Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ahamed.naim (talk | contribs) at 12:08, 6 July 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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


June 30

00:35:13, 30 June 2021 review of draft by Uzik01


Good afternoon,

After 4 months in review the article I've created on Adolf Shapiro (theatre director) was declined by the user Scorpions13256 citing minimum standard for inline citations.

Unfortunately the user Scorpions13256 is unavailable for any comment, user talk page is down for mental health issues.

The article does not contain direct quotations, no challenged statements or statements tagged with "citation needed", no statement that is likely to be challenged, and no contentious material.

The article also contains 18 inline citations.

Furthermore, the article is a translation of the article within Russian language wikipedia which apparently does meet citation standards. Except where Russian language article has 12 inline citation here we expanded the list to 18.

Perhaps the problem is with citation format, or some specific statement is causing the article to be declined, but since the reviewer is unavailable for comment I have no choice but to request help here.

Thank you in advance.

Uzik01 (talk) 00:35, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

01:09:47, 30 June 2021 review of draft by 76.66.120.12


I am the original creator of this draft but I was told it was not referenced properly. But I was not told which lines are missing citations so I can add them. They are all from an official University website so if needed I can cite every single line (but that seems excessive to me).

76.66.120.12 (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One source is nowhere near enough to justify an article, let alone a source associated with the subject. You need to come up with strong third-party sources. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 02:22, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:54:12, 30 June 2021 review of submission by Sapodefirst

This is a media outlet for one of the most valuable utility tokens in Africa. Sapodefirst (talk) 04:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. An organization only merits an article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization; your draft does not do that and the reviewer rejected it because they see little chance that it can. 331dot (talk) 07:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:50:26, 30 June 2021 review of submission by 2401:4900:3149:4846:A405:AA12:5548:903C


2401:4900:3149:4846:A405:AA12:5548:903C (talk) 07:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:57:12, 30 June 2021 review of draft by AlicjankaC


I would like to speed up my draft review, and add a category to my draft:Małgorzata Cybulska. It is about Tokyo Summer Olympics 2020, women equestrian/ eventing athletes. Unfortunately, the category I see is "german scientists" and don't know how to change it. I would like to add this tag about Tokyo since my draft is about one of the nominated athletes for Tokyo that did not have her article yet, so publishing this article should be fast.

Best

AlicjankaC (talk) 14:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That draft would never be accepted because it is not in English. Please write it on the appropriate Wikipedia for that language. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 02:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:36:59, 30 June 2021 review of submission by TheUniversalRapMusician


TheUniversalRapMusician (talk) 15:36, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft contains no reliable sources and contains zero indication of notability. --Kinu t/c 16:12, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:03:04, 30 June 2021 review of submission by Hrishikesh Namboothiri V

I don't know why you're saying that the article have no reliable sources. You can search in google for the topic 'Traditional Malayalam months'. Is Google a reliable source? Yours sincerely, Hrishikesh Namboothiri V

Hrishikesh Namboothiri V (talk) 17:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, Google Searches aren't a reliable source, because 1) there is no real control and 2) it is highely dynamic: What might appear now on the first results page, might be gone in an hour. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This draft is redundant to the article Malayalam calendar, which is sourced more adequately. --Kinu t/c 18:13, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then there are some books on the topic'Traditional Malayalam months'.

18:08:01, 30 June 2021 review of submission by 76.240.112.154


76.240.112.154 (talk) 18:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Refer to this:
In summarry, your sources are all useless. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:31, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:04:26, 30 June 2021 review of submission by 137.103.251.12


Hello this is a new startup i've been following as i met the CEO at tech conference event, I truly believe this will be the next big tech company, how can we help by getting this page up?

137.103.251.12 (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Four of your sources are 404-compliant and the other two are press releases, which are primary sources and cannot help for notability as Wikipedia defines it. We do not have articles about "the next big thing"; they must have already made a name for themselves for us to even consider having an article. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:40:17, 30 June 2021 review of submission by TheoryReader


TheoryReader (talk) 21:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. In order to satisfy WP:Notability, we need multiple reliable third-party sources that discuss the book at length, which for books generally means professional or scholarly reviews. One single review is not going to cut it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I looked online and while there are some reviews, the sources are borderline notable so would agree this wouldn't be notable regardless of any additional sources being added. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:08:02, 30 June 2021 review of submission by Morris Bannerman


Morris Bannerman (talk) 23:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add an article to wiki and link to the composer involved with the article - Morris Bannerman (talk) 23:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:Morris Bannerman/sandbox
We need to see more sources that discuss them at length. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 23:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 1

02:22:18, 1 July 2021 review of submission by LythPython


Hi! My article was declined, and I'm wondering what I can do to fix the sources within it. As per my knowledge, the sources are from large local websites, and award organizations, as well as from websites with an authors opinion on an esports controversy situation subject that pertained to the brand that I'm writing about. Thanks!

LythPython (talk) 02:22, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:22:37, 1 July 2021 review of submission by Syedanustanweer


Syedanustanweer (talk) 02:22, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article template, not an actual article, and was rejected for that reason. Come back when you've actually written an article. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 02:32, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:44:11, 1 July 2021 review of submission by 2603:7000:2143:8500:C13F:1A89:7716:B2C3

It meets GNG. The editor rejecting it did not even indicate that he considered GNG .. only the sport-specific guideline, but clearly simply meeting GNG is sufficient. 2603:7000:2143:8500:C13F:1A89:7716:B2C3 (talk) 05:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that all of the references are basically the announcement of him qualifying to compete in the Olympics so nothing outside of that which shows why he is notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:50, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That does not force one to only consider the sport-specific guideline. If a subject meets GNG, even if all the articles are about them picking their toes, that is sufficient (As the sports notability guideline states: "Subjects that do not meet the sport-specific criteria outlined in this guideline may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline ..."). No need whatsoever to consider why they meet GNG, and to then focus only on the sport-specific guideline, and ignore GNG. That's, respectfully, incorrect. --2603:7000:2143:8500:A053:DB60:EEA0:34CD (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How can I get this reviewed now by another editor? I formerly saw a button for that purpose. Thank you. 2603:7000:2143:8500:845E:FC6C:A0EA:F171 (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:10:24, 1 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Peps215


I created the Kellee Marlow page to further pages of rising podcasters and filmmakers. Kellee Marlow is well-known as a podcaster and budding filmmaker. I wasn't sure if a page about the film needed to be created first but the reviewer who declined the article says she isn't notable enough. I disagree. She is well-known in her area and I have added links from others listed on Wikipedia who have mentioned her, along with references across the Internet. This is my first time doing an article but I see entries with less references than hers but I'll keep digging up more articles if that is the final word.

A little more direction would be greatly appreciated especially since I am a newbie. Thank you! I look forward to contributing more articles in the future if I can get this process figured out.

Best, Sarah

Peps215 (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are in the process of creating a Wikipedia article, not just page. The existence of other potientially inappropiate articles does not mean yours can too, though you are welcome to point them out so that we can deal with them. With regards to the current draft, I am not impressed by the reliability of the sources used and the fact that most are affilated with the subject, IMDB is unreliable, Medium is unreliable too. 14:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

17:03:19, 1 July 2021 review of submission by 65.188.86.76


Hi, I am hoping to re-review this drafted page for Spencer's TV and Appliance. Prior, the text was not properly cited and extremely sales-y, and read like an advert rather than solely informational about the company. Based on this feedback, I have revised the text to remove all sales/advertisement language and included proper citations for each informational fact.

65.188.86.76 (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not for merely providing information or confirming the existence of something; that is considered promotional here. You don't have to be actively soliciting customers or selling something. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:10:32, 1 July 2021 review of draft by Lravisankar


I do not understand why my draft is declined. I have cited the book sources. I would like to know how to cite a book. Lravisankar (talk) 17:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lravisankar, Your draft was declined because your don't have enough reliable sources for verification. If you have a question about references, I would suggest you check out the Reference Help Desk. Curbon7 (talk) 21:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:18:43, 1 July 2021 review of submission by Hello923


Hello923 (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Scott A. Smolka

You didn't ask a question. Also, your draft was declined because it doesn't have enough reliable sources for verification. As the reviewer noted, however, the subject is likely notable, per our notability criteria for professors, so once you get reliable sourcing, it should be good to go. Curbon7 (talk) 21:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:49:18, 1 July 2021 review of submission by Innotivity

The reviewer states: "This submission's 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"

Yet the short article has six external links to commercial publications or which half are daily newspapers in South Africa and one is GQ South Africa. This is a brief article about the first black real estate agency owner in South African history and I believe he deserves a mention, and I am not understanding why these references are not "significant coverage" or why these are not "published, reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" - this seems like some kind of bias against African sources to me.

Innotivity (talk) 21:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Focusing only on the outlets is only going to bring you tears. Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode's top table:
As to the article itself, you have external links in the body of the article outside of reference tags - we don't allow this - as well as claims that are unsourced - we seriously don't allow this. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 00:38, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


July 2

01:16:16, 2 July 2021 review of draft by TulsaOklahoma


TulsaOklahoma (talk) 01:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help with my draft:KTZT-CD? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TulsaOklahoma (talk • contribs) 01:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TulsaOklahoma, As the reviewer noted, you need more reliable sources in order to show notability, per our notability criteria for broadcast media. Curbon7 (talk) 00:33, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:32, 2 July 2021 review of submission by Angelina Dangi


Angelina Dangi (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC){{SAFESUBST:Void|} Why my article was rejected ? It doesn't violate Anybody. It just evolves a sport. Then, Why ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelina Dangi (talk • contribs) 06:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Ummeed(A story)
Angelina Dangi, As the admin who deleted the draft noted, Wikipedia is not a webhost. Curbon7 (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:32:13, 2 July 2021 review of submission by Angelina Dangi


Angelina Dangi (talk) 06:32, 2 July 2021 (UTC) Why my article was rejected ? It is just a story and doesn't violates anybody. Then, Why ?[reply]

Wikipedia does not host personal stories. Perhaps a reading of our article on Encyclopedia should give you more of an idea on what is acceptable and not acceptable here? Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:59:54, 2 July 2021 review of submission by 2001:1C04:4007:1900:5D85:C5E8:22B6:C85A


Hi! I have a question about notability regarding my article about Jan-Wouter Oostenrijk. There have been quite a few publications that discuss his career as a musician but they are mostly in Dutch. I assume I cannot use these Dutch texts on the English page? There is already a Dutch Wikipedia page for him with significant links. Is that considered to build notability? I could really use your input here! Thanks in advance, Akke Pinkster

2001:1C04:4007:1900:5D85:C5E8:22B6:C85A (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not required that sources be in English. It helps, but it is not required. See WP:NOENG. 331dot (talk) 12:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:52, 2 July 2021 review of draft by Shelbyhoward423


Shelbyhoward423 (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cant figure out my mistake with the references? Shelbyhoward423 (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shelbyhoward423, It doesn't seem as though your draft is notable, per our notability criteria for lists. As a previous reviewer noted, Wikipedia is neither an indiscriminate collection of information nor a database. Curbon7 (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:06, 2 July 2021 review of submission by One k tone

Hello, I submitted a new page for posting but was not accepted because it reads like "an advertisement." I thought it was written objectively and am now I'm looking for advice on what edits I can make to have this accepted. Thank you! One k tone (talk) 20:15, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello One k tone, I agree with the reviewer this is almost entirely written like something we would find in a pamphlet trying to sell space in this vault. What the article should based on is only what others have written about it in reliable sources. We write in our own words and don't succumb to the marketing lingo. So avoid terms like "Premium" and "High-tech". I would remove the entire Facilities section as this is entirely promotional, not encyclopedic and unreferenced. The first reference is not helping either as it does not discuss the subject at all and the story being supported by it is then falling into Original Research territory. The second reference is to Wikipedia itself and this is a academic misdemeanor, we don't use Wikipedia as a source. We either wikilink the article or find the actual source in the article to support the information. Lastly avoid references that are press releases, these can be hard to tell sometimes but the Malibu Magazine very much reads like a press release. At this point I am not willing to offer a determination on notability. Please also read through WP:CORPDEPTH as well. The way this is written and the information included there may also be a concern with conflict of interest editing. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 3

Request on 16:51:14, 3 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Happybusan



Happybusan (talk) 16:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happybusan, The draft must be supported by inline citations consisting of reliable and non-primary sources. Curbon7 (talk) 22:26, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:51:39, 3 July 2021 review of submission by Urju 23


If you search for "Urjumelashvili" in the search box for the page it shows the information. I don't know how to get a link that already has the surname written in the search box. What do I do? I saw another family Wikipedia article, Glonti (also a Georgian surname) and in it, they use the same site for a source in the reference list, and when you click the link there it takes you to the same site but it just says 404 გვერდი არ მოიძებნა (meaning: page not found) I don't get how that was approved if this isn't.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:How_geogen_looks_.png#/media/File:How_geogen_looks_.png - in which books the surname appears

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:How_geogen_looks_2.png#/media/File:How_geogen_looks_2.png - from which cities it originates


I'd be very thankful if you could help me out :)

Urju 23 (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Urju 23 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Not every family name merits a Wikipedia article; it depends on significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:45:28, 3 July 2021 review of draft by Forich


I recently created the draft Draft:Ramses Ramos and submitted it for review as a new article. It received this review on July 2 2021:

This submission's 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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

. The reviewer was User: Yeeno. I have introduced half a dozen new sources to the same draft, most of them pertaining to websites of the main TV networks in Colombia (Caracol Television and RCN Television), and others from important local news outlets (i.e. El Tiempo (Colombia)). Please review whether the inclusion of these new sources is enough to address the defficiencies pointed out by Yeeno in his review. Pinging @Yeeno: to see if he can comment here as well.

Forich (talk) 19:45, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Forich, The article was certainly improved with your addition of reliable sources. The only ask I have is that you remove the IMDb reference, as IMDb is not an acceptable reference. I think it's much better than when it was declined, and you are always welcome to resubmit the draft, but it is up to the next reviewer to determine whether it passes either our notability criteria for actors or our general notability criteria. Curbon7 (talk) 22:32, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 4

05:30:54, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Champ Imi model


Champ Imi model (talk) 05:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated re-submission without doing anything to address the issues raised in prior declines is grounds for a rejection or deletion. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 08:07, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, if you are not Champ Imi himself, you should not be using that username and if you are, you should not be writing about yourself on Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 08:08, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:49:11, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Ajaya Kumar Behera 1


Ajaya Kumar Behera 1 (talk) 06:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ajaya Kumar Behera 1 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, we are interested in what independent reliable sources say about you, not what you want to say about yourself. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use your preferred social media outlet. 331dot (talk) 07:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:42:27, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Jackson's official


Jackson's official (talk) 08:42, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Your sourcing is still very much useless. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:44:35, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Jackson's official


Jackson's official (talk) 08:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You didn’t ask a question, although your draft was rejected, meaning it will no longer be considered. Eternal Shadow Talk 18:43, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:50:09, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Flobroderick


I have now had this submission rejected twice in spite of there being reliable, verifiable sources such as main newspapers in Spain (Expansion), TechCrunch and Crunchbase. Please can someone advise me on any other ways I might be able to get this published? This is a legitimate company with more than 25 employees and they just want a simple non-marketing page on Wikipedia.

Flobroderick (talk) 08:50, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We have zero interest in what the company wants, they fail WP:NCORP and the draft is just advertising from the very first word. Theroadislong (talk) 08:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Flobroderick You don't have to be marketing or soliciting customers to be promotional. Wikipedia is not for merely providing information and not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. They should do that on their own website. 331dot (talk) 10:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Flobroderick I see that you declared a COI. If you are an employee or otherwise a paid representative, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:13:21, 4 July 2021 review of submission by Premviswabharathi


I am creating wikipage for my friend who is running a study center for different universities. The institution name is Viswabharathi open school. May I know how I can do this. What I am doing is getting rejected. Premviswabharathi (talk) 20:13, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Premviswabharathi Wikipedia has articles, not wikipages. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something; it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Sice you say you are working for a friend, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 20:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 5

Question by Champ Imi model

Hello sir How many wikipedia pages have I created? I have also made tea with news articles But they all get deleted within 24 hours Please can tell me what is the issue, why is the page of wikipedia getting deleted?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Champ Imi model (talk • contribs)

@Champ Imi model: Hello and Welcome to the AfC help desk. I am not an administrator and therefore cannot see the deleted revisions, however, according to the deletion reason, they were deleted becuase promotion is forbidden here. You might also be interested in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch, particularely its "Puffery" subsection. If you have further questions, perhaps ask them at the Teahouse rather than here because you have a bigger audience there. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:59:09, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Akapro990

the personality mentioned is a very notable one in North India and is one of the best yoga teachers on the planet. He is loved by almost everyone and only a few people on earth without any wantings and controversies as he is a Jain Monk under the digambara tradition. Pls tell me if I need to do something on my part otherwise please approve this article. Akapro990 (talk) 02:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. No sources, no article, no debate. Your argument above also doesn't help your case. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:58:33, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Sudjack8


My article has declined many times by informing that this is more likely to be an advertisement but its wrong. Please help me to create my first Wikipedia article as approved. Please help me where I am wrong.

My article as- The FloralMart is a Indian florist and gift destinations, they offer home delivery of fresh flowers bouquets, cakes and personalized gift items with same-day delivery, next-day delivery. It is a venture of Sankhs Groups India and founded by Aditya Nath Mishra in 03 June 2019. It is a registered brand at the Office of Intellectual Property India.

History

The company was registered in Kanpur City of Uttar Pradesh state on 03 June 2019, by its parent company Sankhs Groups. In June 5 2019, the company was registered on Amazon India. In August 2019, the company was registered on Paytm India.

Retail categories

Though originally a flowers and gift retailer, the company has also expended into the E-commerce sector. . It has expended their business into the cakes and other gift items >.

Products and services

Fresh Flowers Bouquet, Cakes, Greeting Cards, and other gift items.

References     Brand in India- The FloralMart®. "THE FLORALMART - IP India Trademark Details". trademarks.iphawk.com. Retrieved 2021-07-03. Amazon.in Seller History - The FloralMart®. "The FloralMart". Amazon.in. Retrieved 2021-07-03. "Valentine's Day Week List 2021: Gifts for every day of the week - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 2021-07-04. "Amazon sale offers: Celebrate Valentine's Day with Amazon's One-Stop Valentine's Shop for bouquets, greeting cards & more - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 2021-07-04.

Category:E-commerce

Sudjack8 (talk) 03:58, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:The FloralMart
Amazon.in is worthless as a source (online storefront), trademark details are worthless (too sparse/connexion to subject) and the two Times of India pages appear to be non-sequiturs. None of your sources are acceptable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 04:05, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:42:42, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Ramil Salihar


Ramil Salihar (talk) 04:42, 5 July 2021 (UTC) Can you please check for verification of this article. I have developed sources and changed some of them. Will be glad to receive a feedback.[reply]

05:55:20, 5 July 2021 review of submission by OliverForest


I feel like the article I wrote that got denied for Erik Brandt and the Urban Hillbilly Quartet fulfills the noteriety criteria.

It has multiple articles from multiple regional print sources: The Kalamazoo Gazette (ref 1), The Ripsaw in Duluth (ref 8, 33), The Twin Cities Daily Planet (ref 13), The Isthmus in Madison (ref 14), The Pulse in the Twin Cities (ref 20), Seven Days in Vermont (ref 50), Onions AV Club in Madison (ref 70), and Skope in Boston (ref 73)

It also has an article in national music magazine Paste (ref 21).

I feel like this covers the "has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself" criteria.

If it doesn't, why?

Thanks!

OliverForest (talk) 05:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@OliverForest: Not about notability, I am just curious: In Draft:Erik Brandt and the Urban Hillbilly Quartet you use a bunch of sources that read like "Stonehocker 1999", something my head can't convert to the data needed to identify (and possibly access) the souce in question. Could you please elaborate what this refers to? Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:20:45, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Menu maharaj

why reviewer rejected the article? There are more than ten sources talking about the topic. I can't able to understand how the topic is not notable. PLZZ review again don't support the deletion of article.

Menu maharaj (talk) 06:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Menu maharaj The reason for the rejection is given at the top of the draft; please review the comments left by reviewers. It would be preferred if you had fewer high quality source rather than a large number of poor quality sources. A large number of poor quality sources is usually a strong indication that the person does not meet notability guidelines. 331dot (talk) 07:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:31:28, 5 July 2021 review of submission by 2001:D08:D8:7204:116B:E867:55D7:E74A

Would like to learn how to publish genuinely without being recognized as intended to promote something.

2001:D08:D8:7204:116B:E867:55D7:E74A (talk) 06:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something or someone. Wikipedia is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. I would suggest that before attempting to create a new article(the hardest task to perform on Wikipedia) that you first spend much time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Please also read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:50:24, 5 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by M K Mandawar


Hello dear I have created an article for a person but it has been declined. I have paid for this and the person is notable in public it is also show on first search in Google. The name of person Poonam Ankur Chha. Also you can try to search. I have added all of the related references including their links. May I know the exact reason for declined. I'll be thankful to you.

M K Mandawar (talk) 10:50, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@M K Mandawar: There are two things that need to be cleared up. First of all: you say I have paid for this – what does that refer to? Where (or to whom) did you pay? Secondly, you used to have a declaration on your user page (here) that you are being paid for your contributions concerning Poonam Ankur Chhabra, but you removed it half an hour ago, just before you removed the conflict of interest tag from the draft. Why did you remove the disclosure from your user page, and why did you remove the tag from the draft? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I just realised that I have paid for this might have been a typo. Perhaps you meant to say "I have been paid for this"? --bonadea contributions talk 12:21, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah sorry it's a typo. M K Mandawar (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:17, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Ramil Salihar


Ramil Salihar (talk) 14:15, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there In my article I received a feedback of reliable sources. However, I have tried many times and failed and I got a stop sign, so I cant resubmit it. I have improved references so how can I resubmit again? Or there are limited number of tries?


Ramil Salihar (talk) 14:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ramil Salihar The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further at this time. Please review the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:52:21, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Shekhar Aman


Hi, as suggested in the morning, I've removed all the amazon and facebook links. Also, I've added 4 reliable sources as a media coverage. I cross checked the wiki page of "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divya_Prakash_Dubey". In this wiki page also, reliable sources is of media. If its still wrong, then please help me proceed further. Shekhar Aman (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See the section below. Curbon7 (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:55:12, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Gardenkur


Gardenkur (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gardenkur, the subject of the draft seems to be a non-ntoable government official, and the draft fails both our notability criteria for politicians and our general notability criteria. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Curbon7 (talk) 19:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:47:56, 5 July 2021 review of submission by 2600:1700:D4B0:301F:4C65:266F:AE29:8D42


I keep making adjustments - you will see this actor on Getty images, and many tv shows/shows for young people/children Do not understand why keeps getting rejected

2600:1700:D4B0:301F:4C65:266F:AE29:8D42 (talk) 15:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon, Getty Images, Applemusic, IMDb, TVguide, blogs and interviews are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the sources on the draft were discussed and dismissed above, with Getty being the only new source and still useless (we can't use it - too sparse). You're clearly not listening to the criticism. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 02:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:13:19, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Shekhar Aman


Shekhar Aman (talk) 16:13, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shekhar Aman, the draft was seen as too much of an advertisement due to the use of inline external links and a lack of reliable sources. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Curbon7 (talk) 18:58, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:58:05, 5 July 2021 review of submission by RedX8


RedX8 (talk) 17:58, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RedX8, You didn't ask a question, but the reviewers determined that this draft seemed more like a resume than an encyclopedic entry. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Curbon7 (talk) 18:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:00, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Mohamedhussein001


Mohamedhussein001 (talk) 19:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been deleted as it meets the speedy deletion criterion for advertising. The tone of the draft is wholly inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. --Kinu t/c 19:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:30:14, 5 July 2021 review of submission by Benkershman

I'm wondering what other information I need to provide in order for the submission to be noteworthy enough. Would it help if I was able to include a birth date, legal name and more info on their family background? Benkershman (talk) 20:30, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Benkershman You must demonstrate with independent reliable sources with significant coverage that this person meets at least one aspect of the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. The other stuff can wait. 331dot (talk) 20:34, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 6

Request on 03:33:36, 6 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Amaria2016


Dear Team, one problem with my article is that most of my sources are old newspapers that are not available online. Is there any way I can provide them as sources? Unfortunately I haven't found the same information online. Thanks for the help!

Amaria2016 (talk) 03:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see Template:Cite news. We accept offline sources, if enough bibliographical information is provided to look the newspaper article up in an offline archive. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:55:16, 6 July 2021 review of draft by Cog360


Hi,

I have a few questions in regards to my draft.

1. Overall I want to know if the submission is too long? I have edited it down but when compared with submissions on similar subjects it is more detailed.

2. Should I include a table for the subject, as per the example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Murrell

3. Is it best to change the order of the article so that the 'Early Life and Education' section is below 'Career'.

Many thanks in advance

Cog360 (talk) 05:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cog360, I'll answer your questions as you've numbered them;
1. The length seems ok, though I have not read it in depth.
2. WP:Infoboxes can be a bit fiddly to get right, particularly for beginners, so leaving it for someone else to do is fine.
3. The order is correct. A biography should be in chronological order so the events of childhood and youth come before the subject's career.
Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:28:01, 6 July 2021 review of submission by Tedtechno


Tedtechno (talk) 08:28, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:42:06, 6 July 2021 review of submission by Pankaj todabhim


Pankaj todabhim (talk) 09:42, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pankaj todabhim You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:38:27, 6 July 2021 review of submission by Krishnarthiindia


Krishnarthiindia (talk) 10:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Krishnarthiindia You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you have a relationship with the topic, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:08:03, 6 July 2021 review of submission by Ahamed.naim


Ahamed.naim (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1032268016"