Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 436: Line 436:
:
:
:Notability is determined by receiving {{tq|significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic}}. If a subject doesn't have this, then we have no way to verify the article's contents, so can't have an article. <span style="color: darkgreen"> ~~ </span> [[User:OxonAlex|<span style="color: darkgreen"><small>Oxon</small>Alex</span>]] [[User talk:OxonAlex|<span style="color: darkgreen">- talk</span>]] 08:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
:Notability is determined by receiving {{tq|significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic}}. If a subject doesn't have this, then we have no way to verify the article's contents, so can't have an article. <span style="color: darkgreen"> ~~ </span> [[User:OxonAlex|<span style="color: darkgreen"><small>Oxon</small>Alex</span>]] [[User talk:OxonAlex|<span style="color: darkgreen">- talk</span>]] 08:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

== Request on 12:49:00, 17 December 2019 for assistance on [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC]] submission by Brenchristo ==
{{anchor|12:49:00, 17 December 2019 review of submission by Brenchristo}}
{{Lafc|username=Brenchristo|ts=12:49:00, 17 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Brenda_Mohammed}}

12:49:00, 17 December 2019 review of submission by Brenchristo
{{Lafc|username=Brenchristo|ts=12:49:00, 17 December 2019|link=
<!-- [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Brenchristo]] OR [[Draft:Author Brenda Mohammed~~~~~~~~]] -->
}}
<!-- I need assistance to quote references in my article. What type of references do I need? Can I submit photos of my certificates? -->


<!-- End of message -->[[User:Brenchristo|Brenchristo]] ([[User talk:Brenchristo|talk]]) 12:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:49, 17 December 2019

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


December 11

02:44:13, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Frakes928


Found and added a number of citations highlighting both music ensembles and solo work for Tite's career Frakes928 (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frakes928. Discogs and last.fm, being user-generated, are not reliable sources. Celebrityaccess appears to be a press release. The three newspaper articles either don't mention Groce / Tite, or mention him only in passing. Apple and cduniverse are indiscriminate, so they don't help demonstrate notability either. All in all, I concur with the reviewer that the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 15:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:31:00, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Epiphyllumlover


Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I found some reliable sources not yet mentioned in the article, but a reviewer put on a "Stop" button that I believe was unwarranted. How can I get the stop button removed from the article so I can continue to improve the article with the additional sources for eventual re-submission? For reference and a listing of the additional sources, see the end of the discussion on User_talk:RoySmith#Lutheran_Indian_Ministries, the new ones are the books by Wengert and Atkins, and the article in the star phoenix. Thank you for your consideration.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Epiphyllumlover. After declines by 8 different reviewers in 21 months, rejection of the draft is meant to convey that reviewers do not intend to evaluate it again. Under these circumstances, continuing to re-submit it might be construed as tendentious editing. However, unless you have a conflict of interest or are editing under some form of sanctions, Articles for Creation is an optional process for you. If you disagree with the advice of experienced editors, you may move the draft to article space and let it sink or swim there. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks...I have some experience in AfD and am about 90% sure it would survive a deletion attempt if I improved it first. I resubmitted it without modification all of those times because in reading the comments left by the reviewers it was evident that they did not evaluate all of the sources. Maybe half of the sources are not third party--this is an obvious obstacle to reviewers. They probably thought all of the sources were inadequate just because the first ones they looked at were. Also, I was of the impression that there was no limit to the number of times I could request a review--I was evidently wrong on that.
I am not under sanctions, and do not have a COI, as I am not a member of any organization connected to the one mentioned in the article.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 00:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:18:36, 11 December 2019 review of draft by Ccccchaton000


How do I delete this. (kind of want to cry but eh :b) Ccccchaton000 (talk) 05:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ccccchaton000: I tagged the draft for deletion for you. You can also add {{db-author}} to pages you made or blank the page yourself. Stale draft will also be deleted eventually. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:56, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:01:34, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Goforexcellence


The company website is updated. Could you re-review? Also feel free to tell me what would be required to make it published? thanks Goforexcellence (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


08:28:09, 11 December 2019 review of draft by 84.46.52.229

Could somebody with admin rights please "add" (=history merge) the deleted (expired PROD 2016) Kim Iverson with an o to this draft with an e? The birth date on d:Q6408835 needs a better reference than imported from a deleted enwiki page, and I'd like to know which of many US radio stations were considered as "notable" on the deleted page. While at it please also check File:Kim-041.jpg, maybe it can be recycled with a "move to commons".
–84.46.52.229 (talk) 08:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will look into the history merge. In future please make such requests at WP:REFUND. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:28, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have done the history merge, and restored content and a photo from the previously deleted version. Please have a look. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:56, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DESiegel: ^.^b I'm aware of WP:REFUND, but the o vs. e issue could have killed the e draft instead of rescuing the o history—or rather, that's what I feared, because it was all backwards. –84.46.53.86 (talk) 10:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sources seem pretty clear that it is the same person, and notability now seems clear, so i did the refund, integrated to old info, and approved the draft. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:08, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:58:38, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Jordifernanjo


Good morning, As I told you few days ago, I need to have this article published before Christmas. I don’t understand why it is rejected and what should I do to publish it. I would be glad if you could help me.

Regards, Jordi

Jordifernanjo (talk) 08:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jordifernanjo: As the reviewer remarked, the draft has no suitable sources for establishing notability and will not be published in its current state. Since you didn't add any such sources after two reviews, we can only assume there are none and reviewer's decision to decline the article is correct at this time. Unless the game receives coverage such as in-depth reviews from sources such as those listed here, I'm afraid there really isn't anything you can do to have it published. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we rely on sources. I don't know why you need to have this article published before Christmas, but this isn't a criteria we would use for deciding on content to include (if you happen to have connection with the subject matter, you must disclose it). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:28, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Jakeswit

I am working to be included on Wikipedia. As I see it, many of my contemporary theatre artists are portrayed with links to their work, their reviews and their webpages. I have worked with some of the most regarded directors in Europe and feel that it is time to be included in this list. I understand if I am not allowed to write an article about myself, but would like to know how to get included on Wikipedia. Can you help me?

Jakeswit (talk) 10:43, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Create something notable. Then people will care about it and will create the page. DougHill (talk) 00:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:30:02, 11 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Adamkesselhaut


I'm confused a little because all of the links and assertions in this page are true, certifiable, certified and carefully referenced.

thank you for your help

Adamkesselhaut 16:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference and Discogs is not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 16:43, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:15, 11 December 2019 review of submission by RWNYC19


This is an established writer - please find further information on him below:

https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%91%D7%9F_%D7%95%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%A8

http://wimmerbooks.co.il/

https://www.e-vrit.co.il/Author/1087

https://simania.co.il/authorDetails.php?itemId=14002

https://www.booksefer.co.il/index.php?q=%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%91%D7%9F+%D7%95%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%A8&f=author&dir=site&tb_name=catalog&page=search

https://www.makorrishon.co.il/nrg/online/47/ART2/209/734.html

RWNYC19 (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Being an established writer does not necessarily mean you are notable I'm afraid. Your draft Draft:Reuven Wimmer has no independent sources so no chance whatsoever of being accepted. Wikipedia has no interest in what the articles subject wants to say about himself, only what reliable sources have reported.You will need to declare your conflict of interest too. Theroadislong (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:28:44, 11 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Jingleman2


"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified."

NBC, The TENNESSEAN, The WILSON, THE VOICE, are ALL reliable sources. I looked at 10 different articles, cut and paste exactly as they did theirs and you are rejecting? Sundance Head, Frank Sims, etc... Please explain and do I delete citations, or just get someone else to review?


Jingleman2 (talk) 20:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jingleman2. I rather suspect that the reveiwer looked only at the sources used as inline citations. of those, the allmusic and discogs souces are mere track listings with no detailed coverage at all. Moreover, some editors question the reliability of Discogs in any case. The Two NBC.com sources go to pages no longer on display, so there is effectively no source for either of those. The popvortex source is blocked by my firewall as unsafe, so i cannot evaluate it. The 7th cited source is a wiki, and is therefor not reliable and should be removed.
Of the general references not used in the draft as inline cites, The Tennessean articel is faitrly good, althoguh it is partly an interview, which reduces its value. The 2paragraphs source is a bit brief to count as "in depth" coverage, but has some value. The Wilsomn Post seems to be local hometown coverage, and so of limited value. The Idol Chatter source seems not bad, although perhaps a bit superficial. Also i don;'t know that site or how reliable it is considered. The Chronicle Of Mt Juliet is a deaad link at elast for me -- an archived version might be found, I don't have time to look just now. In any case it looks like another case of local hometown reporting. Channel 10 News looks not bad, but again in significant part an interview. And finally there is another wiki, which is again of no use and should be removed promptly.
If the non-local sources from the second group are used in-line, and one or two more on the level of the Tennessean are also added and used, or if the NBC sources can be recorved from an archive site, things might be in pretty good shape. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


DES (talk) 22:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU so much DESiegel!!! I appreciate your direction, and guidance. This is very helpful and I will do my best to fine tune. Should I delete the Discog and Allmusic references Thank you again, my best to you and your family!

22:05:14, 11 December 2019 review of submission by DougHill

Allen Estrin is clearly notable as the co-creator of PragerU. Whatever one may think of PragerU, it's one of the biggest (if not the biggest) providers of political videos on the internet. And if one looks at the sources cited, one can see that PragerU would not exist if it were not for Estrin. (I added a new one, but the pre-existing ones already establish this.) One criticism is that the independent articles cited are not directly about Estrin. This is true, but Estrin is not the public face of PragerU, Dennis Prager is. Can a key person in a major enterprise, but not out in front of it, be notable?

Thanks in advance for replies, and thanks for the quick turnaround so far. DougHill (talk) 22:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

if one looks, none of the sources are independent coverage. I would expect someone applying for AFC to understand that interviews, Amazon and listing aren’t valid sources. Praxidicae (talk) 00:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't Mother Jones and Daily Signal independent coverage? (Even if they interview their subjects as part of their story?) Of course PragerU is extremely dependent, but that link does show that he's a co-founder. (The other links just show that he did indeed write or do the things the article credits him for.) DougHill (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DougHill The Mother Jones piece is indeed significant independant coverage, with a though article about Estrin and his work before the interview section starts. Two more like this and i would approve the draft. Praxidicae should probably have noted that. The Daily Signal piece is a more traditional interview, where more than half of the content comes from the subject. But it is unlike the classic interview, wheer a reporter asks short questions and the subject gives long answers. Those are not considered independent here, because all the significant information is in the words of the subject. The Daily Signal story has significant editotrial content in the reporter's voice, i would count it as perhaps 1/2 of the usual three essential sources. As to the other cited sources:
  • The first is from his business, PragerU, clearly not independent and too breif to be of much value even if it were. Does nothign for notability.
  • The moviews.disney is just an announcement of a production, and does not even mention Estrin . It should be removced from the draft as of no value whatever.
  • The LA times review would be of value in an article about the film Bare Essentials but it again does not even mention Estrin 's name.
  • The 7thart piece very breifly describes a production by Estrin, and does mention his name, but does not help the case for notability. It also looks as if it is largely based on a press release, but even if it is independant, it is not significant coverage.
  • The Amazon listing should be removed promptly. An OCLC or google book link, or even jsut the title, publisher, date and ISBN are enough to support a statement that the book exoists and Estrin was a co-author. An actual independent reveiw of the book might contribute to notability under WP:NAUTHOR. This does not.
I hope that makes things a bit clearer. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DES for your clarity and courtesy. Since then, we've added and removed some sources. Some of the previous sources were included just to support facts and not notability. I felt embarrassed to read that I'd included sources from disney and LA Times that don't list Estrin. So I rechecked, and they do mention Estrin and the roles the article attributes to him. So I've left those sources in. The amazon link was also just to verify a fact, but it's now replaced with a review, which supports the fact and contributes to notability. We've also added a review and a mention of a book he co-wrote.
We've added some more news articles also. So I hope you'll take another look, and advise us what the draft might still need to satisfy notability. If we're not close, we might consider redirecting the article to PragerU#History. If we do so, we should include some comments in the redirect code about what an article would need before the redirect is replaced. DougHill (talk) 06:37, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DES for offering to take another look. Here are the cited sources which IMHO best speak to notability.

Thanks in advance, DougHill (talk) 20:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information, DougHill I will take a look. I note tha tin your post above dated 12 January 2020 you write: Since then, we've added and removed some sources and We've added some more news articles and So I hope you'll take another look, and advise us. Just who exactly is "we" and "us" that you refer to? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lately "we" is mostly me, but I did not start the draft. It has had several contributors, including at least one other lately. But I think I found all the sources listed above. (I think of Wikipedia pages, including drafts, as the collective efforts they are. So that's how I wrote.) DougHill (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And thanks DES for recommending book reviews, which have been added. DougHill (talk) 17:24, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:05:52, 11 December 2019 review of submission by Creators Robot

I have found this book is registered in the Google Books database. As an editor, we are always taught to find out reliable sources and google books is one of those. The book has also got ISBN number which is very necessary to provide the notability of a book. So, I believe this book has got enough notability to be listed in the Wikipedia. Thank you. Creators Robot (talk) 23:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much any published book will be on Google books and have an ISBN. To show notability, cite some reviews of the book or news about it. DougHill (talk) 00:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 12

04:51:06, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Chrisanna Jolly


I would like to re-submit this article because this person is very well known in Telecom (VAS- Value Added Service) in Myanmar. He has a lot of operator experiences and he has many friends/colleagues in Telecom field. Even not in Myanmar Country, he is also famous among foreign Telecom countries. Some of the journalist/reporter offer to interview him but he rejected. According to his nature, he don't want rose to fame among people. So, I want to do this article about him, aim that the other people can search easily about Zat's information. If other foreign Telecom company that want to invest in Myanmar can know/search about his information, it may become good effective on both side.


Chrisanna Jolly (talk) 04:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chrisanna Jolly. None of the sources now cited in the drat comes anywhere close to demonstrating the notability of Zay Yar Phyo. The reviewer, Theroadislong did a "rejection" not a mere "decline" meanign that the reviewer does not think any amount of editing would demonstrae notability of this person, and you should not waste your time or that of future reviewers. What would be needed to demonstrate notability is multiple independent published reliable sources, at least three of them, each of which discusses Zay Yar Phyo in some detail. See our guideline on notability for people. How many friends Zay Yar Phyo has, or what he has accomplished. Nor is Wikipedia interested in helping publicize him to potential investors or business associates. An ordinary web page would serve that function. Nor do interviews, even if he were to do them, help much. Interviews show what he says about himself. Wikipedia needs to know what other people, people who are not friends, family, or close associates, have already published about Zay Yar Phyo in reliable sources. Unless there is enough of that to base an article on, this will not go forward. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In fact the current cited soiurces are his linked-in page, his email, and a document from his employer, if I mam reading it correctly. None of these are independent, and the first two would not even belong in any Wkipedia article about him as supporting sources, even if good reliable sources were found. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the ping. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Hellknowz, but "fixing" a ping doesn't work. One must re-ping in a separately signed comment as I am now doing for Chrisanna Jolly. Sorry to have messed up the initial ping. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I realized after I posted but was way too lazy to fix (I signed so it pings, but totally zoned out that it needs to be an addition). I've literally told other about this before too. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:30:52, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Nguyễn Việt Tùng


I know this one is not attraction in wikipedia at all, but it is no meaningful to my son as well as my family. My wife is about to divorce me and I only have my son left (you could see him in the picture I uploaded), he is my whole world. So could you please kindly give us an exceptional option for our page could be approved?

Me and my family thank you so much!!! Nguyễn Việt Tùng (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nguyễn Việt Tùng: I'm afraid Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is based on reliable sources and we do not make exceptions for personal pages. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:38:45, 12 December 2019 review of submission by John19993


John19993 (talk) 11:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

i am requesting a review on this article becuase i believe in it's Notability. The article contains facks and is worthy of it's own page, i also believe as time goes by people will only add to this article. Please consider a re-review.

Thank you

Kind regards John

I'm afraid the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:02, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Chamith01


Chamith01 (talk) 15:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:06:06, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Texas Black Walnut


Texas Black Walnut (talk) 16:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC) How do you link external sources to your article?[reply]

@Texas Black Walnut: Did you read the Help:Referencing for beginners page linked at your draft? —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Texas Black Walnut: See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to cite sources. (All sources are external, since Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source). Sources need not be online. When referencing a source, there should always be a bibliographic description of it, but there may or may not be a URL link to it.
A related but different concept is an external link. Like references, they are external, but they are always online and are generally not sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:59:56, 12 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by AlliePippy


I have tried twice to get an article for a band, that I'm a big fan of, published. I added more references the second time, as that's what I translated the reason for the first rejection to be. The second rejection says it doesn't meet the criteria. However, when I read the criteria, the band does meet it.

The list Criteria for musicians and ensembles has 12 points that the band must meet at least one of. The band, I am trying to create the article for, meets several. I thought I had gotten this across in my article, but perhaps I haven't?

Could use some clear direction, and layman's terms preferred, as I find the responses that Wikipedia sends back a bit like trying to decipher legal jargon. I appreciate any time and help you can give to help me get this article published, as I feel this band deserves some notoriety.

Kind Regards, Allie

AlliePippy (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't made clear which of the criteria at WP:NMUSIC this band meets? You only have one source which looks reliable to me which is [1] Facebook, Spotify and their own website do not contribute to notability. Theroadislong (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @AlliePippy: The criteria you mention at WP:NBAND are not strict rules. Firstly, WP:GNG is the "king" for determining presumed notability. The band criteria simply help narrow and slightly expand these based on years of consensus and experience with other articles. The key introductory sentence says that the subject "may be notable" not that it definitely will be. If you don't have multiple reliable independent sources, then it mostly doesn't matter what additional criteria are met from supplementary notability guidelines for specific subject areas, because we can't write enough content using proper source. From those in the draft, [2] looks okayish, but short and focused on one event, while half the content is by the band themselves. May be [3] could be suitable if you can show that author's credentials as an established reliable reviewer. All the rest of the sources fail one of more criteria from WP:GNG. Also, can you specify exactly which NBAND criteria does this pass in your opinion? —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


@Hellknowz:@Theroadislong:Thanks for the feedback. More questions...
  1. 5Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

--They produced 2 albums with Linus Entertainment. My understanding is that Linus is a more important indie label.

  1. 10Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).

-- Here is a list of where their music has been featured and used very prominently. The links to articles I included, talk about many of these. Outer Limits (television) Smallville (television) EA MLS Soccer (video game) Triple Play MLB (video game) SSX Tricky (video game) WWE Day of Reckoning (video game) Molson Canadian (national ad) Ford Canada (national ad) Vancouver Canucks (game play) Minnesota Wild (game play) Vancouver Giants (entrance theme) Jet Boy (motion picture) A Bug and a Bag of Weed (motion picture) CBC Hockey Night in Canada CFL Football TSN TSN Hockey Theme Musique Plus Intro Fox Sports

  1. 11Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

--Their music was on major radio stations in the past. Their new song is now being played on The Bear.

Why are the interview/articles I provided links to, not eligible? Aren't Allmusic.com with Artist Biography by Jason MacNeil, last.fm/music/shocore/+wik, Piquenewsmagazine.com, all credible?

[User:AlliePippy|AlliePippy]] (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AlliePippy. You may be able to make an argument that Linus Entertainment is a more important indie label. It wouldn't have counted as one when it released ShoCore's first album, because the label had just been formed that year, but now nine of the first ten artists they list on their roster are notable.
If ShoCore's albums are what make them notable, then you're burying the lead. The first two sentences of the draft do a good job of establishing context: what, where, who. But they should also explain why the topic is notable, e.g. "... known for releasing two albums on label Linus Entertainment."
The draft's independent sources don't support their music being in rotation on a major network or performed for a work of media that is notable. With better sources you might be able to make a case for these criteria or others.
Last.fm, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. The allmusic biography is independent and reliable, but at under 100 words, it's really short. Pique is reliable. Whether it is independent depends on how strictly one interprets the exclusion "except for the following: ... publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves". Some reviewers may also discount it because it's a small town outlet with a limited audience. An article in the Vancouver Sun or The Globe and Mail would carry more weight. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources for a list of sources Wikipedians have found useful in writing about albums and musicians. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:25:08, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Codeauth


Hello, we are attempting to create a page for a national startup accelerator event named CodeLaunch. CodeLaunch is a non-profit organization that hosts an annual competition among startup organizations from all over the world where applicants pitch their idea to a review panel, an audience, and a handful of qualified judges. There is no application fee or surrendered equity for applying. CodeLaunch is now entering its 8th year and we are attempting to restore the Wikipedia page, which cites that all references are from within its own organization - giving the impression that this page is self-promoting. There are numerous local and national publications that have shared articles about CodeLaunch. Would including these references make a stronger case for the page to be approved? Any additional tips for approval would be greatly appreciated.

Codeauth (talk) 18:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Codeauth Who is "we"? Wikipedia accounts are for single person use only. The draft is just blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:58:52, 12 December 2019 review of draft by Andy Halper

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

FIRST TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING HELP ON THE LINE BELOW THIS LINE. Take as many lines as you need. -->}

I want to confirm that I have properly submitted my article for review and where I should look to see if it has been published. I know this will take time. Thanks.

Andy Halper (talk) 18:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two comments, first please follow the recommendations for referencing given, secondly if it is published, the draft page will be redirected to the published page and I that should also put a note on your talk page.Naraht (talk) 19:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:08, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Andy Halper


Andy Halper (talk) 19:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes - placed references under reference title and added <ref> before and after each reference but I'm really not sure what else I need to do. Thanks.

Andy Halper Creating a new article is one of the most difficult tasks on Wikipedia, you really need to read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources and you also need to ascertain whether your subject is actually notable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 13

02:40:27, 13 December 2019 review of submission by Gecko990


Someone has been messing with the WikiProject Articles for creation page!!! Can it be cleaned up?

Gecko990 (talk) 02:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:56:48, 13 December 2019 review of submission by 68.132.13.90

Mr Manzi is a well known and respected law enforcement officer, businessman and security expert. He is publicly known for his appearance in Andrew Jareki's The Jinx, The Life and Death of Robert Durst. Mr. Manzi is now tasked with protecting the Durst family in New York City. He has received for his past law enforcement work, City Council Citation ( Councilman Fiala), City Council Proclamation (Councilman Andrew Lanza) 68.132.13.90 (talk) 02:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:23:22, 13 December 2019 review of submission by DylanStone17


Dylan Stone (talk) 06:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:53:13, 13 December 2019 review of submission by DylanStone17


Dylan Stone (talk) 06:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Un sourced and just blatant advertising of a non notable topic. Theroadislong (talk) 09:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:25:45, 13 December 2019 review of draft by Gajendra Ray


Gajendra Ray (talk) 07:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

HI , i have add an articles why not response please answer this article "Sangor mithila nepal "

Hi Gajendra Ray. Draft:Sangor Mithila Nepal is in the pool to be reviewed. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so you can expect a review by May 2020. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:31:06, 13 December 2019 review of submission by 219.91.238.108


I got strong references i:e Google search and crunchbase more

219.91.238.108 (talk) 09:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@219.91.238.108: Stop Please stop trying to use Wikipedia to promote yourself or your company. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:30:36, 13 December 2019 review of submission by Rrajji


Raghubar 11:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

There are no independent sources, and no indications of significance much less notability. As far as one can tell from this draft, this person is simply not notable. See our guideline on the notability of people. Unless there are additional facts, and independent reliable sources supporting those facts, and discussing this person in depth there simply will not be an article about this person, and trying to create one by editing without those facts and sources simply wastes everyone's time. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:34:00, 13 December 2019 review of submission by 68.103.78.155

{{Lafc|username=68.103.78.155|ts=14:34:00, 13 December 2019|page=

What No 2020-21 United States Television Network Schedule Article I Created and drafted this article almost 3 Months Ago it has 6 References but i hope it's enough to be an article. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:18:24, 13 December 2019 review of submission by Frakes928


Requested re review - added additional citations from news sources Frakes928 (talk) 15:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:41:23, 13 December 2019 review of submission by Meghani89

I have provided authentication and valid references for this popular figure in Sri Lanka, Raween Kanishka. Most of the articles are in Sri Lankan language. I feel that's the main reason for this wikipedia to get declined. Please look into the matter Meghani89 (talk) 20:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Meghani89, The sources are not suffucient. They need to be from reliable and independent sources, and give significant coverage. A list of winners of an event is not enough. Think news articles, coverage in magazines, that sort of thing. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 14

05:16:46, 14 December 2019 review of submission by Nikhilpriyatam


Hello,

Thanks for reviewing the article. I would like to request a re-review of this article for the following reasons.

  • I feel the subject is notable as he has been awarded the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award by Government of India, which is the highest Indian recognition, given to an artist.
  • In this article, I have included only few awards which the subject has won. I am collecting suitable references for about 30 more awards and honours which were bestowed upon the subject, which affect the notability criteria.
  • The article under consideration states facts with appropriate citations. It does not use "peacock language" unlike the earlier version.
  • The number of references might seem low as I have not included those references which do not add significant new information and those which are not in English language. Also, I have only added citations which are accessible through Internet. There are a lot of articles on this subject in the print media which I do not have access to. I am assuming the community will contribute to this article significantly.
  • While, I understand that "Notability" is a subjective matter, I do believe there needs to be some standardisation with respect to this parameter. There exist Wikipedia articles on Indian classical musicians such as Neyveli Santhanagopalan, Pantula Rama who according to my understanding have similar notability as the subject of this article.

Thanks Nikhil


Nikhilpriyatam (talk) 05:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikhilpriyatam. As a recipient of the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award, Ramaswamy is likely notable according to WP:ANYBIO. Piling on less important awards will not make notability more certain. On the contrary, it is likely to obscure his notability by burying what is significant in a mass of things that are not. I've tweaked the first sentence to provide context and emphasize the apex award.
The draft comes across as promotional despite your conviction that it avoids peacock language. This may be due partly to cultural differences between South Asia and the West. It may also be due to a lack of context and attribution. One source says "He was an A-grade staff artiste of the All-India Radio, Vijayawada, from 1948 to 1986, before retiring." Readers outside Andhra Pradesh may not know Vijayawada, let alone the significance of being "A-grade". Another source lists him as one of several hundred "Top Grade Artistes" in the category of Carnatic musicians, giving 1988 as the date the grade was awarded. At a minimum, the draft should attribute the opinion, such as: "All India Radio ranked him as a top grade Carnatic musician from 1988". And since the significance is unclear (is the grade based on seniority, talent, or what?) it may be better to omit it entirely.
If you make an effort to address the promotional tone, context, and attribution, then you may resubmit the draft by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top of it. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:48:48, 14 December 2019 review of submission by Ashish Vaidyanath Dwivedi

Why my submission was declined Ashish Vaidyanath Dwivedi (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ashish Vaidyanath Dwivedi. User:Ashish Vaidyanath Dwivedi/sandbox was declined because the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). That is commonly true for student wing or other politicians below the level of state-wide or national office (e.g. Maharashtra Legislative Assembly or Lok Sabha), although major local political figures like the Mayor of Mumbai are notable if they have received significant press coverage. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:18, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

04:10:03, 15 December 2019 review of submission by Speakersden digitals


Speakersden digitals (talk) 04:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Speakersden digitals, did you have a question? The linked article has been denied due to the subject not being notable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:30:12, 15 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Pritesh Lunkad


I had submitted a page for review and it got rejected can i know the reason for rejection and how can i make the required changes to be able to publish my page

Pritesh Lunkad (talk) 13:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Might be worth asking the reviewer DGG regarding this. It might be a close call in my opinion, as it does look like a bit of press on this one. The article needs a lot of work to be promoted, since there are external links inproperly added, and a lot of grammatical errors. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:13:27, 15 December 2019 review of draft by Manar Wehbe


I don't understand the copyrights for the Posters of a theatrical play in Lebanon. The poster are already al over internet. I fixed my citations still have some to do but I don't know how to verify the posters used.

Manar Wehbe (talk) 15:13, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The question is - is the images such as File:Majnoun Yehki Poster.jpg, created by yourself, and you are the sole copyright owner? Most images are owned by someone, just because it is on the internet somewhere, doesn't mean it is your "own work". Did you create these posters? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:39, 15 December 2019 review of submission by Sentai01

I now understand that it is disruptive and too soon and maybe not because a season 3 trailer might air after the masked singer season 2 finale. And also I took some references away so I have enough already and I’ll wait on wednesday to edit so we can get more information. I promise. Sentai01 (talk) 21:48, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sentai01, please see Wikipedia:Too soon. You can resubmit the draft for review when more information is available to base the article on. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 11:05, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But I can’t. It only says ask for advice and no resubmit, can you fix it? Sentai01 (talk) 3:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

21:54:25, 15 December 2019 review of submission by PINGGPONGG


PINGGPONGG (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PINGGPONGG, for anything to have a Wikipedia article it needs significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic. The article should be based entirely on what these sources say, without anything based on personal knowledge. This is so the contents of the article can be verified.
In your case, there isn't this coverage, therefore it is impossible to write an article, hence it was rejected. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 11:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I made myself so stop it

23:19:00, 15 December 2019 review of submission by Kenpj


Kenpj (talk) 23:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:19:00, 15 December 2019 review of submission by Kenpj

I accept the opinion that my draft lacks notability. I accept the advice to incorporate it as history within the existing article Outwood Academy Adwick. Could you do this for me? Or explain how I could do it? I am a novice. Kenpj (talk) 23:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kenpj, at its simplest level, simply copy the wikicode into a new section of the article you're merging into, then state that it was a merge from the draft in the edit summary.
There will then have to be some copyediting etc to ensure it fits well in the new article it's been placed in.
See WP:merging#How to merge has a more detailed look at the steps. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 11:01, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is Percy Jackson Grammar School. Kenpj (talk) 23:21, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

10:39:02, 16 December 2019 review of submission by Winston16

i have added 5 reliable and independent sources that give the subject significant coverage. please can you re review this

Winston16 (talk) 10:39, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

None of the new sources appear to be significant coverage. The closest is the Tugendhaft article, but it says almost nothing about the person and talks mostly about the event. Plus, the newspaper is focused on the subject, so it would have needed to be much more in-depth. The rest are basically profile entries and primary sources where the content is provided by the subject themselves. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:18:48, 16 December 2019 review of submission by Juanestebanp94

I request that please there be a new revision of this article in which I have rewritten everything from scratch, I have added many more references and literature, and I have changed the wording to make the article more informative. I hope it will now be notable enough to be included in Wikipedia.

Thank you.

Juanestebanp94 (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Juanestebanp94 Lots of unsourced and entirely inappropriate promotional content... "The company moved to a larger office in Barcelona on Passeig de Gràcia, and for the first time had separate departments dedicated to Development, Projects, Marketing, Accounts and Management" " The main outcome of the decade of research in these fields was the creation of a prototype microscopic traffic simulator and a software environment for traffic modeling and analysis" " launched Auto, a new software platform for testing path planning algorithms for self-driving vehicles" " its software is used in 85 countries and deployed in transportation networks worldwide, from New York City to Paris, San Diego, Toronto, Sydney, Singapore and London." etc etc etc. Theroadislong (talk) 15:39, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:14:22, 16 December 2019 review of submission by Amazsara10

Hi, I am trying to translate a page and upload the images but fail for that, appreciate if you can give some tips for that? Thanks. ~amazsara10 Amazsara10 (talk) 17:14, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Amazsara10, firstly, please see commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Amazsara10. All of the images have been deleted by Commons because they were copyright violations. As images taken from the internet, they are assumed copyrighted by default. If you do in fact own the permission to use the images, please email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, who will confirm this, and store the permission in their archives. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 18:09, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


17:54:26, 16 December 2019 review of submission by TylLangDev

For some months I made a real new programming language called: Tyl. I think that software developers of all ages and backgrounds, will have an interest in a new and special programming language. I am not sure that the COI issue is as much relevant to the page because I am not into business or self promotion of any kind, the software is given on a free basis and is intended for anyone who has interest in software languages. If any modifications are needed, or other actions, please let me know. I intend to give this software also for educational purposes to help students and curious people learn other programming languages. As for references or "sources", it is understood that as a new software language, there are none such, and waiting for years will not be good for those who can be interested in the information in the meantime. I wrote an extensive and special informative website as a reference to the programming language. TylLangDev (talk) 17:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TylLangDev: Wikipedia only covers subjects that have already received reliable independent secondary source coverage. Without sources, there is no chance that the draft will be accepted, because this would fail the fundamental purpose and pillar of Wikipedia. There are many other ways you can publish your content, but I'm afraid Wikipedia is not one of them (until if and when there are sufficient sources). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 18:46, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:54:31, 16 December 2019 review of submission by NoteBlockBoi

There is only one written source on Thomas, however I personally know his grandson Jackson Sabo, could I use Jackson as a source? NoteBlockBoi (talk) 21:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NoteBlockBoi: Wikipedia requires reliable sources, which means no individual accounts. If they did an interview or a piece for a reliable source with editorial oversight, we could use that for content, but not for notability (i.e. approving the draft). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:13, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:55:23, 16 December 2019 review of submission by Jakerubin

Hi, all I'm trying to do is remove the "(business)" from Cargomatic_(business) page - can you please help me. I was planning on creating a new page, and then migrating the old page to the new page - is there a better/faster way to accomplish this? My request got rejected for "copyright" reasons... Jakerubin (talk) 21:55, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the original page for you, it is now at Cargomatic. For future, you can read up on Help:Move, which is what Wikipedia calls renaming pages. I also tagged the Draft:Cargomatic for speedy deletion, because it's copy-pasted content and shouldn't be done. You can edit Cargomatic directly. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:17, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 17

03:00:11, 17 December 2019 review of submission by CheatCodes4ever

I’ve fixed it. How do I submit the page for review? CheatCodes4ever (talk) 03:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CheatCodes4ever, as a rejected draft, it can only be submitted by AFC reviewers using the script.
As the article currently has one source, a link to the chart position of a song they were involved in, it would be rejected if resubmitted.
As the article is a biography of a living person, there should be reliable sources to support all claims made. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 08:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:30:36, 17 December 2019 review of submission by Sentai01


I wish I could resubmit my draft on wednesday but I can’t. It only says ask for advice but no resubmit. can you fix it please?

Sentai01 (talk) 04:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sentai01, it has been rejected, so can't be resubmitted, expect by AFC reviewers themselves, using the tool.
As I've previously told you, please see Wikipedia:Too soon, and WP:Crystal Ball. The article can be submitted when there is more coverage to base the article on. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 08:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:29:34, 17 December 2019 review of draft by DonCamillo


Hi, I don't really understand why this article is not accepted. I agree that the article needs editing, and the media articles that are linked might deal with events that seem insignificant (even if in fact a big market fire is not insignificant in Nigeria) but they also establish that this is one of the main markets if not the main one for a 1,5 M+ city (Kaduna), and more than 40 years old. I've been there and it is a huge market (something like 2 hectares?). Kindly reconsider. Thank you. --DonCamillo (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DonCamillo (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:22:02, 17 December 2019 review of submission by Sunny4bd2


1. This is a web portal that is very useful for people in the region. 2. Unemployment rates are high in my country and people do not have sufficient resources. 3. If this article is published, it could help a lot of job aspirants by helping them reach for options and vacancies which are otherwise not easily accessible. 4. It's weird that the article has been flagged as "not notable" though the webpage clearly provides details that are useful to society as a whole. 5. Searches for Wikipedia articles are high in my area and inclusion of this article could be very beneficial for all age groups. 6. Rejecting the article without any advice or suggestions is not really a Wikipedia thing! Hope you help... Ninja (talk) 07:22, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sunny4bd2, The page was rejected as isn't suitable for an encyclopedia.
However good your motivations are, we only host encyclopedic articles about notable topics, and are not just a web host.
Notability is determined by receiving significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic. If a subject doesn't have this, then we have no way to verify the article's contents, so can't have an article. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 08:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:49:00, 17 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Brenchristo


12:49:00, 17 December 2019 review of submission by Brenchristo


Brenchristo (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=931177798"