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
Azunna4u (talk | contribs)
116 edits
Line 582: Line 582:
::Thanks for fixing my link. I improved on the references but was declined again. If you can, please look at it again and advice. Thanks. [[User:Azunna4u|Azunna4u]] ([[User talk:Azunna4u|talk]]) 14:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
::Thanks for fixing my link. I improved on the references but was declined again. If you can, please look at it again and advice. Thanks. [[User:Azunna4u|Azunna4u]] ([[User talk:Azunna4u|talk]]) 14:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Azunna4u|Azunna4u]]: the only secondary source you're citing is the first one, and it's not enough. We need to see significant coverage of him in multiple (= 3+) independent and reliable secondary sources. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 15:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Azunna4u|Azunna4u]]: the only secondary source you're citing is the first one, and it's not enough. We need to see significant coverage of him in multiple (= 3+) independent and reliable secondary sources. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 15:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
::::Thanks @DoubleGrazing. I'll need more advice please. When you write about things that happened pre internet (especially in Nigeria) it becomes a bit tough with what I'm seeing here. The other ones are secondary sources but unfortunately are hard copies and cannot be accessed from the internet. For example, I have the 1959 student's union handbook right before me here and it talks about the subject extensively. So do the other hard copies. What's the best way to deal with this? [[User:Azunna4u|Azunna4u]] ([[User talk:Azunna4u|talk]]) 15:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)


== 22:49, 30 August 2023 review of submission by 2402:4000:12D2:7D85:D10C:AB11:B901:BA77 ==
== 22:49, 30 August 2023 review of submission by 2402:4000:12D2:7D85:D10C:AB11:B901:BA77 ==

Revision as of 15:24, 1 September 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
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


August 25

02:05, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Mamaoohid

Where do I get secondary sources? Mamaoohid (talk) 02:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@mamaoohid:
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL ltbdl (talk) 02:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
these are potential places to find online sources. given that your subject is quite old, you may have to search some offline ones (books, old newspapers etc.) as well. ltbdl (talk) 02:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mamaoohid. Go to Newark, New Jersey, and spend a day in the public library there, befriending the librarians in your search for reliable, independent sources devoting significant coverage to Benzler. Then, add those new sources and what they say to the draft. Cullen328 (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

03:30, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Mamaoohid

Can someone help me to give some information and what to put in this page? Mamaoohid (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mamaoohid please start by reading Help:YFA, then return with additional questions. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 06:39, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:33, 25 August 2023 review of submission by EinHachiNami

Hello, An editor declined this draft, saying "last bit is shameless promotion." There is no product for sale and it is not an advertisement. Am I supposed to remove the free music link? Thank you EinHachiNami (talk) 07:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@EinHachiNami: well, the last sentence does seem a bit of a non-sequitur, at the very least. :)
The bigger problem here is that the sources are quite flaky, so you really need to improve on the referencing. I think the text could also do with an overhaul, to make it more factual and less POV. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks so much! I appreciate your help. Our number-one priority is establishing a source, however minimal, on Rav Be'eri in English, because there is unfortunately tons of conspiracy/misinformation content on him but few sources aside from YouTube. Please take a look at the new draft. There are no secular sources on him yet. With your help, this can be the first. EinHachiNami (talk) 22:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PROMOTION is interpreted more widely on Wikipedia than in general. Articles are required to summarize in a neutral way what the sources say. If the text appears to be promoting the subject then it is promotion - quite apart from any commercial questions.
I am also concerned when you talk about "establishing a source". There must be solid independent sources with significant coverage in order to ground an article. If these sources happen to be all in Hebrew. But it sounds as if your agenda might be RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS, which is not what Wikipedia is for. ColinFine (talk) 15:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, not Righting Great Wrongs. Just having a source in English that is reputable. 2601:180:8300:D1A0:B8BB:4868:551D:BA36 (talk) 20:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:28, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Aksana reddy

Why my article page rejected Aksana reddy (talk) 09:28, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aksana reddy: because there is not the slightest indication, let alone evidence, of any notability; nor is it written as a viable encyclopaedia article draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:26, 25 August 2023 review of submission by NFTs1

What in this article does not meet Wikipedia's requirements? 



NFTs1 (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NFTs1: all sorts of things...
  • it has a few external links, but they're not cited at all, and more specifically they're not cited inline like required for articles on living people;
  • most of the external links are inline, which is not allowed;
  • it doesn't comply with many aspects of the Manual of Style;
  • there is no evidence that the subject is notable by any standard; and
  • it's promotional, which is not allowed.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:23, 25 August 2023 review of submission by MarcdePezenas

Hey there! This is my first time trying to write a new Wikipedia entry from scratch and it was declined. Is it because there weren't enough references/footnotes? I read the explanation given for the rejection and I can't seem to identify the issue. For example, the subject of my Wikipedia post has been cited in many reliable, mainstream secondary sources. Do I need to mention them? Thanks so much for any help! MarcdePezenas (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has only two references one of which is a primary source, articles are based on significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:31, 25 August 2023 review of submission by 102.88.62.61

Hi Team,

Please, can someone higher take a look at this. Is it not funny that an arm of business is approved but not the parent company? How is this page a self promo? The controversy is something that is quite big in Africa and has been used by several industry stakeholders to cite examples at music conferences and this guys are saying it's not enough. It's annoying and frustrating that my passion and efforts to support Wikipedia's goal of documenting are not supported. Please someone reasonable should review this. 102.88.62.61 (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sources about the company do not comply with the three basic requirements: Independent, Significant coverage, and Reliably published. See WP:CORP for further guidance. However, the "Controversy" section content could possibly be adapted to fit into the Wizkid article which currently does not mention the issue at all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's goal is not mere documentation. It's to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. 331dot (talk) 17:15, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nobody higher, just us chickens. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Notability, as Wikipedia defines it, is not inherited. A work can be notable and its creator not. A subsidiary of a corporation can be notable and its parent not. The notability of every potential subject is determined on its own terms, and depends on what has been published about it. ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:19, 25 August 2023 review of submission by JeromePartout

Dear Team, the submission is declined and I got this note. I don not now what to change? Note: Comment: The article currently lacks inline citations, and none of the general references met the standards of sourcing for biographies (see edit history). On a side note, the draft also provides a large number of inappropriate external links. However, the article subject might meet WP:ARTIST, but this needs to be demonstrated with independent reliable sources. Actualcpscm (talk) 16:57, 27 June 2023 (UTC). Thank you in advance Jerome JeromePartout (talk) 14:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link Draft:Karin Elmers. Theroadislong (talk) 14:23, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to have no references at all which are independent of Elmers. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.
Your next step is to find several sources that meet that criterion - see 42 for more detail. If you cannot find them, then you will know that Elmers does not at present meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and not to spend any more time on this.
If you find at least three sources, each of which meets those criteria, then write your draft by paraphrasing what those sources say (not what you personally know), and for each piece of information you include, cite its source inline (see REFB for how to do so.) ColinFine (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:12, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Curious405

I am starting an article in English Wikipedia about Svante Wold. A short article in Swedish Wikipedia already exists, and I am using it as my starting point. I am trying to link it to my draft article following the directions at Wikipedia:Translate Us page, under the heading "Handmade," No. 5: 'Go to the sidebar and click "Add links" or "Edit links" (under 'Languages', in the language of that wiki). Enter "en" as the language of the wiki you got the content from, and the title of the page you translated, then click "Link with page".'

I don't see an "Add links" or "Edit links" under the "Add Languages" in the top right-hand corner of the page. I would, of course, substitute "sv" for "en". Thanks for any help you can give. Curious405 (talk) 18:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Curious405: you can only add the interlanguage links once the article is published. In any case, that has no bearing on whether this can be published or not, so my advice would be to focus on getting this accepted... which in its current state it wouldn't be, as there is no evidence of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:19, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Bobdopsob

The user denied publishing the submission due to a lack of significant importance, but this actress has a Google Knowledge Panel, demonstrating notability. Bobdopsob (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobdopsob: that's not a question. Do you have one in mind you would like to ask?
Please do not mess with the AfC review templates. This draft has been declined, and must stay that way until you have addressed the decline reason(s) and resubmitted it for another review.
And just for the record, a 'Google Knowledge Panel' is not a publishing criterion on Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:49, 25 August 2023 review of submission by 2601:184:300:15F2:71C3:BD56:25D9:63D0

Why was my article declined? 2601:184:300:15F2:71C3:BD56:25D9:63D0 (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Andrew Camarata was declined because it does nothing to establish that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability.
Note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.
As far as I can see, every one of your sources is either Camarata himself, or is somebody else repeating his words. None of that is of any relevance to a Wikipedia article about him. You need to begin by finding at least three sources which meet those criteria - see WP:42 for more detail - and if you can find them, write an article based entirely on what they say about him, not at all on what he or his associates say.
You also need to cite these sources properly inline - see WP:REFB. ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:14, 25 August 2023 review of submission by Ashygreninja

Typo in my draft title, I don’t know if I can get assistance for this. Ashygreninja (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashygreninja  Done assuming it to have a double "l" 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 06:09, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 26

07:04, 26 August 2023 review of submission by HealTheWorld144

I have created an article for a VERY notable person who i feel is under recognized. He has affiliations with celebrities and world leaders and more than enough sources and was even tagged by Rolling Stone Magazine. I think the person who rejected the submission is racist and doesn't appreciate black voices advocating for black people. HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HealTheWorld144: be very careful with accusations of racism or any other prejudice, especially when directed at an individual editor where you have no proof whatsoever. Personal attacks will not be tolerated, so make sure this was your last one. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:09, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yes but it was a malicious response to say my article was "Contrary to the purpose of wikipedia" when i created a page for an AMBASSADOR who has been tagged by CNN, Rollingstone Magazine, Kyrie Irving, is in NTV News Stories and Newspapers and Affiliated with Scotty McCreery... Can anyone justify the idea of these sources constituting a "Contrary purpose" to that of wikipedia? HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
what im saying is as a new editor, i would appreciate a thorough critique of my article that i took alot of time to find all those sources and listen to this guys lives on his social media to put this together. Only for some random guy to come and give the vaguest claim of my work being "Contrary to the purpose of wiki". That sounds CRAZY to me. I would need more details. Seriously? my article is "BEYOND SALVAGINg?" yep sounds like someone is not being genuine HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HealTheWorld144, perhaps you may want to find another website to host this content. It is nowhere near an acceptable article and is completely inappropriate for this encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 07:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
no i want to him to have a Wikipedia. Why is it that no one gives any details here? HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Facebook, YouTube and Blurb books are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 07:46, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those are sources where i mentioned general info about the man's message. Where else is better than his own book or social media? Those are are the minority. I made sure the majority were credible press sites. Rolling Stone, Justia, LA Tribune, WRAL, EURWeb, Rolling Out Magazine. Whats the issue? I think quoting his social media is appropriate for someone who gained notoriety from going viral. This is a new day and age. Social media is a thing and a credible source for certain information concerning the owner of the profile. But i will remove those points anyway to make you guys happy HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not want to know what someone says about themselves(except in very limited circumstances), Wikipedia wants to know what others say about a person. If you just want to tell the world about this person's message, that's what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If basketball players have a wikipedia then i think the man who has provided accessed to ancient scrolls from the Nasarean Essenes to the public should definitely have one. Make it make sense? HealTheWorld144 (talk) 07:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
People do not "have a Wikipedia". Wikipedia is the name of this entire website, which is composed of individual articles about notable topics. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HealTheWorld144: with "some random guy" and "sounds like someone is not being genuine" you are again casting aspersions at an individual reviewer, despite the earlier warning. Do not pursue this line of insults and accusations any further, or I will request that you are duly sanctioned. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ok well i took the detailed criticism from this thread and i removed the social media references and all narratives associated with social media references. And i added some more national press references from Kenya and direct celebrity association. Also reworded a bunch of stuff so hopefully you guys are happy with the changes. Let me know if it reads better. Thanks and ill leave any commentary about anyone out of my responses from now on. HealTheWorld144 (talk) 10:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rejected typically means that a draft may not be resubmitted. You must first appeal to the reviewer to convince them that something has fundamentally changed about the draft in order to resubmit it. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:31, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Nebosky

Hello, my article has just been rejected on the grounds that it was published in Bosnian on the English Wikipedia, which is not true because it is written in Serbian and is intended for the Serbian region. What can I do to resubmit my article to review? How can I change the language on Wikipedia? Please help! Nebosky (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend the article for the Serbian Wikipedia, you need to go there to publish it. I have provided this link. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:55, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Rebekkin

I do not fully understand the reason my last draft was rejected. Additional information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Regards, Joseph Farrugia Rebekkin (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was only declined, not rejected. "Rejected" would mean that it could not be resubmitted, "declined" means that it may be resubmitted. Please read the messages left by reviewers at the top of the draft. Sourcing seems to be the main issue. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:58, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Samirshass

My article got rejected everytime can anybody can help me to make sure it is not rejected . Samirshass (talk) 10:58, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Samirshass Your draft has not been rejected, it has been declined. "Rejected" has a specific meaning here, that a draft may not be resubmitted. "Declined" means that it may be resubmitted. You must address the concerns of the reviewer, which are that you have not demonstrated that the company meets our special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell of the existence of a company and what it does. You must summarize what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about the company and what makes it important/significant/influential. Such sources cannot include interviews, press releases, announcements of routine business activities, and brief mentions. Please read Your First Article.
If you work for this company, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, please see the paid editing policy, as well as conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:47, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Iam Stylox Vai Official

-Draft creation using the WP:Article wizard- Iam Stylox Vai Official (talk) 14:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopaedia, NOT social media. Theroadislong (talk) 14:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:24, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Wikiuser8787

Can i know the reason this article is declined ? Iv found different of pages similar to this type of article and references and they were approved and still on wikipedia can you please show me the differences of this article for example : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krysle_Lip (she got the same reference and coverage from the site Audiofuzz.com) and even less references than "Decreek" has Also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Riot Same reverences is showing from audiofuzz.com the same number of references as "Decreek" has Decreek has a reference from New Noise Magazine which is a notable and reliable reference 

Wikiuser8787 (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wikiuser8787. Your draft has seven references and only two sentences. If this person is actually notable, then surely much more can be said about him. As for the comparison to Krysle Lip, that is a poor quality stub article flagged as having multiple issues. Wikipedia does not need more poor quality articles. It needs less of them. Cullen328 (talk) 18:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also please note that interviews are not reliable, independent sources and you need to show how the subject passes WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 18:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:44, 26 August 2023 review of submission by Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans

Pardon my brashness in putting forth this question but I would like to inquire as to why this subject is not notable. A few articles in the New York Age all quite focused on this man and his restaurant could perhaps warrant a stub article such as this. If I could source the birth and marriage info at the start or perhaps remove it altogether, I believe it could pass grade. If a second serious objection is raised as to notability, I will lick my wounds and move on. One again, apologies for questioning reviewer judgement if that is how this appears. I just wish to create a discussion. Thanks in advance! Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 18:44, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are assorted mentions of him in the New York Age, and a few adverts but no significant coverage? Theroadislong (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I'm not quite sure what significant coverage means, you have a point. The New York Age covered his activities periodically for the most notable years of his life but I suppose significant coverage would mean more than one paper covered the topic in question. As I have no other articles to improve the page with, I believe I shall have to move on. I'll just save the page in some form for my own archive and then the draft can be deleted. How do I get it deleted? Thanks in advance, from Clyde Jimpson of the Arkansas String Beans (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It would be deleted in 6 months automatically if it wasn't edited further, but perhaps you can find better sources in the meantime? Other reviewers might chime in with other opinions. Theroadislong (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:17, 26 August 2023 review of submission by HealTheWorld144

I have removed social media references and narratives based on social media data. Please review HealTheWorld144 (talk) 19:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:12, 26 August 2023 review of submission by 2A02:C7C:A251:E00:8D0D:F62D:4394:2AF8

My English version of this page has been declined, yet less detailed French and German pages already exist. This makes no sense. Either my version is acceptable, or my additional information is not trusted but a straight translation of the French page (which is a bit more detsiled than the German) is acceptable, or none of them are acceptable in which case the French and German pages should be taken down (which, in my view,would be a mistake). 2A02:C7C:A251:E00:8D0D:F62D:4394:2AF8 (talk) 23:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. The English version tends to be stricter than others. It's not the case that an article must exist on all versions or not exist on all versions. 331dot (talk) 23:51, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


August 27

00:39, 27 August 2023 review of submission by JNOJ1423

The preview is error I put a new picture on the page but preview noting so please edit please. JNOJ1423 (talk) 00:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for asking about drafts, you are asking about an existing article. You may do that at the more general Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

01:07, 27 August 2023 review of submission by JeffKramer651

This is an actor I've seen in multiple significant roles in TV productions I've watched, which is why I was curious as to why he did not have a wikipedia page (especially "I'm A Virgo") I found all of his work to be validated by IMDb and I cited Entertainment Weekly, The Los Angeles Times, and The Hollywood Reporter, which includes a photo of him. This was my first contribution and I'd like to continue to do so, but would like to make sure my work wasn't for nothing. Is there something I'm missing? I seem to find many entertainment professionals with far less media coverage and legitimate film and TV work that have pages. He also seems to be a cast member in the new Jennifer Lawrence movie, but I haven't seen that yet. JeffKramer651 (talk) 01:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your link. 331dot (talk) 01:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see other stuff exists. It could be that these other articles(the preferred term, not the broader "page") are also inappropriate and simply unaddressed yet, and you would be unaware of this. We can only address what we know about, this is why each draft or article is considered on its own merits. If you would like to help us, please identify other inappropriate articles you have seen for possible action. We need the help, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can.
As noted by the reviewer, the sources you have offered are not appropriate for establishing notability. 331dot (talk) 01:29, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please also note that IMDb is not a reliable source so doesn't help establish notability. Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:42, 27 August 2023 review of submission by Kgothikabi

Please assist with the clean up submission Kgothikabi (talk) 10:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted it for a review. This isn't the place to request co-authors; if you want to see the draft published, you need to do the work. If you have questions about what work is needed, please ask. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:36, 27 August 2023 review of submission by Patricia Mannerheim

Hi.Regarding the subject of this article, it is said in Iran that as of 2018, he is the last and only survivor of the battalion that he commanded in 1987 Operation Karbala-4, and secondary sources also confirm this claim. What makes me question is whether bringing such a fact to the content of the article, even though it has a source, is worthy of wikipedia and encyclopedia? —Patricia (Talk) 11:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:54, 27 August 2023 review of submission by Albughu

I AM NEW HERE, I WANT TO POST A ARTICLE , WHY NOT POSTED. Albughu (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't yell at us(use all capital letters). The reviewer left a reason for their rejection at the top of your draft. Do you have questions about this? 331dot (talk) 12:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Albughu. Your sandbox draft is redundant and unnecessary. We already have an article about Chandrayaan-3. We only have one article for each topic. Cullen328 (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:03, 27 August 2023 review of submission by Albughu

My article deleted. Albughu (talk) 13:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Albughu. Your article is not suitable for Wikipedia at this time. Only topics that meet the strict Wikipedia:Notability policy can have articles. Qcne (talk) 13:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:08, 27 August 2023 review of submission by Tahami86

Draft has been submitted multiple times but has been declined. It is about a person of a highest rank in medical domain of Pakistan Army and yet draft is being declined on reason that references do not show significant coverage. It is to mention that online coverage is not available due to organizational policies.

Please help me as I strongly recommend/ want to get this person's presence on Wikipedia. If you can please guide me, I am willing to remove any part of the content that will make the article published.

Thanks Tahami86 (talk) 18:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources do not need to be online, but this draft must summarize what independent reliable sources say about him. If no such sources exist, he would not merit a Wikipedia article despite his position. If you are associated with him, please read WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:15, 27 August 2023 review of submission by PainterManIvan

Hi, I will review the referencing guidelines and edit the article. However, I am unclear about the feedback about notability as an artist. What kind of evidence needs to be provided? Thanks PainterManIvan (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @PainterManIvan.
To establish notability, you need to find reliable, independent, secondary sources that cover Ivan in detail, and then summarise them in your own words. That should make up the content of your article draft. Note that the sources must be:
- Reliable: Your article should rely on strong, reliable sources that are published by reputable institutions. Primary sources can be used for basic facts (such as a date of birth), but they should be supplemented with strong secondary sources that offer analysis or interpretation.
- Independent: Your sources should be independent of the subject, for example not self-published or from the subject's own website.
- Show significant coverage: Your subject should be discussed in detail in the sources you find. The sources should provide in-depth information or analysis about the subject, going beyond basic facts or promotional material.
- From multiple places: You should find at least three separate reliable, independent, secondary sources that discuss your subject.
- Not original research: Wikipedia articles should summarise existing knowledge about a subject, not present new research. This means you should avoid drawing your own conclusions or analyses from the sources. Stick to summarising what the sources say in a neutral tone.
If you cannot find multiple, reliable, and independent sources then I am afraid that Ivan would not meet the notability threshold at this time and therefore cannot have a Wikipedia article. Qcne (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PainterManIvan, vast swathes of your draft are currently unreferenced. Your draft needs a lot of work before being resubmitted. Cullen328 (talk) 20:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 28

01:21, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Wsjimmys

Why did u decline Wsjimmys (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@wsjimmys: to be blunt, your draft is a hot mess. ltbdl (talk) 02:26, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
U know right ur suppose to be kind and besides others can edit it Wsjimmys (talk) 03:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wsjimmys: this draft, as well as you other ones, has been deleted; I would advise you not to create any more of such nonsense. You're welcome to contribute in a constructive manner, but this wasn't it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:46, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:23, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Albughu

how to merge this article into chandrayaan 3 article 

Albughu (talk) 04:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Albughu: there is no particular process, and no formalities needed as this isn't yet an article, only a draft; simply edit Chandrayaan-3, and add whatever information and sources you wish from the draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Chandrayaan 3 article already mentions that it was the first to land on the lunar south pole. 331dot (talk) 07:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:37, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Chauhan72

Dear Sir, Thikana Barothi is an under of Jawas or State of Mewar... I write in about thikana Barothi,plzz accept Wikipedia page Thanks Chauhan72 (talk) 07:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chauhan72 Your draft is completely unsourced. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:40, 28 August 2023 review of submission by RMSTitanlc

i'm confused i added a source to the page, he played a role in rescue efforts. RMSTitanlc (talk) 07:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • RMSTitanlc I fixed your link(you were missing the "Draft:" portion). You have one source; to pass this process most reviewers look for at least three sources with significant coverage to be summarized in the draft. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    so i need to find 2 more soruces? RMSTitanlc (talk) 07:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    So you are going about this backwards(see WP:BACKWARD); you should first gather the sources and then summarize them, not look for sources to support what you have already written. But, yes, most reviewers will look for at least three sources to have been summarized. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You say that this man played a "key role" in the Titanic response as first officer but don't say what that role was. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    so should i look for what Dean did aboard Carpathia during the rescue efforts? RMSTitanlc (talk) 08:29, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @RMSTitanlc: if this gentleman's 'claim to fame' is that he was a major player in the Titanic's rescue efforts, then that needs to be fleshed out considerably; at the moment this is covered by a single sentence ("He is known for being the First Officer aboard RMS Carpathia he played a key role in the evacuation process.") which doesn't even mention the Titanic. And, as 331dot has already explained, that fleshing out needs to happen by way of summarising reliable published sources. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    so just give an explanation an backstory of Titanic or something and add more detail to the article? RMSTitanlc (talk) 09:27, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You should give what sources say was his role in the Titanic rescue operation. You described it as a "key" role. Did he direct rescue operations? Issue any important orders? I do find it curious that no one has written about this man before now; RMS Carpathia mentions many actions of the captain, but none from the first officer; it could be that sources might not support a standalone article about the first officer, but that he could be mentioned in the article about his ship or about the Titanic disaster. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:14, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Umepand99

We currently lack a sufficient number of articles written for the CCaaS platform on wiki. I am working on creating a page for CCaaS providers, and I would greatly appreciate your assistance. Could you please help us with this? Umepand99 (talk) 08:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Umepand99 Who is "we" and "us"? Only a single person should be exclusively operating your account. Your draft consists of a sentence fragment and two urls which I assume you intend as sources; this will not be accepted as an article, which is why it was rejected and won't be considered further. Please see Your First Article and Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We means I ( Umeshpand99) Umepand99 (talk) 08:20, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Umepand99 Please read HELP:YFA. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Umepand99, We currently lack a sufficient number of articles written for the CCaaS platform on wiki immediately sounds as if your purpose is telling people about the CCaaS platform, rather than improving Wikipedia. That is called promotion. If there are subjects connected with this platform that (each) meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then Wikipedia wants to have articles on those subjects. If there are not, then Wikipedia does not want, and will not accept, articles on them. ColinFine (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:59, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Bruce954

I actually seek help from the Wikipedia help desk when it was rejected the second time and they requested I re-summit it with this sources [1] [2][3][4][5][6][7] I'm still shocked, it still been rejected. He is an inventor that has received recognition globally even from Nigeria President Muhammadu Buhari, Amazon (company), Techstars Accelerator Los Angeles, and has been featured by TechCrunch, []Business of Fashion]]. If I am to humbly suggest, this needs to be critically looked at by another experience editor aside from the editor constantly rejecting it.Bruce954 (talk) 09:59, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruce954 It might have been wiser for the reviewer to have allowed someone else to review it. However, I do understand their rationale. From what is present, including references, I am finding it hard to see how he passes WP:BIO.
Jamiebuba do you have any further comments, please? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:11, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Timtrent I appreciate you for your response, and respect to your first line of reply that Jamiebuba he should have allowed another editor to look at it instead, than constantly giving other editor no clear head to take a good look at it. On this article when it was rejected by him I seek advice from other experience editor on their talk page and also came to the tea house twice before those reference was requested I used instead. The subject in questions has received significant coverage outside of Nigeria with loads of over 30 awards to his name that huge and has been featured international including by Princeton University , World Economic Forum, Junior Chamber International6th European Union–African Union Summit Stellenbosch University CNN etc he has loads of reference to back all this up including all the awards. I still humble request for this subjects to be looked at critical inline with the references. He should be able to pass either any of these or all if I'm not mistaken WP:GNG , WP: Basic, WP:Anybio. Bruce954 (talk) 22:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruce954 One of the major problems is the slew of adverts that your references hurl at the reviewer trying to validate them. One also linked to a scam. Another changed before my eyes into something else. So forgive me if I find them difficult to trust.
Fewer, good quality references would change my mind. See WP:CITEKILL and WP:BOMBARD. A fact you assert, once verified in a reliable source, is verified. More is gilding the lily. Please choose the very best in each case of multiple referencing for a single point and either drop or repurpose the remainder.
Please approach me on my talk page once you have slimmed the references down, and I will take a long look at the draft. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:45, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Imanluk

Please control Jamiebuba he is on the loose.

Jamiebuba, I can see you are on a mission against my articles. I published this article (Igun Street) and it was moved to draft with some suggestions on improving it. I am in the middle of that and you have rejected it without giving me a chance to address the areas identified.

What authority have you to reject articles because in your own view they should not be on Wikipedia. My last article you rejected meets Wikipedia sources guidelines on use of oral history. You rejected it on the grounds that the person is not notable enough. Yet there are people on Wikipedia with simple two sentences biographies because they have an OBE. The one you rejected was the Chief Royal Blacksmith of the Benin Kingdom who worked across a large part of that area.

History records that do not allow oral tradition sources as you are claiming that Wikipedia does is not reliable and is biased against other cultures of the world. Without oral historical sources where would the world be today? I suggest you take a couple of basic history lessons before you reject any more articles. Your view on Wikipedia is dangerous because it is racist against many cultures of the world that are not current Western media topics.

Finally why is it your duty to pursue my articles on Wikipedia and reject them? Imanluk (talk) 10:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Imanluk No-one has rejected Draft:Igun Street.
Jamiebuba has rejectedDraft:Prince Aigbogun Omeike
Coming here to complain about someone in the manner that you have is uncivil. Please ameliorate your tone, or no-one will listen to you. Read WP:NPA, please. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:11, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Editor has been warned formally on their talk page about lack of civility. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I remain concerned about the editor accusing another of racism in their penultimate paragraph, and again on their own talk page (this diff). Had it been once I might have considered a casual insult, but doubling down on it may require intervention by an admin. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent Personally, while reviewing the article I noticed that the draft in question is infact not about a notable subject. I attempted to find sources myself to add but on a search even on GBOOKS there is not a mention of the subject. The links used are from Weebly sites which is probably created by whoever is trying to get the article done. At this point, I would reject it a second time if i had the chance. My grandparents are of African descent, so am not being racist. I've only come across this user once but i have a feeling they may have another account seeing how they lashed out over a review which i did for a non-notable subject. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jamiebuba I also have reservations about the article,though I performed "borderline acceptance" on it (see its talk page). If you offer it to AfD I will remain neutral.
I am more concerned that you have been accused twice of racism. I feel that any further action is yours to take, not mine, so I have carefully let it stand in plain sight. My own opinion on abuse is to keep it visible. I have my own policy about this my talk page. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link Igun Street 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Igun Street seems ok, so no comment on that. Jamiebuba (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:41, 28 August 2023 review of submission by GeorgeSeaks

Can someone do a review for this article? It has been awaiting a second review for more than 4 months now. Thanks! GeorgeSeaks (talk) 12:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GeorgeSeaks: for the record, it has been waiting slightly under 4 months (resubmitted on 3 May), but yes, I take your point that it has been waiting quite long. Alas, we have well over 4,000 drafts awaiting review, and they are not processed in any particular order, so it could be another while; please remain patient. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: Thank you for the swift action. -- GeorgeSeaks (talk) 14:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:36, 28 August 2023 review of submission by NicholasCarver

Hello. I have made the necessary edits as per the recommendations by the community. The article, while shown as "under review" has not changed status in about a year (there was some confusion as I created a duplicate article by mistake, which has now been deleted). This confusion may have caused this edited article to go to the bottom of the pile. Would you be able to get this a second look and either (1) post it or (2) inform me what is required to get this done? Thank you. NicholasCarver (talk) 13:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NicholasCarver: there is no 'pile' or 'queue', there is rather a 'pool', meaning drafts are not reviewed in any particular order. You have resubmitted this (on 23 June) and it is awaiting review, please be patient; we have over 4,000 drafts pending. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:53, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Jamesinhere

what happened - Draft article got rejected (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Foundit.in&oldid=1150484128) with below comment:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Monster.com instead.

Here editor referring to USA based Monster entity however Region specific Monster entity got sold to Quess corp in Jan 2018 (https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/companies/quess-corp-acquires-monsters-business/article22613035.ece) and rebranded Monster in South East Asia and Middle east region with a different name (foundit) https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/jobsearch-portal-monster-rebranded-as-foundit-becomes-talent-management-portal/articleshow/95715997.cms?from=mdr, with Ownership change there is no direct linkages between Monster.com USA and foundit (Formerly Monster in South East Asia and Middle East).

I need help from someone to review and conclude that now Monster.com USA and foundit are 2 different entities and can have a listing on wikipedia, also need a fair review on the information listed on page and offer guidance.

Why I need help - seems questioning on nature of edit from reviewer leads to COI and even after denying it nothing would happen. Hence want neutral opinion from other reviewer and help in review. 

Jamesinhere (talk) 13:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jamesinhere Do not use any supposed AI text generator. They usually create high quality gibberish 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:41, 28 August 2023 review of submission by 161.22.53.36

Hi, We used Chatgpt for additional content indeed. What sources are you refering to, so that we can edit or delete them.

What else needs to be done in order to get this informational page published? 


161.22.53.36 (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do not use any supposed AI text generator. They usually create high quality gibberish 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing you can do, IP editor. Your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You are welcome to improve the existing articles Algorithmic trading or Automated trading system but do not use ChatGPT. Qcne (talk) 16:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:44, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Rebekkin

I am now at a loss for what else to do for this article to be approved. I have tried to provide as many references as possible to support the information, including a biographical book about the subject. Thank you. Rebekkin (talk) 14:44, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been rejected so will not be reviewed again and as previously notified " Wikipedia is not a Facebook link collection" Facebook is NOT a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the Facebook references are the actual Facebook page of the respective band clubs. (Some have their own web site and others have a Facebook page). Other references are made to a Facebook page on the subject (Antonio Micallef) referring to documents confirming information about the subject. In this respect, all links refer to reliable sources. Rebekkin (talk) 15:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but that is not the case, see WP:RSPFACEBOOK. Theroadislong (talk) 15:35, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rebekkin I see you have at last removed the Facebook references, but alas the vast majority of the remaining sources do not even mention Micallef? I fear you are wasting your time. Theroadislong (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment. References 1, 3, 6, 8 and 10 include biographies about Antonio. Reference 1 refers to a biographical book on Antonio Micallef published on Amazon in paperback and Kindle formats (ISBN 9798512574454). In order to provide more clarity I will remove all references that do not mention him. Hopefully it will look better. Rebekkin (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:10, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Sergemaurice

can i have the points who are considered unreliable? Sergemaurice (talk) 15:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergemaurice Any site with user generated content is unreliable. This includes Spotify, Youtube, Facebook etc. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:31, 28 August 2023 review of submission by 2600:6C44:1A3F:CBFC:3CF1:4B71:5BF6:2B17

Hi - The article was rejected for a lack of reliable sources. The article is about an alternative tuition model for higher education that is appearing across the country. I was told not to link to the universities' tuition pages as sources, but those are the primary sources. What is a more reliable source than the university websites? 2600:6C44:1A3F:CBFC:3CF1:4B71:5BF6:2B17 (talk) 15:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have ignored the comment made by the reviewer. If that is not the case please confirm that you have. Then consider what question you really wish to ask 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, can you help me understand the comment? The comment was twofold: a) there are errors in the sources that need fixing and b) "you should not be linking random University finance pages." I didn't mean to ignore the comment. My question is: Are university tuition pages legitimate sources? 2600:6C44:1A3F:CBFC:3CF1:4B71:5BF6:2B17 (talk) 15:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi IP Editor. Every one of your sources has the Help:CS1 errors error. To resolve this error, remove the external link from the identified parameter. As for the External Links section - it's not clear why you have linked those specific finance pages. Were you wanting to use them as a reference? In which case they should be in the References section, although they are primary sources so probably shouldn't be used. Qcne (talk) 16:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. I'll fix the links and I appreciate the clarification, but I don't want to fix the links if the sources aren't going to be accepted.
Yes, I want to use the university finance pages as sources. They are primary sources, but the article is about an alternative tuition model that's being used across the country. It's not a fringe idea, schools like UC Berkeley and Ohio State are using this tuition model. How can I write about the tuition model if I can't link to the university web pages? There are not many articles about it. This is a major trend happening in higher education and deserves a wikipedia page. 2600:6C44:1A3F:CBFC:3CF1:4B71:5BF6:2B17 (talk) 17:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia articles paraphrase what reliable, independent, secondary sources say about a subject. If There are not many articles about it then it is simply WP:TOOSOON for there to be a Wikipedia article. Note that no topic inherently deserves an article: all articles must be backed up by reliable and independent sources.
I would recommend waiting until reputable places (newspapers, journals, etc) discuss this new tuition model in detail and provide some sort of analysis, interpretation, or discussion. Then you can paraphrase those sources and use them to make up the content of your draft. Qcne (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:42, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Rebekkin

The article was rejected. Where do we go from here? Do I need to start a fresh (revised) entry with other references? Rebekkin (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rebekkin first discuss the rejection with the reviewer. You might persuade them to rescind the rejection 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You would need to remove/replace, the 9 x Facebook references and the 4 x YouTube references to start with. Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I can do that, no problem. Rebekkin (talk) 16:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rebekkin, please note that Wikipedia accounts can only be used by a single person. Your use of the word 'we' implies you might be sharing your account or representing an organisation? Qcne (talk) 16:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am the only one using this account. 'We' in this context is a figure of speech. Rebekkin (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. Qcne (talk) 16:30, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:56, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Chauhan72

Sir this is an all real plz accept Chauhan72 (talk) 15:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chauhan72 So am I, but an article about me would also be rejected. This doesn't even look liken article, as you can see. Please read Help:YFA and start afresh 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:15, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Chauhan72, you were repeatedly asked to provide sources but re-submitted the article despite not doing so. Read WP:VERIFY closely. Qcne (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:15, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Ankitsingh620

i worked as a assistant director Ankitsingh620 (talk) 16:15, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ankitsingh620 do you have a specific question? Your article has been rejected as you do not meet the threshold at WP:NPEOPLE. Qcne (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:16, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Kadoon2013

This article page has been a accepted. Kadoon2013 (talk) 16:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kadoon2013, no it has not been accepted, it was rejected. Qcne (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:01, 28 August 2023 review of submission by Rooghu

how to publish this article 

Rooghu (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rooghu, you cannot: it has been rejected and will not be considered further. Qcne (talk) 18:02, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


August 29

00:21, 29 August 2023 review of submission by NooterSuper

Hi, I tried to make a draft for this page and it was declined because the reviewer said it “didn’t exist” even though it clearly did, so how do I prove him wrong? Also check Springfield Gardens LIRR station just for extra proof. NooterSuper (talk) 00:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@nootersuper: then surely you can find sources proving it exists? ltbdl (talk) 00:34, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NooterSuper (ec) I fixed the link to your draft. If you have reliable sources that show this station existed, please offer them. Any article about this station should summarize what is said about it by reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 00:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:50, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Reid1801

My draft was rejected on 26 August with the claim that:

The draft cannot be accepted as it heavily relies on Oliver [i.e. the subject] as a source. Using an article's subject as a source in a Wikipedia context is only allowed if an article doesn't primarily rely on the subject as a source. Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 06:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

There are two problems with this ruling. One is that the draft contains 17 references to independent reviews of Oliver's work, references that backup the substantive claims about his work that are made in the draft. In this sense, the draft does NOT rely on heavily on the subject himself.

The second problem is that the other references cover his biography and are based on his published autobiographical memoir. These references are unavoidable when it comes to the biography of minor literary writers because (unlike major writers) no one else has written biographies of them. If you look at writers listed on the wikipedia list of Australian poets at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_poets you will find that in many of the entries, the biographical information comes either directly or indirectly from the poets themselves. There are no alternative sources.

This leaves Wikipedia with two unattractive options. The first would be to cull about half of the Wikipeda pages for minor but distinguished people in many fields (and not just the field of poetry). This first approach would reduce the utility of Wikipedia immensely.

The second option would be to retain their pages, but remove most of the biographical information. This would also greatly diminish Wikipedia.

Incidentally, if you are going to be consistent in ruling against references to a person's published autobiography, you will need to remove most of the biographical information in the Wikipedia page on St. Augustine, since that information comes directly or indirectly from his 'Confessions'.

So my question is: What do you want me to do? Do you really want me to remove the biographical information?

I point out, again, that it is based on a published memoir and is thus a verifiable source. I also point to the many reviews of Oliver's work as evidence that he meets the notability standard and deserves a Wikipedia page. I could list another hundred reviews, if that is in doubt. Reid1801 (talk) 04:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Reid1801: just because something is published, doesn't mean it is necessarily reliable. Anyone can write and self-publish their own autobio, making whatever claims they wish about themselves. (Obviously I'm not saying this person's autobio is unreliable, only that it could be.) Closer primary sources can only be used to verify entirely uncontentious statements, and cannot be used to establish notability.
Another point: reviews of Oliver's work may may his work notable, but that does not, in and of itself, make him notable, as notability is not inherited or otherwise transferred. It could be that if the critical reviews are exceptionally significant, this may potentially satisfy WP:POET #4, but that bar is quite high and we would need to see clear evidence that it has been met. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:58, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Viviinnovatives

Hello Team , I am requesting to approve articles. I have given all required reference to validate source of truth. The reviewer doesn't understand source truth. I have given all the information to validate the truth of the information in the article. Please review and approve it.

Example - https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/the-road-to-tokyo/article35911428.ece https://m.dinamalar.com/detail.php?id=2828566 Also Mr Seshadri Nathan Sukumaran was conferred with the esteemed KALAIMAMANI title, the highest honor bestowed by the Government of Tamil Nadu, accompanied by a Gold medal. 

Viviinnovatives (talk) 07:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Viviinnovatives: you have cited Wikipedia several times, which you cannot do; Wikipedia cannot be a source for itself. You have also cited YouTube, which is user-generated and in most cases not reliable and/or independent. You have also left some of the content unreferenced (eg. which source gives this person's DOB?). Therefore the draft was correctly declined for being insufficiently supported by reliable sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I might add that it is rather disrespectful to accuse a reviewer of not "understanding", when this draft has in fact been declined by two separate reviewers, who between them have 20+ years and 40,000+ edits under their belt, and in any case wouldn't be AfC reviewers without a pretty good understanding of the various guidelines and policies. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:00, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Vozaba85

Hi, I'm not sure what the issue is and why the draft keeps getting declined. Do you have anyone who can assist in editing this page in a way that would suit Wikipedia? Please let us know and we will gladly provide all the details. Vozaba85 (talk) 10:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? Only a single person should have access to your account. Do you represent this professor or his university? The reviewers have left message on the draft telling you what you need to do. 331dot (talk) 10:04, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vozaba85: have you read any of the decline messages? They will give the reason(s) for declining. In short, far too much of the content is unreferenced, and there is no evidence that the subject is notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:04, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:36, 29 August 2023 review of submission by 122.168.29.85

actully this is the new concept about brassets (i work on it to make perfect) if you want to know more about brasset let me know. 122.168.29.85 (talk) 11:36, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Wikipedia is not the place for WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. Qcne (talk) 11:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to tell the world about your inventions, try some social media or blogging site. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:59, 29 August 2023 review of submission by 149.241.253.112

Hello I was hoping to get some help with this creation of a page, I know it needs articles that are valid/relevant/verified however I believe I have provided them from Forbes, CNBC etc, would anyone be able to give guidance? 149.241.253.112 (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the sources themselves that are the issue, but their content. They largely discuss the routine business activities of the company(like the raising of funds) and do not go into detail about what makes the company important/significant/influential as a company as the sources see it. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:44, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Chevsi

Good afternoon, Can you please advise what changes are required to this page in order to have a successful publishing? Thanks Chevsi (talk) 13:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:00, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Hondapolo

This person does not seem to have much media coverage. How will I get Independent sources for citation/reference? But all his works are verified by authentic sources like architect associations and institutions. He seems to be a deserving person. I am trying to add people who are experts in their own field and are not recognised by the mainline media. I am a novice in Wikipedia editing. Please help. Hondapolo (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that neither all his works are verified by authentic sources nor He seems to be a deserving person is of any relevance in deciding whether to accept a draft into Wikipedia. Wikipedia has articles on things that exist and things that don't exist (and some hoaxes!), on deserving and thoroughly undeserving people. What is required is that several people wholly unconnected with the subject should have chosen to spend time researching and writing about the subject in depth, with a quality of care, independence, and fact-checking that a publisher with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking has been willing to publish them.
If you can find at least three such sources, then there can be an article, which should be based almost entirely on what those independent sources say.
If, as you suggest, such sources do not exist, then there cannot be an article about him, because there is literally almost nothing which can be put into an article. ColinFine (talk) 16:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:03, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Arjun162

I need time to find "reliable sources" to cite. Arjun162 (talk) 15:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arjun162: assuming nobody tags this for speedy deletion, you have six months from the last human edit, before the draft gets automatically deleted.
That said, sounds like you're going about this the wrong way. You shouldn't first write what you want, and then try to find sources that support what you've written. You should first find reliable published sources, and summarise what they've said about the subject, citing each source as you go; there's your article and your referencing done! -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, thank you for notifying me about the time. I would like to tell that I have not "written what I like" but carefully gathered my information from sources directly and indirectly related to academic field and the educational institution "Sita Shiromani Degree College". There are few colleges in Prayagraj (formerly Allahabad) that provide quality education and are not owned by Central or State government. This is a notable institution, familiar to everyone in Prayagraj. I am currently looking for proper sources I can cite on Wiki. If there is any other advice, please let me know; I'd be glad to learn and improve. Arjun162 (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:20, 29 August 2023 review of submission by 14.139.207.130

why are you rejecting my artcle again and again, what's the problem on that ? 14.139.207.130 (talk) 15:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there is no suggestion that the subject is notable, and even less evidence. Wikipedia is a global encyclopaedia, not a social media or blogging platform where anyone can tell the world about themselves and their cat, or generally write whatever they want. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is NOT a potential article, you are NOT notable by Wikipedia standards. Wikipedia is not a social media website. Theroadislong (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:37, 29 August 2023 review of submission by AMISH14

how to fix this error An error occurred (TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'pages')). Please try again or refer to the help desk. AMISH14 (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AMISH14, I have declined your draft as it is not written in an encyclopaedic way at all: it is full of language that is completely inappropriate for Wikipedia. Qcne (talk) 15:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also your mentor here on Wikipedia. You also must follow conflict-of-interest and paid editing disclosure policies, as they are required on Wikipedia. ~~2NumForIce (speak|edits) 16:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:07, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Humphrey.Mulberry

Hello, I have updated the links, enlarged the submission with all secondary sources from notable media outlets. I have reviewed all his contemporaries at BBC Radio Manchester and believe Jsky's page is far more qualifying. Can you kindly approve or offer further specific guidance. Humphrey.Mulberry (talk) 16:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am pinging the rejecting reviewer, @S0091. Qcne (talk) 16:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Humphrey.Mulberry I started a discussion at Draft talk:Jsky so join me there. (Stop giving me more work @Qcne, lol). S0091 (talk) 16:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
♥ Qcne (talk) 16:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:09, 29 August 2023 review of submission by HikingManiac2010

I've asked for advice a couple times now, please have an admin/help desk person email me! Please!!! Thank you!! HikingManiac2010 (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HikingManiac2010. Sorry no one has replied to your requests for help on your User Page.
Unfortunately your attempts at a draft have been rejected. Musicians must pass the strict WP:NMUSIC threshold, and unfortunately Lynn does not pass that threshold.
Even if she did pass that threshold (she does not.) you have vast swathes of her biography completely unsourced. This is not permitted on Wikipedia, see WP:BLP. Every single statement should have been backed up by an independent and reliable source.
I'm afraid this is the end of the road: there will be no article on Wikipedia for Lynn at this time. Qcne (talk) 17:45, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If I can provide more sources in my article in my Sandbox, can I resubmit the article later, if I cover all of the required parameters under WP:NMUSIC? Thank you! 2605:59C8:1C5:7800:E9E6:F5B5:DC6A:C5D3 (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have accidentally logged yourself out, FYI.
Since it's been rejected, you'd have to appeal to the rejecting reviewers directly (@CNMall41 or @Theroadislong). Do that by posting a message on their User Talk page, or WP:Ping them. Qcne (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your sources are VERY poor quality [8] is a single passing mention, [9] is a single passing mention and [10] appears to be user edited so not reliable. We need in-depth significant coverage in reliable, [[WP:IS|independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:18, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Aisamiscool8315

Can you publish my page into a article. the tv show is real Aisamiscool8315 (talk) 18:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Aisamiscool8315. The answer is no, sorry. Wikipedia articles are only about topics that meet our strict WP:GNG requirements: you and your show do not meet that criteria. Qcne (talk) 18:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WHY DID YOU DELETE MY PAGE Aisamiscool8315 (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do not shout. Your page was deleted as contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Please very carefully read WP:NOT. Qcne (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
whats wrong with that?! Aisamiscool8315 (talk) 19:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not for you to tell the world about your show. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:10, 29 August 2023 review of submission by Warezalex911

Hi, I'd like to know how to get this page over the line as I believe there are sufficient independent references for the page. Warezalex911 (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewers disagree with you, which is why they rejected the draft. If something has fundamentally changed about the draft, you should first attempt to appeal to the last reviewer.
You declared a COI with regards to Mr. Bird, what is the nature of it? 331dot (talk) 21:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


August 30

00:05, 30 August 2023 review of submission by Marcosfv2020

Dear Wikipedia Admin,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request your assistance in reviewing and providing guidance on a Wikipedia page I have created for Filevine, a legal tech software company. As a dedicated Wikipedia editor and administrator, your expertise would be immensely valuable in ensuring that the page adheres to Wikipedia's high standards.

I have put considerable effort into crafting a comprehensive and accurate article about Filevine, drawing inspiration from similar pages for software companies like CLIO. Given the similarity in nature and scope between Filevine and CLIO, I believed that a Wikipedia page for Filevine would also be compliant.

To bolster the credibility of the article and its alignment with Wikipedia's content guidelines, I have tagged the article with several relevant WikiProject tags, including:

WikiProject Companies WikiProject Computing WikiProject Technology WikiProject Software These tags were added with the intention of providing a solid framework for the article's context and structure, in line with Wikipedia's standards.

However, before proceeding further, I would greatly appreciate your expertise in reviewing the article to ensure that it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, neutrality, and verifiability. Your insights and guidance would help ensure the accuracy and compliance of the article.

I understand the importance of maintaining the quality and integrity of Wikipedia's content, and I am committed to making any necessary edits or adjustments to align with the community's expectations.

If you have the time and willingness to assist, I would be very grateful. Your expertise and feedback would be a tremendous asset in contributing to the reliability of the information presented.

Thank you for considering my request. I look forward to your response and appreciate your commitment to maintaining the excellence of Wikipedia's content.

Best regards, Marcosfv2020 (talk) 00:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcosfv2020: the draft has been resubmitted and is awaiting review, please be patient. That said, I did have a quick scan of the sources, and found nothing that would amount to WP:GNG notability, as they all seem to be just routine business reporting and primary sources. Looks like you only added one source, and a pretty useless one, since the last decline. I'd say you either need to improve your sources significantly, or expect this to be declined again. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Marcosfv2020 Be aware of other stuff exists. It could be that the other articles you used as a reference are also problematic and you would be unaware of this. As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate content to get by us and be unaddressed for years. We can only deal with what we know about. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those classified as good articles, which have been vetted by the community. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

02:54, 30 August 2023 review of submission by Vianzo

Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to request that the draft biography I have written in Bahasa Indonesia be submitted to the Indonesian version of Wikipedia. Can you assist me in resubmitting it to Wikipedia Indonesia?

Kind regards 

Vianzo (talk) 02:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vianzo: sorry, no. Each language version is a completely separate project. You will have to go to the Indonesian Wiki and submit it there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:10, 30 August 2023 review of submission by StrawberryChi'sCake

I don't know where to put the citations because she didn't show me what she did StrawberryChi'sCake (talk) 07:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

StrawberryChi'sCake, your draft lacks references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to this book. Please see WP:NBOOK for what is required. Cullen328 (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@StrawberryChi'sCake For a beginner-friendly guide to citations, see WP:REFB. Ca talk to me! 14:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:14, 30 August 2023 review of submission by OruVattamKoodi

This is a new article regarding a new film releasing soon, so we don't have any resources to add under reference and citation. Can I publish it? 

OruVattamKoodi (talk) 13:14, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@OruVattamKoodi: no, you cannot publish it, and if you did, it would either be sent back to drafts or deleted. Unreleased films are invariably not notable. In any case, a draft/article must be supported by reliable sources; yours has none.
I will also post a message on your talk page about conflicts of interest; please read and action it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:15, 30 August 2023 review of submission by 159.148.48.1

This term is used extremely often in social media and in interpersonal communication. I think it's only logical that wikipedia describes what this word means to help wiki users understand what someone else is talking about. 159.148.48.1 (talk) 13:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been deleted, and your other one is pending deletion. Please do not create more of the same. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:02, 30 August 2023 review of submission by 103.237.36.81

how can i solve this please help me 

103.237.36.81 (talk) 16:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing to solve? The subject is not notable so we cannot have an article about them. Theroadislong (talk) 16:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Zahidul, Wikipedia is not a social networking website. You cannot have a Wikipedia article. Qcne (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:29, 30 August 2023 review of submission by KatiaApati

How can I improve my content KatiaApati (talk) 16:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The content is blatant advertising please use other means to promote this. Theroadislong (talk) 16:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Left my standard deletion notice. Perhaps it will be both helpful and informative. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:00, 30 August 2023 review of submission by Berber.Enjoyer2

Hello ! thank for fast response i wanted to know why it's say my draft should be sourced with source and not wikipedia the last source i putted came from a webstite that resume all the war and i wanted to know how to take the good url to redirect to the good line ! t Berber.Enjoyer2 (talk) 17:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, @Berber.Enjoyer2, could you try re-phrasing that: I'm not sure what you mean?
Unfortunately you also seem to have copied a large amount of the text from [11]https://journals.openedition.org/cdlm/8011#ftn1. This has now been deleted as a copyright violation. I am sorry I didn't pick up on this when I first reviewed it. You should have paraphrased the article, not copied it indiscriminately. Pinging the second reviewer, @ARandomName123 Qcne (talk) 17:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes sorry i'm right now paraphrased the article i hope it will be accepted Berber.Enjoyer2 (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When doing so, please take care not to paraphrase it too closely. Instead, summarize it in your own words. WP:PARAPHRASE may be helpful. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 17:43, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think there may be some confusion about my decline. Before I noticed the copyvio, I declined it for reliable sources. The comment I left (this is probably what you're talking about) was The background and negotiation sections are sourced to this draft. They should be sourced to reliable sources, not Wikipedia. See WP:CIRCULAR. I removed this decline and replaced it with the cv one when I noticed the copyvio. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 17:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again ! thank for helping me creating my draft, i finnaly finish it and i think now it's better and it have better source like a comptoprary source and a whole website Berber.Enjoyer2 (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:42, 30 August 2023 review of submission by User18762

My submission has been rejected for the lack of third'party sources. I would like to confirm that the number of independent sources in the revised version is sufficient. User18762 (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that you inappropriately copied the image of her from her website; her website states "all rights reserved" meaning it is incompatible with Wikipedia's license(which allows for reuse for any purpose with attribution). It will need to be deleted. 331dot (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding on, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, which is what the photo is licensed as, is incompatible with Wikipedia, per WP:COMPLIC. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:35, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Image license issue has been resolved. Released under CC-BY-SA 4.0 per her webpage. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 21:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a reply on your talk page. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:45, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:22, 30 August 2023 review of submission by Azunna4u

I had an entry refused with the reason that the references doesn't show significant coverage. Most of the items are from newspaper publication making me repeat it severally but in specific places, I quoted specific references like being students union president where I referenced the handbook with the information (He was actually the first African students union president at West Ham). I have a copy of that hand book here with me. I need help on how to remedy this. The person in questions deserves this as he was a forerunner in many instances Azunna4u (talk) 21:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Azunna4u I fixed your link, you were missing the "Draft:" part. 331dot (talk) 21:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have done a great job summarizing thjs person's accomplishments, but that's not what we are looking for; we are looking for significant coverage in independent reliable sources, coverage that discusses what makes him important/significant/influential as a person. 331dot (talk) 21:45, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for fixing my link. I improved on the references but was declined again. If you can, please look at it again and advice. Thanks. Azunna4u (talk) 14:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Azunna4u: the only secondary source you're citing is the first one, and it's not enough. We need to see significant coverage of him in multiple (= 3+) independent and reliable secondary sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @DoubleGrazing. I'll need more advice please. When you write about things that happened pre internet (especially in Nigeria) it becomes a bit tough with what I'm seeing here. The other ones are secondary sources but unfortunately are hard copies and cannot be accessed from the internet. For example, I have the 1959 student's union handbook right before me here and it talks about the subject extensively. So do the other hard copies. What's the best way to deal with this? Azunna4u (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:49, 30 August 2023 review of submission by 2402:4000:12D2:7D85:D10C:AB11:B901:BA77

Why u rejected my draft 2402:4000:12D2:7D85:D10C:AB11:B901:BA77 (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not social media where people tell the world about themselves, you should do that on actual social media. 331dot (talk) 23:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 31

04:10, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Sankar raja 123

I am new here, I have done the things best of my knowledge and made that article and still it has some flaws.....so, kindly request for help Sankar raja 123 (talk) 04:10, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sankar raja 123: your article needs to be based on reliable published sources, and you need to cite those sources so that readers can see where the information is coming from and verify it if needed. See WP:REFB for advice on referencing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:04, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:52, 31 August 2023 review of submission by 111.92.125.131

How we can publish this wikipedia page? 111.92.125.131 (talk) 04:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, please log into your account when editing.
Secondly, who is "we"?
As to your question, you could and should have listened to all the advice that was offered during the numerous reviews, and improved the draft. You didn't. Therefore it has now been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:51, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Jujupiter

I would like to add a picture of the artist unfortunately, I don't know where I can get a picture free of rights for Wikimedia. I have messaged him on Instagram, contacted his music label and even the studio that did a movie with him and no one has replied. How do people usually do? Is there a specific service or a way to get in touch with photographers...? Thank you for your help 🙏 Jujupiter (talk) 05:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jujupiter: we can't really help, as we don't have any special access to images here at the help desk. If you cannot find a suitable image, then don't add one; it isn't important, in that it has no bearing on this draft's chances of being accepted.
Just to say also that contacting third parties asking for photos is a bit pointless. Even if they send you a copy, you still wouldn't be able to use it, because it remains under their copyright. They would have to expressly release it under a compatible licence, which they are probably unwilling to do, and even if they did, you would have hard time proving this. In fact, they as the creator and copyright owner would have to upload it and release the rights. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thank you. I did ask them for a picture free of rights, hoping maybe they would be happy to release one but indeed, it was pointless. Jujupiter (talk) 06:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:21, 31 August 2023 review of submission by 117.121.211.195

We include several external links, not limited to those from Wikipedia or our own sources, as recommendations for the Wiki page and request permission for publication. However, the commit button is invisible, and our only option is to 'Ask for advice.' Could you kindly offer your guidance? 117.121.211.195 (talk) 07:21, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The submit button is unavailable because I have rejected this draft, rather than merely declined, meaning you can no longer submit it for review. At the time when I reviewed this, the only references were to the university's own website and to Wikipedia articles. I can see that you have since then added a few other references, but these are still not enough to establish notability, and I therefore stand by my rejection. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:38, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Bavile

Hi, it's the first time I have created an article. I'm not sure how to create the table of contents so that I can then populate this with the summary and other information? Bavile (talk) 08:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bavile: the TOC gets created automatically, once there are four (IIRC) or more section headings. You can also force it (on and off), although normally you shouldn't. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Apologies but I don't yet have any section headings and not sure how to begin updating my draft article with these? I looked for guidance information on this but it didn't seem obvious where this info is? Bavile (talk) 09:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bavile: never mind no section headings, you don't seem to have any content, if this Draft:Mellatron is the draft you're referring to. Create the content, divide it into sections with MOS:HEADINGS, and the TOC will follow. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Yes that's the draft that I have opened. Many thanks I will creating content and try using the MOS: HEADINGS to divide it as you have advised. Bavile (talk) 09:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Thank you again for the technical advice earlier but apologies again I unfortunately accidentally prematurely submitted my draft article before I had finished adding citations etc. I fully understand you rejecting it. I will endeavour to not submit it again before it's ready for submission. Just checking apart from lack of citations and links, whether the layout is ok now? If it correctly has the MOS Headings etc as you explained earlier? Bavile (talk) 13:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bavile: it has no section headings, other than the 'References' one. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:52, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Hisonlysoneditor

please accept it sir . this is a famous artist and a actor who has workvery hard and he has reknowed as Artist Ashish Rawde He Has Work In Many Films And Many Songs in current he has worked as Ishamel ( in only son) and the indian film bande utkala janani please accept it sir Hisonlysoneditor (talk) 09:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hisonlysoneditor: we don't review articles on demand; this is awaiting review, and will be assessed when a reviewer happens to pick it up. Although having said that, I can tell you already now that it will not be accepted, as there is no evidence of notability, and it is also entirely promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:56, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hisonlysoneditor What is your association with him, since he posed for the picture you took? 331dot (talk) 10:01, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero reliable independent sources in the draft and the content is laughably promotional in tone. Theroadislong (talk) 10:07, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:29, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Bilaldj7

Please let me know the reason for rejection. Bilaldj7 (talk) 11:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bilaldj7 I fixed the link to your draft(you were missing the "Draft:" portion). Your draft was only declined, not rejected. "Rejected" has a specific meaning here, that a draft may not be resubmitted. "Declined" means that it may be resubmitted. The reason for the decline was left by the reviewer at the top of your draft. Do you have a question about it? 331dot (talk) 11:33, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Bilaldj7, I am the decliner. Your draft does not read like a Wikipedia article, it reads like an essay. That is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Qcne (talk) 11:39, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:55, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Falia2

What can I do to get this article accepted? Falia2 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Falia2- nothing, sorry. It has been rejected and won't be considered further. Qcne (talk) 11:59, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Falia2: what is your relationship to this subject? I asked this on your talk page a week or so ago, but you have not responded. Please do so now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no relationship with it, its just a company that created a snowboard machine for Quebec winters Falia2 (talk) 12:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
what can i do? Falia2 (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As stated, nothing, as the draft has been rejected. Sorry. Qcne (talk) 12:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:29, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Bine Gruen

Hi, I am currently creating a new article. Here are my questions: 1. In the menu, "cotnribute" is not active and I cannot access the function. 2. I would like to work in the visual editor mode, but it this function is not visible to me, only read and source mode. 3. I would like to insert in the article a picture, but without the visual editor I do not know how to manage. If my question 2 cannot be solved, I would need the source code for inserting the image. Thanks for the help 

Bine Gruen (talk) 12:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Bine Gruen: I can't help you with regards to the visual editor, but someone will hopefully come along shortly who can. In the meantime, I can't help noticing that your draft is entirely unreferenced, which means that the information cannot be verified, and also that there is no evidence that the subject is notable. Those are both hard requirements for a draft to be accepted (whereas images and other 'nice to haves' aren't), so my advice would be to focus first and foremost on referencing your article fully. Please see WP:BLP, WP:GNG and WP:REFB for advice on articles on living people, the general notability guideline, and referencing, respectively. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:39, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your advice. It is meant to be a biography rather than a topic article. I try to gather some references and try to argue the importance of the person. Bine Gruen (talk) 12:45, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bine Gruen: I'm not quite sure what you mean, articles are articles regardless of the topic; if anything biographies on living people have stricter referencing requirements, as explained in WP:BLP.
It sounds like you may be trying to go about this BACKWARD, by first writing what you want, and then trying to support it with sources. What you should do is find some sources that are reliable and independent, and provide significant coverage of the subject, summarise (in your own words) what they have said, and cite each source against the information provided. This gives you both your article content and the necessary referencing. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:22, 31 August 2023 review of submission by LittlePerson10

I don't know, I cited the most reliable source I could find. Maybe do I need to cite a link to the game on the Google Appstore as it says what the game is about on there? LittlePerson10 (talk) 13:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LittlePerson10: no, linking to the app store blurb would not help at all, as that is merely the app developer/marketer telling you what they think you want to hear in order to download the app. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Where do I cite it to then? Theres not really much places to cite it to. LittlePerson10 (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is a strong indication that the topic is not notable so we do not require an article about it. Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:35, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Askthebamaphoenix

I am trying to understand why my article was deleted about a social media presence. There are many Wikipedia pages dedicated to other social media personalities yet mine was deleted. What I was attempting to do is set up a few wiki pages regarding social media personalities that fight for social justice and equality. So, can you tell me what is wrong with that? When y'all literally have a page dedicated to. ones that have done nothing other than just become popular. If it is simply a question of reformatting or adding notations. Please let me know because these are people who have put themselves in danger to fight for and stand up for other people. This was the first of several that I was going to add but I did not want to go through all the trouble of adding them if they were going to be deleted. Please advise and if possible, not in technical terminology please. Askthebamaphoenix (talk) 13:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Askthebamaphoenix: if you mean  Courtesy link: Draft:Bama2Dads, that was deleted as promotional. And I can see that in  Courtesy link: User:Askthebamaphoenix/sandbox you're about to repeat that. This is a pretty sure-fire way to get yourself blocked, so I would advise caution. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Askthebamaphoenix, I rejected your original draft and marked it for speedy deletion. Unfortunately you do not meet the very strict WP:NPEOPLE or WP:NORG criteria. Further attempts to make these articles will also be rejected, I am afraid.
Wikipedia has millions of articles and unfortunately many are poor quality and would not be permitted on Wikipedia if submitted today. Qcne (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about people who do good things. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:45, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Falia2

What can I do to make this page work? I am not affiliated to this product Falia2 (talk) 13:45, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Falia2: why do you keep asking the same question, and opening a new thread? As already advised (twice), this draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:47, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:49, 31 August 2023 review of submission by The Phil Pixie

This is my first article I've created from scratch....Is this now ready for review, is there anyhing else that needs to be added? The Phil Pixie (talk) 17:49, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Phil Pixie. Your brief draft fails to make the case that this company meets the notability guideline for companies. An acceptable Wikipedia article about a company summarizes significant coverage of the company in reliable, independent sources. Neither of your references meet that standard. Cullen328 (talk) 17:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:04, 31 August 2023 review of submission by Ogoos11

Remove this article from draft section Ogoos11 (talk) 22:04, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you were to attempt to place it in the encyclopedia yourself, it would likely be deleted. You'll need to move on from this. 331dot (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 1

03:37, 1 September 2023 review of submission by Queenvictoria

I would like to know how to communicate with the decliner (Jamiebuba) so that I can correct the article. Do I contact them directly on their talk page? Do I add an AFC comment below theirs on the article? Or do I communicate on the subject here? Or on the articles talk page?

I see that they view the NYT and Forbes articles as trivial mentions. Should I remove the sentence that cites them and remove the citations?

Thanks in advance. Queen Victoria (talk) 03:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Queenvictoria You do not need to remove them, you just have to provide additional sources that discuss the subject indepth. NYT is a Reliable sources but we require sources that demonstrate the subject is indeed notable. Jamiebuba (talk) 06:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:58, 1 September 2023 review of submission by 31.223.116.133

I have recently communicated with the artist. He states that he has now an interview online, as well as credible accomplishments. Is this enough for a Wikipedia page 31.223.116.133 (talk) 12:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea what draft you're referring to, as your edit history shows nothing, and there is no Draft:Georgie P. But no, an interview cannot be used to establish notability (assuming that's what you're asking about?), so this wouldn't help in any case. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1173301096"