang Radecke (talk) 09:38, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wolfgang Radecke, I don't quite understand your question but if this is a general editing question, I recommend the Teahouse or maybe WikiProject Math. S0091 (talk) 20:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wolfgang Radecke This draft is a math paper, which is "original research". Wikipedia does not allow WP:OR. David10244 (talk) 07:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:36:48, 15 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Angelagh


I would like to get specific feedback on how to improve this article instead of the same generic responses. What exactly needs to be changed -- highlight specific wording or phrases that don't meet the standards. I'm feeling stuck as I've made significant changes in the last few edits but received the exact same rejection message from the original to the vastly modified versions.

Thanks for your help!

Angelagh (talk) 13:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Angelagh: this draft has so many issues, the POV being just one of them, that to provide a comprehensive listing would be quite an undertaking; probably easier if I were to rewrite this myself (which I obviously won't). I also can't help noting that you've been paid to write this, so... isn't the onus on you, rather, to figure out how to write it in a way that is acceptable? Or am I being unreasonable? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My specific feedback would be to spend a few months editing Wikipedia to get a feel for how things work, you are being paid to edit and we are all volunteers here, why should we help you? Your draft will need a complete re-write, IMDb is never a reliable source and her Fan club website clearly isn't independent. Theroadislong (talk) 14:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:50, 15 December 2022 review of submission by Johnnyhelpingyou


This profile is not a joke. Zachary Debacco has made significant contributions to the Sarasota County Area. He encourage and brought the IB program to Venice High. Without him, the school and the program would probably be wildly different. He just means so much to us students, the parents, and the community. He's been with the school for over 20 years, and we are just trying to show him some love. Johnnyhelpingyou (talk) 19:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Johnnyhelpingyou Wikipedia is not a place to recognize or honor someone, but a place to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. You could try alternative forums with less stringent requirements. 331dot (talk) 21:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnnyhelpingyou Wikipedia doesn't publish profiles. We want encyclopedia articles. As 331dot mentioned, you'll need independent, published references on which to base an article. David10244 (talk) 07:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:56:29, 15 December 2022 review of draft by MasterMatt12


MasterMatt12 (talk) 20:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if adding info on Seterra memberships and their benefits would be considered advertising? Thanks, Matthew. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasterMatt12 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@mastermatt12: if you could write it in a neutral point of view, no, it would not be advertising. lettherebedarklight晚安 08:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:09:56, 15 December 2022 review of draft by ElisabethDiAngelo


I replaced all sources. Is it fine now?

ElisabethDiAngelo (talk) 21:09, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@elisabethdiangelo: i would say no.
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.citizensoldierband.com/about No this source is the band's website. Yes i would hope that the band is reliable about the band, Yes and that they would cover themselves significantly. ✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrwvdRxFt-E&t=1731s No interviews with the subject are not independent of the subject. No this is someone's youtube channel. Yes yeah, 50 minutes of this. ✘ No
https://indiebandguru.com/citizen-soldier/ No again, interviews with the subject are not independent of the subject. ? i am uncertain, and it's a moot point anyway. Yes ✘ No
https://open.spotify.com/artist/7fM0h2CG7zKqKc0jEa1b4R No this is just the spotify link for the band No No ✘ No
https://centerstagemag.com/article/3340/Citizen-Soldier--Down-the-Rabbit-Hole No yet again, interviews with the subject are not independent of the subject. ? uncertain but moot Yes ✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

lettherebedarklight晚安 08:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

02:43:34, 16 December 2022 review of submission by Kernel123


Kernel123 (talk) 02:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC) 02:43:34, 16 December 2022 review of submission by Kernel123[reply]

Help Me, Please! Draft: 10,001

@kernel123: your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. lettherebedarklight晚安 09:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:54:23, 16 December 2022 review of draft by 2601:380:8480:65C0:38C9:A596:3350:898B

Hello! I am a proud firefighter and with other great cities having pages for their fire services, I am trying to build one for Little Rock. Now, the first submit was denied, and I dont want the page to get deleted, so please tell me exactly what needs to happen to get this page submitted and approved :)

2601:380:8480:65C0:38C9:A596:3350:898B (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what needs to happen is that you need to gather at least two or three independent, reliable sources that covers the subject significantly. your sources, on the other hand...
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.littlerock.gov/city-administration/city-departments/fire-department/ No just the fire department's website. Yes Yes ✘ No
https://www.littlerock.gov/city-administration/city-departments/fire-department/operations/ No still the fire department's website. Yes Yes ✘ No
https://sitefinity.uniontrack.com/local0034 No still the fire department's website. Yes Yes ✘ No
https://www.littlerock.gov/media/5203/lrfd-2017-annual-report-2.pdf No still the fire department's website. Yes Yes ✘ No
https://metroems.org/ ? this is a homepage, did you mean to link to a subpage of the website? ? ? ? Unknown
https://gisservices-dallasgis.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/DallasGIS::dfr-fire-districts/explore ? this appears to be a map of fire districts?? ? ? ? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
as an aside, help:referencing for beginners has advice on how to reference your sources properly. "https://www.littlerock.gov/city-administration/city-departments/fire-department/ ->https://www.littlerock.gov/city-administration/city-departments/fire-department/operations/ ->https://sitefinity.uniontrack.com/local0034 ->https://www.littlerock.gov/media/5203/lrfd-2017-annual-report-2.pdf ->https://metroems.org/" is not proper referencing, to say the least. lettherebedarklight晚安 09:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:43:02, 16 December 2022 review of submission by Realwebteam

This page is translation of approved russian version Novakid Novakid. Page prepared according all rules with advice (on sednbox) of experiansed wiki users. Russian sources are not applicable so i find english one. In russian media they have high notability. Novakid is notable example of business model.

Will be appritiate for advice. RWTM 07:43, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@realwebteam: your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. the english wikipedia has much higher standards for inclusion than the russian wikipedia. lettherebedarklight晚安 09:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:58:23, 16 December 2022 review of submission by LordVoldemort728

I want to know that why this draft was declined. This draft is about a notable person because he served as Member of Lok Sabha, Lower House of Indian Parliament so this draft meets WP:NPOL.

​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 07:58, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@LordVoldemort728: do not ask your question at more than one venue. your question has been answered at wikipedia:teahouse#Why my draft declined?. lettherebedarklight晚安 09:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:25:45, 16 December 2022 review of submission by 8090updesh


8090updesh (talk) 14:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@8090updesh: after four declines, and a rejection, of this self-evidently unviable (and likely autobio) draft, I'm curious as to what your question might be? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:38:55, 16 December 2022 review of submission by 2001:579:9324:970:B493:B080:B5E2:85A2


Removed all low-quality citations and added high-quality citations for his Book (Amazon, Google Books, & Barns and Nobles)

2001:579:9324:970:B493:B080:B5E2:85A2 (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon and IMDb are NOT reliable independent sources. Draft was rejected it will not be considered further. 19:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

22:35:13, 16 December 2022 review of submission by RatMoomin


RatMoomin (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, your draft Draft:Matmedlassen was declined because it is written in Danish, this is the English Wikipedia and articles need to be written in English. Theroadislong (talk) 22:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 17

02:22:26, 17 December 2022 review of draft by Rahulnag07


The request has been declined twice. Can someone please help on pointing out the gaps? I am unable to find any. I am not sure what exactly looks promotional. Hope to find some guidance here

@Rahulnag07: most of the content has no encyclopaedic value, eg. the 'Revenue' and 'Funding' sections are of no interest to us. And the whole draft has a very promotional feel to it, it's all about this many listeners and that many hours and partnerships here and licensing there. I get the feeling it's trying to sell me something.
The sources cited are also insufficient for establishing notability per WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT, consisting entirely of routine business reporting, churnalism, and in many cases covering individual programmes rather than the business as a whole.
And please don't ask the same question everywhere; either here or (not and) at the Teahouse. Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I've posted a COI query on your talk page; please read and action as relevant. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:23:42, 17 December 2022 review of draft by Krystal LeChuck


Last time the article was declined for the following reason: 

Comment: It appears that most if not all of the referenced sources are not reliable, press releases, primary, or only contain trivial mentions of the subject. This is a clear case of notability bombing and the prose is both promotional and not neutral. TipsyElephant (talk) 23:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The article is absolutely neutral, it is not promotional in any sense. If you believe it is, please point out the promotional language because I am failing to see it.

The references come from sources such as the University of Pennsylvania, United Nations, Interpol UNICRI, Forbes, American Banker Conferences, the World Bank, and there are many references to the subjects own website to show actual video or audio assets of mentioned interviews, and participations to events as a speaker.

Are those not reliable sources?

Krystal LeChuck (talk) 08:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Krystal LeChuck It's not necessarily the sources themselves, but their content. You have done a nice job of describing Mr. Faggella's background and what he has done- the trouble is, that's not what we are looking for. Any article about Mr. Faggella must primarily summarize independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him, showing how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely telling us what the subject has done, and goes into detail about their significance or influence as the source sees it.
The part about the podcast is more about the podcast itself than Mr. Faggella. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Krystal LeChuck: so what exactly is your question — whether the sources cited are considered reliable? Yes, some of them are; others (Soundcloud, YouTube, Forbes) are not. But the draft wasn't declined for lack of reliable source, but rather for lack of apparently notability. The sources are mostly primary, including many that he has written or said himself. We need to see what independent and reliable secondary sources have said about him, and moreover we need to see significant coverage, not just passing mentions. (Meanwhile, we don't need to see 11 sources confirming that he has given some speeches, that's just WP:REFBOMBING.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


December 19

01:43:15, 19 December 2022 review of submission by Jaxon Montan

I felt Bondea did not look at my sources or my comments towards him.

Jaxon Montan (talk) 01:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jaxon Montan, Tiktok is not a source.Slywriter (talk) 01:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:29:16, 19 December 2022 review of submission by Btspurplegalaxy

The subject meets WP:BAND as they've charted on a country's national music chart. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 02:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:BAND it should qualify due to charting tracks. The reviewers should check these things before declining the page. (I am not a reviewer, just another editor like you.) Hairmer (talk) 05:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to imply that reviewers routinely don't "check these things", which is quite an accusation. Any evidence for that? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Btspurplegalaxy, message the reviewer who rejected on their talk page and ask for reconsideration based on the new source. I'd note that the article did not have the source when it was rejected and did not meet NBAND until 16 hours ago when another editor added the source. Until then it was too forward looking. Congrats to them on an excellent debut. Slywriter (talk) 06:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:14:00, 19 December 2022 review of submission by SumitVerma18


SumitVerma18 (talk) 07:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SumitVerma18: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered again. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:31, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi i saw the ask for help link in the rejection and i just clicked it SumitVerma18 (talk) 07:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1128265780"