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 Cdasbd (talk | contribs) at 21:05, 1 January 2022 (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G14).). 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


December 26

01:28:30, 26 December 2021 review of draft by Pankaj kumar (Director)


Pankaj kumar (Director) (talk) 01:28, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pankaj kumar (Director) You don't ask a question, but(after being moved, I have placed the proper link here) 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) 07:33, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:48:29, 26 December 2021 review of submission by 223.239.25.16


223.239.25.16 (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place to post a basic description of someone. 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. If you were attempting to write about yourself, please review the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 08:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:55:09, 26 December 2021 review of submission by AndyS74


We have made amendments to the text and references and request a re-review. Many thanks!

AndyS74 (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:21:55, 26 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Famousrappersnft


Why my article get rejected? I need assistance in making it eligible.

Famousrappersnft (talk) 11:21, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:04, 26 December 2021 review of submission by 81.83.43.211

I want the article to learn from - not because I am an expert on it. So I'd want to publish a stub, inviting people in the know to extend it. Another problem I have is the low quality of the references. I don't know where to find better ones, but no doubt others do. So - can I publish this stub?


81.83.43.211 (talk) 13:54, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Users without accounts(and new accounts) cannot directly create articles, you must submit it for a review. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

Request on 03:36:09, 27 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Nikhilraoactvis


why article submissioned by me was declined ? Nikhilraoactvis (talk) 03:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nikhilraoactvis, we don't encourage people to write autobiographies on wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Autobiography. If you are notable enough, third party editors may write about you eventually. – robertsky (talk) 13:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:45:46, 27 December 2021 review of submission by Amhjn

Want to know what all should I include to make this page notable? Amhjn (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amhjn You cannot make the subject notable, but you can demonstrate its notability by summarizing at least three independent reliable sources that have significant coverage of this topic(not just a brief mention or simple description) and have chosen on their own to write about it(not based on any materials put out by the topic like an interview, press releases, or their website) showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial.
If you are associated with this company, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 08:29, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:14:19, 27 December 2021 review of submission by Mr cosmic king

Hi, I'm new comer here and i dont know how to write wiki pedia pages. I felt that its important to make a page for it since. the app is a global medicinal plant app and is supporting the ayurveda community all around the world. and also it a way the ayurveda is developing forward. So please help make me complete the page. Mr cosmic king (talk) 08:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr cosmic king You have asked this at the Teahouse, please only use one method to seek assistance, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:48:03, 27 December 2021 review of submission by 2601:241:480:6340:0:0:0:19D7


It is currently one of the most popular vegan restaurant in the world. It’s co-owned by Celebrity Tabitha Brown and featured in about 300 news articles including different languages:

Please allow page to be on Wikipedia so we can keep editing.

https://la.eater.com/2021/10/26/22747011/tabitha-brown-social-media-influencer-plant-based-restaurant-opening-encino-kale-my-name


2601:241:480:6340:0:0:0:19D7 (talk) 08:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? If you work for or represent this restaurant, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing.
Your draft has no sources whatsoever. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the restaurant, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. To get a draft accepted you need to have at least three sources with significant coverage, not based on any materials put out by the restaurant(such as staff interviews, press releases, or basic announcements). Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:13:54, 27 December 2021 review of submission by Cyan2021


The first version of the draft that I have uploaded in July had some quality issues, and it was soon tagged with the "excessive citations" and the "COI" templates.[1] Afterwards, I have removed all the excessive citations,[2] and, on my user page, I have declared in accordance with Wikipedia's terms of use that I am a paid editor[3] – I had not known that this disclosure is necessary (well, now I do!). I believe though that the template is meant to tag articles in which an editor has not chosen the path of disclosure – this renders the COI template obsolete in my case. Therefore, I believe that the templates should be removed. Now, I feel that I can only appeal these two templates, but I should definitely not remove them myself.

The reason why the draft had been declined in the first place was that "routine press coverage and announcements are not sufficient to establish notability."[4] The editor User:TheBirdsShedTears encouraged me to "add multiple reliable sources – independent of the subject" in order to demonstrate how the draft's subject is notable.[5] I have done exactly that by adding multiple references that clearly indicate substantial coverage of the topic in reliable sources.[6] These are not just passing mentions. Nonetheless, the article has been rejected this time which I think is not warranted.

I hereby appeal the rejection and kindly ask for reassessment.

Kind regards, Cyan2021 (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cyan2021 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further at this time. Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about a company and what it does, but to summarize what independent reliable sources say about it. I fear you may be too close to your company to be able to write about it as Wikipedia requires. Please describe the three best sources in the draft with the best coverage that indicates how your company meets WP:ORG. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 331dot! The draft cites at least three WP:SIRS-compliant sources: Fintechnews Switzerland (Source 1), FAZ (Source 3), and Handelsblatt (Source 9). I have already included a Google translation which is not perfect, but good enough to understand what these three sources say.

In the Fintechnews Switzerland source, the editorial staff decided to write an article about WebID Solutions because of a recent legal dispute. However, the article is not mainly about the legal dispute, it actually describes the company's history in significant detail, and puts the legal history into focus. So I'd say that it's warranted to believe that they consider WebID Solutions significant.

In the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung source, Helmut Bünder describes WebID Solutions on two pages. The first third of text outline how the employees work at WebID, the second third summarises key points of the company's history, and the last third describes how the company sees its future. Bünder has done a traditional journalistic job here: The article doesn't present the company (ie it's not an advert written like a newspaper article), it actually is a newspaper article that describes the company, both tone-wise and content-wise.

In the Handelsblatt source, Katharina Schneider delivers a more business-oriented description of WebID Solutions, especially regarding the 2018 corporate strategies. Nonetheless, the article also includes brief descriptions of who WebID Solutions are, what they do, and of course which financial figures apply to them.

I'd say that these three sources which are all independent, reliable, secondary, and most importantly, significant (no single-sentence mentions, but actual articles about the subject), definitely indicate notability. Kind regards, --Cyan2021 (talk) 13:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:26, 27 December 2021 review of submission by Alquduws


My Holy country deserves a Wikipedia page just as the other country’s in the world have one . . . . . Why do you not find it significant why do you think it does not qualify for a Article page? My Country is very great, I’m the highest noble in the world in every sense.

Condensed for brevity
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. 
***** The prophet Muhammad ( peace & Blessings be up on him ) His Writings & teachings ( from Allah ) ( God ) that have accumulated 3 Billion + Followers that all the Arab countries benefit forever from (Especially Saudi Arabia The location near Mecca 🕋) ( 3 Billion + Followers that came from my holy Blood & genetics, the fact that all the Arab/Muslim countries benefit forever from 3 Billion + Followers & Islam Especially Saudi Arabia the location near Mecca 🕋& the fact Kings & that many people follow the writings & teachings, the fact this makes me a King & a King of Kings & the fact that This religion brings structure, rule, order, faith, people, abundance of many things forever & more to these countries & They all use some type of systems that come from this religion *****

There’s no one in the world that could top that.

Mecca & Medina does not belong to Saudi Arabia, it Belongs to the founding family of the religion of Islam ( the Dajani Family ) it’s claimed, It belongs to me A Accepted lineal descendant of the Prophet. Mecca & Medina is a territory of “Alquduws” ( The Holy Emirate ) & the world needs to know. 

This is very significant, very important. Great history being made. Legendary.

I would appreciate it if you could accept my draft & make it into a Article. Alquduws (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alquduws Wikipedia is not a place to just tell the world about something. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. When independent sources choose to write about your country, that's when it would merit an article. If you want to tell the world about it, please use social media. 331dot (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:29:48, 27 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Ajmead99


Hello! I just finished my first article on Wikipedia written on DJ Code. It was declined and this was the memo I received as to why, 

"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 music-related topics). 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 subject I wrote about is a musician who has traveled all over, performed with big-time Christian artists, although most of his publicity is on social media. Even how he books new shows and events is via social media and email. He is definitely someone worth having a Wikipedia page on but is there a way I can site some sources or mention things that would help get my article approved?


Ajmead99 (talk) 21:29, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ajmead99, notability can't be created or forced. If secondary sources are not discussing the subject then Wikipedia can not have an article on them. You need to find sources unconnected to the subject. Slywriter (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:52:26, 27 December 2021 review of submission by Sebsox6

Hello! I'd like to ask whether the current draft meets the notability guidelines. There has been notable information added including reliable references, mainly regarding the Monopoly board game. Sebsox6 (talk) 22:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and furthermore, the draft features notable information since it's part of programming for the G4TV network. Sebsox6 (talk) 23:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

04:08:54, 28 December 2021 review of draft by IHuB2021


Hi there, my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pantai_Hospital_Kuala_Lumpur has been declined. I have made some changes. Kindly advise if this is still look like advertisement. The information I got is based on the books, journals, website and so forth. Please advise. IHuB2021 (talk) 04:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IHuB2021 (talk) 04:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IHuB2021, Your article reads like an advertisement than presenting it in encyclopaedic manner. It needs to be rewritten. You may read other similar articles or WP:BETTER for writing a better article. See also Kuala Lumpur Hospital. Regards TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TheBirdsShedTears Thanks for your opinion. I have revised the paragraph and sentences. Is the article still looks like advertisement? IHuB2021 (talk) 07:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:34:09, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Chakraborty Saikat

Keeping the reviewer's comments in mind I have changed the content on the page. I request the reviewer to kindly re-review the page and see if it fits the Wikipedia page standards. Chakraborty Saikat (talk) 04:34, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chakraborty Saikat,  Done. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 19:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:09:53, 28 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by جاسم آهن


Dear Wiki Team, I am trying to make a wiki page for Late Jassim Abdulaziz. He was well renowned Qatar Television anchor and host, and was popular among the local community and GCC countries. He joined Qatar Television in early 1980's. In my recently article created for him, mentioned basic information like date of birth, demise date and honor the government has given in regard to his services. Unfortunately, all the references are from local newspaper websites. The national television website, has no information related to their staff (present or past).

Can you kindly assist, how can we create page for him. If it is acceptable, can we arrange a letter and send it to your team that shows his employment details.

Appreciate your kind assistance in this regard.

جاسم آهن (talk) 05:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look and approved your article. Given a studio named after him, condolences by the PM and the other references mentioning his connection to national events, subject appears notable. Slywriter (talk) 05:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:23:49, 28 December 2021 review of submission by NileshPatel560

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

I've added a few more sources that are able to show the notability for the subject. NileshPatel560 (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:39:13, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Shruti232002Bond


Shruti232002Bond (talk) 08:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC) Need help. Are these websites not acceptable? ZEE5 & Mid-day are good and notable news resources. Shruti232002Bond (talk) 08:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shruti232002Bond The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. The sources themselves may be okay, but their content is not. Interviews are primary sources and not acceptable for establishing that this company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company; an article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, not based on interviews or any other materials put out by the company, its staff, or associates. That includes basic announcements. Please read Your First Article. If you have an association with this company, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shruti232002Bond (talk) 09:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC) Thank you for the clarification. I had asked this yesterday. How do I claim paid contributions and disclose the employer details etc. But did not get a response. Can you help as to how its to be done? After disclosing the same, will the content be accepted? Shruti232002Bond (talk) 09:43, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shruti232002Bond Please read WP:PAID for information on how to make the disclosure on your user page, User:Shruti232002Bond. Disclosure is required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use and must occur irrespective of what happens to your draft. The content has already been rejected and will not be considered further, for the reasons I discuss above. Articles are typically written by independent editors that lack any connection whatsoever with the topic; those editors take note of a topic being covered in independent sources and choose on their own to write about it. That's usually the best indicator that a topic is notable; a topic trying to force the issue and do it themselves is not often successful, because company representatives are too close to their company to be able to set aside what they know about it(among other reasons). 331dot (talk) 09:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:52:58, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Zian Sreekanth (Film Editor)


Zian Sreekanth (Film Editor) (talk) 09:52, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zian Sreekanth (Film Editor) 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 read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Zian Sreekanth (Film Editor) If you are attempting to post a reply, pleaes edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier to do in full desktop mode, even in a browser on a device, the app and mobile versions do not yet have full functionality. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:52, 28 December 2021 review of submission by 46.131.44.207

Hello,

This is my first time publishing an article on Wikipedia. Since I have no previous experience with writing articles here, I would really appreciate some feedback, advice and tips on how to improve my article and make it worthy of being available on Wikipedia. If you have some specific examples of what the article definitely shouldn't include, you can also point it out, so I know what to be aware of next time.

Kind regards, Ave 46.131.44.207 (talk) 09:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are no edits from your IP address other than this comment, so I am guessing that you forgot to log in. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:16:26, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Avenurmeots

Hello,

Yes I forgot to log in the first time I wrote. I will publish it again from under my user now.

This is my first time publishing an article on Wikipedia. Since I have no previous experience with writing articles here, I would really appreciate some feedback, advice and tips on how to improve my article and make it worthy of being available on Wikipedia. If you have some specific examples of what the article definitely shouldn't include, you can also point it out, so I know what to be aware of next time.

Avenurmeots (talk) 11:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Avenurmeots I imagine you speak of Draft:Incap Corporation. This has an important banner at the head suggesting it may be an article written for reward. I will leave a formal question on your user page whcih requires a formal answer.
Your draft is written for the corporation ;s perspective, not form the perspective of what other people say about it. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 12:46, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:47:44, 28 December 2021 review of draft by Montreuxconvention


Hi i have two question when citing a source about a person and they are just named on the source is that does that count as a citied source? also the BFI (British Film Institute) is not said to be a reliable source or and unreliable one does that mean I can use it?


Montreuxconvention (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Montreuxconvention For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
That ought to answer the first question FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 13:49, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:27:21, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Mysterious Whisper

The target page is create-protected, and I noticed most recently-accepted AfC submissions were reviewed by non-admins. I'm not trying to jump the queue (and since drafts are reviewed in no specific order, there really isn't any queue to jump), I'm just a little concerned that non-admins might pass this over due to the extra complication. Mysterious Whisper (talk) 18:27, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mysterious Whisper: this will not prevent anyone reviewing your draft or accepting it. If accepted there may a delay in publishing it until an can admin either move it or unprotect the target, but this is standard procedure that reviewers are prepared to handle. S0091 (talk) 19:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:57:58, 28 December 2021 review of submission by Radhihudijan

I have provided enough resources and the character achieves the notability required for Wikipedia. moreover, the character is one of the famous poets in UAE and he is a poet who reaches widely in the Arab world .he was also the 6th winner of Million's Poet TV show. thus, this article needs to be reviewed. Radhihudijan (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. What matters is if this person meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional, and it seems that he does not at this time. 331dot (talk) 20:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

11:07:27, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Bobe8q8661

What is wrong with my draft, I need a reason for it. So that, I can improve it. Bobe8q8661 (talk) 11:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobe8q8661 there is nothing right about it. Please read Help:Your first article. In addition it contains major copyright violations. I have asked that it be deleted. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 11:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:51:20, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Avi Sindhu


Avi Sindhu (talk) 11:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I have added more citations, if that's what was needed. Please check it.

Avi Sindhu, it was not. The draft has ben rejec ted. It will not be considered further. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 12:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:03:02, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Youngcryptomax

Hi, I have added in their history, information, partnerships, Notability and References. They are pretty big in the crypto world. I also had a look at other wikipedia pages such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YWN to see which sort of information was needed. Thank you for your time, Max Youngcryptomax (talk) 12:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Youngcryptomax regrettably there is nothing that you have added to change the rejection FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 12:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your responce. Do you have any advice of what I should add / change in order to get this approved? thank you very much, Max Youngcryptomax (talk) 13:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Youngcryptomax For additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier to do in full desktop mode in a browser, the mobile and app versions do not have full functionality. As noted, once a draft is rejected, it will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. You have also chosen to edit in a contentious area, which has its own special rules, I posted information about this on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:32:36, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Krisperp

Im here requesting why i was declined and if its possible to make it better to be eligible for approval I want to make new wikipedia pages about small content creators that dont get the recognition they deserve

Krisperp Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. It is completely unsourced. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone, and topics must already be recognized and received significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article. You cannot create an article to establish recognition. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:29:57, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Cessnabroon

In what way do you feel is my article contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia? I shall edit my article to ensure that it does. Cessnabroon (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cessnabroon It is a promotional essay almost exclusively sourced to the company itself. A Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own, and not prompted by any materials put out by the company, to say about it, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. If you work for or represent this company, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on formal disclosures you must make. 331dot (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:32:20, 29 December 2021 review of draft by TSventon


Hi, I have found a draft on Brindisa submitted by Derekguthrie on 29 October 2021‎ and rejected as not notable by Curb Safe Charmer. Coincidentally, I have recently written an article on a neighbouring business, Monmouth Coffee Company. I have looked for independent references and have found several newspaper articles

  • Financial Times[1]
  • The Independent[2]
  • The Times (partial access)[3]

Also several mentions in a book[4]

Are those sufficient to pass AfC notability? If so I will edit the article based on independent sources and resubmit. As I did not start the article I would prefer not to publish it myself.

References

  1. ^ Steavenson, Wendell (2 September 2016). "Food and free movement in Borough Market". Financial Times. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
  2. ^ Kaminski, Julia (20 February 1994). "Small Business: Importer has the scent of success: Spain was the right source but wine gave way to a niche market in cheese". The Independent. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
  3. ^ Keating, Sheila (9 July 2005). "Food heroes...Monika Linton". The Times. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
  4. ^ Parham, Susan (2012). Market Place: Food Quarters, Design and Urban Renewal in London. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN 9781443841726.

TSventon (talk) 17:32, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies again, I replied to you a moment ago on another page, as the author of the original draft submission. As I said there after the article I wrote was rejected I started to look for more authoritative, independent sources to use and have found several, including those you have cited. There are several more which I have access to but are not publicly online. I intend to restart the article and submit an acceptable version soon. The Holidays have interrupted matters! Kind regards DerekguthrieDerekguthrie (talk) 18:39, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Derekguthrie I am happy to leave the writing to you. However, please can you answer Curb Safe Charmer's question from 29 October about paid editing on your talk page? TSventon (talk) 18:49, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TSventon Thankyou for your note(s). I will return to this project in the New Year when time allows. I thought I had answered the question about paid editing but will check and do so if it's not clear. DerekguthrieDerekguthrie (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Derekguthrie, I see you said you were "emphatically NOT paid for the submission" on another page, it would be helpful to answer on your talk page as well to make the answer easier to find. Also please could you confirm whether you have any Wikipedia:Conflict of interest relating to Brindisa? TSventon (talk) 14:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:43:30, 29 December 2021 review of submission by Caraghm


I recently submitted a page for https://thinkinvestments.com/ as there was no information available on this company but it was rejected and I'd love to get further clarification as to why?

Thanks, caraghm Caraghm (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Caraghm (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caraghm. Wikipedia doesn't aim to have articles about everything. Its inclusion criteria are set out in notability guidelines. Nothing in the draft suggests that Think Investments should have an encyclopedia article about it. Furthermore, Wikipedia may not be used for any form of publicity, promotion, or public relations. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 30

06:07:03, 30 December 2021 review of submission by Muniraj789


Muniraj789 (talk) 06:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every possibly challengeable claim MUST be accompied by an inline citation to a reliable source. This draft was rejected and as such will not be considered further at this time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:27:42, 30 December 2021 review of draft by KetchupSalt


Hi

Does lp_solve being part of Debian not make it notable? This it has in common with GLPK, which is what I've been basing my draft on.

There are R bindings for lp_solve, node.js bindings and stackoverflow discussions related to it.

I found some academic references to it as well: Understanding Systems of Linear Equations and Programming through lpSolve and R Language, Calling the lp_solve Linear Program Software from R, S-PLUS and Excel

The R bindings are particularly popular and show up as references in tons of stuff, like this book on marketing: Fuzzy Optimization and Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Digital Marketing


KetchupSalt (talk) 09:27, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:50:33, 30 December 2021 review of submission by Ig sk 09


Ig sk 09 (talk) 09:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:51:53, 30 December 2021 review of submission by Sk Wasim Akram 13


Sk Wasim Akram 13 (talk) 09:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We consider reality TV personalities to fall under WP:BLP1E. Therefore, you need to prove he is notable independent of the reality TV show. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 14:17, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:48:37, 30 December 2021 review of draft by Mivida2021


Hi. Greetings. I have made some changes to my page of canadian chamber of commerce middle east. Earlier my page was declined as they asked for some more sources to be included. I have added them but I want your advice on how could i improve my chances of getting the page getting accepted. Would really appreciate your help on this. Thank you. Mivida2021 (talk) 10:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mivida2021, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion. Currently, your article is just reciting what the subject wants the world to know and Wikipedia cares very little what a subject has to say about themselves. Either write what independent reliable sources have to say about the subject or abandon the draft. Also see WP:COI as the promotional nature raises concern you may have an interest in the subject. Slywriter (talk) 13:05, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:35:18, 30 December 2021 review of submission by Rambabuyadavnepal


Rambabuyadavnepal (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

draft:Milan_Pandey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambabuyadavnepal (talk • contribs) 11:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I Want to say that why my first article draft:Milan_Pandey is decline. He is the top level politician of Nepal and his facebook and twitter account is already verified. so please approve.

Having a verified Facebook and Twitter account confers zero notability. Theroadislong (talk) 11:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Rambabuyadavnepal the important thing is to show that he passes WP:NPOL. Does he? FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:23, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:13:35, 30 December 2021 review of submission by 79.73.247.119

Dear Sir, I have added many references as i can when i created this wiki page and used her main website as refernces and articles to back all of it up. 79.73.247.119 (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Her own website is useless for notability (connexion to subject), with all the rest being passing mentions (too sparse), gossip (no editorial oversight), or written under role bylines (unknown provenance). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 15:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:13:30, 30 December 2021 review of submission by 831n


Hello, i'm a little confused as to how I can improve this submission to be approved. This league is essentially a slightly diluted version of the MASL2, is just regional as opposed to national. I used the MASL2 wiki as a guide and has the same kind of references/content. To add, this league has a lot more clout and backing than other soccer divisions readable/available on wikipedia. 831n (talk) 21:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

831n, if the league launches and is successful then the reliable sources will be available to prove notability. Trying to force the article before then with minimal sourcing available is not the best use of everyone's time.Slywriter (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response, i suppose I understand however there are numerous american soccer leagues which rely on niche or own-source coverage due to a general disinterest by national media, particularly indoor soccer. This league however has had regional coverege (linked). Other wikipedia examples with less (or like) compliance by these rules would include the NISA nation page, Womens independent soccer league, Major Arena Soccer League 2, USL League One, other sports too like the USA Rugby League, I could go on. What would I need to add at this point (it is a short season) to make this page approve? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 831n (talk • contribs) 21:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@831n No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy
We have a great number of poor articles here, and they will, eventually, be improved or excised FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, appreciate that, bummed that they made it through the scrutiny but not mine despite holding to the "rules" as best as possible. Thats life. What kind of extra sources do you need? A major newspaper and tv stations have had their references used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 831n (talk • contribs) 21:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:24:05, 30 December 2021 review of submission by 831n

I added a few more media source references as recommended. 831n (talk) 22:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:42:07, 30 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Ryanmyles123


should everything in the article that does not have a site or independent source at the end of it be removed from the article?

which areas in particular need independent sources on this article?


Ryanmyles123 (talk) 22:42, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:33:22, 30 December 2021 review of submission by JaredMars


JaredMars (talk) 23:33, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 31

07:46:46, 31 December 2021 review of submission by JaredMars


JaredMars (talk) 07:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft fails to provide any references to independent, reliable sources that devote significant coverage to this film. Without such coverage, an acceptable Wikipedia article is impossible to write. Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:34:09, 31 December 2021 review of draft by Tullia Rossato


My submission was declined because of references regarding unreliable sources. I need help understanding which of the sources I used are identified as unreliable, and if the editor, when writing his response, was saying that all of the references didn't show significant coverage or just that some didn't.

Tullia Rossato (talk) 08:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tullia Rossato, none of your sources are independent of the subject. You need to find reliable sources that have no connection to the subject. The Vail Daily while it looks independent is actually a profile by a connected source (alum was a big hint, editors note to article makes it obvious) Slywriter (talk)

Request on 10:04:19, 31 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Keijusiivet


Hello, My submission of draft was declined due to reference. Although the second message was very unclear of why the references I added were not sufficient. The first reference was a book by legitimate publication house with ISBN registration. The second reference which was article conducted by academic personnel, was used as reference of the same Wikipedia article in German version (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigme_Tenpe_Wangchug) and Bengalisch version (https://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27%E0%A6%9C%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%97%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B8-%E0%A6%AE%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%A6-%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B8%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%A4%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A6%AA%E0%A6%BE%27%E0%A6%87-%E0%A6%A6%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%82-%E0%A6%AB%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF%E0%A7%81%E0%A6%97). Could someone please give some detailed feedback of why my references aren't sufficient enough?

Keijusiivet (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:57:53, 31 December 2021 review of submission by Laboratorynews

It is a company details page, along with the Social Activities what Redcliffe Labs is doing...There is No promotional content Laboratorynews (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Laboratorynews Wikipedia does not have "company details pages", not a single one. That is considered promotional here, you don't have to be soliciting or selling something. Wikipedia has articles. Those articles, when about a company, must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company(and not based on any materials put out by the company, such as interviews, press releases, or announcements), showing how the company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Your draft is exclusively sourced to annoucements, which are not significant, independent coverage.
If you have an association with this company, you must read about conflict of interest and paid editing. Declaring a paid relationship with a subject you are editing about is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. 331dot (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As your draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:09:56, 31 December 2021 review of submission by AhmadJawadbth


AhmadJawadbth (talk) 13:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AhmadJawadbth You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume. This is an encyclopedia, not social media. Please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:59:17, 31 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by SirWumpus


The reviewer's response 

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage...

I contest the finding. I supplied three independent 3rd party publications in which the article subject in question appears. I have hard copies of all three and have provided photo evidence of them and the pages on which the references to subject are made below.

  • Obfuscted C And Other Mysteries by Don Libes start of ch 39 pg 392. - subject is top of the chapter

(https://www.amazon.ca/Obfuscated-Other-Mysteries-Don-Libes/dp/0471578053/ref=sr_1_1)

Part of the issue might be I failed to use (didn't figure out) wiki markup in a way I could at least tie the history text to the publications cited and that they were placed separate from the references, so they might just appear as random references in an initial review.

Also not sure this 4th one falls under the publication guidelines, though it was the impetus for everything that followed over the years, the IOCCC's publishing of subject as a contest winner.

There is a French article https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony%27s_Editor created independently back in 2010, without my knowledge for a long time, with a far less detailed history of the subject, which is fair since all the publications listed above were only found in N.America in English and that contributor never contacted me for background.

I created this English version in part so that the French version might one day be updated.

I tried to write as neutral and general as possible.

Photo evidence follows:

SirWumpus (talk) 13:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SirWumpus Please do not upload pictures of your sources to Wikimedia Commons (or Wikipedia). Copyright-wise, these pictures will be a derivate work of the works in the picture, which means that we can only have them if whatever is in the picture is compatibly licensed or Public domain. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:34:09, 31 December 2021 review of submission by Damnits


how do i move this to userspace?

Damnits (talk) 19:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damnits. See Wikipedia:User pages and Wikipedia:Moving a page. The first field of the move dialog box lets you choose the space "User" from the dropdown. In the second field, use your username followed by a slash and the name you want to use for the userspace draft, perhaps "Damnits/Rodoljub Vulović" or "Damnits/sandbox". --Worldbruce (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:17, 31 December 2021 review of submission by TjS1979


Hi - thank you Lightbluerain for responding so quickly to my draft of the "Dents and Shells (Richard Buckner Album)" Page! I had carefully read the guidelines on reliable sources, and all information in the page was assembled from three reviews (all of them cited) and the liner notes of the album. If you could please let me know which pieces of information are considered unreliable I will remove them, or if something in there requires an additional citation I will cite it. I really appreciate your assistance. Thank you.

TjS1979 (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


January 1

02:58:37, 1 January 2022 review of draft by Aventineavenue


My initial request to add a page for The Rising Pints (band) was rejected due to inadequate citation so added a different one that should be acceptable. I want to make sure that my request is resubmitted for review. Thanks!

Aventineavenue (talk) 02:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aventineavenue. Draft:The Rising Pints is not currently submitted for review. To submit it, click the blue Resubmit button within the large pink box at the top of the draft.
Before you do that, however, add more and better sources. The AllMusic review is a start, but at under 100 words is mighty short. The review in Avenues likely won't count when evaluating notability because it seems to be authored by a linguistics professor rather than a professional music critic, and the publication is of limited interest and circulation, with no clear reputation for accuracy and fact checking. (For a start, did they misspelled the reviewer's first name?) Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of their topic. The draft cites at most one, and that's being charitable about depth. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:04, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 03:19:52, 1 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Lane Hastings


Hello, I tried to include a bio of the woman who invented the Boppy pillow for babies but was told she wasn't important enough for inclusion. I gave up but my blood boiled. How can the inventor of the world's most beloved baby pillow not be important enough to mention? Furthermore, the rejection came from someone ostensibly on the project to foster women. If someone could help me get this published--plus I need help connecting the references to the text. Thanks for your help. Lane Hastings


Lane Hastings (talk) 03:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lane Hastings You must offer signficant coverage of Susan Henderson that is found in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about her, and not based on any materials put out by her or her associates(like interviews, press releases, basic announcements, a company website, etc.). The sources you offered include a press release, an interview with the company marketing director(her associate), a piece about the company that does not mention Henderson at all, and another interview. It is also possible that the pillow merits an article but not its inventor(who could be discussed in an article about the pillow she invented), see WP:BLP1E. 331dot (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:01:10, 1 January 2022 review of submission by Misskinski

Hello! I decided to create a page for an artist on a label I enjoy, Stones Throw. I included a multitude of references (24). Many of her male counterparts on the label have their own pages, with far fewer references (7-8), yet I have recieved a rejection with the following words:

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).

Most of the articles are about the artist herself, and definitely not passing mentions, either from her record label or music and lifestyle publications. Kindly let me know what I would need to fix?

Thank you!

Misskinski (talk) 16:01, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misskinski I answered you at the Teahouse, please only use one method of seeking assistance at a time, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:31:40, 1 January 2022 review of draft by Lamona


Draft has been greatly updated. Please review.

Lamona (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC) I got the Opera folks involved and there are now 38 references, and the article has more information about his music. Please send this one out to the world! Thank you, Lamona (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:36:29, 1 January 2022 review of submission by Cdasbd


Cdasbd (talk) 17:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC) I think my article contained all the necessary information and had enough reference links even I deserve a Wikipedia page, but would you please tell me why it was rejected?[reply]

Cdasbd Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. As the reviewer noted, your sources were neither independent or reliable. 331dot (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1063205047"