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
AnuYog (talk | contribs)
370 edits
AnuYog (talk | contribs)
370 edits
Line 584: Line 584:
== 14:27:22, 25 December 2019 review of draft by AnuYog ==
== 14:27:22, 25 December 2019 review of draft by AnuYog ==
{{Lafc|username=AnuYog|ts=14:27:22, 25 December 2019|draft=Draft:Swiftships}}
{{Lafc|username=AnuYog|ts=14:27:22, 25 December 2019|draft=Draft:Swiftships}}
{{SAFESUBST:Void|


Greetings! Kindly have a look & approve this page.[[User:AnuYog|AnuYog]] ([[User talk:AnuYog|talk]])
Greetings! Kindly have a look & approve this page.[[User:AnuYog|AnuYog]] ([[User talk:AnuYog|talk]])

Revision as of 14:28, 25 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 18

03:22:11, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Cyeks5Om


I believe the page is important because its about a village.

Cyeks5Om (talk) 03:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cyeks5Om, You will need more than just three references. The existing refs do not cover the subject in enough detail to meet our notability guidelines. You need sources that are reliable, independent, and give significant coverage to the subject. If such sources cannot be found, the subject is not notable. If they can be found, please add them, and drop a note here so that a reviewer can re-activate your submission. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no dispute as far as I can see about notability in the sense that Wong Weng-chi is a publically elected official in a national level election. There is no 'number' of references that qualifies for significant coverage - the reliability and independence of the sources should be taken into account. In this case we are citing national newspapers and his role in the articles is certainly more than a trivial mention. Wong is central to the articles' topic. We also have to take into account that many sources are in Chinese language newspapers that would not be suitable here. The particular elections have attracted a vast deal of attention (as can be seen by the detail to which wiki pages about them have been created such as 2019 Hong Kong local elections) and to the extent of International media coverage. It follows that those who are elected are certainly notable. As far as I can see, the page (now) meets wiki criteria for notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyeks5Om (talk • contribs) 10:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are basing your rationale on arguments that are not part of Wikipedia's notability guideline. None of the sources in the article qualify for WP:GNG. And there's no rule against non-English sources if you have such. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:12, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:57:35, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Indianbeauty

I have updated a new reference link. Kindly review it. Indianbeauty (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indianbeauty, The sourcing is still insufficient. The advice of Theroadislong is correct: the subject is not notable and thus we cannot cover it. I suggest you turn your attention elsewhere on Wikipedia, and edit some existing articles. Making an article from scratch is the hardest thing on Wikipedia, and very few folks succeed on their first go. Editing some other articles will give you a feel for how the place works. If you have questions about Wikipedia or on where else to edit, you are welcome to ask them at the friendly Teahouse. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:18:03, 18 December 2019 review of draft by Wikidevster


Can I know in plain English not legal gibberish of why an article is rejected and what needs to be done to fix it... Wikidevster (talk) 05:18, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidevster, It needs sources and prose. You seem to be writing about an album, thus I suggest you read Contra (album) for an example of how an article about an album ought be written. Currently you have no sources (see how to properly add references at referencing for beginners). Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:04:04, 18 December 2019 review of draft by Maddiedlt


How do I rename my draft?

Maddiedlt (talk) 06:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Maddiedlt: See Help:Move, which is what renaming pages is called on Wikipedia (it also moves the talk page, page history, etc.). In short, select Page->Move, in this case it would be at Special:MovePage/Draft:Roger_A._de_la_Torre,_MD. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:05, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:12:16, 18 December 2019 review of draft by Lmanenti


Dear all, I would like to know if my article is under review. Many thanks.

Lmanenti (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lmanenti: Hi, yes it's in the review queue. Unfortunately, it can take a long time to get reviewed because there are so many drafts waiting. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:56:31, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Bandaru Danaiah kavi garu


I dont know why i have been rejected, can you please explain me why Bandaru Danaiah kavi garu (talk) 11:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bandaru Danaiah kavi garu: As the reason stated and linked to, the subject does not meet the notability threshold. You need multiple reliable independent in-depth sources that cover the subject. Also, you should properly WP:DISCLOSE the conflict of interest. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:55:57, 18 December 2019 review of submission by 37.6.253.37


37.6.253.37 (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any questions? Your subject does not meet the notability criteria for musicians - Wikipedia:MUSICBIO, therefore they can't have an article. We would have no way to verify the contents of the article if there is no reliable coverage to base the article on. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 16:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:58:38, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Ehuff29


My article was request was denied because it says it looks like a copy of this link: https://github.com/YetiForceCompany/YetiForceCRM/issues/11680, but that link contains no information in my article, and is about a completely different subject area. Can I ask you to please relook at this article and this link that you have sent me. You sent me a chat page about a discontinued CRM product; my original submission was about Digital Operations Platforms - which have been coined by (and sourced to) Forrester Research.

Ehuff29 (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ehuff29, you would need to contact the deleting administrator in this case. This would be HickoryOughtShirt?4. Only admins can see deleted articles. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 07:51, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:09:55, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Rshirale

I understand the value of Wikipedia and thank you very much for re-reviewing the page. Harvard Business Analytics Program is a part of HBS, a very important program that's shaping analytics for the world. Having this on Wikipedia will definitely help spread the word. Please approve. Rshirale (talk) 21:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rshirale, the draft has been deleted as an administrator saw it as unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia containing neutrally written articles about notable topics, not a place to advertise a business. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 07:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


21:43:47, 18 December 2019 review of draft by HLHJ


I'm an experienced editor, and wanting to help out with the backlog, I found an article that's been here a really long time and fixed it up. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to just move it to the mainspace now. See talk page for comments on sourcing.

HLHJ (talk) 21:43, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed and approved the submission. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 19

02:13:42, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Aganija05

Hi. I got my article declined because of refrencing issues, but I got that fixed. I used reliable sources, such as the bands credits on album releases and their bio on their record label's website. I want to resubmit it. Even though it's sort of a stub, I'm proud of it. Could you tell me how to resubmit my draft? Thanks. Aganija05 (talk) 02:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aganija05: You can just click the blue Resubmit button. However, it will get declined again for the same reason, and probably permanently this time since it likely means you don't have other sources. You need to add sources that meet the threshold of being reliable, independent and in-depth. The previous reviewer already explained this. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:45:54, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Octino


Hi there, i was wondering if you could give me any advice on how to improve my article ? It's my very first one, so any advice I can use on this one, or any future ones would be very helpful.

Thank you!

Octino (talk) 09:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Octino. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Most businesses are not notable. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. No amount of editing can fix the problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again.
You are welcome to write about something else; we have nearly 6 million topics to choose from. If you're only interested in writing new articles about extant companies, you may wish to explore alternative outlets. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:48, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Alx27alx

Hello, i would like to get assistance in order to make the topic more notable for wikipedia. The company i am writing about is pioneering on the swiss market trying to help solve the problem of vacant homes. I understand that perhaps i need to refocus the writing, but i would really appreciate your tips. The idea to add a wiki page came after i saw guestready page on wiki, that is a very simple business and does have an approved page.

Alx27alx (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alx27alx: What you need as a minimum is reliable independent sources that cover the topic in-depth. GuestReady article isn't great, but it has such sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:36:58, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Gvsnraju


Gvsnraju (talk) 14:36, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


can you give me exact information why you are rejecting. if you have reliable source i will provide to you. can you do it for edit?

@Gvsnraju: The threshold is having multiple reliable, independent and in-depth sources. The ones in the article fail at least one point each. It is unlikely there are any better sources or presumably you would have already included them. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:38:42, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Gscroggins


My article has been in the "reviewing phase" for quite a long tim now and was wondering when it would be finished? Gscroggins (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gscroggins, The review process is currently taking at least 8 weeks, please be patient. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:45:44, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Donald Sylvester


I know why my article was rejected. I have more references but don't understand how to format them. Perhaps they are merely footnotes?:

Extended content

Fab TV

[1]

Hollywood Reporter:

[2]

Deadline:

[3]

Variety:

[4]

[5]

Indiewire:

[6]

BAFTA

[7]

Collider:

[8]

AwardsDaily

[9]

Consumerguide.com

[10]

Matthew Toffolo

[11]

BoomLibrary

[12]

BFI

[13]

The Exorcist, Revised 2nd Edition, Mark Kermode, P.127

[14]

The Encyclopedia of Musicians and Bands on Film, Melissa U.D. Goldsmith, Paige A. Willson, Anthony J. Fonseca, P.332

[15]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xitxFigsn14
  2. ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/ford-v-ferrari-sound-team-featured-thrs-behind-screen-show-1255117
  3. ^ https://deadline.com/video/james-mangold-ford-v-ferrari-matt-damon-interview-oscar-contenders/
  4. ^ https://variety.com/2019/artisans/production/james-mangold-crew-ford-v-ferrari-1203393985/
  5. ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/ford-v-ferrari-sound-team-featured-thrs-behind-screen-show-1255117
  6. ^ https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/ford-v-ferrari-sound-design-1202190953/
  7. ^ http://awards.bafta.org/award/2006/film/sound
  8. ^ https://collider.com/ford-v-ferrari-review-christian-bale/
  9. ^ https://www.awardsdaily.com/2019/12/16/joker-1917-ford-v-ferrari-lead-mpse-motion-picture-sound-editors-announce-nominees/
  10. ^ https://blog.consumerguide.com/speed-sound-ford-v-ferrari/
  11. ^ https://matthewtoffolo.com/2018/03/08/interview-with-supervising-sound-editor-donald-sylvester-logan-walk-the-line-310-to-yuma/
  12. ^ https://www.boomlibrary.com/blog/interview-donald-sylvester/
  13. ^ https://www.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2bb58e295f
  14. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=jLiUKCPQWj8C&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=donald+sylvester+sound&source=bl&ots=dpwbWZ6AuB&sig=ACfU3U3O0rxPpmzNCJF3qDJZZc-yg2WpOA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwizrtvAvsLmAhWFKn0KHdHMDjkQ6AEwCXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=donald%20sylvester%20sound&f=false
  15. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=_TP3DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA332&lpg=PA332&dq=donald+sylvester+sound&source=bl&ots=aOp4YtLXVT&sig=ACfU3U0pyCo25UHvcUeWGAKbM1GlIchohA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjqgOmLwsLmAhVtIDQIHawOAL04ChDoATAAegQICxAB#v=onepage&q=donald%20sylvester%20sound&f=false

I hope these references will be enough to permit my article to be published. Thank you!


Donald Sylvester (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Sylvester, You can simply add them, along with the info they support, as you have them currently. You can then use a handy tool called ReFill link here to automatically create nice, filled references. If you need further help, leave a note on my talk page. You might also wish to read referencing for beginners. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:48:16, 19 December 2019 review of submission by TLHistory

I have added more credible sources and added more background information. TLHistory (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TLHistory. The bulk of any article should come from independent, reliable sources. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three such sources. The draft cites one. Find two more, and minimize the use of her and her employer as sources.
The opinion piece in The New York Times is not a reliable source for facts (it may not be used as a source for "was a founding member ..."). It is reliable only for opinions. Those opinions must be attributed, they may not be stated in Wikipedia's voice ("According to feminist Nona Willis-Aronowitz, Densmore believed ...").
Remove Prabook. Being user-generated, it is not a reliable source. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:19, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:58:31, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Nsomnaik21


For niche industries with significant prominence in healthcare (i.e. precision medicine), what are acceptable sources for references? I've written an article citing in-depth articles from prominent third party, industry sources but it was declined with the note that these sources aren't prominent enough. While there are many articles that offer a high-level overview of this industry, company specifics are unlikely to be written up in NYT or WaPo. Given that, what sources would be acceptable? I can also cite scientific journals but most are behind a paywall which I'm trying to avoid. For this article, I followed the rough template offered by The Foundation Medicine article and cited articles from many of the same publications. Guidance is welcome!

Nsomnaik21 (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nsomnaik21. Examples of sources that could demonstrate notability include independent press coverage and analyst reports. The New York Times would be fine. For business coverage, The Wall Street Journal might be even better. Other metropolitan newspapers work too. Often a large paper near the company's headquarters has coverage. Check The Mercury News in San Jose. Academic journals are unlikely to say much about the company unless they're business studies. There is no need to avoid paywalled sources.
Remove Crunchbase, it is considered generally unreliable, and use of the source is generally prohibited. Although NASDAQ-traded companies are often notable, there is no guarantee that Personalis is. Being public for six months may not be long enough for significant coverage to have developed. You may need to wait a couple of years. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 20

01:16:04, 20 December 2019 review of submission by 2601:18C:8500:A730:6C45:A793:8137:60E9


Even though this is not a notable person, he still has done stuff to the community that not a lot of people have done like raised 1,000+ to charity as well as support most charities through his career.

He also built a supportive community to help other people and much more. 2601:18C:8500:A730:6C45:A793:8137:60E9 (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He may be a cool person, but so are many. But only notable people, those that have been covered by reliable sources, can be in Wikipedia. Not being in Wikipedia isn't the end of the world, most folks don't. I recommend you put this article aside for now, and work on editing existing articles. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:44:16, 20 December 2019 review of draft by Ioannis1981dr


Hello! I am John and I created an article in en.wiki about my village in Crete, as I did in greek wiki and in german wiki. My article was declined and I sumbitted it again and I m waiting for approval! Plz Help!!Ioannis1981dr (talk) 09:44, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ioannis1981dr (talk) 09:44, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ioannis1981dr. Draft:Agios Georgios was declined because it makes statements that are not supported by references. You have added some references, but there are still statements that do not cite a source. Specifically, the altitude of the village, its population, and that many people from the village now live in a nearby town and city. To fix the problem, add references for these, or remove the statements. --Worldbruce (talk) 11:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:36:33, 20 December 2019 review of submission by Blackdusty0604


Blackdusty0604 (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blackdusty0604, as a rejected draft, it can only be resubmitted by an AFC reviewer, using the helper script to override the rejection.
The article needs references from reliable sources to support all information in the article. At the moment you only have one reference. We need all information to be from reliable sources, so it is verifiable.
Add some more references, (see WP:v) and then come back here and ask for it to be submitted by an AFC reviewer. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 14:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:38:52, 20 December 2019 review of submission by Blackdusty0604


Blackdusty0604 (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


15:17:13, 20 December 2019 review of draft by GYT19701086


GYT19701086 (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2019 (UTC) Be Bold: Would you allow the artists from a country, where English is not the first spoken language, to claim existing and doing a good work in the world? I do not understand why my article about Mincho Panayotov, artist and art teacher, is not accepted at the English version of Wikipedia. Knowledge about the world outside the english speaking countries is certainely valuable. At the moment Mincho Panayotov's works are presented in two of the main, brand new galleries in Plovdiv, one of the oldest still inhabitted towns in the world.Two of Mincho's sons are also artists, one of them teaching in Bulgaria, and the other one successfully working in Norway. Thank You in advance for your attention! And looking forward to your answer, Galina www.galina-art.com GYT19701086 (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GYT19701086: You will need to improve the article first. We have minimum standards for quality, and your draft does not currently meet them. You need inline citations to reliable sources (please see referencing for beginners for a guide on how to do so). You need at least 3 good sources, ideally more. Every claim in the body must be backed by an inline citation. Also, remove any external links from the body. You would also be well advised to read your submission for grammar errors before submitting again. I wish you well, and you are welcome to ask here if you have any more questions. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:29, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:36:12, 20 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Luis Peral


We submitted a new Wikipedia page for our dear colleague Luis Peral that passed away in July, the first draft was rejected and we submitted another one with changes made from the comments we received. We would like to know if you received that second draft and if its under review.

Thank you, Dara team

Luis Peral (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luis Peral. Please clarify what you mean by "we". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals.
The yellow box at the top of Draft:Luis Peral entitled "Review waiting, please be patient." shows that the draft is in the pool to be reviewed. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so it could take that long. As another reviewer has commented, external links (those that take the reader away from Wikipedia, like Refugee Law Reader) are not allowed in the body of the article. They should be removed or, if they support the content where they appear, converted into references. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Please guide me to correct the shortcomings of this article. Thanks and thanks to the managers Draft:Pars (Shahnameh). Goodarz Irani (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Goodarz Irani, For starters, you need more reliable sources, presented as inline references. See referncing for beginners if you need help. At least 3 good sources, preferably more, are needed. The main issue is lack of context. You need additional context to explain to the average person what this is. Most folks don't have in-depth knowledge of Iranian history, and thus have no clue what the article is about. Make it accessible to the average person please. Additionally, from what I see, this might be fictional? If so, it must be presented as such. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 21

Request on 02:43:59, 21 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Arizonista


I would like to know why my very simple edit. I changed the line "Police found no evidence..." to Police SAID THEY found no evidence..." which of course is more careful and less declarative. This is elementary journalism. Please explain.


Arizonista (talk) 02:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arizonista, Howdy hello! This isn't the standard place to ask those sorts of questions, you should ask at the Teahouse in the future. But since you're here, I'll say: you made that edit 3+ years ago. Kind of late to ask that question. The reason your edit was undone has been lost to time. In fact, its possible that the phrasing was just changed in general. Articles change a lot in the course of years. If you want to make the change again, you ought ask on the talk page of the article in question. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:28, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:51:49, 21 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Dinesh Gautam 1



Dinesh Gautam 1 (talk) 05:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dinesh Gautam 1, Wikipedia is not for writing about yourself or people you know. It is also not for writing about minor news events. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:17, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:51:56, 21 December 2019 review of submission by 42.110.142.141

This subject is notable, Kumar Sen is a very rich business man. Requesting a re-review.

42.110.142.141 (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We do not accept articles with no sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:01, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:12, 21 December 2019 review of submission by 42.110.142.141

The subject is notable. He is a brilliant maths teacher, requesting a re-review

We do not accept articles with no sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:38:52, 21 December 2019 review of submission by Wkpobox


Wkpobox (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Please re-review, additional changes have been made. Thanks

Hi Wkpobox. The references are so incomplete that they are unverifiable. Content on discogs.com is user-generated, so that website is not a reliable source. The AllMusic url is a dead link. There is a relevant page on AllMusic, https://www.allmusic.com/artist/ira-ingber-mn0000098637/credits, but it doesn't support the claims about The Knight Before Christmas or Outlander. I suggest you spend some time studying Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia's best articles about musicians. Then build up experience by editing existing articles for a while. After that, if you still want to create a new article, choose a topic with which you do not have a conflict of interest.
Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:32, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:51:23, 21 December 2019 review of submission by AnuYog


I have made all the changes according to reviewer's suggestions & comments. Kindly have a look & approve this page.AnuYog (talk) 17:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AnuYog (talk) 17:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AnuYog. The draft is in the pool to be reviewed. With the current backlog, you can anticipate that will happen in the next 4-5 months. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:00:48, 21 December 2019 review of submission by Dr.Farrukh Khan


Dr.Farrukh Khan (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Why you have rejected my appeal?.If there is a mistake I kindly say can you please correct the wrong stuff and upload it please.[reply]

Hi Dr.Farrukh Khan. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 22

12:16:37, 22 December 2019 review of draft by Vanrumbeke


Hello,

This article is not an advertisment. What can I change to make this article meet the requirements? I based the article on the Fanki piling system article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franki_piling_system Links and references to official institutions were also added.

Thank you

Vanrumbeke (talk) 12:16, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vanrumbeke, I would recommend at least one more source, preferably more. You should also to make sure that the writing is neutral, and from an encyclopedic perspective. The Franki pile article is not particularly good. I'm afraid that I can't really hold up an example of a good pile article. But really you just need to make sure that the writing is not overly casual, and presents facts without trying to convince the reader of something. The main reason it looks like an ad is because the main source is from the company that created it, and it seems to be more of a fact sheet of numbers rather than an encyclopedia article. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:03, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:19:14, 22 December 2019 review of draft by Brittvansloun


Brittvansloun (talk) 18:19, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brittvansloun, Not quite sure what your issue/question is? Could you perhaps elaborate on how we can help you? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:56, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:13, 22 December 2019 review of submission by TabBytes


Hello moderator, I have added more references to the article. please review it. Thanks TabBytes (talk) 20:50, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TabBytes, Of the three refs, two are from the company being covered. That means they are not independent. Please find at least 3, and preferably more, reliable and independent sources. Also, the draft is written like a promotional puff piece, or an advertisement. Write it from a neutral point of view. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:54, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 23

00:23:04, 23 December 2019 review of draft by Jeanbernard2019


I would like to get an unbiased review of this page as it seems I cannot get to the current reviewers. They aren't from the US and dont understand the notability of our senior US officials. I have also added dozens of articles including the cover of a business magazine https://issuu.com/businessreviewusa/docs/bc_usa_oct2019. He is literally on the cover. If this isn't notable then we should delete 50 percent of the articles on Wikipedia as most don't have such references. Please let me know what I need to do.

Jeanbernard2019 (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeanbernard2019. It's a mistake to add "dozens of articles" when a draft needs only three to demonstrate notability. Quality is far more important than quantity. Business Chief, the "business magazine" you link to, employs creatives, producers, and directors, and describes itself as "delivering world-class creative, video, PR and social media content." So no, being on the cover of it (or its sister publication Gigabit Magazine) is not notable. It only demonstrates an embarrassing desperation to promote him. What you need to do first is disclose your conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:02, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:08:10, 23 December 2019 review of submission by Editor940


There have been hundreds of news articles on prominent news sites like the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette regarding this situation. For it to be rejected on the basis of it not being a big enough thing is nonsense.

Editor940 (talk) 08:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Editor940. If there have been hundreds of news articles about it in reliable sources, then cite three of them, instead of citing three copies of a press release. Don't make any statement about a living person without citing a reliable published source that supports it. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:11:32, 23 December 2019 review of submission by Madhunilav


Madhunilav (talk) 08:11, 23 December 2019 (UTC) Hi. How can I make my article notable? Should references be added for my content?[reply]

Hi Madhunilav. All content must be supported by reliable published sources. Most businesses are not notable. Do you have a connection to Preethi Vijay or Piwocart gallery? If so, you might be able to make the business notable by forgetting about Wikipedia and concentrating on making the business highly successful. That might eventually result in independent sources writing about it and/or its founder in depth.
Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not presently notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit Draft:Piwocart by Preethi Vijay because volunteers do not intend to review it again in the near future. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:39, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SEO

09:10:47, 23 December 2019 review of submission by Splaybeats007


Need to index an approved page. Page ShareChat was approved and it's been more than 90 days. How do I index it?

Splaybeats007 (talk) 09:10, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Splaybeats007#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:48, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:43:32, 23 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Yaniv unger


Hi There I was trying to create an article about a new startup named BOOKAWAY. The main reason my article was decline is because I don't have enough substantial truly independent sources and citations as written to remain published. My problem is that I added all the credible, independent, secondary reference sources detailing information about significant milestones and events in the history of this company I have. and it's not enough...

I double-checked my self, I went and checked other pages in the same niche... They also don't have those substantial independent references you require now. we all using the same template, the same structure but still... my article was declined. and I wonder why? What else should I do? paying NYT and HTB to quote me?

Secondly, the article was worded as a promotional article or web page. I don't get it. nothing related to promotion. all are facts.

I would be extremely grateful if you could find the time to assist me in ensuring that I can make the necessary edits to secure approval for this submission.

Regards and thanks. Yaniv Yaniv unger (talk) 09:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well for starters this is just blatant advertising…“Realizing there isn’t a simple way to book transport tickets online, Noam created an online landing page that offers one route – Manila to Banaue, operated by Bookaway’s first supplier - local travel agency.” Theroadislong (talk) 13:20, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:08, 23 December 2019 review of submission by AnuYog

I have made all the changes according to the reviewer's suggestions & comments. Kindly have a look & approve this page. AnuYog (talk)

Can anyone help? AnuYog (talk)

15:12:47, 23 December 2019 review of draft by Andy Halper


Andy Halper (talk) 15:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble submitting my article for review. I've corrected my references several times and they're as good as they're going to be without more help. I think the article itself is fine. What do I need to do to submit my article for review? Thanks.

You need to click the large blue button which reads "Submit draft for review" looks like you didn't read WP:REFB as advised though? Theroadislong (talk) 16:10, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:39:58, 23 December 2019 review of submission by 122.176.208.146


122.176.208.146 (talk) 15:39, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:07, 23 December 2019 review of submission by Manojtaliyan2002

This is very important page, wikipedia should have information about all thing, if somebody want information about Chhur on wiki" How he find without this article?". It is big Village and very useful information are in this article. Manojtaliyan2002 (talk) 15:48, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Manojtaliyan2002, we are an encyclopedia, not a repository of all knowledge. In order to have an article, we require significant coverage in reliable independent sources, in order to ensure the article is based of information that is likely to be correct. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 09:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:17:20, 23 December 2019 review of submission by Andy Halper


Andy Halper (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help but I give up. The article is neutral and only repeats what is said in the sources cited (some of which are published). This is a frustrating process. I know you need to have rules but rejecting an article about a notable person (more accomplished than others who have articles in Wikipedia) seems counter productive to what you are trying to achieve as an encyclopedia. Thanks anyway.

Your draft Draft:Vivian Wang has not been rejected? You have not even submitted it for review yet! ALL sources need to be published and I'm not finding any so far that are independent. As regards "more accomplished than others who have articles in Wikipedia" please see other crap exists. Theroadislong (talk) 17:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:36:38, 23 December 2019 review of submission by 2605:E000:1C02:812E:554D:A2D3:8110:796B


What are you talking about? Click "expand credits" on the left, and you'll see:

NES producer Teddy Walton producer Swiff D producer Gravez producer Skyz Muzik producer WondaGurl producer FrancisGotHeat producer Hollywood Hot Sauce producer J-Louis producer Rob Holladay additional producer Wow Jones additional producer, producer, keyboard Boi-1da producer Allen Ritter co-producer Ayo producer Xeryus producer Keyz co-producer Pro Logic producer Mahxie producer Illmind producer IAMNOBODI producer Soundz producer T-Minus producer Frank Dukes producer Fingazz talk box




2605:E000:1C02:812E:554D:A2D3:8110:796B (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A single tiny mention does not meet our standards. Articles need at least 3 reliable and independent sources with significant coverage (think several paragraphs) of the subject. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:18, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:45:58, 23 December 2019 review of draft by Zipster969


May I ask for specific suggestions about how to make it less like a marketing brochure?

→ The first draft was declined, with the feedback: "Remove PR language from the lead section". I removed the entire lead section in order to fully comply. I also removed some other sections (to help ensure the article would have a neutral point of view).

→ Despite making the suggested change, the article was declined a second time for the same reason. This time, though, there were no specifics (about how to make it less like a marketing brochure), and I'm not sure what else to do. Can you help? I'm probably too close to the subject as it does seem pretty neutral to me. The article also "has a range of independent, reliable, published sources", and zero "materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed".

I'd appreciate any assistance.

Zipster969 (talk) 17:45, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 24

08:37:58, 24 December 2019 review of submission by 140Macpherson


140Macpherson (talk) 08:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


We have refurbished the Etere article with more references and the sources. As Etere is a long standing company that is present at techonolgy shows, conferences, and news articles throughout the world, it is a liable topic to require a wikipedia page.

Hi 140Macpherson. Please clarify what you mean by "we". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:07, 24 December 2019 review of draft by Ronmun


I have been revising the Draft:The ROADEX Project page in my Sandbox and wonder if there is a way to update the present Draft version to the Sandbox version. Any help that you can give will be appreciated. With best regards Ron

Ronmun (talk) 13:31, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ronmun. You are welcome to edit Draft:The Roadex Project and make it (below the comment "EDIT BELOW THIS LINE") as much like your sandbox as you care to. Editing the first draft really would have been the best thing to do in the first place. When editors create copies or second drafts under different names it frequently leads to confusion. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:06, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:32:50, 24 December 2019 review of submission by Moodmechanic96

I am a music producer so i want to publish my article Moodmechanic96 (talk) 15:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moodmechanic96. You may use your user page to say a few words about yourself and your Wikipedia editing, but Wikipedia is not for advertising, public relations, or self-promotion. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:46, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:54:37, 24 December 2019 review of submission by Payalsingh0135

I was adding the reference of subject due to this all things are required

Payalsingh0135 (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Payalsingh0135, This is a nonsensical question, perhaps some of it got cut off? Could you clarify? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:02, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Payalsingh0135, I took a look at your draft, and it seems to be about yourself or a non-notable person. Wikipedia only covers those who have been covered in reliable sources. We also strongly discourage autobiographies. WIkiepdia is also not a resume site. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:03, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


20:33:31, 24 December 2019 review of submission by Aureliojohn


Aureliojohn (talk) 20:33, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the Phemex Wikipedia page at my sandbox please let me know why it's not approved and what can I do for the approvall. I believe the page is important because its about a bitcoin futures and cryptocurrency derivatives trading platform.

Hi Aureliojohn. As stated at Draft:Phemex, it was declined because it fails to show that it is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Considering Wikipedia's general sanctions on blockchain and cryptocurrency-related articles, you may wish to explore alternative outlets for anything you write on the subject. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:33:46, 24 December 2019 review of submission by Pritesh Lunkad

Can I please know the reason for rejection of article and how can i make the necessary changes to republish this article. Pritesh Lunkad (talk) 21:33, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:33:58, 24 December 2019 review of submission by Thanoscar21


Thanoscar21 (talk) 22:33, 24 December 2019 (UTC) But aren't users supposed to have their page...?[reply]

Thanoscar21 You can start your user page here User:Thanoscar21 you do not need to submit a draft version for review. Theroadislong (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 25

01:31:29, 25 December 2019 review of submission by 173.70.134.32

So I found this draft page. It doesn't seem like it was reviewed, or has anyone found it besides a couple of me. (I found it because I'm a fan of Battle For Dream Island) 173.70.134.32 (talk) 01:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted it for review under the Articles for Creation process. A reviewer should get to it in an average of 8 weeks. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:24:10, 25 December 2019 review of submission by TabBytes

Hello moderator , I have edited the article and added valid references . I have removed some paragraphs ( that has linkedin sources ) . I have added only media references. please review it. Thanks TabBytes (talk) 11:24, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:27:22, 25 December 2019 review of submission by AnuYog

14:27:22, 25 December 2019 review of draft by AnuYog


Greetings! Kindly have a look & approve this page.AnuYog (talk)

AnuYog (talk)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=932386177"