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 796: Line 796:


[[User:Jainemark|Jainemark]], if you could be more specific about what tips you would like, I would be happy to be more specific. Your article was rejected because it isn't notable. I recommend that you read [[WP:Notability]]. It can be confusing, so if you have any questions on it, feel free to ask me here. In short, to be included in Wikipedia, an article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. An experienced reviewer at AFC has determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't meet these requirements (that is, these sources don't exist). If you want to continue editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you edit one of the millions of existing articles already on wikipedia, or if you want to create an article, take a look at [[WP:Your First Article]]. [[User:Sam-2727|Sam-2727]] ([[User talk:Sam-2727|talk]]) 22:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
[[User:Jainemark|Jainemark]], if you could be more specific about what tips you would like, I would be happy to be more specific. Your article was rejected because it isn't notable. I recommend that you read [[WP:Notability]]. It can be confusing, so if you have any questions on it, feel free to ask me here. In short, to be included in Wikipedia, an article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. An experienced reviewer at AFC has determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't meet these requirements (that is, these sources don't exist). If you want to continue editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you edit one of the millions of existing articles already on wikipedia, or if you want to create an article, take a look at [[WP:Your First Article]]. [[User:Sam-2727|Sam-2727]] ([[User talk:Sam-2727|talk]]) 22:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

== 22:54:38, 18 March 2020 review of draft by WriteIncunabula ==
{{Lafc|username=WriteIncunabula|ts=22:54:38, 18 March 2020|draft=Draft:Reverend_Peter_Farmer}}


Hello, I've recently gotten back into Wikipedia writing, which caused me to revive an old article I worked on, which was rejected. [[Draft:Reverend Peter Farmer]]. I see a few adjustments I'd like to make in tone, but the final rejection for the article was due to a lack of broad coverage for the individual in question. He's certainly not famous, although I would argue his impact is quite notable, if somewhat regional, across many generations. The big reason I think the decision might change now is that the school which the person founded has recently gained additional notability, in that it's newest headmaster is a former NFL player who was captain of his team when it won a Super Bowl. While this doesn't have a ton to do with education, the headmaster did earn an advanced degree in education from UC Berkeley and it will be interesting to see how he does at the helm of the school over the coming years. The individual for this rejected article, Father Farmer, is a beloved figure in the region, and the story of how he founded the school by scrounging used government surplus warehouses and laying irrigation systems with his own hands and those of other volunteers is, I would argue, objectively of merit.

So, before I take the time to edit the page all over again, and see if I can dig up a few additional, properly-sourced facts, I was hoping some more experienced editors could let me know whether I'm wasting my time or not. Thank you very much, by the way, for yours.[[User:WriteIncunabula|WriteIncunabula]] ([[User talk:WriteIncunabula|talk]]) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


[[User:WriteIncunabula|WriteIncunabula]] ([[User talk:WriteIncunabula|talk]]) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:54, 18 March 2020

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply — By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


March 12

00:32:41, 12 March 2020 review of draft by SystemDisrupt


SystemDisrupt (talk) 00:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]



Hello. Thank you for all your help; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jenny_Grant_Rankin?action=edit is my first original page and I really appreciate your help! I also wish to work on Wikipedia's goal of having more female contributors and also on adding deserving female profiles to the site to offset the historical gender imbalance in who is represented in Wikipedia.

I appreciate the feedback I have gotten so far (hi to MurielMary; the page said I should post any questions here but I hope you see this thanks) and want to meet Wikipedia's criteria. In order to provide the “significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject)” that is needed for the page to then be published/approved...

Do you/Wikipedia mean things like this (below)?

I have listed 5 samples that seem to me to fit the “Wikipedia:Notability (people)” criteria but I’d love to please check with you first (because if they don’t fit the criteria I am not understanding why they don’t fit; also, there are more where these came from, e.g., just googling her name brings up 1,800,000 webpages); thank you so much:


A) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY ORGANIZATIONS

Dr. Rankin was interviewed (and is the sole focus of the interview) by the American Educational Research Association (AERA) for an issue of AERA Highlights.

AERA was established in 1916 and is the largest educational research association in the world (larger even than the World Educational Research Association). AERA is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or in its offices, etc.).

The interview can be found online here: https://www.aera.net/Newsroom/AERA-Highlights-E-newsletter/AERA-Highlights-September-2018/AERA-Member-Jenny-Rankin-Discusses-How-Education-Researchers-Can-Share-Their-Findings-Widely


B) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN MAINSTREAM PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin was sometimes interviewed for articles in Good Housekeeping.

Good Housekeeping was established in 1885 and (according to Wikipedia) is the 7th most widely circulated publication in the United States. If you only count its U.S. circulation, it reaches an audience of 4,315,026 people per year.

Good Housekeeping is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The articles can be found online; here is one (Dr. Rankin is mentioned in 3 times even though the article is quite short): https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a27044118/what-is-helicopter-parenting/


C) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin has been interviewed (16 times) for issues of Education Week.

Education Week was established in 1981 and is funded by the likes of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Education Week is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or in its offices, etc.).

The 16 interviews can be found online here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2020/02/educators_must_have_a_plan_of_action_to_confront_our_challenges.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/12/instructional_coaching_conversations_must_be_built_on_relationships.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/10/invite_students_to_write_real_arguments.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/06/response_administrators_cant_lead_from_the_confines_of_their_office.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/06/response_principals_shouldnt_be_lonely.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/05/response_a_trauma_informed_classroom_is_a_safe_and_secure_place.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/01/response_technology_will_never_replace_a_great_teacher.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/11/response_students_as_teachers_in_the_classroom.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/08/qa_collections_advice_for_new_teachers.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/05/response_avoid_burn-out_by_remembering_what_first_drove_you_into_teaching.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/03/response_teachers_must_encourage_students_to_make_meaning_together.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/09/response_new_teachers_must_create_a_balance.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/06/response_leaders_can_support_innovation_by_listening_more_speaking_less.html?cn=bWVudGlvbg%3D%3D http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/06/response_career-changers_are_attractive_teaching_candidates.html?cn=bWVudGlvbg%3D%3D http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/05/response_the_toughest_part_of_teaching_is.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/01/response_challenging_moments_in_teaching.html?r=1953741459


C) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

Mensa World Journal did a book review of one of Dr. Rankin’s books.

Mensa World Journal is the international journal of Mensa, which was established in 1946 and is the largest and oldest high IQ society in the world.

Mensa World Journal is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked for the publication, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The book review can be found online here: https://www.us.mensa.org/?LinkServID=ECB6C2BD-E35E-D520-7FF5145152348936&type=mwj&name=2018-07-MWJ.pdf


D) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN MAINSTREAM PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin was interviewed for an article in U.S. News & World Report.

U.S. News & World Report was established in 1933 and (according to Wikipedia) its circulation reached an audience of 2,000,000 people in 1973.

U.S. News & World Report is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The article can be found online here (Dr. Rankin is mentioned in 6 times even though the article is quite short): https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a27044118/what-is-helicopter-parenting/


E) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

The book Data as a Feature - A Guide for Product Managers by Alice LaPlante and Matt Lemay builds heavily on the research of Dr. Rankin, includes an entire segment on Dr. Rankin’s Over-the-Counter Data concept, cites her for all of this, etc.

The book was published by O’Reilly Media, which was established in 1978 in Cambridge.

O’Reilly Media is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked for the company, she has never written for it, she has never spoken at any of the conferences listed for it on Wikipedia, etc.). The book’s authors are also completely independent of Dr. Rankin (she seems to have never worked with them or written about them).

The book can be found online here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/47943735-data-as-a-feature---a-guide-for-product-managers

SystemDisrupt (talk) 00:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SystemDisrupt. TL;DR. Skimming your question, the word "interview" crops up frequently. Interviews are primary sources. And to the extent that they're simply Rankin talking about Rankin, without independent analysis by the interviewer, they are not independent of Rankin. To demonstrate notability, the draft should cite independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of Rankin. Any other sources hurt the draft's chances by obscuring whatever good sources the draft may have.
Mensa World Journal is not a scholarly publication. It's a magazine. You may cite a book review in it to help demonstrate notability via WP:AUTHOR criterion #3. The link you provided is dead, so I can't evaluate how much weight the review would carry. The ideal review would be full length and by a professional book critic, think 1,500 words by Michiko Kakutani in The New York Times. I've had drafts that cite five meaty reviews declined, and have had to fight hard to keep articles that cite six or seven such reviews.
The 24-page book from O'Reilly contains two sentences about Rankin's work and a quote from Rankin. It contains no citations. It is not significant coverage of Rankin, so does not help demonstrate notability.
You may find WP:THREE a useful exercise. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:46:37, 12 March 2020 review of submission by 103.192.78.154


Hello, As I'm The Public Figure & Entrepreneur People Want To Know More About Me And This Article Will Inspire Them. I Request You Look Once Again On This And Approve As Soon As Poosible. 103.192.78.154 (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:21:39, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Barthmelo Cubin

This article is on Salar Shamas; an emerging artist and entrepreneur in Lahore, Pakistan with notable achievements in the field of music.The person has been recognized by various international platforms includinf Spotify, Apple Music and even Google search and in turn needs a Wikipedia page to further reinforce the online presence. Kindly look into this matter. Barthmelo Cubin (talk) 05:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Barthmelo Cubin: WP:Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. They don't need a Wikipedia page to further reinforce the online presence. If they are notable, someone else will write about them. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:41:07, 12 March 2020 review of draft by Fyodor Sam Brook


why is my article being rejected? how can I submit a scanned document on my computer as a reference? how should I make a reference like? Fyodor Sam Brook (talk) 06:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:27:47, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Twinphile

I have reviewed the old article and enriched the missing content with more notable information links. Twinphile (talk) 07:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


07:41:09, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Cimfalab


I have added external links (GitHub and OWASP) mentioning DeepScan. As of GitHub especially, DeepScan is a member of its Marketplace and now a partner of its Student pack recently. I know GitHub is the largest developer community/platform so to being with GitHub is an evidence of notability. Also, when I search 'javascript static analysis' in Google, DeepScan is shown up at the very first rank.

Cimfalab (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


07:45:58, 12 March 2020 review of submission by HZyk

Hello. I was wondering if you could tell me exactly why was my submission declined? When creating it, I was looking at already published articles about similar topics which are already approved, and I simply cannot understand why there is an issue with mine. I made sure to only disclose factual information, and I am not quite sure what is meant by it being an "advert". Articles regarding similar topics - like Dropbox, WeTransfer or MEGA that are approved on wiki disclose in my opinion a huge amount of detailed information that could be considered an advert, yet, those are allowed?

Please, if you could explain in detail what is wrong with my submission so that I can work on it more and fix it, that would be really helpful. Thank you for your time and I am looking forward to hearing from you.

HZyk (talk) 07:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at WP:OSE. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:42, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:13:37, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Boongalings


Boongalings (talk) 09:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:05:14, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Fyodor Sam Brook

What information should be added?

Fyodor Sam Brook (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fyodor Sam Brook, unfortunately a Wikipedia editor has determined that the subject of the article isn't notability. As such, no amount of editing would likely get the article included in Wikipedia. But if you do believe that your article complies with WP:Notability, you can list the sources here and I'll see if they do in qualify the article. Then your article could be resubmitted. However, given the experience of AFC reviewers, I believe this is unlikely to happen. I would strongly encourage you, if you want to continue to edit Wikipedia, to focus your efforts on a subject that likely meets the notability guidelines of Wikipedia but doesn't have an article yet (you can see a list at WP:Requested Articles). Let me know if you have any other questions!Sam-2727 (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:35:06, 12 March 2020 review of draft by Teak11

I’m trying to create an article about high fashion model and actor Karolina Muller. She’s had a successful career in fashion and entertainment industry since the 1990s. I don’t understand why the article is still declined.

I’ve sent a lot of references too.

Teak11 (talk) 12:35, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Teak11: I have declined your submission again. Please see your draft for tips on how to move forward. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:43:35, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Baghirovmusa

Hi, I hope you're doing well, I would like to get advice for making our company's page acceptable for Wikipedia community, as I read you G11 I found out that it's declined for reason that it had promoting content, i have seen this type of message on the top of page of 'Deloitte' which is also consulting company like ours.Please give me information that how i suppose to do that in a proper way to get confirmation. Baghirovmusa (talk) 12:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baghirovmusa Any article about your company would not be "your company's page", but an article about your company. Your company has no special rights to it as the subject. I see that you declared a conflict of interest, but you still need to formally comply with the paid editing policy and make the stricter paid editing declaration; a Terms of Use requirement.
Regarding your draft, I think that you misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to merely tell about a company. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes information that appears in independent reliable sources with significant coverage showing how a company meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself. Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field, it all depends on the sources. As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years- this is why it is not a good idea to cite other similar articles as a reason for yours to exist. Each article is judged on its own merits.
In order for you to be successful in writing about your company, you in essence need to forget everything you know about it and only write based on the content of independent sources. Using press releases, the company website, staff interviews, or other primary sources are not acceptable for establishing notability. Most people in your position have great difficulty writing in such a manner. If you just want to tell the world about your company, you should use its own website, social media, or other alternative forum where what you want to do is permitted. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:55:18, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Lendale Johnson

Looking to add hometown Kalamazoo, MI

https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2015/03/kalamazoo_celebrity_lendale_jo.html Lendale Johnson 17:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lendale Johnson (talk • contribs)

Hi Lendale Johnson, this article already exists in the mainspace (at Lendale Johnson). There is no need to create a separate article if the article exists. Also, the fact you are referencing about him is already in that article. Let me know if you have any other questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:32:42, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Jeff E Mayo Jr


Jeff E Mayo Jr (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff E Mayo Jr, Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 13

04:39:05, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Azim.atma


I am not very much on why this article has been declined? I need to know specific reason. I have just use School information, nothing promotional or advertisement materials. I have given all references to create this article.

Azim.atma (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Azim.atma, The specific reason was provided. You need to prove the notability of the subject. WP:GNG Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:52:04, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 2020USER



2020USER (talk) 04:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020USER, Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:30:29, 13 March 2020 review of submission by 45.64.227.49


45.64.227.49 (talk) 06:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:36:33, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Tjkeeran


I have removed the sections Prepay plans and External links, if you find that as a promotional material. Please let me know if any other sections need edit. Apologies for the inconvenience.

Tjkeeran (talk) 07:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Munjarin Abony (talk) 10:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:03:16, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Munjarin Abony

{{Lafc|username=Munjarin Abony|ts=10:03:16, 13 March 2020|page=

Hi, I am interested in knowing specifics on why my page is being declined. The reason states "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject...". Do I need more reliable sources? Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.

Spherical45 (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spherical45 You need independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject himself, not just citations of his accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:56:34, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Munjarin Abony

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

12:37:54, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Eeberbach


Eeberbach (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Can somebody else, more competent in computer science and mathematics than Sulfurboy review our Evolutionary automata draft submission to Wikipedia? To whom can we officially complain? We made substantial corrections for Sulfurboy three times. This time he "invented" as the new pretext for rejection that our submission is "not notable" enough in his opinion. Nobody else mentioned that to us before. Does it mean that before it was notable and now it stopped to be? We are recognized experts in the area of computer science, mathematics and evolutionary computation with hundreds of reputable reviewed publications, with Ph.D. and D.Sc. degrees in those areas, thus we know perfectly well what is notable in that area. It is a complete nonsense that a neutral encyclopedic submission, supported by multiple reliable sources, on foundations of evolutionary computation and its expressiveness, something that is badly missing in evolutionary computation, is not notable enough. It provides new venues for research and knowledge in that area, and Wikipedia readers (specialists and general public) deserve to read about that. What else can be more notable on this subject? See for comparison existing Wikipedia pages on evolutionary algorithm, genetic algorithm, genetic programming, evolutionary computation. Are they not notable too? Sulfurboy, with his Bachelor in political science and English, does not have the slightest idea what is "notable" or not in that specialized area. He may not like our submission, but he is not Wikipedia's God and does not have, we hope, an absolute power on submissions to Wikipedia. We never had such problems with publications before, but compared to Wikipedia, the reviews were done by the experts in specific area and not by ignorants. Note that the ignorant reviewer rejected before Alan Turing's, the founder of computer science an AI, famous "Intelligent Machinery" report labeling it as a "schoolboy essay". Of course, we cannot compare ourselves with the genius of Alan Turing, but we strongly believe that Sulfurboy would reject Turing's submission too if he had a chance. Fortunately, he had not. We spent one year on corrections to Wikipedia of this specific page, and it was a very unpleasant and frustrating experience so far. Note that our submission to Wikipedia does not constitute an original research, but it is based on such research. We hope that our comments will not be ignored and the last version will get an independent, neutral formal review.

Sincerely,

Eugene Eberbach and Mark Burgin

Firstly, attacking other editors calling them "ignorant reviewers" will not help you here, secondly you are sharing your user account which is expressly forbidden. Theroadislong (talk) 13:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstand the core purpose of Wikipedia. No article should require a review by anyone "more competent in computer science and mathematics". If the article does not provide sufficient context and explanation to a general reader without speciality technical knowledge, then the article simply isn't suited for this encyclopedia in that state. There is no academic essay-style content on Wikipedia, everything must be directly attributed to sources without conclusions, synthesis or bias. Fact-source(s), fact-source(s), etc. You jest that "Sulfurboy would reject Turing's submission too if he had a chance", but that would indeed likely be the correct decision by any of the reviewers. We do not accept content based on primary sources, original research, synthesis of sources or essay-like exploration of topics like one finds in academic writings. Your extremely hostile tone suggests you have no desire to actually adapt your work to Wikipedia requirements, so I agree with the decline. Wikipedia is not the platform for this publication in this state. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:55:55, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Cjhmace


Hi. I am waiting for a draft in relation Chris Guest (Artist) to be reviewed but have received a comment to say that if the page is accepted I will need to create a disambiguation from Chris/Christopher Guest. I am assuming this means the actor Christopher Guest but my query is how do I create this disambiguation as I seem unable to find any information on how to do this. Also do I need to do this now or will it only need to be done if my page is accepted? Thanks for your help!

Cjhmace (talk) 12:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cjhmace. Robert McClenon's comment about disambiguation is more for any future reviewers that for yourself. Novice editors are not expected to know all the ins and outs of the encyclopedia. If you're interested, the process is described at Wikipedia:Disambiguation. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:47:38, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Jack Cherrett

Hi, I was just wondering if there is anything you'd suggest that I can do to get this published, Thanks Jack Cherrett (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Cherrett Your band needs to be shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable band, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Facebook posts and locations the band has played do not do it. Not every band merits a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:25:50, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Arjun dhiman11


Arjun dhiman11 (talk) 14:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arjun dhiman11, what is your question, exactly? Sam-2727 (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:17, 13 March 2020 review of draft by M.A.Sarmiento


I have made a few revisions to my page and have eliminated outside sources but I think I am still struggling with figuring out what language is considered neutral or encyclopedic. If someone could read through my draft and point out anything that really stands out I would appreciate the help. Also, should I cut down the lists of commissions, panels, publications, etc? Thank you! M.A.Sarmiento (talk) 14:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

M.A.Sarmiento Before you edit any further you need to make a statutory declaration, you have a conflict of interest and you need to declare this on your user page. Theroadislong (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Theroadislong Thank you, I believe I correctly noted COI on the article. Please let me know if I made a mistake. Thanks.
M.A.Sarmiento, you made a slight mistake in the placing of the template. I have corrected it for you. As to regards for neutral language, as editors have said in the past, you should remove all the "select" sections. These skew the neutrality of the article to portray the subject in an overly positive manner. Also remove language like "custom-made, one-of-a-kind" as this makes the article read like an advertisement. If you have any other questions, let me know and I'll be sure to answer them. Sam-2727 (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:37:23, 13 March 2020 review of submission by MC Choji

Information required in order to have this article on this specific person published on wikipedia. MC Choji (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it is not suitable for Wikipedia, there isn't anything you can do. Theroadislong (talk) 17:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:08:13, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Laurenroche1


Laurenroche1 (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Laurenroche1, I assume you are asking why your article was declined? It is because your references don't establish the notability of this person, and may be unreliable. All of your sources are autogenerated (i.e. not reliable), or not independent of the source. For an article to be notable, references must be independent and reliable of the subject (articles from the website of a golf course the subject helped design aren't independent). Also, Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a reference. Finally, the decliner noted that this reads like a resume. Wikipedia articles shouldn't just be a blatant collection of every single one of a person's accomplishments. They should address parts of the subjects life, without going into too much detail. Adding an indiscriminate collection of facts can skew the neutrality of the article, giving undue weight to one section of the article. To learn more about this, I encourage you to read WP:Notability, WP:Neutrality, and WP:TooMuch. Feel free to ask me any other questions you might have. Sam-2727 (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:32:53, 13 March 2020 review of submission by 74.51.153.252


I am working with my school mate and friend Actor Ciby to get his wikipedia page setup. This would help him in reaching to his audience and know more about his life. I am not sure why it's being rejected multiple times. Can I get a layman example of mistakes I am making? 74.51.153.252 (talk) 23:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For an article to merit inclusion into Wikipedia, the subject of the article must be notable. That is, the subject of the article must be supported by multiple independent, reliable sources that cover the subject of the article significantly (that is, not just trivial references). You currently have two sources. imdb isn't considered a reliable source by Wikipedia editors, so it doesn't meet the reliability criterion, and a link to a netflix show isn't independent of the subject (Nor does it likely mention the subject beyond trivial coverage). Not everybody merits inclusion into Wikipedia, and AFC reviewers have determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't. I would recommend that if you enjoy editing Wikipedia, you find another article to create (or expand on the many existing Wikipedia articles). A list of potential articles to create can be found at WP:Requested Articles. Sam-2727 (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


March 14

00:29:15, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Frank Marrows


Frank Marrows (talk) 00:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Verification is apextv.net instagram.com/apextvofficial Google ApexTV and you'll find it.

I'm assuming you're wondering why your article was declined. To merit inclusion into Wikipedia, the subject of an article must not just exist. It must comply with WP:Notability. That is, it must be supported by multiple independent, reliable sources that mention the subject of the article significantly (that is, not just trivial coverage). An instagram page and the company page aren't independent of the source (nor reliable), so they don't count towards the notability criteria for inclusion into Wikipedia. Your article has been rejected, which means AFC reviewers have made the determination that this subject isn't notable for inclusion into Wikipedia. I recommend that, if you enjoy editing Wikipedia, you edit one of the many articles already created or create a new article of a subject others have deemed to be likely notable (you can find a list at WP:Requested Articles). Let me know if you have any other questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:17:34, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Fyodor Sam Brook

Give me some advice Fyodor Sam Brook (talk) 03:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fyodor Sam Brook. You've already started this article at Samkutty Pattomkary. There's a lot more information in the new draft article, but it's mostly unsourced, and we can't have two articles about the same person. Please continue adding reliably sourced information to Samkutty Pattomkary. You're welcome to ask for help on improving that, either here or at my talk page. Thanks, Capewearer (talk) 03:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:30:35, 14 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Mohammad Faiq Shah



Mohammad Faiq Shah 07:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Mohammad Faiq Shah You essentially wrote your resume; that is not what Wikipedia is for. Please review the autobiography policy as to why writing about yourself is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not for telling the world about yourself; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that show how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable person). If you meet that definition of notability, you shouldn't be the one to write the article about you. Also note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:35:42, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Prasad3455


Prasad3455 (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has zero independent reliable sources and has been rejected as not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:07:43, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Capo7~nlwiki


My article was rejected. For the creation of it, I based myself upon the content of other record labels in the list electronic music. I would like to know what extra needs to be done to get this article approved?

If I need to add more reference then I can add the info of some releases on external media: Bouzidi - Lazy Monday North South Project - Phoenix Simpatiek - Auwey


Capo7~nlwiki (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Capo7~nlwiki. Your article was rejected which means unfortunately an editor has determined that it is likely not notable enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. Although your article has the general format of a Wikipedia article, you should look at the sources you have. To qualify as a Wikipedia article, a subject must be mentioned in multiple independent, reliable sources that cover the subject significantly (not just trivial coverage). For more on this, see WP:Notability. Some subjects simply aren't inherently notable. That is, no amount of research could make the article to a level acceptable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I would encourage you, if you want to continue creating articles, to create one from a list of subjects that other editors have determined to likely meet the notability criteria of Wikipedia. Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 00:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:37:11, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Ness 129

Hello,

I submitted an article about the sailor Pip Hare (linked above) in February and received some really useful feedback which I applied.

I regularly check to see if the corrections have been accepted yet, but I just noticed that my Pip Hare article doesn't appear in the list of articles awaiting review.

So I just wanted to check that it is still in the queue to be reviewed. This is the first time I have created a wikipedia article so I'm very new to the source coding aspect!

Thank you in advance.

Best wishes,

Ness

Ness 129 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ness 129. The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed since 3 February. The current backlog is 3-4 months, so you can anticipate a review by some time in May. Neither The Daily Mail nor the Forbes site by the same contributing writer is a reliable source. You'll need to remove both of those to have any hope of acceptance. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would also like to add that a lot of the language in your article has a promotional tone. Articles should be written in a neutral tone to qualify as Wikipedia articles. Sam-2727 (talk) 00:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:39:15, 14 March 2020 review of submission by Cerrenfly

The page I created for a photographer was rejected twice, saying that the page was created with copy-paste from the advertising contents. However, almost all of the sources shown on the page are major independent reliable national news sources. Today I made another small edits on the page with adding two news sources. I also checked the sought-after conditions for creative people for wikipedia and I think this artist meets all these requirements. Before I resubmit the page for approval, I would like to get help here because I am not an experienced wikipedia writer. Thank you and best wishes.


Cerrenfly (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:35:57, 14 March 2020 review of draft by Lemieuxn

How much context do I need to provide for a list of ... article? I have adapted the text of the article from that of List of social networking websites, granted that stakeholder engagement is less broadly known than social media.
If I add three lines explaining the reasons why people turn to software to manage their stakeholders, would that be enough?
And then again, this is not an article about stakeholder engagement software... Please help!
Lemieuxn (talk) 23:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lemieuxn It is almost impossible to justify the existence of a "List of X products" page if an article about X does not already exist. So I think you should change it to an article about stakeholder engagement software, which can possibly contain a list of such software products.  Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks Dodger67, I will take this under advisement. Lemieuxn (talk) 00:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 15

01:30:39, 15 March 2020 review of submission by 82.10.37.178

I believe fusion cinemas need to be on Wikipedia as they are well known in the USA 82.10.37.178 (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


01:38:50, 15 March 2020 review of draft by Singingmaya


I am having a hard time submitting the citations supporting this article. I have tested the page but I am afraid to resubmit and lose all the work. Please help. I read a lot of links to learn to attach the citations but even the online supporting material is not attaching. I apologize I am not very good at this. Can you please help? Thank you. Singingmaya

Singingmaya (talk) 01:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Singingmaya. As an example, I've added a reference to the first sentence of the body of the draft in this edit. After studying the example and Help:Referencing for beginners, see if you can add references for the remainder of the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:19:42, 15 March 2020 review of submission by 1.186.196.255


Vedang is very popular digital marketer in india and his remarkable entry at age of 16 made him a national sensation. He is verified on many social media platforms, he deserve wikipedia page . 1.186.196.255 (talk) 05:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


06:16:15, 15 March 2020 review of submission by 1.186.196.255

plz re review and tell what can be done, vedang sir is reputed marketer in india and ceo of million dollar venture.

1.186.196.255 (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


08:17:35, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Kadrong

I understand that as a newcomer, it will be alittle difficult to establish a foothold. ApaxonHost is a newcomer on the market, the company doesn't have any history nor newsfeed about it. The reason for this article is to simple establish the brand and grow with that help. I also understand wikipedia is business and tend to look at bigger companies with citations/references etc. ApaxonHost doesnt have those luxury and the references are people behind ApaxonHost helping it grow. Currently, a search on google doesn't bring much, hence why me creating an article. Kadrong (talk) 08:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I am not sure if we are understanding each other here and it is based on that misunderstanding my article is being declined. I am writing about my company (Is that allowed?) and the links is about the people who are helping the company establish. I may be misinterpreting what wikipedia is about so please enlighten me. Can I write an article about my company or should there someone who write it that isn't affiliated with me? Kadrong (talk) 11:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kadrong. Writing about one's own company on Wikipedia is discouraged because it creates a conflict of interest. The disclosure requirements are especially strict if you have a financial stake in a topic. I've left more information about that on your talk page.
Furthermore, you misunderstand what Wikipedia is about. The encyclopedia's articles cover notable topics—those that have gained significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, as demonstrated by coverage in reliable sources. If a Google search doesn't return much, Wikipedia almost certainly should not have an article about the company. The encyclopedia may not be used to "establish the brand", grow it, or publicize the company in any way. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:10:00, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Iamfrzu07

Draft:Manjappada_Kerala_Blasters_Fan_Club is a supporting club of Kerala Blasters FC Like West Block Blues of Bengaluru FC. so please approve this article Iamfrzu07 (talk) 09:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iamfrzu07. There is already enough information about Manjappada Kerala Blasters Fan Club at Kerala Blasters FC#Support. Based on the draft, Wikipedia should not have a stand-alone article about the fan club, so the draft will not be accepted. Continuing to beg for it to be accepted, after it has been declined four times and finally rejected, could be interpreted as tendentious editing. Such behavior could lead to you being blocked from editing, something that I see has already happened to the original author of the draft and a sockpuppet. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:53:12, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Kadrong


This is where I realised that we are not understanding each other and this gives the question on how many articles are declined due to this misunderstanding. The company ApaxonHost is owned by me. I am not getting or receiving any form of compensation to write this article nor is there any financial reward attached to the writing of this. ApaxonHost is my company and I own and operate it. My only reason for writing this article is for customers or users to see what the company is about on its history and any other information that would be required for trust. The companies I have link to are government companies that I have approached for for advise on the law etc. People Plus is geared towards helping people gain self employed through the government allowances. I simple highlighted those information so that users can see where we as a company grew from. So let me clarify that this article is not for financial contribution nor am I receiving any financial contribution to create it.

Kadrong (talk) 12:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kadrong: If you own the company, then you are in violation of Wikipedia's terms of use under policy Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. On top of that, neither you, nor anyone else, may use Wikipedia "for customers or users to see what the company is about on its history and any other information". If you want to tell people about your company, you should use your own website to do so. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Well I didn't know that seeing I see many companies business articles created on this platform. You can delete the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kadrong (talk • contribs) 14:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:53:12, 15 March 2020 review of draft by Kadrong


Kadrong (talk) 12:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:46:17, 15 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Anzar sheikh


Hy I write a article on Md Anzaruddin On wikipedia. But its rejected why i can't understand that could you help me.

Anzar sheikh (talk) 13:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anzar sheikh. The topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Unlike other platforms you may be familiar with, such as Facebook or LinkedIn, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself or your friends. It is an encyclopedia, it summarizes what independent, reliable sources have written about topics that have attracted significant attention from the world at large and over time. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:59:49, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Music Matters MK


Music Matters MK (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:03:57, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Music Matters MK

Hello, my draft was rejected, and I would like to get detailed information why is that. It is the English version of Polish wikipedia article of Łukasz Konieczny (with one or two minor changes). Music Matters MK (talk) 17:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Music Matters MK, The reason has been quite clearly pointed out in the decline: The page does not meet the minimum standard for inline citations. All claims about a living person need to be backed with cites or the information needs to be removed. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:12:59, 15 March 2020 review of submission by Bpurkaple


The page was rejected as a neologism. I have added more citations to show you that it is not a neologism and is used in medical literature substantially Bpurkaple (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bpurkaple, The article has been rejected which means it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
sulfurboy Even with substantial edits? I was told that it could be published if the neologism issue was addressed.Bpurkaple (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:35:46, 15 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Oliver-Serwinski


Why did my article about Mr. dude Phil get declined?? He is a YouTuber/Influencer/Streamer, with over 2,500 followers/subscribers/fans combined. He needs his own Wikipedia page so his fans could learn more about him. Oliver-Serwinski (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oliver-Serwinski "needs his own Wikipedia page so his fans could learn more about him" is a promotional purpose and not permitted on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not concerned with helping fans of "Mr. dude Phil" learn more about him. If he is a "YouTuber", he is perfectly capable of helping his fans himself. It doesn't matter if he has 25 fans, 2,500 fans, or 2.5 billion fans- there needs to be independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person showing how he meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article to learn more about the process of creating an article and what is being looked for. 331dot (talk) 19:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:24:45, 15 March 2020 review of submission by 82.10.37.178

I have added the Office from Google Maps which you will see if the current location in the Ref

82.10.37.178 (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid your draft has been rejected the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia, you have zero independent reliable sources so notability cannot be established. Theroadislong (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:46:49, 15 March 2020 review of submission by 173.59.16.114


Hello, I'd be so thankful for a mentor who could:

1. tell me straightforwardly whether I'm wasting my time with this article and should give up

2. or give me bold suggestions on how to make it Wiki friendly (other than to go and read tutorials, which I've been doing)

In essence, I'm inviting the red pen :)

Thank you very kindly!

173.59.16.114 (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't link to a draft. Further we're not here to "red pen" for you. Your article is you work, don't expect others to fix it for you. WP:BUILDER Sulfurboy (talk) 21:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's best to model your draft after an similar existing article section-wise so it doesn't read like an essay. Asking a specific WP:WikiProject about your topic in question rather than a general project such as this is going to be more beneficial. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you asking about Draft:Pharmacological studies on berberine? As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what has been written in secondary sources. So if there are three review articles, published in reputable medical journals, about pharmacological studies of berberine, then Wikipedia could have an article about pharmacological studies of berberine. Wikipedia is not the place, however, to summarize primary source research articles. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and Wikipedia:No original research for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to all of you for the pointers. Will try to incorporate all of the advice. Blessings.173.59.16.114 (talk) 18:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 16

00:15:14, 16 March 2020 review of draft by MeVeOl


I'm having trouble determining why my article, "Karyn Olivier" isn't being approved. Is there any advice you can give me on how to proceed? Is it due to layout? Is it due to over-sourcing? I'm trying to provide a reference for every line, but perhaps this is more than needed? This artist is undoubtedly a notable person, and I'm new to wiki so I really don't know what I'm doing wrong. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. MeVeOl (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC) MeVeOl (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 01:35:56, 16 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Christyt852


May I ask which part of the articles requires more independent sources to increase credibility?


Christyt852 (talk) 01:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:46:49, 16 March 2020 review of submission by Manakshal

Hi , I would like to know how this article can be saved Manakshal (talk) 03:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't really ands article it's entire content consists of "CEO of Arabian Industries LLC , Abu Dhabi" Wikipedia is not a business directory. Theroadislong (talk) 12:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:26:49, 16 March 2020 review of submission by 1.186.196.95


Vedang Shahane is very popular youngest entrepreneur in india and u saying he isn't popular for Wikipedia? It's bad experience 1.186.196.95 (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:57:25, 16 March 2020 review of draft by Gaussianfilter


Gaussianfilter (talk) 06:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting, with the feedback, but the feedback is not specific, looking for specific recommendations to submit properly

06:58:07, 16 March 2020 review of submission by Gaussianfilter


Gaussianfilter (talk) 06:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC) Looking for specific feedback to resubmit[reply]

08:01:53, 16 March 2020 review of draft by OohAahTw

Because I thought a tv show which is not aired yet is still approving by the admins, Like Ang Lihim ni Ligaya that is not yet airing. But it's already approved. I created a page "Everybody Sing!" which is upcoming show, why it is declined and rejected? I've already read the guidelines. But it's rejected again? please I need assistance.

OohAahTw (talk) 08:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:25:48, 16 March 2020 review of submission by Katikov

Could you please let me know specifically how I can improve the draft to be approved. Katikov (talk) 08:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:13:28, 16 March 2020 review of submission by Kjell1918

Hi! Would it be possible for you to guide me on how to moderate this article to correct standards? At the moment I don't understand why it didn't "pass". I put a lot of work into finding theses sources and writing this article and would be devastated if it was all in vain.

Kjell1918 (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kjell1918. Writing about private companies that are still in business is risky these days. Wikipedia has very little appetite for articles about such companies. It would be safer to write about public companies, defunct companies, something other than companies and their leaders, or to write for an alternative outlet with different inclusion criteria.
The problems with the tone of Draft:Eleiko may stem from its sources. Website feelsoma.wordpress.com (which redirects to u-n-motion.com) is a self-published blog, not a reliable source. Many of the other sources appear to be trade publications, which often have a too-cozy relationship with the companies in the industry they cover. Hallands Nyheter would generally be a reliable source, but that article is an obituary of the owner of the company, written by the former owner, so it too lacks independence. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:18:11, 16 March 2020 review of submission by 1.186.199.81

vedang is very popular and got his page denied because of notability?really? i have almost 20m+ followers 1.186.199.81 (talk) 12:18, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The number of followers you have is irrelevant, you have zero independent reliable sources. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia only summarizes information that appears in independent reliable sources Theroadislong (talk) 12:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:33:11, 16 March 2020 review of draft by Rolf robert fischer


I need explanations why this is seen as advertisement, while I tried to write facts in a neutral form. There are plenty of verifiable and reliable sources of different authors. If you try to read articles of comparable softwares like Abaqus, Nastran, Ansys, I am convinced you may find more advertisements. So please help me. And I like to mention, that the article in this form is on de.wikipedia

Rolf robert fischer (talk) 14:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have not read the entire submission, but the words "particularly suitable" jumped out at me. This means "here is a solution to your problems" and is therefore language favorably disposed towards the topic, rather than being a dispassionate explanation. Please review your submission for other, similar lines of thought. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 19:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please also declare your clear conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:22:19, 16 March 2020 review of submission by 2409:4040:410:191E:E11C:50AF:AC8D:F3D


2409:4040:410:191E:E11C:50AF:AC8D:F3D (talk) 19:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with previous reviewers that the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:03:29, 16 March 2020 review of submission by 86.135.144.186

She is a popular person in my area and there are many people looking for information about her, hence why I made this wikipedia page 86.135.144.186 (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:02:05, 16 March 2020 review of submission by SethBrewster

Why was it rejected? I talked to him, and all of it is true. No making sense. Disappointed. Why!!!??? SethBrewster (talk) 22:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SethBrewster: First of all, WP:TRUTH. Secondly, WP:NPERSON applies here, presumably the section on entertainers. Since this is a WP:BLP sources are absolutely required. What is definitely required is significant coverage in independent relieable sources. Wikipedia doesn't consider itself a reliebale source. From what I see its WP:TOSOON for now. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help!

23:41:38, 16 March 2020 review of draft by Timofeytv


Hi there! Tibetan elections are coming up next month and i would like to ask you for your help in regards of publishing this article.

I searched and included only reputable and verifiable sources. There is NY Times, The Hill, NPR, and Forbes among others. All of the sources have been used in other articles on wiki.

Lobsang Nyandak is also included in other wiki articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_Centre_for_Human_Rights_and_Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Tibetan_Parliament_in_Exile_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Tibetan_Administration

The article is written in formal tone and I'm lost about what else could be done?

Thank you in advance!

Tim.

Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lobsang_Nyandak


Timofeytv (talk) 23:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 17

06:06:46, 17 March 2020 review of submission by 122.183.154.143


122.183.154.143 (talk) 06:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


06:11:51, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Basilseo


Basilseo (talk) 06:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont advertise on Wikipedia. Avoid Puffery. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:53:38, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Aalmir Plastic


I am writting about my comapny which is one of the biggest plastic products manufacturer in UAE and well reputed, but it is being rejected, can someone help me in this to get my company listed on wikipedia. Aalmir Plastic (talk) 08:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aalmir Plastic, hello! I know that you are blocked, but I'll answer anyways. Wikipedia has a set of rules regarding how articles should be written. The article was written in a promotional or advertising tone, which contravenes Wikipedia's ban on advertising of companies. As a result, the draft was rejected and speedy deleted. Also, because you have used your company's name as a username, you have been indefinitely blocked, as Wikipedia's policies prohibit using company names as usernames to prevent advertising. If you wish to write an article about your company, you MUST follow the following guidelines:
1) Read Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest (COI).
2) Make an unblock appeal on your talk page as per the instructions mentioned there. You should demonstrate that you wish to edit Wikipedia for reasons other than advertising and that you have understood Wikipedia's COI guidelines. Also, give the new username you would like to use, so that a renamer may rename your account.
3) If an administrator finds your appeal reasonable, they will have your account renamed and unblocked.
4) Since Wikipedia's policies strongly discourage creating or editing articles about subjects you have a COI with, you may instead create a draft with a neutral and encyclopaediac tone, source the draft with reliable sources and submit it. One of our large team of reviewers will go through the article and pass it if it meets certain criteria, or will decline it with suggestions for improvement.
Thank you, and hopefully happy editing! JavaHurricane 09:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:37:16, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Opjensen

I would like to know why this topic does not meet notability standards. This is a pretty major industry event with a wide international reach--that seems notable to me! Opjensen (talk) 09:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opjensen You offer no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support the content of the article and show how the event meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable event. Wikipedia articles should only summarize what independent sources state, not what those putting on the event say about it. If an event is not written about in independent sources, it would not merit an article here at this time. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:41:47, 17 March 2020 review of submission by עפרהראובן


עפרהראובן (talk) 09:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i'm not sure why my article wasn't accepted : draft: Shlomo Shoham

I was trying to translate it from the Hebrew page: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%9C%D7%9E%D7%94_%D7%A9%D7%94%D7%9D

But it was declined....

עפרהראובן You offer no independent reliable sources to support the content of the article. Two of the sources, the subject's Facebook page, and an Amazon listing for their work, do not establish notability as Wikipedia defines it- in this case, at WP:BIO. The third, the Hebrew version, cannot be used to cite this article, as Wikipedia articles cannot be used to cite other Wikipedia articles. Sources do not need to be in English.
Also keep in mind that each language version of Wikipedia is its own project with their own editors and policies, and as such what is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:17:45, 17 March 2020 review of submission by 2405:204:32AD:2919:9F4:1562:3357:30DA

2405:204:32AD:2919:9F4:1562:3357:30DA (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


16:01:09, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Iayaz


Hello , I wrote article"wapda town Sheikhupura" but it is rejected.

I don't know why it is rejected because

(1) I mentioned two references to authenticate information (2) article has correct information (3) this article is of interest of thousands of people of Sheikhupura city (4) similar housing society (of another city Lahore) page already exists

This is unfortunate that my article (bearing correct information & carry interest of thousands) is rejected. Please review decision

Looking forward for approval

Thanks

Iayaz (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iayaz. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of their topic. Zameen blog is not a reliable source and should not be used as a reference. wapdatownskp.com is not independent, so does not help establish notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). Existence of a page does not mean it meets Wikipedia policies and guidelines or should exist. It may only mean that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. So generally it isn't productive to compare a draft to other pages. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:43:57, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Neel n popat

I want to give Shine to The player who is not much famous in India but is a international representative in PUBG Mobile Game , I have accepted the challenge of it posting on wikipedia,

Neel n popat (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neel n popat. Wikipedia is not for that. You may wish to consider alternative outlets that have different inclusion criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:00:44, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Jrprudlick


Jrprudlick (talk) 20:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC) It was stated what I wrote was advertising. My changes are more factual in nature and less content. Its' my first article, so forgive my ignorance.[reply]

Jamez

Your draft Draft:Magg Dylan is entirely promotional and has zero independent reliable sources so has been rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:33:41, 17 March 2020 review of submission by 38.140.155.66


The stated reason seems arbitrary and applicable to a great number of existing entries. And if the man is cross-referenced on other, less-than-accurate entries, that would seem to undercut the whole basis for rejection. I respectfully request you reconsider.

38.140.155.66 (talk) 20:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. This is a volunteer project, and as such it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. The draft you have written seems to be more about the individual's business than about themselves. To merit an article, a person must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 23:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:44:47, 17 March 2020 review of submission by 2604:6000:100E:8160:4CF4:161C:881B:19A7

My article, Draft:Tyler Barish, has been rejected! 2604:6000:100E:8160:4CF4:161C:881B:19A7 (talk) 21:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was completely unsourced and consisted of two lines. Yes, that will be rejected. Wikipedia articles should summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 23:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:51:13, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Matthew Swanton


Matthew Swanton (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:56:33, 17 March 2020 review of submission by Matthew Swanton

I am creating a Wikipedia page about a Sociologist for a school project and I need it to published soon. Please let me know what I can do so I can get my article submission to be accepted. It was declined in the first 5 minutes for being requested for review.


Matthew Swanton (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to read Help:Your first article to get a better understanding of how Wikipedia works, writing an article from scratch is the hardest task on Wikipedia, your draft has no independent sources, Wikipedia only publishes articles for topics that have received significant coverage in reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Matthew Swanton: If your instructor is imposing a deadline, they may not understand how Wikipedia works. Reviewers are all volunteers, and do not work to anyone else's schedule. The current reviewing backlog is 3-4 months, and each time a draft is declined, it may have to wait that long after improvements and resubmission to be reviewed again. If that puts you in an impossible situation, direct your instructor to the Wikipedia:Education noticeboard, where Wikipedians experienced with student assignments will set them straight.
Meanwhile, in addition to Help:Your first article, I recommend you study WP:PROF and decide which criterion Jean-Anne Sutherland meets most unambiguously. Then focus on citing sources that prove it. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:41:48, 17 March 2020 review of draft by Filmmoonshot


I'm requesting help because a reviewer has come to a strange and hasty decision about the Naimh Algar (actress) article for creation. The reviewer said her significance was not established by independent sources, but all the sources used are independent of her as far as I can tell. They are not from her personal blog for example. An actress who has already worked for Shane Meadows and Ridley Scott for heavens sake, and is not notable enough for an article? I don't understand. There are myriad sources out there to improve the article I am absolutely certain but I don't accept there are insufficient ones as it stands. Once established other editors can quickly build it up from sources I am very sure. The decision to decline looks like it was taken in ten seconds flat. Filmmoonshot (talk) 22:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 18

03:46:42, 18 March 2020 review of submission by 73.191.192.154

Minetest is by far the most popular open-source minecraft-style game available, and is actively maintained. It fits well in lists like List of open-source video games -- it is apparently fine for all of these games to have their own wiki page, so I see no reason why minetest should not also be allowed to have a similar page. 73.191.192.154 (talk) 03:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minetest as to why this game does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:09:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by VenkteshN


Hello, My name is Venktesh and I am working for CELETTE based in India. Celette is a French company situated in the township of Vienne France. We have been the market leader worldwide for designing, manufacturing Collision Repair equipment since 1952 and CELETTE and its products have been approved by major car manufactures across the globe.

In the initial stage we had asked a third party to create a page for us in Wikipedia who did not provide correct information as per wiki guidelines and due to which it has been rejected multiple times and the third party has also retried various different IPs to get success. We now asked them to stop updating the page and we directly trying to frame contents per guidelines instructed by wiki. We really wanted to have a page for us in wiki with following all its guidelines in a appropriate way.

We kindly request you to re-review the content submitted by me and request you help on improvising the content to fit wiki rules and kindly help to make the page live. VenkteshN (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

VenkteshN The draft is currently not acceptable. It is sourced to little more than press release type articles, which do not establish that your company meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to give the significant coverage about your company, not simply republish a press release or announcement. You will need to read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:37:22, 18 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Ianpalmer


Hello

I have submitted this article which has been rejected twice. It is for a TV manufacturer called Cello Electronics. They have been established for 20 years and are the only remaining TV manufacturer in the UK. They appeared twice on BBC Breakfast and once on BBC One Show in the last 12 months. Cello have made some notable product developments over the years with solar-powered products for Africa being one of the latest interesting ideas. They are well covered in the press with these developments.

I have added citations and references where appropriate, but the article continues to be rejected. I have also been careful with language and tone to make sure it doesn't read like an advertisement.

I wonder if you could help advise me on any specific changes I need to make to the article in order to get it published for the benefit and interest of Wikipedia readers.

Thanks for your help.

Ian Ianpalmer (talk) 10:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ianpalmer (talk) 10:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has been rejected, creating an article about your own company is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia and you will find few editors willing to help you. I suggest you find other articles to improve. Theroadislong (talk) 10:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:12:54, 18 March 2020 review of submission by WikiWriter4Peanuts


WikiWriter4Peanuts (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWriter4Peanuts, I'm assuming you're asking why your article has been nominated for speedy deletion. This is because the article has been interpreted as an unambiguous advertisement. If you wish to protest the speedy deletion, this isn't the correct place. I see you have already contested the speedy deletion, so there is no further action you can take here. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would encourage you to find a page already created to edit, or create one from a list of topics other editors have already established as likely notable (found at WP:Requested Articles). Sam-2727 (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:17:36, 18 March 2020 review of draft by Meimaar.93


Hi, I am writing an article about an architecture company based in Eindhoven, Netherlands (UArchitects). I am struggling to publish it because of the content sounding too promotional. I would like to ask for help regarding some ways I can make the article sound more neutral and still publish the information in it. The awards and projects that I have mentioned in the article are quite known in the Netherlands and I have added references to the source of the award information as well. The submission was already declined twice by reviewers. Is there a way that you can help me publish this article without it sounding like an advertisement for the company? Meimaar.93 (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meimaar.93 " has received a number of prestigious national and international awards" sounds VERY promotional and are ANY of these awards notable? Theroadislong (talk) 13:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:26:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Annisd

Hey, Let me know when you have reviewed this and if it is now okay. Thanks, Danielle Annisd (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Annisd, unfortunately your article has been rejected, which means no further action can be taken on it. It was rejected because the topic likely isn't notable (that is, mentioned in multiple independent reliable sources), and the article is written more like an advertisement than a neutral encyclopedic article. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would encourage you to check out one of the many articles already created. Creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, and it's best to begin with editing already existing articles first. Sam-2727 (talk) 15:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:31:08, 18 March 2020 review of draft by TheBirdsShedTears


Please review this draft as part of the AfC help desk. Thanks TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheBirdsShedTears, Done. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:34:02, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Pw55823

Template:Danaustino I submitted an article for a review from my sandbox and i was decline. please I need help to improve my article

Pw55823 (talk) 17:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)Template:Danaustino[reply]

Hi Pw55823, unfortunately your article has been rejected. This means an experienced editor has determined that the subject of the article isn't currently notable enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. This means that there aren't multiple independent, reliable sources that discuss the subject. As a side note, your article is written in a promotional tone (with phrases like "has always been drawn to the sound of music"), but Wikipedia articles must be written in a neutral tone. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I recommend you edit an already created article, as creating your first article is one of the most challenging tasks on Wikipedia. Feel free to ask anymore questions you have here. Sam-2727 (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pw55823. The topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia), so no amount of editing can make it acceptable. Unlike other platforms you may be familiar with, such as Facebook or LinkedIn, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself or your friends. It is an encyclopedia, it summarizes what independent, reliable sources have written about topics that have attracted significant attention from the world at large and over time. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:38:27, 18 March 2020 review of submission by RGws


RGws (talk) 17:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RGws, your article was rejected, which means an experienced editor has determined that it isn't notable. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you find an article already created to edit, as creating your first article on Wikipedia is one of the hardest tasks to do. Also, please don't remove "rejection" notices from a page in the future. They should remain for maintenance purposes. Sam-2727 (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:05:46, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Severen Tezvel


Thank you so much for your honest feedback. I am grateful for your time as I know it took much effort to not only review, but to also point out specific issues that I needed to sort out. I hope you will find the edits I made now fit Wikipedia's standards and you will allow the school to have a Wikipedia page. Thank you again for your time and for your consideration.

Severen Tezvel (talk) 18:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:21:40, 18 March 2020 review of submission by SouL Viper


SouL Viper (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:23:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by SouL Viper


SouL Viper (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:27:44, 18 March 2020 review of submission by 2409:4040:410:191E:BC25:2E79:AEC4:2CF0


2409:4040:410:191E:BC25:2E79:AEC4:2CF0 (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Suraj rajvardham07 (I'm presuming you or someone you might know) has already requested a review at the help desk for this submission. These comments still stand: the subject has been reviewed by experienced AFC reviewers and determined to be not notable. It has been reviewed by others (including me) and we agree with the original assessment. If you want to edit Wikipedia further, I would recommend turning your attention to editing pages that have already been created. Creating an article on Wikipedia is a difficult task and it's much easier to start out by editing pages that already exist. If you have further questions, feel free to ask them here (a more specific inquiry would be appreciated, though). Sam-2727 (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:29:57, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Pubg Noob

I haven't violated any of the Wikipedia guidelines please once againrebiew my page Pubg Noob (talk) 20:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:05, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Jainemark


Jainemark (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, could you give me some tips?

Jainemark, if you could be more specific about what tips you would like, I would be happy to be more specific. Your article was rejected because it isn't notable. I recommend that you read WP:Notability. It can be confusing, so if you have any questions on it, feel free to ask me here. In short, to be included in Wikipedia, an article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. An experienced reviewer at AFC has determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't meet these requirements (that is, these sources don't exist). If you want to continue editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you edit one of the millions of existing articles already on wikipedia, or if you want to create an article, take a look at WP:Your First Article. Sam-2727 (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:54:38, 18 March 2020 review of draft by WriteIncunabula


Hello, I've recently gotten back into Wikipedia writing, which caused me to revive an old article I worked on, which was rejected. Draft:Reverend Peter Farmer. I see a few adjustments I'd like to make in tone, but the final rejection for the article was due to a lack of broad coverage for the individual in question. He's certainly not famous, although I would argue his impact is quite notable, if somewhat regional, across many generations. The big reason I think the decision might change now is that the school which the person founded has recently gained additional notability, in that it's newest headmaster is a former NFL player who was captain of his team when it won a Super Bowl. While this doesn't have a ton to do with education, the headmaster did earn an advanced degree in education from UC Berkeley and it will be interesting to see how he does at the helm of the school over the coming years. The individual for this rejected article, Father Farmer, is a beloved figure in the region, and the story of how he founded the school by scrounging used government surplus warehouses and laying irrigation systems with his own hands and those of other volunteers is, I would argue, objectively of merit.

So, before I take the time to edit the page all over again, and see if I can dig up a few additional, properly-sourced facts, I was hoping some more experienced editors could let me know whether I'm wasting my time or not. Thank you very much, by the way, for yours.WriteIncunabula (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


WriteIncunabula (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=946235902"