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 397: Line 397:
:Most of this draft is unreferenced – where did the information come from? Did you read it somewhere? If so, cite those sources. Or do you have some 'insider' information from unpublished sources that you've based the draft on? -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 06:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
:Most of this draft is unreferenced – where did the information come from? Did you read it somewhere? If so, cite those sources. Or do you have some 'insider' information from unpublished sources that you've based the draft on? -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 06:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you for your reply! Basically all the info I have written can be found from those references I have attached... For example, the features part, it can be found from the description of the app stores; and the lines of the cities can also be found from the links I have put on. [[User:Writer01wiki|Writer01wiki]] ([[User talk:Writer01wiki|talk]]) 07:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you for your reply! Basically all the info I have written can be found from those references I have attached... For example, the features part, it can be found from the description of the app stores; and the lines of the cities can also be found from the links I have put on. [[User:Writer01wiki|Writer01wiki]] ([[User talk:Writer01wiki|talk]]) 07:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

== 15:04:28, 17 March 2023 review of draft by UrFathermaybeblind ==
{{Lafc|username=UrFathermaybeblind|ts=15:04:28, 17 March 2023|draft=Draft:JJ_Savani}}
Hello! This is JJ Savani's Team and we are trying get his page published on wikipedia and we dont know why you declined it. It was his actual biography recorded by him.

[[User:UrFathermaybeblind|UrFathermaybeblind]] ([[User talk:UrFathermaybeblind|talk]]) 15:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:04, 17 March 2023

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

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


March 11

Why was my article declined

 Courtesy link: Draft:Good Party

My article was declined and i dont know why UrFathermaybeblind (talk) 04:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UrFathermaybeblind: it was declined for the reasons stated in the decline notice, specifically inside the two grey boxes within the large pink box; to wit, lack of evidence of notability, and promotional nature of the draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cubic Castles

I'm posting this message in regards to the decline of my draft on the 2014 indie game Cubic Castles. Draft:Cubic Castles The decline message said I did not use reliable sources even though the sources I was using was from the official secondary wiki for the game. I apologize if I got anything wrong and if you can direct me on the requirements to get it published. Thanks! - Slug9k — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slug9k (talk • contribs) 10:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Slug9k We don't need the whole url when you link to another Wikipedia draft or article, simply place the title of the target page in double brackets like this [[Joe Biden]] displays as Joe Biden. I've fixed this for you here.
Wiki type sources are not considered reliable sources as they are user-editable(just as Wikipedia is not a reliable source). An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the game. For games, that is typically independent reviews/assessments of the game. If you have no independent sources, the game would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if this is wrong, but the wiki is made by the Cosmic Cow, (the developers of the game) and they have made it to where editing cannot be accessed by others. I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear before. Slug9k (talk) 10:55, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In that case then it is a primary source and still not does not count towards the inclusion criteria. We need to see others have taken the time right about the subject on their own accord and had it published by a reliable source. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 22:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:37:06, 11 March 2023 review of submission by Swiss Rhone Ranger

Thanks for reaching out. I'm not an editor nor do I wish to become one. We are wine growers in the northern Rhone in Switzerland. We are the Swiss Rhone Rangers. It's a not for profit organisation based in Switzerland founded 2 years ago. There are no other references to the Swiss Rhone Rangers as it's a new association. There are however Rhone Rangers ie. wine makers producing Rhone type wines in the US (California) in Austrialia and South Africa. In other words Swiss Rhone Rangers are simply Swiss wine growers growing Rhone wine. I find no references to this and I've searched wikipedia and found no references to the Swiss Rhone Rangers. We are Swiss. We are Rhone based and are Rangers. Any and all help appreciated. MTIA Swiss Rhone Ranger (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't write articles about yourself. I think you would have more success in getting listed at https://www.winetourism.com/wineries-in-rhone-wine-region/ Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dolores Cannon

Today I translated the Dutch article about Dolores Cannon to English. Soon a draft was made of it. I translated the text and sources literally, so I wonder why it was not approved? In my opinion, it is just a decent article. S. Perquin (talk) (discover the power of thankfulness!) – 17:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @S. Perquin each Wikipedia language is its own project with its own policies and guidelines. Generally, the English Wikipedia is more strict as far as notability guidelines. Please read through the linked documentation in the decline message which outlines the notability criteria. If you have additional questions, you can ask here or at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 22:59, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:10:37, 11 March 2023 review of submission by Andrewsmith12345


Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewsmith12345 you are wasting your time more importantly the time of Wikipedia's volunteers . See also the deletion log. S0091 (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My time is just as important how can you work out that volunteers time is more important than mine Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 22:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because you are likely a sock, see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Drug Addicts Anonymous so I will be filing an investigation. Best you just go away and save everyone time. S0091 (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File your investigation and get a kick out of being a keyboard warrior. Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No help whatsoever on here about as much use as a chocolate teapot Andrewsmith12345 (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 12

03:29:45, 12 March 2023 review of submission by Treepak411


Treepak411 (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a brief article about my artistry and my own work and it was denied but I am an emerging talent who is trying very hard to get himself out there — I am on Spotify as a verified artist and on Soundcloud as well with a family is semi-famous. Please reconsider this article —I would so genuinely appreciate it.

@Treepak411: notability cannot be inherited from your family. I don't see how you meet the notability guide for musicians either. Also, please be aware of Wikipedia's autobiography policy. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 03:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok…well can you at least write one about my family '' like Steven Spolansky or Jodi Smith (née Spolansky) —I really need reach but I could really appreciate this potential opportunity Treepak411 (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Treepak411 that is counterintuitive to the purpose of Wikipedia, this is an encyclopedia on topics which are already considered notable by our standards. It is not meant to be an avenue of promotion or extending anyone's "reach" . Your time would be better spent elsewhere if this is your goal. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I just please have an article? Treepak411 (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Treepak411 As already described, Wikipedia is emphatically not for articles about "emerging talent". To merit an article on Wikipedia, a "talent" must have already arrived. The person must also be notable, as described in the clickable links above. Has anyone written in-depth articles about you in any newspapers or magazines? If there are no sources like this, there cannot be an article here, and you should use other sites for promotion. Also please read TOOSOON. Sorry. David10244 (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:02, 12 March 2023 review of submission by EstezaRemmy


Hi everyone on this help page, My first page on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Iconic_Kent_Kris was declined for passing as a Wikipedia Article, and I am stuck on where I did not satisfy the requirements.

If any one here can be of help and assistance to have the page approved, I will be grateful.

Thanks in advance!

EstezaRemmy (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EstezaRemmy: the draft was declined for lack of notability; the sources cited are interviews and publicity pieces, whereas we need to see what independent and reliable sources have said about him, on their own initiative.
There is also unreferenced content in the draft, eg. the entire 'Career' section hasn't a single citation. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @DoubleGrazing for the helpful feedback, so probably as it stands i will have to find more reliable sources before resubmitting for further review, right? EstezaRemmy (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@EstezaRemmy: that's correct – you need to find more and better sources to establish notability (see WP:GNG for advice); and on a related but separate point, you need to support the contents better, using more citations. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:58:43, 12 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by DanielChutzpah


I'm requesting a review since I don't understand what the problem is with the draft article I submitted. The article respects Wikipedia's standards and I have been taking into account all of the reviews I received from previous reviewers. I, again, modified the draft article today to respect as much as possible the guidelines and policy of Wikiepdia and would appreciate that the article be published (or that at least I know why it's not...). Thank you in advance. I am by the way associated with the subject of the article, as stated explicitely.


DanielChutzpah (talk) 09:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DanielChutzpah: this draft has been rejected, which means it won't be considered further. If you wish to challenge that, you need to do so directly with the reviewer who rejected it, and you need to have substantive grounds for doing so.
I should probably add that if I were reviewing this now, I would be declining it for insufficient referencing, as quite a lot of the content is either unreferenced or referenced using inadequate sources. There are also many other issues with this. Which is to say, the draft would need quite a lot of work to bring it up to required standards, so don't expect it to be simply waved trough as-is. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DoubleGrazing and thanks for your reply and explanation.
Do you mind expanding a little on the referencing? Which parts are not referenced adequately according to you? Because as it is, everything looks very solid to me.
Please feel free to answer me in private if this forum is not appropriate.
Thank you in advance.
?
? 2A0D:6FC2:5FB2:B400:C9A3:A3A1:1F33:81A2 (talk) 10:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to get too much into it, as this has been rejected and as such is not viable content, but:
  • Sources like Amazon, Baidu, PRNewsWire and YouTube are generally not considered reliable.
  • Forbes' editorial content is usually reliable, but their contributors are often not independent, and their writings are not subject to editorial oversight; see WP:FORBESCON.
  • Anything written by Arieli herself needs to be corroborated by an independent source. For example, the statement that she served as a Lieutenant in Unit 8200 is referenced only by an article she wrote.
  • Per WP:BLP, all material statements, anything potentially contentious, and private personal details such as DOB, educational achievements and family members all need to be backed up by clearly citing reliable published sources.
My hunch is, you've written what your client or employer wanted you to write, and then cited some sources to support some of it. What you should do instead is summarise what reliable published sources have said about her, no more, no less, citing the sources as you go. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. DanielChutzpah (talk) 12:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:36:51, 12 March 2023 review of submission by 2600:4040:937B:1B00:8D0F:1F63:EB74:6FE4


2600:4040:937B:1B00:8D0F:1F63:EB74:6FE4 (talk) 11:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, this draft has been rejected.
Secondly, this is just a copy of an existing article, as pointed out in the review comments, as well as on this page two days ago.
And thirdly, you don't ask a question. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:19:22, 12 March 2023 review of draft by WriterGP


Query about which citation form to use.

I am quoting from an article accessed via the British Newspaper Archive. Is this the correct way of citing?

[1]

Another citation for an article, accessed the same way, refers to an article with no title. How should I cite this?

Many thanks.

References

  1. ^ Christmas, Linda (1969-03-07). "It's all a dream to Irene Evans..." Middlesex County Times. Retrieved 2023-03-08.

WriterGP (talk) 12:19, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:18:55, 12 March 2023 review of draft by Antivoid


I tried to submit an earlier version of this draft, but it was rejected due to lacking sources. The original article had no sources so I had to look for some. I found two of them, but I'm not sure if I'll need to add more sources.

Antivoid (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Antivoid: the draft has only two sources, which isn't really enough to establish notability per WP:GNG. Moreover, it has only three citations, leaving the vast majority of the content unsupported, begging the obvious question – where is all this information coming from? So yes, you will need to add more sources, and cite them throughout the text, so that it is clear which source supports what content. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So will I be able to have a minor page if I add kore resources (about two) Treepak411 (talk) 18:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Treepak411 Is all of the text in the draft backed by just the two sources you listed? If so, that's likely not broad enough coverage to prove notability of the topic.
On the other hand, if the text in the draft comes from different places, then you are not understanding what DoubleGrazing is explaining. Every fact or assertion in the draft needs a reference. For example, the first two sentences in the section "Background" need one reference per sentence, or, if the statements in both sentences are found in the same publication, then one reference might cover both sentences. If everything comes from your two sources, you should still add a reference for each fact, preferably with page numbers that show where in the source the information came from. See referencing for details.
The sentences in the other two sections also need references, even if they are from the (only two) sources. David10244 (talk) 10:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:39:58, 12 March 2023 review of submission by PIRINATION

Hello! My article was denied and I'm curious as to why. Thanks!

PIRINATION (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PIRINATION Welcome to the Teahouse. The reasons why are given in the big gray box in the draft, after the words "Submission declined". In that explanation, the words or phrases in blue (or possibly purple) are clickable links. Clicking those links, and reading all of the information given, should answer your question.
Writing a new article is hard until you are familiar with all of the rules and guidelines. I'll give a partial answer to your question: several sections in your draft have no citations. For example, where did the information in the "Early life" section come from? Where did you learn all of that? The assertions in that section (and throughout the draft) must be backed with references showing the sources of the info. David10244 (talk) 08:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


March 14

Request on 01:28:27, 14 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by UrFathermaybeblind


I want to know what was the reason for the decline and how could i get it published


UrFathermaybeblind (talk) 01:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Can you please tell me how can i get this published all the things are provided the references the website what is the problem then can you advise me to get it published


UrFathermaybeblind (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UrFathermaybeblind: the reason for the declines has been provided by the reviewers, namely that the draft is virtually unreferenced with no evidence of notability, as well as being promotional in nature. In any case, this has been rejected and won't be considered further at this stage. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:22:36, 14 March 2023 review of submission by Z812483032


I have rewritten the content that may have caused controversy, so I have resubmitted it for review and inspection. I would greatly appreciate it if you could guide me on how to improve the content I submit. Thank you.

Z812483032 (talk) 05:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Z812483032: this draft has been rejected and won't therefore be considered further; not because it "caused controversy", but because it is not written as an encyclopaedia article (see WP:NOT). It is also entirely unreferenced, suggesting that it may be original research or synthesis. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:52:02, 14 March 2023 review of draft by Ben wid


Hi, I created a draft (Draft: Christoph Ingenhoven). One reaction to that was negative, which I can't understand. Will my contribution be checked again? I would be happy to explain why I consider the article to be suitable and important information for the English Wikipedia.

Ben wid (talk) 07:52, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ben wid: it's not clear whether you already resubmitted the draft or something just went wrong with the AfC tags, but either way it is back in the pending pool, so I would suggest you simply wait for the re-review. (BTW, please don't edit the AfC tags, they form a record of the draft's progress through the system. Thanks.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ino. it seems to be working now Ben wid (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:51:39, 14 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Georgealexandar



George alexandar A (talk) 12:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgealexandar: you don't ask a question, but your sandbox draft was rejected and deleted. Please note that this is an encyclopaedia, not LinkedIn or classified ads. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:33:45, 14 March 2023 review of submission by Paulboy


Hello! I am working on creating a page for Camila Coelho, one of the biggest creators and entrepreneurs from the original 2009 blogger era that is a top creator to this date (was on Forbes 2022 creator list, CEO of two businesses), but I am running into some trouble despite having about 30 credible sources. Any help would be appreciated. She has been on GMA, CBS This Morning, interviews with Vogue U.S., Elle U.S., InStyle U.S., Harper's Bazaar U.S., People Magazine U.S., Business Insider U.S., Women's Wear Daily (WWD), Business of Fashion, and many more, including far spanning International titles. WWD has ranked Camila as the talent who brings the most media value to New York and Paris Fashion Week multiple times in the last 2 years. I have found many, many smaller creators in the same space who have lenghty pages, while Camila has been a prominent creator for 13 years. Please note there is only one Forbes contributor interview, the Forbes lists are from the editorial board, including financial audits, and are completely separate from contributors.

Paulboy (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paulboy: you've improved the draft, and resubmitted it; now you need to wait for its next review. Or do you have a question you wish to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:58:20, 14 March 2023 review of draft by WikiNikki0127


Hello. I submitted an article for review on 3/10. I've been working to get this article published for a while now. I believe I had finally removed all of the "nonreliable" sources and included all of the reliable sources possible. I was waiting to receive the email that it was declined or approved, but I never got one. I logged back in today to see the status and it shows that I never submitted it on 3/10 on the main draft page. I have to look at the View History page to see that. My View History page has strange notes that I do not understand...any help would be appreciated.

curprev 06:20, 14 March 2023‎ 174.212.224.64 talk‎ 6,733 bytes −448‎ →‎Notable Alumni: not notable. See WP:ALUMNI and WP:WTAF undo 12 March 2023 curprev 13:52, 12 March 2023‎ 174.212.224.64 talk‎ 7,181 bytes +335‎ This draft has been rejected. Do not resubmit. undo Tag: Undo 10 March 2023 curprev 16:19, 10 March 2023‎ WikiNikki0127 talk contribs‎ 6,846 bytes +63‎ Submitting using AfC-submit-wizard undo Tag: Reverted curprev 16:18, 10 March 2023‎ WikiNikki0127 talk contribs‎ m 6,783 bytes −398‎ removed nonreliable sources. undo Tags: Reverted

WikiNikki0127 (talk) 22:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiNikki0127: yes, an IP editor had interfered with the AfC templates (possible vandalism), but it was later reverted, and the draft is back in the pending pool awaiting review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Sheesh. Wikipedia is weird haha. Is that something I should be concerned about? Why would an IP editor interfere with the it? Did they mess with my template or just the AfC template in general? These are mostly rhetorical questions... I read and write multiple coding languages, but wiki is a whole new world to me. Thanks for your help! WikiNikki0127 (talk) 17:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:36:13, 14 March 2023 review of submission by Ttwkr


Dear reviews, I think there's a huge mistake here. He's a notable person, probably there's a need for more sources. Let me know

Thank you Ttwkr (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ttwkr: what is your question? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ttwkr Unfortunately, your draft has been rejected because the reviewer feels that the subject is not sufficiently notable. In fact, it was rejected in September 2022. I am not a reviewer, but my impressions are: The first cite is to Twitter, which is not reliable since there is no fact-checking. The second source talks about Covid, but as far as I can see, it doesn't have in-depth discussion of the subject. Although references in other languages are acceptable, I personally can't evaluate them. Rejection means that the draft won't be considered further. If new sources have appeared, you can provide them, and ask the reviewer (I had the wrong user here, see below) if he or she will take another look. David10244 (talk) 07:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging the correct reviewer @Tymon.r. David10244 (talk) 07:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 15

Request on 01:47:15, 15 March 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by UrFathermaybeblind


i am not resumiting the article it is automatically getting resubmited and i dont know why


UrFathermaybeblind (talk) 01:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UrFathermaybeblind: yes you are, by messing with the AfC templates; please stop. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:40:07, 15 March 2023 review of submission by SalahEldin1

Hi, my draft has been in pending state for over 4 months. Please can you help. (SalahEldin1 (talk) 04:40, 15 March 2023 (UTC)) SalahEldin1 (talk) 04:40, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SalahEldin1: it was submitted 2½ months, not "over 4 months", ago. And drafts are not reviewed in any order. So you should just wait until a reviewer gets around to it. Although I must say you're not helping things with the REFBOMBING; eg. the statement Azizi Developments is a Dubai-based property developer surely doesn't need eight sources to support it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:53, 15 March 2023 review of submission by Alexandrabkk


Hello, My topic has been rejected because not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I think is wrong, it's a young political of the opposition who need space, including on Wikipedia. Most of articles he has are in thai langage, so I focused on english langage coverages. Still have a look on his name he does have press coverage. How can I do to improve my article to make is sufficiently notable? The election are coming soon and a wikipedia page is a big help inside the country but also outstide. Many thanks.

Alexandrabkk (talk) 09:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Alexandrabkk: Wikipedia is not here to provide "space" or otherwise help promote anyone or anything. Either this person is notable based on existing published sources, or they're not. And if they're not, no amount of editing can make them so.
As for sources, these don't need to be in English, Thai sources are perfectly acceptable, as long as they otherwise meet the WP:GNG standard (= independent and reliable secondary published sources).
In any case, as this draft has been rejected, it won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:04, 15 March 2023 review of draft by BHKendler161148


I, as editor, have been asked to find at least three further sources. I suggest that as Giles Marsh played one Top-Flight Match and played for a club that went bankrupt 130 years ago there are NO other sources other than those I have used. I respectfully request Giles Marsh is reinstated despite its limitations. Also it is suggested that it does not link to other articles. With due deference to Wikipedia I suggest that is not correct as I have linked the article to Accrington FC the team he played against that he was a Goalkeeper and to Thorneyholme Road, the home ground of Accrington are four examples.

BHKendler161148 (talk) 18:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BHKendler161148 this draft has not been submitted for review. It appears this was sent to draft by an WP:NPP reviewer so I suggest addressing any questions or concerns with that editor directly, who left a detailed note on your talk page. However, generally if there are no additional sources that indicates an article is not warranted. S0091 (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:37:35, 15 March 2023 review of draft by Rohin vaidya


Submission was denied due to inadequate sources and because the organization did not have an influence outside of the university. However, many other student sections have been given Wikipedia pages despite not having an influence outside of the university or having as many sources on their page (see Oakland Zoo, The Show (SDSU Student Section), etc.). What can we change so that we get our submission accepted?

Rohin vaidya (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rohin vaidya: what you can and should change is cite sources that meet the WP:GNG standard, namely: independent and reliable secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject. You currently cite no such source. (As for "many other student sections" etc., this is neither here nor there; please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:22:06, 15 March 2023 review of draft by Kj2023


I want to change the name of this page to Christian Cash Harrison in order to disambiguate from another article talking about someone else named Christian Harrison

Kj2023 (talk) 22:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kj2023: if and when the draft is accepted, the name will be disambiguated in an appropriate manner. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:08, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good! Thanks Kj2023 (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:22:11, 15 March 2023 review of draft by TexasEditor1


When my draft was declined, I received the following comments: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics).

Comment: Need in-depth coverage about him. Also, interviews are not independent so cannot be used to establish notability. S0091 (talk) 16:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand this, as I referenced several articles from mainstream publications that showed significant coverage of the subject, in interviews and independently, including the Cleveland Plain Dealer and it's Clevelanddotcom website, and books from reputable publishers. I also used other reputable publications such as a major university's alumni magazine. I'm quite confused about the idea that interviews don't constitute worthy coverage; I've built my entire journalism career writing stories about people based on interviews and research, many of which are cited on Wiki pages. And some of the interviews I used are part of bigger feature stories that include valid reviews, quotes from other people, etc. If significant coverage of living people cannot include interviews, what about the reviews and other pieces I included? I took care to cite — and verify — very reputable and reliable sources, not blogs or fly-by-night publications. I've also taken pains to archive everything. I understand mentions "in passing" aren't considered major coverage, but I included those to provide context and verification not only of information, but of relevance as a subject. I'm having a hard time comprehending how this person, who has cowritten major hits for superstars, had a foundational role in a major motion picture (as acknowledged by the director in linked references) and had a role in inspiring one of Bruce Springsteen's biggest hits — and is cited on many other Wikipedia pages — isn't worthy of a Wikipedia page. What can I do to turn this into a page that will be accepted? TexasEditor1 (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TexasEditor1: there may well be solid sources cited, but they can be missed among the 70+ references. Perhaps you could highlight the three strongest ones in terms of meeting the WP:GNG standard (= independent and reliable secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject). Alternatively, please explain how the subject meets the WP:MUSICBIO, WP:COMPOSER or other relevant notability guideline, and what evidence supports this. You can do so eg. on the draft talk page, so that once you resubmit the reviewer will have easy access to this. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 16

Administrators only? — 04:02:01, 16 March 2023 review of submission by Ajshul

When I tried to create the page, it wouldn't let me, informing me that only an administrator could create it. Thus, I created a draft; should I submit it through AfC, or through a different process (directly to administrators...?)?

Thanks! Ajshul<talk> 04:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ajshul: that's correct, that article has been repeatedly created and deleted, and consequently the name has been protected. You should submit it to AfC, which you have already done, so all you now need to do is wait for it to be reviewed. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks for clarifying! Ajshul<talk> 12:42, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:58:45, 16 March 2023 review of submission by ShartingSophia

lookie here, im not sure how to ask a question but I hope im doing it right the steps confused me. I just recived the sad information that my article was declined for publishing because it was

" an attempt at humor." now.

LOOKIE HERE BUD. It was

' 'much'*' more than an attempt. In fact, it was the funniest piece of literature that has ever graced gods green earth. It is okay to decline my witting for being not serious and not factual but to insult my incredible work is insanity.

Thank you so much for

the fast response and I look foreard to (hopefully) another fast response[to my comment.

ShartingSophia (talk) 05:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? --bonadea contributions talk 06:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea, @331dot I'm not sure if this is appropriate, but this user's unblock request, which is spelled out on their Talk page User_talk:ShartingSophia, is vulgar and unnecessary. I'm not a shrinking violet, but... ugh. Could that be redacted? David10244 (talk) 12:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Declination of my article

My article was move to draft. I want to publish it and contribute in wikipedia. Draft:Hartley Higher Secondary School Hartley High School (talk) 08:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hartley High School: yes it was moved, because it wasn't ready to be published. And then I discovered that it's also a flagrant copyvio, so I've requested speedy deletion.
And judging by your username, you clearly have a COI. Therefore I've posted a message on your talk page to help you address this. Please do so before any other editing. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We will gather information from different website. If I gather information from website you call it a copyright and if I write a article base on what I has see in the school and places then you will Call it as No proof verification. What I will do now. Atlas don't delete it. Make it draft and when you get time you edit it. It is a famous School in Kolkata, india Hartley High School (talk) 08:59, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hartley High School:
Please don't open a new thread with each comment, just reply to the existing thread.
It's not just me "call[ing] it a copyright"; copyright violations are actually against the law, and if the draft is found to be a violation it will be deleted, no ifs no buts. (Please read and understand WP:CV.)
And please respond to the COI query on your talk page. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:06, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:24:56, 16 March 2023 review of submission by Terry123jenkins

I have had two submissions rejected, and both state that the proposed article reads like advertising for the John Lewis Partnership. It is difficult to write about this subject without mentioning John Lewis. I have no connection with the company beyond the fact that I was a guest soloist in the 1966 and 1967 opera productions at the start of my professional career. That is over 50 years ago.I came to write this article after chancing on a blog requesting details of past performances. So I assembled all the information - with help from the JL Heritage Department - and wrote the brief history submitted. I have no other interest in the matter. I consider that the information in my last submission was impartial and purely factual. Please advise where and what precise changes are needed. Terry123jenkins (talk) 10:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Terry123jenkins,
Thank you for contributing a draft on this topic, and thank you also for confirming you have no connection with the subject.
The first thing that strikes me is that the draft has quite a lot of content which isn't supported by referencing. This could be because you've simply not been thorough enough in adding citations. Or it could be that you've written what you know about the subject, as opposed to what independent and reliable secondary sources have published about it. At Wikipedia, we only summarise what such sources have said; ergo, if you cannot support a particular statement with a citation to a published source, then it shouldn't be included at all. With that in mind, my first advice is to ask you to go through everything in the draft, and either reference it, or remove it.
The second thing I noticed is that the structure and style of writing is not particularly encyclopaedic, but instead narrative. For example (and this is only that; one example), an article must have a lead section (which is not the same as a 'lede' in a newspaper), which introduces the subject, establishes context and describes why the subject is notable. Your draft has no lead section. While such stylistic matters are not why the draft was declined, ultimately these must be addressed before the article is fully ready. You may find this guidance useful in further developing the draft.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your prompt reply. I am surprised you state the content is not supported by referencing. I considered that everything had a reference, although many of these are to newspaper articles. Generally, every production was reviewed in the major London newspapers and music journals, which are surely published sources. I will check to see what I have omitted. Terry123jenkins (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Terry123jenkins Let's take a sentence at random: "The first production took place in 1947, and the series continued virtually without a break until 1991." Where did that come from? Is it from reference number 2, which is three paragraphs down, with a heading in the middle? That's a long way between the information and the reference.
As the draft stands now, it looks like the first two paragraphs have zero references. You must show where all of the information came from. If one reference covers many sentences or paragraphs of material, you should ask for advice on how frequently to include a "ref" tag, so that it's clear to a reader (and a reviewer) what sources cover which info. David10244 (talk) 12:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I find your comments puzzling. I understood that the opening preamble simply stated the facts of the subject, and these were justified, and expanded, with references in the second section.
I find, for instance, that the wikipedia entries for Colin Davis, Edward Downes, and Arthur Benjamin - all mentioned in the text - have no references in this part of their entries. Ralph Vaughan Williams just has a note about the pronunciation of his first name, and the entry for James Robertson doesn't even appear to follow current guide lines at all.
I am quite willing to add a reference to the first performance being in 1947, but it is difficult to give a reference for the final performance in 1991. It was not intended to be the last and, as I explain, the enterprise simply fizzled out.
You describe the style as narrative. I have written it in chronological order, which seems sensible. Is that narrative? You also state that the opening sentences should describe why the subject is notable. I consider that my opening sentence does just that.
I would be pleased to hear your further comments. Terry123jenkins (talk) 16:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:15:10, 16 March 2023 review of submission by Snehal Narkar

Why my article is being deleted? DJ UV india is a notable person, i have attatched sources too please go through that once. He have remixed many popular songs which you can check on youtube which have 113k+ views. He have 10k+ followers on instagram. He is an famous artist in india so please go through my article and sources once again. THANK YOU :) Snehal Narkar (talk) 13:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Snehal Narkar, you need reliable, independent sources (eg, newspaper articles). It doesn't matter how many youtube views someone has. -- asilvering (talk) 06:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:03, 16 March 2023 review of draft by PBTheIsland


A page I created {Howard Cox, Jr.) was declined for notability reasons -- "No indication he's a notable businessman, philanthropist." I'm new and I was hoping to get guidance on how to improve the page. The subject is a leader in the venture capital industry, having led his firm's investments in more than 30 companies, is a past Chairman of the National Venture Capital Association, received the industry's lifetime achievement award and, with his four partners, received the 2003 Harvard Business School Alumni Achievement Award. He is involved with numerous philanthropies, having donated $20 million to the South Florida Science Museum in 2021 and $10 million to Harvard Business School in 2022. There are a number of other business and civic achievements as well. I would reach out to the administrator who issued the decline, but am not sure how to do so. I'd welcome any assistance you can provide. Many thanks! PBTheIsland (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PBTheIsland, notability isn't determined by what a person has done, but whether reliable, independent, secondary sources have written about what a person has done. To start, what you would need is independent, secondary sources saying things like "Cox is a leader in the venture capital industry". Are there (independent!) newspaper profiles on him? Have a look at the links in the grey box in the decline message for a deeper explanation. -- asilvering (talk) 06:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 17

02:39:20, 17 March 2023 review of submission by Writer01wiki


Hi there, I am a new editor and just received a decline on my first submission. I am suggested to add more references which need to meet the criteria before the resubmission. However, as my topic is an app which was launched not long ago. It would be difficult for me to provide more sources at the moment... Therefore, I would like to seek for more specific guidelines on improving my page so as to get a pass on launching the article. Please let me know what I should do in this case.

Thank you!

Writer01wiki (talk) 02:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Writer01wiki: if you cannot find sources to establish notability, then by definition you cannot publish an article, because Wikipedia only summarises what reliable published sources have already said about a subject.
Most of this draft is unreferenced – where did the information come from? Did you read it somewhere? If so, cite those sources. Or do you have some 'insider' information from unpublished sources that you've based the draft on? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply! Basically all the info I have written can be found from those references I have attached... For example, the features part, it can be found from the description of the app stores; and the lines of the cities can also be found from the links I have put on. Writer01wiki (talk) 07:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:04:28, 17 March 2023 review of draft by UrFathermaybeblind

Hello! This is JJ Savani's Team and we are trying get his page published on wikipedia and we dont know why you declined it. It was his actual biography recorded by him.

UrFathermaybeblind (talk) 15:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1145152363"