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
IISL (talk | contribs)
12 edits
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 693: Line 693:


[[User:IISL|IISL]] ([[User talk:IISL|talk]]) 11:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
[[User:IISL|IISL]] ([[User talk:IISL|talk]]) 11:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


== 11:29:41, 30 August 2020 review of submission by Ponmaakishan ==
{{Lafc|username=Ponmaakishan|ts=11:29:41, 30 August 2020|declined=Draft:WINGS_OF_AERO}}

Pon Maa Kishan A 11:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:29, 30 August 2020

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


August 24

04:15:56, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Sheshanks2020

I'm confused why it was rejected again. I had rewrote it so that it doesn't look like an "advertisement", but it looks like it was rejected for the same reason. Can someone help me? Sheshanks2020 (talk) 04:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:00:29, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Komalsharma664655


Komalsharma664655 (talk) 05:00, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Komalsharma664655: This needs relibale sources that are independent of the subject (no interviews or press releases) that have some coverage of the subject (not yust passing mentions). LinkedIn and other user generated content sites arent considered reliable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:24:59, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Rixle


It has taken a long time to get to where I am with my article, and on July 22nd it seems that all that was needed to be done was: "Please remove the external links in the text and convert them to wikilinks, if possible."

I did this and now I seem to be back to where it all started with a new rejection on August 22 based on: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article"

I was already pass this step, so it is very confusing that this is the reason for non-acceptance. (??)


Rixle (talk) 06:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't know, but I would like to note that TheImaCow (talk · contribs), who declined the draft for the external links, was blocked from editing for accpting drafts for pay. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:23:54, 24 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jianmarin


Good day. I am writing to you regarding two articles I wrote about 2 Greek writers Maria Papayanni and Vassilis Papatheodorou. I wrote the 2 articles using identicall information and sources and (at least in my eyes) I wrote them "in the same way". the article for Mrs Papayanni was accepted while the article aboyt Mr Papatheodorou was declined twice. I would like to correct the article of Mr Papatheodorou but I do not know what more is needed (inline citations) especially when I compare it with Mrs papayanni article. Can you pleae advise?

Best regards John Marinos


Jianmarin (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:49, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Flooyd7


Dear Editors, My draft has been declined and it says I have undisclosed paid editing, can someone help explain what I should do next?

Thanks in advance! Best regards, Mate

Flooyd7 (talk) 07:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Flooyd7 You should read and make the declaration required by the paid editing policy, or if you are not paid, explain any conflict of interest you might have. 331dot (talk) 10:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:17:19, 24 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Puffymuffinz9


Hello Wikipedia Staff, I'm really trying to make a wiki page for our upcoming game Scars of Honor. But it seems that I am not really able to make it properly. It is important for us to have a Wiki page so we can be more discoverable. I will really appreciate all help you can give me. I am directly involved in the project. Thank you in advance!

Puffymuffinz9 (talk) 10:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puffymuffinz9 Wikipedia does not have a "staff", just a community of volunteer editors. Wikipedia, to be frank, has no interest in helping you get the word out about your game or to help potential users of your game find it. Those are promotional purposes and not permitted on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources how the subject meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia has no interest in what an article subject wants to say about itself. Your draft reads as an advertisement for the game; any article about your game, if it meets the definition of notability, should only summarize what independent sources have chosen to say about your game.
I see you declared a COI, but if you are compensated in any way for your work with the game(not just money), you must make the stricter paid editing declaration required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:10:59, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Csvijay141987


Csvijay141987 (talk) 12:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't for promoting or "spreading the word" about something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:07, 24 August 2020 review of submission by 0rk2

I have updated the references and strengthened citations to show that this topic is notable enough for inclusion. 0rk2 (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


15:26:08, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Peanutbutterwikipedia1230


Peanutbutterwikipedia1230 (talk) 15:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC) I recently created the page 2022 United States Senate Election in Ohio, and it was successfully approved. However, I now see that the correct capitalization, which is consistent with other pages about similar elections, would have been "2022 United States Senate election in Ohio", with a lowercase e for election. I attempted to move the page to reflect this change, but it will not let me. I think this is because the page 2022 United States Senate election in Ohio redirects to the Ohio section of the 2022 United States Senate elections page. Would a Wikipedia administrator be able to assist me and be able to move by changing the title to "2022 United States Senate election in Ohio". Thank you very much.[reply]

User:Peanutbutterwikipedia1230 - Sandwich created. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:08, 24 August 2020 review of submission by 2409:4054:215:674B:1139:9E61:9F61:BC3B


2409:4054:215:674B:1139:9E61:9F61:BC3B (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but what you wrote is not an encyclopedia article. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:29:17, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why has my entry for the earlier Mark Saber series been rejected? It's not a duplicate but rather a new entry entirely.

@Glammazon: Well, it probably was a bit confusing that you were writing about two series with similar names, and that one of the titles has an 11 in parentheses, which looks like a Roman numeral 2, which could be look to someone like a duplicate. You know how when you create multiple files on your computer desktop it will often number them, like New folder, New folder (2), etc? It probably also didn't help that none of the web references you added seem to resolve and none of the other references seem very certain. I personally thought these were hoax articles until I happened to find a Mark Saber video at archive.org. So what I'd recommend, is that you try to beef up the references in the article and establish proper notability before resubmitting. That might mean having to go to the library or something. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minor tweak to the above, I guess they're lower-case Ls, not 1s. Still confusing, though. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:36, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Humanrabbit96

Hey i created the {[Draft:collegeinsider.in]] but it was rejected for notability reasons i read about the notability but i am unable to understand it someone kindly help me to how to make it as article what changes i have to do to make it as article Humanrabbit96 (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Humanrabbit96: our general notability guideline can be found at WP:GNG. The more specific guideline for corporations can be found at WP:NCORP. They both basically say that in order for a subject to be notable, you have to demonstrate that several mainstream sources independent of the subject (no interviews, no press releases, etc.) have written extensively about collegeinsider.in. We want to see bona fide news or magazine articles from known sources, for example, not dead links to Google Play or links to a web hosting Whois page. I performed a Google News search and found nothing on the site, so I think it will be very hard for you to demonstrate notability. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

very much thanks you cyphoidbomb i am very much glad that u made me understand how it works thank you so much love from india. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanrabbit96 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 25 August 2020‎

17:34:07, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Alex Rutu

Hi,

This article is not about promotion. This article about a person. I know that person closely that's why i write a article about his and want to publish this article please review the article and publish it. Or advise me how to write the perfect article for publishing I need to publish an article.

Thank you.

Alex Rutu (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex Rutu: Subject is a 17-year-old. How exactly is he notable? I don't see any hits at Google News. Looks like a vanity article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:36:28, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Soibangla


I tried to created a shortname, TRUMPECON, to redirect to Economic policy of Donald Trump administration. On other database systems, shortnames are routine and, while they may not be initially widely known to many, they become known as others use the system more. Also, the shortname would be picked up by googlebot such that googling the shortname would take a user straight to the article. For example of what I'm getting at, googing USPRIV takes a user directly here on FRED, while googling TRUMPECON would take a user directly to Economic policy of Donald Trump administration. Isn't that the point of shortnames? I'd like to create a whole bunch of them. It would be nice if, as on FRED, an article's shortname would be displayed at the top of the page (upper-right corner?) so users could see it and learn it. soibangla (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

soibangla (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Soibangla: I don't think that Wikipedia is the right place to create a bunch of neologistic shortcuts, especially ones for implausible search terms like "TRUMPECON". Who uses that? Also, per your USPRIV example, there is no USPRIV redirect at Wikipedia, (note the red link) so whatever algorithm Google is using to point to the article you desire to wind up at, has nothing to do with Wikipedia as far as I know. I guess I'm just generally confused as to what value this would have here. 22:43, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
I suggest that the reason people would not use such shortnames is simply because they are unaware they exist. If they become of their existence, they discover shortnames are an enormous time-saver and adopt them, then wonder how they ever got along without them. And, as on FRED and other database systems, the shortname is displayed on the page as a cue to users that it’s a faster route to find what they’re seeking. I used USPRIV simply to illustrate this concept, which is widely used elsewhere; I did not mean that it’s a WP shortname. soibangla (talk) 17:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:50:23, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Lwazilwenkosi Mpofu


I am wondering if a ZIMA award (among many others) won by a Zimbabwean music artist is not enough to warrant a Wikipedia article? I ask because the article Draft:Sandra Ndebele has been rejected several times yet it is backed by a lot of independent sources from Zimbabwe

lwax malax (talk) 23:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 25

02:00:46, 25 August 2020 review of submission by NimmaPawanprs


NimmaPawanprs (talk) 02:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NimmaPawanprs, your submission was rejected and tagged for deletion as WP:SPAM. You appear to have a undeclared COI as well. Eternal Shadow Talk 03:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well... got themselves indeffed... Eternal Shadow Talk 02:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:52:33, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Contributers2020

I want to know that whenever a write an article, it gets declined. Despite taking all citations and all references as I can which is available publicly, it always gets declined. This is very wrong on the user. I think if this happens, in 100% of articles, only 2% gets selected. My article, despite having all information I have, was rejected 8 times. Please resolve this issue and accept my article as soon as possible. This Article is mine.

Contributers2020 (talk) 04:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:30:05, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Vanos777


I am an independent article writer with no COI. The biographical article in question has been said to read like a promotion; however, I fashioned it in the likeness of many other articles that I read prior to drafting - namely Dan Bongino’s page for example. This biography does have independent sourcing as corporations are “people” in the United States, and the corporation known as Arlumen Health is an actual Heath system in Texas. Therefore, its webpage is independent of the CEO due to the fact that a corporation would not publish about a person who was not its CEO as if they were. Furthermore, this article references the nationally notable organization Future Physicians of America, which is one of the country’s largest pipeline organizations for premedical and medical student going into the medical profession. The reviewer is mistaken by his own bias of hunting for promotional materials, so much so he has made a fundamental attribution error in assuming that organizations and companies are not independent of their employees. The Texas Tech article also independently verified that this individual did graduate there and was the number one graduate of his class. Yes, some of the minor articles are harder to connect, but the individual known in Texas as “Mac Ewart” is very notable, as proven by an entire corporation and one of the medical community’s largest organizations. I strongly believe this article needs to be published. Vanos777 (talk) 05:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vanos777. There are several problems with Draft:Mac Ewart.
  1. Several of the cited references, specifically those from Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer. (#5), Rutledge Cancer Foundation (#6), Observatorio Venezolano De La Salud (#7), McLennan Co. Mosquito Project (#8), and National Cancer Institute (#9) do not even mention Ewart's name. These are surely not "significant coverage" of Ewart. In some cases the web pages cited are general, if there is discussion of Ewart on deeper pages the link should be to the specific page where he or his work is discussed. If his work is discussed, he should at elast be named, or there must be some way for the reader to verify that it is in fact his work.
  2. Organizations with which Ewart was associated, such as Arlumen Health and Future Physicians. are not independent sources This includes any of his current or former employers, and and organization that sponsored his work, or which he founded or helped organize. Nothing from such a source counts towards notability. Independent coverage, that is about Future Physicians., from sources in no way associated with him, that have nothing to gain by promoting him, and are not based primarily on his statements (as interviews are) are needed. There seem to be none in the current draft, and there should be at least three.
  3. Statements such as Ewart graduated number one in his class at Texas Tech University from the College of Biological Sciences with a 4.0 GPA are of limited relevance to his reasons for notability, and are ratehr promotional.
  4. The entire "Entrepreneurship" section is promotional in tone, and supported only by closely assoiciated sources, it seems. An organization's self-proclaimed mission interments is rarely encylopedic, unless independent sources quote or refer to it. Phrases such as has grown from an idea into a future for health i do not belong in a Wikipedia article except possibly as part of a quotation, proiperly attributed and cited, from an independent person, and even then might be dubious.
  5. In reference citations, please only wiki-link sources if an article about the source already exists.
Please understand that on Wikipedia "promotion is not limited to commercial advertising, but includes anything intended to promote or praise an individual or organization, or bring it to wider notice, rather than to summarize what independent reliable sources have already published about it. Wikipedia articles should never include judgements of value or opinions in the editorial voice, only ones directly attributes to named and cited sources. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:14, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DESiegel, thank you for your guidance on this and my stated position. I need to do a better job with the links. Would you be willing to work on some other form of chat besides Wikipedia? If not, I understand. I have questions about how to cite institutionally-protected journals and medical/academic findings: 1) How do we cite information printed and/or presented without internet publication? For example, Ewart presented wrote Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer. (#5) Note: I will work to find the print-only title of this work, was sponsored by Rutledge Cancer Foundation (#6) Note: I will find the deeper source, contributed to the data of the Observatorio Venezolano De La Salud (#7) Note: I am having trouble on this one due to the government of Venezuela’s malevolent nature towards scientific freedom currently, wrote the entire for scientific presentation only McLennan Co. Mosquito Project (#8) Note: this was scientific presentation-only also, and is cited deeper into National Cancer Institute (#9).

How do we prove print-only, or presentation-only works on Wikipedia? They no doubt carry more influence over Texas’s regional epidemiology and medical communities than other sources external to the State.

Lastly, I will continue to follow the works of Ewart, as I have come to knowledge of his notoriety regionally via Adolescent Young Adult Conferences, Galas, and other scientific presentations of which I personally attend for these reasons.

My personal goal is to ensure that this encyclopedia does not lose-out on the contributions of regional individuals, companies, and organizations specifically from the State of Texas, USA. I would appreciate guidance, as I am just beginning this journey!

To expand on this, I believe there needs to be articles for Arlumen Health, and the Future Physicians of America organization. However, now I am cautious to even attempt. There is also a vacant space concerning Venezuela’s epidemiology findings and organizations. Tropical Medicine of Venezuela and Texas share much information! Therefore, there are no in-wiki citations available due to these large gaps and lapses of information in knowledge found in Wikipedia. I am passionate to not let a dictatorship exclude the science of an entire nation and its relationships with the USA/Texas go undocumented. How do I proceed with such a large task?

Again, if you’re willing, I would love to have some Wikipedia mentorship throughout this task.

Thank you kindly for the time an thought you provided in your response! Vanos777 (talk) 13:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vanos777 I do Wikipedia work on Wikipedia only, in part for transparency. I have in the past done detailed collaboration over Wikipedia talk pages, and it can work well. Draft talk:Mac_Ewart would be a possible place to hold such discussions. To answer your specific questions:
  • Print sources are cited much like online ones, but without a URL. You may use {{cite book}} for books, {{cite journal}} for scholarly journals, {{cite news}} for newspapers, {{cite magazine}} for print publications that are neither books nor journals nor newspapers. Provide the title, author (when known), date of publication, name of the publication, name of publisher (when relevant), ISBN or ISSN when known, page number, and DOI or other identifier when available. In general there should be enough info to find the source in a library. You can also use the |quote= parameter to provide a short quotation from the source in place of being able to read the source online. As long as the source is published, and could be found and checked with some effort, there is no need to "prove" the content of the source. See also WP:RX.
  • A for possible new article on Arlumen Health, and the Future Physicians of America, please read WP:NORG. Again independent reliable published sources that discuss the organization is some detail would be needed. Sources need not be online, or in English.
Is that helpful? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:54, 25 August 2020 review of submission by LucyNakahara


hello I am requesting some advise on this article. why do you think this article is not good?

LucyNakahara (talk) 07:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were given the reasons the draft was rejected; do you have questions about those reasons? 331dot (talk) 09:50, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motizin: Disagreement (Epistemology) Submission declined

08:19:57, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Motizin

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

A reviewer has rejected my submission of Disagreements (Epistemology). The claim is that that the page is essay-like and no encyclopedic. I firmly disagree. I was very careful not to include any "original" content. What I included is just an exposition of existing issue in epistemology literature. Any philosophical issue may look like an essay. Examples: Internalism and externalism, Justification (epistemology), Philosophical skepticism,Bayesian probability and many others . It seems that the reviewer is not familiar with philosophical content. I request that my submission will be reviewed again by a reviewer with the necessary background like a person from the Philosophy workgroup.

Motizin (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it reads like an essay, I don't need to have a philosophy background to see that. Theroadislong (talk) 08:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If specific editors or someone from a specific field needs to be the one to review your draft, there's something wrong with it. Articles need to be accessible to all, as they can be edited by anyone, not just people who are knowledgeable about a field. It's also good for outside eyes to see the subject. In addition, the group you speak of is not necessarily large and may not have many users who volunteer to review drafts. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a naïve approach. There are many articles in math, physics, chemistry, etc. that are not accessible to the general user and you won't expect that a "general user" will review , accept or reject them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motizin (talk • contribs) 10:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motizin That's exactly what Wikipedia expects. Please see WP:EXPERT for guidance for editors who are experts in a particular field. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Motizin. Do not be discouraged by one decline. Most Wikipedia articles, including the four examples you give above, are rated less than "good" by the community. Confirmation bias and Philosophy of mind are much better examples of how to write about philosophy for Wikipedia. You may be able to get ideas from them, from the initial review and comments above, or from colleagues at Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Epistemology, on how to change the tone of the draft.
If you resubmit the draft, you may encourage Chenzw or Sulfurboy, reviewers who self-identify as having moderate expertise in philosophy, to review it, but in the end it may be reviewed by any experienced Wikipedian. As an autoconfirmed editor, Articles for Creation is an optional process for you. You may move the draft to article space yourself if you don't believe it is benefiting from AfC's review-revise cycle. At worst, the page might be deleted there. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for tagging me, and thank you Motizin for your work on the draft. The issue of disagreements (also called "peer disagreement", which may be a better choice of title, given how it's mentioned as such in Social epistemology) is indeed a discussed problem in epistemology. I am not seeing any primary research in this draft, though I suspect the draft appeared to read like an essay due to the diction and tone of the article (the lede in particular). I will leave a few additional comments in the draft. Please look for me on my home wiki if I do not manage to get back to you in a timely manner. Chenzw  Talk  16:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:41, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Jediwriter1975

The comment was that this is "essentially(sic) a press release", though I followed the article format and wording for other similar business figures, such as Tony Robbins. I'm happy to make changes to better comply with the guidelines...I just need to know what I did wrong specifically. All copy was drawn from content within the approved news/magazine articles. Thanks for your help! Chip Jediwriter1975 (talk) 11:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jediwriter1975 The draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It was rejected because it was loaded with promotional/embellishing language like "In January of 1995, he joined Dale Carnegie, a leader in professional training programs"; "During his stint with Dale Carnegie, Tyson got his foot in the door with sales coaching for professional sports teams when he offered his services to the Philadelphia Eagles in exchange for game tickets. That small move was about to pay off in a big way." The sources you gave seem to all be based on interviews with him. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves or their own work. Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how they meet(in this case) the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.
I noticed that Mr. Tyson is the only subject you have edited about. Do you have a connection with him? 331dot (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:56:43, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Userths

I am new in wikipedia. I created the draft and submitted. But it was declined and I was told that I had to add more citations. I have added 7 references and resubmitted it. Can you help about publishing the article. Userths (talk) 11:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userths If you have resubmitted it, it will be reviewed in due course; please be patient. I notice that the draft does little more than tell of the existence of the college and what it does; Wikipedia articles must do more, they must show with significant coverage in independent reliable sources how the subject(in this case an organization) meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. The sources you have offered do not seem to be such sources. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:22:09, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Martin1094




I have tried to sujbmit this article fopr review, but I can;t tell whether I have been successful as it keeps returning me to a page which says the article is not yet submitted for review.Martin1094 (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Martin1094 (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for review. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin1094: I have submitted the draft on your behalf. While you are waiting for review, please have a look at WP:REFB on fomatting the refs, and it would also be nice if you would add some internal links to other Wikipedia articles. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Note: @331dot: that wasn't me, that was I.)

13:25:03, 25 August 2020 review of submission by 50.250.100.49


This is a very important cultural institution in our community that has stood up for LGBTQ in a right wing neighborhood. They also support artists in a culturally devoid neighborhood and fought for a female muralist to paint the first grafitti mural in Boca. This places is not a museum but there is art everywhere inside and it means a lot to a lot of people here and deserves to be on Wikipedia. It is important to our community and a safe haven for marginalized people. Lee gives out interest free loans to the poor, his family is so generous and they deserve to be noted on Wikepedia. I am not a pro so maybe I wrote things wrong but they deserve to be here way more than other people that are on here.

50.250.100.49 (talk) 13:25, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the puffery was already pointed out by Theroadislong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Do you have a WP:COI with this? Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's good that you want to tell the world about the good work this organization does- but that's not what Wikipedia is for. See WP:NOBLE. Social media would be better suited to that. The only concern with regards to who "deserves" an article is if it meets the notability criteria, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:56:22, 25 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Pruthiviraj Nahak



Pruthiviraj Nahak (talk) 13:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pruthiviraj Nahak You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about an organization; a Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. You only cite the Trust's website, which does not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:32, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Pandey Family


I need help because I created a page on "Stranger than Fiction (TV Series)" with only on reference. I did a lot of research, but could only found info on IMDb. I request you to please do some more intensive research and cite sources. And it's my first attempt of creating an article, so I am just a beginner. The rules are quite confusing and too technical for me to understand. Well, I would to urge the respective user and Wikipedia to pass my article, rest is your decision on the basis of rules and guidelines.

Pandey Family (talk) 15:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pandey Family If you are writing a draft, it is up to you to make it meet standards for sources and notability. There is no deadline for this, feel free to take all the time you need to learn about Wikipedia first. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:44:17, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Justin Crow Asuka


Hello, i have created a Wikipedia page for Denis Zhivotovsky from the band Amatory on the occasion of his birthday on August 28. I know that the verification takes a long time but if someone has a possibility to verify and publish it before August 28, i kindly ask you to help me. Sincerely, Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)Justin Crow Asuka[reply]

Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Justin Crow Asuka: Why should we do that? There are 0 submissions that have been waiting for 2 months already. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Victor Schmidt: Hello! For me a birthday is a good enough reason to hope for a miracle, at least I have tried :-) Thank you for your quick response! Sincerely, Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 07:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)Justin Crow Asuka[reply]
@Victor Schmidt: I have a question about the article - the majority of the facts about this musician are coming from the book about the band, is it correctly to put a reference to the book (page 2, page 19, page 77 etc.) more than 3-5 times in one article? Sincerely, Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 08:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)Justin Crow Asuka[reply]
@Justin Crow Asuka: you can use named references for that. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Victor Schmidt: Thank you for your help! Kind regards, Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)Justin Crow Asuka[reply]

19:31:00, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Thespiansapien


Hi. Please help. I received feedback from a reviewer who was unclear how Chido is a notable actor. He is a series regular on a major network television show and also had a recurring role in other major network television shows. He also has a large following on his social media and many interviews and appearances that I linked in external links. My confusion lies within the fact that on the show series wiki, Sistas, many actors that have wikipedia pages have less film and tv credits and little to no citations, yet their articles were still approved. I also noticed an actor wiki with "This article about an American actor or actress is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it." Should I include in this article? Can you give me advice on what else I need to include or is this a lost cause? Thanks!

Thespiansapien (talk) 19:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thespiansapien, the references do not indicates that the subject meets WP:NACTOR. Eternal Shadow Talk 20:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 26

05:32:59, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Charlie063

When topic is not notable y dont u help me to delete this draft its not drafted properly i am using delete tag some one wil re store it i m trying to redraft complete article by making corrctions in it all other contributers accounts has been blocked due to stockpuppet kindly help me in deleting this draft


Charlie063 (talk) 05:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat myself: Yust wait! Please have a read of WP:AMOUNT, rewriting this will probbably dont change anything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:41:23, 26 August 2020 review of submission by LucyNakahara


I am trying to make an article about Japanese designer Yuima Nakazato translated from Japanese Wikipedia. I get rejected because it looks like an advertisement.

How does it look different from an article about Guo Pei's? I believe I am following the similar format like early-stage, career. Guo Pei I'm not so sure why this is not meeting the quality. somebody please tell me!

LucyNakahara (talk) 05:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LucyNakahara Please see other stuff exists. It is possible that the article you cite is also inappropriate. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. This is why each draft or article is judged on its own merits. Also note that what is acceptable on one language version of Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable on another, as each language version is a separate project with its own editors and policies.
The draft is sourced to what seem to be routine announcements or press release type articles. Wikipedia articles must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(in this case). 331dot (talk) 08:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:37, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Jamesinhere


I have received a comment - Most of this was copied from Clinical coder. — Diannaa (talk) 15:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC) and I have added attribution in edit summary section, also updated the content a bit to match page requirement.

This page is about certification and would like to know if there is any specific template I should select.

Jamesinhere (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jamesinhere (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:20:32, 26 August 2020 review of submission by 62.30.196.51


The article was declined. the reason given was: references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

If there is not substantial enough secondary source material, what would Wikipedia suggest using to ensure the page is published?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_White_(artist)

This artist's Wikipedia uses similar source material for references, what is the difference between this article and the Nick Smith draft article?


62.30.196.51 (talk) 10:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:RhodesGallery20#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:46:44, 26 August 2020 review of draft by 2.37.185.87


Hello! I'm trying to add a page for Annalisa Stroppa, an italian mezzo. I've added as much reference as possible but still the page is rejected, which kind of references should I look for to add? Thanks!


2.37.185.87 (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

independent (no interviews or press releases) reliable sources (so no user-generated content) with some coverage of the subject (not yust passing mentions) Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:23:31, 26 August 2020 review of submission by PublicAffairs71


Was not expecting article to be reviewed in such a short duration (initial estimates were two months before review)

Still adding references and links (note: will not reference or link to information on Wikileaks/Snowden incident). Some information still pending NSA pre-publication.

Waiting for updated military photo in the new Army Green Service Uniform (est Oct 2020).

Please keep in draft until photo is posted.

Thank you in advance.

PublicAffairs71 (talk) 11:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to have to demonstrate why the subject is notable. See our General Notability Guideline. Ogdahl's mere existence is not sufficient for inclusion in a global encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a social media network or a Who's Who of people who own green jackets. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Submission by Francisjk2020

Kindly check the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Massar_Solutions. I have worked hard to improve the article as per the instructions of reviewers. The company Massar is owned by the Government of UAE and Abu Dhabi. 51% is owned by Abu Dhabi Water & Electricity Authority and 49% is owned by Abu Dhabi National Energy Company PJSC (TAQA). Thank you for your help (Francisjk2020 (talk) 11:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

12:54:41, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Charlie063

This page is drafted with many errors references also has not attached properly,, & this page stock puppets accounts are blocked. if we draft properly article As mentioned its not lack of notability request u to kindly help me in getting this draft deleted Charlie063 (talk) 12:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no more shopping until cristmas please. If you want to have this deleted, please simple wait 6 months or take this to WP:MfD. Note that you still haven't indicated how this is noteable in Wikipedia's sence of the word. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:12, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Dnpatel01


Dnpatel01 (talk) 13:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This submission doesn't indicate how the subject meets WP:NPERSON. Instagram isn't considered a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Famous for his attitude and personality? Lol. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:43:39, 26 August 2020 review of submission by PamelaAshley


Hi there, my page keeps being submitted for speedy deletion. I've been trying for months to figure out how to publish it and I need some guidance as to how to get it approved. Lila Abbate, PT, DPT, MS, OCS, WCS, PRPC is a practiced, published, pelvic health expert and an international educator in her field. I'm being told the subject does not qualify for a Wikipedia entry and I'm not sure why that is.

Secondly, I'm being told her page reads more like an advertisement when it is simply listing facts about her career to date. Again, I need some guidance on how to rectify this.

Again, I've been trying to get this page up for months and am happy to oblige whatever Wikipedia needs for it to be accepted, but I need some clear instructions on what that looks like. Thank you so much for your time. PamelaAshley (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Lila Abbate is basically a CV. Wikipedia doesn't host CVs you would be better off at Linkedin.com Wikipedia has no interest in what the articles subject wants to say about herself, only what reliable sources have reported.

The article should be limited to a summary of what such independent sources have said about them. If there are no sources then we don’t have an article.Theroadislong (talk) 16:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:52:26, 26 August 2020 review of draft by Matthewzilch


Hello, I have created a page about drummer Spike T Smith. I have tried submitting it twice but i keep a message saying that i don't have reliable sources.

I have about 4 different magazines about drumming and music, also he has been referenced to in two books.

How do i submit these as a source to support the verification of his page?

Matthewzilch (talk) 19:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]



I have had two messages back but i don't know how to read them?

Matthewzilch (talk) 20:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthewzilch: You've received several replies at Wikipedia:Help desk#reliable sources for my article. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:26:32, 26 August 2020 review of draft by Gamer guy 27


Gamer guy 27 (talk) 20:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:29:21, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Gamer guy 27

My article got declined and i need help resubmitting it so it wont get declined again Gamer guy 27 (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We are not interested in another Seigenthaler. Every claim the article makes must be cited to a strong third-party reliable source that backs it up. Any claims with no source must be removed entirely. Wikipedia is not a billboard. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh.... 22:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:49:52, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Jayscott294


Jayscott294 (talk) 21:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:03:29, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Banetmp


Banetmp (talk) 22:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC) Hello. I got my page declined because of no verifitiability. You can search the things I say and find. You want me to add links on the page? I didnt understand sorry. Reply me so I can edit it[reply]

You need to find and cite newspaper, news magazine, and tech news/tech industry articles that discuss them in some depth. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh.... 22:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:22:51, 26 August 2020 review of draft by Emlycia


Emaly (talk) 23:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I requested this because I'm a Writer and a singer and I wanted my page to be public só that people cans search me

@Emlycia: Wikipedia is not a social media site. It's an encyclopedia, and we are interested in articles on people who have established themselves in their fields and who have become notable. Our General Notability Guideline can be found at WP:GNG. Note also that if you are writing about yourself, you have a conflict of interest and you are strongly discouraged from writing about yourself. If you are actually notable, someone unrelated to you, disconnected from you, will, of their own accord, with no provocation, write about you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 27

05:51:40, 27 August 2020 review of draft by 197.185.102.91

I’m having a school assignment that requires me to write a Wikipedia article about the impact of Covid19 within any of the South African township(of my choice). Thus for me to get good marks, I need to have the article of my own topic and submit the topic to my lecturer. Thus how much content is needed or how many topics is needed for my article to be published? Once my article has been marked I’m likely to delete it since I’m only writing it for school purposes

197.185.102.91 (talk) 05:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thats a realy bad idea of your teacher, to take Wikipedia articles as somethign you could give marks on. Creating a Wikipedia article is the absolute hardest task one can undertake on Wikipedia. It requires much effort and pratice. Your teacher may wants to have a look at Wikipedia:Student assignments. If you want to make a new attempt, consider following the guide User:Ian.thomson/Howto. What you may also want to tell me is why the article resides as a subpage of ADQ2020Group, which btw has a disallowed username that would require changing. I think thats enough for now, if you or your instructor want to know specifically whats wrong with the current version and they dont know it after having a close look at all the pages I have linked to, please ask again. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:32:18, 27 August 2020 review of submission by Khusd khuvd


Khusd khuvd (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC) why my pablish is not coming in wikipedia[reply]

This lacks reliable sources and doesn't looks like a serious attempt at writing an article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:22:37, 27 August 2020 review of submission by Rumelwapbd


Rumel Ahmed 09:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

You haven't asked a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It reads as little more than a social media profile, which is not an encyclopedia article. A Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 09:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:28:49, 27 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Adilmustakimqureshi8



Adilmustakimqureshi8 (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Adilmustakimqureshi8: This appears to be a (failed) attempt to write about yourself. please note that creating an article about yourself is strongely discouraged. If you realy want to make a new attempt (which I don't recommend) have a look at User:Ian.thomson/Howto, a guide by Ian.thomson on how to create new articles, as part of a larger guide by him. please also see Wikipedia:Advice for younger editors. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:42:03, 27 August 2020 review of submission by Wikiinfopedia2019


Man, I do not accept this claim. Advertising? Based on what? That's laughable. I read well the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoiding_harm#Pseudo-biographies you are denying me to create an article about a well-known woman who owns a finishing school, the first online one of its kind.

Give me a reason to stop it, because until now I see conspiracy theories with no fundaments, biased distorted claims - so you mention Wikipedia's rule applied to your own distortion of the facts.


Wikiinfopedia2019 (talk) 13:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiinfopedia2019 Your draft is only sourced to interviews of Bey. Primary sources do not establish that she meets the notability guidelines for people. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves, only what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) As an outside observer, the article currently feels like it's promoting a rank-and-file blogger. We care about people who are notable. Notability can be demonstrated by showing the community that the subject has received substantial coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. See our general notability guideline. That means there should be many articles written in depth about Bey, without her involvement. An interview, for instance, wouldn't establish notability, because it is dependent on her. A person who owns a finishing school is not by default notable, and certainly not any more than someone who owns a plumbing company. Just because she spends time "rubbing shoulders" with the rich doesn't make her more notable than someone who snakes drains for a living. So if you want to continue, you are going to have to demonstrate this notability. And I'd also scale back some of the promotional language. It shouldn't read like a brochure selling the 'demystification of the jet set lifestyle'. It should read like a dispassionate biography. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiinfopedia2019: To quote WP:WISDOM:

It's much more productive to refute the arguments of the majority through reasoned discussion than imply they are wrong because they are the majority, or implying you are being repressed because they don't agree with you. If you attack people who oppose you as if they were a collective with an agenda against you, then whether they were or not, they will certainly become one. There is no cabal conspiring against you unless you created it. Also, consider that if many people disagree with you, it may be just because you are wrong.

The only thing that's laughable is that you think Anna Bey is a suitable subject for an encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:19:49, 27 August 2020 review of submission by 103.87.30.141


103.87.30.141 (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amitmgosavi. Wikipedia is not like Facebook or LinkedIn. It is not a place to write about yourself. There are over 7 billion people in the world. Each has their own story, but very few warrant encyclopedia articles. Unless someone has gained significant notice by the world at large, as evidenced by in-depth coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources, a biography of them is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. You may also find the cautionary essay "An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing" informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:04:09, 27 August 2020 review of draft by Layla noor


Hi! I'm trying to add an article about an actress that's been in the popular Netflix series Warrior Nun. This actress has already been featured in award-winning short films and others. Her name has been all over the news, together with Alba Baptista. I have given some references, but I'm not sure what other references would be considered valid for Wikipedia. I read your articles on sources, but still not sure. Can you please help?

Layla noor (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Layla noor IMDB is not considered a reliable source as it is user-editable. A Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about this actress, showing how she meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actress. Not every actress merits a Wikipedia article; if there are few or no sources with coverage of her, she would not merit one at this time. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:10:35, 27 August 2020 review of submission by 2601:403:281:54F0:CC25:3779:BF6:EC2B


2601:403:281:54F0:CC25:3779:BF6:EC2B (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft has no independent reliable sources to support its content and show how this person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 20:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:37:08, 27 August 2020 review of submission by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34

I ADDED ADDITIONAL REFERENCES AS REQUESTED. Now what is the problem? 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 20:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:59:43, 27 August 2020 review of draft by Travelinfashionberlin


Hello there. Still trying to get the above draft:The_Travel_Almanac approved. References are independent and trustworthy, including the New York Times, models.com, The Guardian, The German Design Awards. Similar, less established publications have existing wikipedia listings. Featured personalities in the publication are of the highest international relevance and caliber. Also, the original declining User:Quek157 has been long blocked now, because of wrongly commenting on drafts. Therefor, would highly appreciate a re-evaulation of the draft. Thank you.

InFashionBerlin 20:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

21:24:51, 27 August 2020 review of submission by 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34

Does this draft page also have a ‘talk’ page?...if so, please provide a link within the draft so that I can access its talk page. Thank you. 2600:1009:B16D:882D:21B1:E29C:4E9E:BC34 (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is here Draft talk:Cedar Point peninsula (Ohio) you have already left a comment on it previously. Theroadislong (talk) 21:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anon, I spent about 25 minutes cleaning it up. The bottom line is that while your contribution is appreciated, if you're not interested in fleshing out that article, there's a strong likelihood that it will ultimately be deleted. You can't force other people to be interested in this subject, and abandoned drafts eventually get axed. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 28

06:21:35, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Karthik CL


I have included a few more notable inclusions into the page. As the founder and head of one of India's largest Education based companies, I feel that notability should not be an issue especially because the work that he is doing with the government on education policy. Please let me know what I can do in order to prove the notability of the subject. Karthik CL (talk) 06:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have added exaxtly one link since the rejection, http://www.businessworld.in/author/Guest-Author/Satya-Narayanan-R-83813/, which appears to be a listing of articles by the subject, and is therefore not significant coverage or realy independent of the subject. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:27:48, 28 August 2020 review of draft by SagnicChongder12


SagnicChongder12 (talk) 07:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SagnicChongder12 You don't ask a question, but what you have written is not yet suitable as a Wikipedia article. A Wikipedia article must be more than a basic information listing, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, that of a notable organization. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 07:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SagnicChongder12 If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section instead of creating a new section. 331dot (talk) 07:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:44:44, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash


Studyash (talk) 10:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


10:46:04, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash


Studyash (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This submission lacks reliable sources and fails WP:NACTOR. We arent interested in another Seigenthaler. The contact section will be removed. If anyone wants to contact the subject, they can look at the homepage. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:17:09, 28 August 2020 review of submission by SKYORANGE123

Come on Accept it their is no reliable source for her All this information is collected from Instagram

SKYORANGE123 (talk) 12:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SKYORANGE123 That is exactly why it can not be accepted, the subject is simply not notable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:05:05, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash


Studyash (talk) 13:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Studyash: see 2 sections above. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:46:33, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Pnwcob


Thank you for reviewing the content, but can I ask one question before I abandon the effort? In developing this page, I followed the same architecture as the following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Student_Advertising_Competition

I know the history of the event isn't there, but the content is pretty similar. Have I done something wrong in trying to stick to the example? I noticed they only had their own website sourced, but this one provides external support. Again, I just had to ask so I can understand for future efforts. Thanks in advance! Matt Pnwcob (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pnwcob Unfortunately you chose a really bad example to follow, the Digital Marketing Competition article has just been deleted as blatant promotion of a non-notable topic. Following examples is generally a bad idea, rather follow the basic guidelines at Your first article. If you still want to look at examples, do make sure they have a "Good article" or even "Feature article" quality rating - which you can check on the article's Talk page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:05:20, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Harpaalsingh


Thank you for reviewing my article. I really appreciate the minimum time being the team have taken to review. I would like to know the mistakes to improve the article and make it to publish. I have mentioned the real Citations within the article to verify the Authenticity of the article subject. What kind of the secondary sources the WIKIPEDIA Team looking for? You can review our official website of Anand International College of Engineering to check the real existence. Please help me out to resolve the issues and publish this article. Thank you in advance!

--Harpaalsingh (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Harpaalsingh[reply]

@Harpaalsingh: The simplest answer is that you would have to find news articles, magazine articles, that sort of thing, which talk in detail about the subject. No press releases, because press releases are primary sources, not secondary, since the information comes from the school itself. Pro tip: "premier" is marketing speech and that has no place in an encyclopedia. We write in a dispassionate tone, not in a tone reverent of the organisation. This is part of why we strongly discourage people who have a conflict of interest from editing articles they are related to. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:08:56, 28 August 2020 review of submission by 39.41.159.39

Dhoom is the fifth highest grossing film franchise in Indian Cinema. 39.41.159.39 (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That does not change the points raised by the reviewer. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:24:39, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Iloveyoga

Excessive information was removed and what remains is basic info, pulled from reputable sources, about a popular website for baby names as well as information on its creation 20 years ago. The subject of this page - BabyNames.com - is used as a source all across Wikipedia pages so I feel that it only makes sense to have more information available about this commonly used resource. Iloveyoga (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:06:44, 28 August 2020 review of draft by Jean1010101010101101010101010


I don't understand why my draft still refused, i would like to understand why. 

The reason given is "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." by AngusWOOF could you please take a look ?

The article is about a smartphone, most technical details are extracted from the vendor site is that the not reliable source ?

I also provided details on the OS used, how to do some things (like go into DLOAD), maybe as a primary source of information : is that bad regarding to wikipedia rules ?

Please give me some more verbose information on the causes of reject (could be the form, the background)

If the article is just too bad, just tell me why but I really which to add this page and maybe on my others smartphones later :)

Thanks for reply, don't hit me :)

Jean1010101010101101010101010 (talk) 22:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jean1010101010101101010101010: Wikipedia is mainly interested in what independent sources have writen about the subject, as subjects tend to write more favourable about themselves. An please consider changing you username, its overly long and hard to read or spell. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:56:39, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Oxyrinchus

Not sure how it is not sufficiently notable. The is a public figure. Please stop deleting. Oxyrinchus (talk) 23:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyrinchus I have explained already on my talk page. Please consult WP:NACTOR and WP:V. Just because someone is a public figure doesn't mean they automatically get a Wikipedia article. As well, the "personal communication" section makes it very clear you have a WP:COI. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


August 29

Request on 02:39:40, 29 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Q at MSA


Hi. I’m having difficulties drafting an article for an economic and social development consulting firm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:MarketShare_Associates.

First off, I’ll disclose that I’ve been paid by MarketShare Associates (MSA) for my contributions to Wikipedia, as also indicated on my userpage. However, I’m not a staff member, and my mandate is foremost to work with Wikipedia editors to ensure the article’s content is legitimately worthy of inclusion. I'm keen to edit any or all parts of the article in order to achieve this. Any feedback that is helpful in this regard is very appreciated.

The reason I’ve been provided for the declined article is: “This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed.”

I’d appreciate guidance on 2 points to ensure that the article is a meaningful encyclopaedic contribution in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines:

  • Areas to change to ensure the article is written from a neutral point of view;
  • Improving the range of independent, reliable, published sources

A few additional clarifying points to explain the challenges I’m having so far:

  1. In terms of notability, the subject of the article (an international development firm) provides services and research that have been documented extensively in technical and policy documents formally published by other international aid organizations. No original research is needed to extract content for this article beyond what has been addressed directly and in detail in works published by these projects.

  2. On independent, reliable, published sources: The majority of sources referenced in this article are published by international aid organizations (international organizations like the UN, NGOs like Habitat for Humanity, foundations, think tanks, academia, and other private firms), rather than the subject being discussed. The development projects wholly own and have control over the content of the published works. Based #1 and #2, I believe I’ve met the criteria for verifiability and notability.

  3. On neutrality: I believe I’ve culled the advertorial language from the article. Which other areas likely need attention? The objective is to include the legitimately impactful work that MSA has contributed to helping other international development organizations.

If there are other areas you’d flag for improvement, please suggest! Thank you for your help!


Q at MSA (talk) 02:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:19:04, 29 August 2020 review of submission by Csvijay141987


Csvijay141987 (talk) 04:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't a vehicle to promote your webshop, and I feel like I saw this submission before... Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:04:18, 29 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash


Studyash (talk) 08:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Studyash You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. You have no independent reliable sources with significant coverage(more than a brief mention or press release) to support the article's content. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Note that itn't their fist time they create a section here in the last days. My browser says me that there are 4 section in total, including this one. Maybe send the draft to MfD? Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:32, 29 August 2020 review of draft by Imi Ike Nui


I am trying to create a page "Kapaemahu (film)" for the animated short film Kapaemahu, which is already mentioned on a few other Wikipedia pages and which is a legit subject (noted in Variety Magazine and other trade and professional journals, Oscar qualified, etc.) But after I aw the review process might take 2-3 months I went to the internet and saw the suggestion of how to get the page published directly (subject to deletion0 I copy-pasted the content into a new page form and added a "suggested deletion" to the draft page. Now it looks like both pages are rejected? Sorry to be so amateur- how to fix???

Imi Ike Nui (talk) 19:16, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Imi Ike Nui, The copy and paste move breaks the enquire traceability that Wikipedia requires, so is invalid. The draft has simply been declined. I suggest you resubmit it.
There is no deadline on Wikipedia, so the review will take the time it takes. Fiddle Faddle 19:26, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:21:08, 29 August 2020 review of submission by Rhodium66


Dear friends, I have a question concerning the draft article "Pomogailo Anatoliy". Unfortunately, it has been declined. I have a question - why are the references not enough for Wikipedia? They do show the texts of publications concerning the subject of the article. In addition, the reference to the web-site "math-net.ru", the reference to the web-site of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, the reference to the web-site "lifelib.ru" and the reference to the "Intellectual system of the thematic research of the scientometric data" - all of them are the independant and publidhed sources of information in Russia concerning the subject of the article. All these web-sites are the international data bases of the articles and details about their authors. The subject matter of the article is the Soviet and Russian scientist - so, the information about his articles are the main part of the references. I do not understand - why are they not reliable and not enough for Wikipedia? Could ypu please clarify it? So that I could fix the draft of the article. Looking forward to your reply. Thank you!

Kind regards, Rhodium66 (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Rhodium66[reply]

Rhodium66 (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:18:55, 29 August 2020 review of draft by Dyokomizo


I wrote this draft of an article about Code Ocean and it was rejected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Code_Ocean

Code Ocean is basically a scientific researcher's tool, so there's no significant mention of it on mainstream media.

Both Nature and IEEE published articles about them, but they also partnered with Code Ocean so neither are "independent" sources.

This draft is now stuck in limbo because of this Catch-22.

Dyokomizo (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dyokomizo. If multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of it turn up, then Draft:Code Ocean may be resubmitted. If such sources don't exist, then Wikipedia should not have an article on the topic. Billions of things are unsuitable subjects. I don't see any dilemma here. If you are editing with Wikipedia's interests foremost, then you shouldn't want an article that fails the encyclopedia's inclusion criteria. If you are instead driven by some outside motivation, then you shouldn't be writing about this topic here. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 30

00:17:31, 30 August 2020 review of draft by Blueboyto


This is the first time that I've submitted a WikiProject Articles for creation. I'm not very computer savvy and I'm unsure of the structure to how this should be submitted. I would appreciate some feedback moving forward.Blueboyto (talk) 00:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC) Blueboyto (talk) 00:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Blueboyto: I could submit it for review for you, howewer, if it were to be submitted it would be rejected quickly. I have identified the following problems:

08:37:08, 30 August 2020 review of submission by Ruthwyshogrod

I wrote this page and it was rejected because of supposed conflict of interest that I had. I was told the page "gives the impression that I have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic." What I don't understand is that this page is a translation from an existing (published, approved) Wikipedia page in Hebrew on the same topic - https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/סמדר_נהב. I was paid to translate the page from Hebrew to English. Beyond that I have no financial stake. So I wonder if there is any way to reverse the decision to reject?

Ruthwyshogrod (talk) 08:37, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthwyshogrod: ☒N Not done and not likely to be done Different Wikipedias are different projects and possibly different rules. See WP:OSE. I cant read hebrew, so I cant tell if the hebrew article needsto be deleted as well. This draft is a highely promotional press release full of puffery. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:37:30, 30 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Eswnav



Eswnav (talk) 08:37, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move this article

@Eswnav:  Not done. It still hasn't improved. The fact that you try so hard to get this to mainspace lets me question wether you ahev a WP:COI to disclose? Note that if it were moved to article space, it would get taken to AFD very soon. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:31, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:04:10, 30 August 2020 review of draft by Arif917


I am unable to make my article in Wiki format. Even I am trying to learn from a template but it seems for me like a programming language. Hence I want experts to manage my data and show it like Wiki format.

Arif917 (talk) 09:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arif917: You can have a look at Help:Wikitext or the Wikipedia article on Wikisyntax to learn more about the syntax of Wikipedia and other Wikis. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

== 10:37:18, 30 August 2020 review of submission by IISL

  • IISL (talk · contribs) (TB)
    • [[:]] ([[[:Template:Fullurl::]] edit] | [[:|talk]] | [[[:Template:Fullurl::]] history] | links | [[[:Template:Fullurl::]] watch] | logs)

{{SAFESUBST:Void|



10:37:18, 30 August 2020 review of draft by IISL

11:10:17, 30 August 2020 review of submission by IISL


IISL (talk) 11:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:29:41, 30 August 2020 review of submission by Ponmaakishan


Pon Maa Kishan A 11:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=975781987"