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 176.33.244.251 (talk) at 14:05, 22 September 2023 (Requesting assistance regarding Draft:AZK_(disambiguation)). 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, 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
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


September 16

12:43, 16 September 2023 review of submission by Abhisha Bond

Wee created This page for our idol Abhishek malhan and manisha Rani about there bond. which is very popular in bonding currently in india. We not promoting it's just that everyone know about this bonding. just please request to upload this page Abhisha Bond (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhisha Bond: I declined it and requested that it be deleted, for the reasons given in the notices posted on your talk page. My advice is, don't create it again.
Also, when you say "we", who do you mean? Please note that Wikipedia user accounts are for use by a single individual only. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:16, 16 September 2023 review of submission by HikingManiac2010

Just wondering if I've given enough links hopefully proving that Lynn Sorensen is a noteable enough person to qualify for a Wikipedia page? Thank you! HikingManiac2010 (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The draft article(not a "page") was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If something has fundamentally changed about the draft, like new sources that the reviewer did not consider, you should first attempt to appeal to the reviewer. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 23:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 17

01:29, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Ben-hurrian

Hello,

The Reddit page was mine too, however, since it was causing issue with this article, i removed all traces from Reddit. I hope this will solve the problem. Please let me know if I need to do more work as this entry is crucial and I need to get it right.

Many thanks Ben-hurrian (talk) 01:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ben-hurrian: even though you've removed the same text from the Reddit page, that doesn't actually change the fact that this is a copyvio, it just makes it less obvious. In any case, the draft is completely unsuitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, not least because it is unreferenced with no evidence of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:36, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote this material, if there is a copyright it belongs to me. This is an original piece by me. I did not copy and paste from anywhere. So‌ an entity such as this young organization cannot be listed anywhere? I know the suject is taboo and many have problem with it, but that does not make it unsuitable for Wiki. Ben-hurrian (talk) 06:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The subject being unconventional or taboo is not relevant- there are many "taboo" subjects that merit articles- however this one does not, as it is just an essay that you wrote explaining the concept. Wikipedia does not merely list things, and is not a place for organizations to tell the world about themselves. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources say about topics that meet the special Wikipedia definition of notability.
As for the copyright, if your first posted it on Reddit, the copyright is associated with that, even if you wrote the text. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
message:
---
Dear Wikipedia
Editorial Team,
I hope this message finds you well. I have recently submitted an article about Altronauts, a groundbreaking concept in the field of space exploration, to Wikipedia. I understand that the initial submission did not meet all of Wikipedia's guidelines, and I have since made revisions to align it more closely with your standards. The updated article is now available in my "sandbox" for your review.
Altronaut is a grassroots organization comprised entirely of volunteers. We are not a commercial venture; rather, we are dedicated to advancing humanity's capabilities in space exploration.
I am in active discussions with President Biden, Vice President Harris, various members of Congress, and NASA to bring attention to this innovative approach. We believe it is a critical step for humanity to become a spacefaring species and mitigate the risks associated with being confined to a single planet.
The inclusion of this article on Wikipedia would serve as a valuable resource for the public, as well as for policymakers and members of the administration who are interested in understanding our work. It aims to educate and prepare society for the future possibilities and challenges that come with deep space exploration.
I would be immensely grateful if you could assist in moving this article from the "sandbox" to the main Wikipedia space, thereby helping to educate the public about this important initiative.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
Founder, Altronaut
---
Feel free to make any adjustments or let me know if you'd like to add more details. Ben-hurrian (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you are the founder of this organization, you have a conflict of interest. Please review that policy. Currently your sandbox is blank(though it looks like you may have put text in the edit summary- if that's what you intended as your article content, it is thoroughly unsuitable. Wikipedia is not a place for organizations to tell about themselvse and what they do- Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. You being in discussion with what I assume is actually the offices/staff of various politicians instead of them directly, is not relevant. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:32, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Rajeshranga0715

My article is declined I want to know why I posted "7 day loan" related a article and that is declined by Teahouse so here I want to know what is the issue with my article so in future i provide proper knowledge Rajeshranga0715 (talk) 06:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajeshranga0715: the draft was declined because it is poorly referenced with no evidence of notability. It is also unsuitable for Wikipedia, as we are an encyclopaedia, not a loan comparison site. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
now how to modified that article again Rajeshranga0715 (talk) 06:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed your post to provide a proper link to your draft. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has now been deleted as promotional- please review Your First Article to learn more about what is being looked for. If you work in the loan industry, please read conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 08:15, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:28, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Footy031982

I am unsure what Wikipedia are looking for to publish the draft for Logan Williams-Owen.

Can you please provide examples of what you require with regards references. Footy031982 (talk) 13:28, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Footy031982: as it says in the decline notice(s), we need to see
"multiple published sources that are:
  • in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
  • reliable
  • secondary
  • independent of the subject"
Of the sources currently cited, none is independent, none provides significant coverage, and additionally Twitter is not considered reliable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, although the draft wasn't (at this time) declined for this reason, all the citations are piled at the end, whereas they need to be cited inline after the information that they support, so that it is clear which source provides what information. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:22, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Farshadsadri

Hello,

I have created a new article and tried to fix resources for an Oscar 2024 selected director. The article has shown some resource and structure problems due to a lack of experience on my side. I have been advised to discuss the issues here among experienced editors.

So far, I have made many attempts to improve the article; however, some of the news sources have been selected as copyright protected, though I just tried to transfer news, not copying the exact text, just an indication to the news article. Would someone please help me with improving the article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Behrouz_Sebt_Rasoul Farshad (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:28, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Punk Rock London

I would like to know why my article has been declined, Many thanks. Punk Rock London (talk) 17:28, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The decline notice at the top of your draft tells you VERY clearly why... namely "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." which part of that don't you understand? Theroadislong (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:08, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Dunnothing

Hi, I am just wondering what sources should I put on this? Dunnothing (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dunnothing. The key thing is if it passes WP:NPLACE. Qcne (talk) 20:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:09, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Commercial-Way-2982

Because Commercial-Way-2982 (talk) 20:09, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:13, 17 September 2023 review of submission by 2607:FB91:C1B:57D3:94C4:6B30:8F53:BF43

Can someone write a Wikipedia for Ian A. Medina based on what I wrote. 2607:FB91:C1B:57D3:94C4:6B30:8F53:BF43 (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Stellacorrales.
The answer is no, obviously. Please see the message I left on your talk page. Qcne (talk) 20:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:13, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Commercial-Way-2982

Project Commercial-Way-2982 (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question, @Commercial-Way-2982? Your draft was rejected for being nonsense, and will soon be deleted. Qcne (talk) 20:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:32, 17 September 2023 review of submission by MoneySaver12

I want to know why this article should not exist on Wikipedia? The article is neatly written (if there is anything that is not worthy of Wikipedia, please let me know exactly what I need to change and correct in order to edit the article...) The article is instructive, here are all the guidelines on how to work with SEO.. MoneySaver12 (talk) 21:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OP blocked as a sock. 331dot (talk) 00:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:07, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Taimia Ayub

I have removed the material which was flagged as copyright.I have now used my own words to explain things.Can anyone suggest further necessary changes?and how to proceed?Thank you Taimia Ayub (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:00, 17 September 2023 review of submission by Discerningfortruth

Hello,

Would you have any other suggestions to improve this article about Professor Calvin Johnson? I added several new articles reputable sources, such as NPR, in addition to his publications.

Please let me know if there is anything else I should add or change. Discerningfortruth (talk) 23:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Discerningfortruth. Your last five references are bullet points, instead of having an associated footnote number? Qcne (talk) 08:27, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like it is live! Another editor helped improve it quite a bit. Glad this is live! Discerningfortruth (talk) 13:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Discerningfortruth: what do you mean "it is live"? The draft is still a draft, it hasn't been published (that I can see, at least) if that's what you mean. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 18

03:09, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Astute23

Good evening, I am requesting assistance for maintaining a neutral tone. I believe that one example may be: "according to Brittany ,having witnessed the "devastating effects of Alzheimer's on her family", she is passionate about raising awareness, educating the public [4], and fundraising for the cause. Brittany appeared on Fox 32 Chicago to discuss the importance of Alzheimer's research [4]". I attempted to convey the mood and emotions provided in the interviews and attribute those emotions to Brittany herself, but in this situation, should I leave words like "passionate" out of the article completely or should I find a way to demonstrate more clearly that these are her personal thoughts as stated in interviews? Astute23 (talk) 03:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Astute23. It is a violation of the core content policy No original research for a Wikipedia editor to conclude that someone is "passionate" about something. Aren't all successful people "passionate" about something, without needing to say so? Albert Einstein was passionate about physics and Babe Ruth was passionate about baseball and Meryl Streep is passionate about acting, but you will not see that in their Wikipedia articles, because it goes without saying, and saying it is trite. How does that differentiate this person from millions of other successful people? Would you expect to read a Wikipedia article about a great cardiac surgeon that says, "Despite her enormous success, she is not passionate about surgery". As far as language like "raising awareness, educating the public, and fundraising for the cause", that just comes off as boilerplate language to me. Again, isn't that what all activists do? Your goal should be to describe what make this person unique, not to trot out standard promotional cliches applicable to millions of people. Cullen328 (talk) 08:53, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:37, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Eric Charles

Hello, I would like clarification on the grounds for the rejection of my submission. The article relies on reputable sources and is written neutrally, so I fail to understand the grounds for its rejection. Eric (talk) 04:37, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eric Charles. Your draft was not rejected. It was declined, and those are two very different things. The first means "No, never" and the second means "Work to improve your draft, and resubmit". And it looks like you have resubmitted it. I recommend that you continue working on the draft while it awaits another review. In particular, phrases like held the title of and a pioneering figure are not neutral. See the Neutral point of view, a core content policy. These three key sentences: The club's popularity peaked in the 1970s and early 1980s. Business declined as the HIV/AIDS crisis began to devastate the gay community in the mid-1980s. A dance club was added in 1987, but as the crisis subsided, patrons increasingly frequented Man's Country for sex rather than dancing or socializing. are unreferenced. You need to provide one or more references to reliable sources that verify this content. Cullen328 (talk) 09:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cullen, when several sentences in a row rely on the same citation, I was leaving the citation at the end of the last sentence. Should I add the citation after each sentence even if it is the same? Eric (talk) 13:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eric Charles The draft was declined, not rejected. "Rejected" has a specific meaning here, that a draft may not be resubmitted. "Declined" means a draft may be resubmitted(and you have already done so). According to the message left by the reviewer, it was declined due to not being written in an encyclopedic tone. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Eric Charles: you could always ask the reviewer why specifically they declined (not 'rejected') it. Or, given that you have now resubmitted the draft, you could just wait for the next review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:04, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Kru666

Assistance Request for Wikipedia Submission

I am writing to seek your guidance and assistance in relation to my Wikipedia submission that I have been attempting to make. The submission pertains to a biography page for Sumiko Nakano, and aims to provide readers with information about her background as a writer, as well as her family connection to Nakano Takeko.

I have encountered a recurring issue with the submission, as I keep receiving the message "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources." despite my diligent efforts to provide credible references. I believe that the sources I have provided are substantial and relevant, including references to her author page on Amazon, where her upcoming book, "Shadows of the Naginata," is showcased.

I am writing to request your opinion on whether a link to her author page on Amazon can be considered a reliable source for the Wikipedia submission. The reason I believe this source is credible is because:

1. Amazon Author Pages: Amazon is a widely recognized and trusted platform for authors to promote and sell their work. Author pages on Amazon provide comprehensive information about the author, including their bibliography, biographical details, and links to published works. Readers often turn to Amazon when researching authors and their books, making it a valuable and accessible source of information.

2. Transparency and Verification: Amazon author pages are publicly accessible and verifiable by anyone interested in confirming the details about an author and their publications. The transparency and accessibility of this platform contribute to its reliability as a source of information.

3. Upcoming Book: her upcoming book, "Shadows of the Naginata," is featured on my Amazon author page. This not only substantiates her status as a writer but also provides readers with insight into her literary work, which is directly related to the biography I am submitting to Wikipedia. As an emerging author, her Amazon author page serves as a central hub for information about my writing career.

Before I proceed with any further submissions, I wanted to seek your expert opinion on the suitability of her Amazon author page as a reliable source for the Wikipedia biography. Your guidance and feedback in this matter would be greatly appreciated, as I am committed to ensuring that the information presented on Wikipedia is accurate, well-supported, and meets the community's standards.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and any recommendations you may have. 

Kru666 (talk) 08:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Kru666. I am the latest decliner of your draft.
Amazon Author Pages are not an WP:INDEPENDENT source so cannot be used to establish notability under WP:NWRITER. It's that simple. We need to see independent secondary sources that discuss the author, as set out in the WP:NWRITER guidelines. Qcne (talk) 08:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also note, @Kru666, that multiple sections of your draft are entirely unsourced with zero in-line citations. This is strictly against the WP:BLPRS guidelines. So your draft would fail on this aspect too. Qcne (talk) 08:17, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you very much for your fast reply and comments I really appreciate it. I will continue to work on it. Kru666 (talk) 08:27, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Be aware that you say she is an "emerging author". This may mean it is simply WP:TOOSOON for a Wikipedia article to exist about this writer. Qcne (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:14, 18 September 2023 review of submission by 62.250.238.111

Hello Team, do you need proof of identity ? for Youcef BEN AMOR ? 62.250.238.111 (talk) 12:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We certainly do not need proof of ID. What we do need to see is significant coverage of him in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. We also need to see reliable published sources to verify the personal details. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:27, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Naniu9hei

I've updated the entry and replaced the photograph. Please let me know if there's anything else I need to do for approval. Thanks for your time and attention Naniu9hei (talk) 14:27, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Naniu9hei: you should please respond to the COI query posted on your talk page a week ago, describing your relationship with Mr Pollock. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I work in the Taiwan film industry and recently read Jake Pollock’s Chinese Wikipedia page. I felt that it hadn’t been updated recently and took it upon myself to edit the page. Afterwards, I decided to create an English entry to complement the original Chinese entry.
I voluntarily created this page, but I also understand the requirements of Wikipedia’s term of use , so I’ve updated my user page. Please let me know if there's anything else I need to do for approval. Thanks for your time and attention. Naniu9hei (talk) 02:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:33, 18 September 2023 review of submission by 209.159.198.177

I am new to writing on Wikipedia, obviously :-) I see this draft was rejected due to the subject not meeting notability guidelines. I modeled the article after this one: Danell Lynn Her sole claim to fame is the same Guinness World Record, set as an individual, whereas McPhee set the team version of the record. I understand that other articles slipping in under the radar, so to speak, is not a valid reason for similar new articles to be approved. Before I put any work into changing the article or improving the citations, I want to be clear on whether this article has any chance of being approved, or if I've been basing my work on a questionable article that slipped through the approval cracks. Thank you! 209.159.198.177 (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:04, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Saram Niazi

Plz add this to wekipedia Saram Niazi (talk) 18:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Saram Niazi no, it has been rejected for being inappropriate. Wikipedia is not a social networking website. Qcne (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:22, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Miamireader


I am confused as to what is considered  "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." The coverage used to prepare the article includes featured articles specifically on Dunbar in the New York Times, the New Orleans Times-Picayune, a local arts publications, and New Orleans public radio station WWNO. These articles were not passing mentions but feature stories focused on Dunbar himself. This is an artist whose work is in the collections of major museums around the world.

Help me understand the process so I can be a better editor - and not waste everyone's time. Thank you! Miamireader (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Miamireader All of your sources involve interviews with him; interviews are not an independent reliable source, as it is the person speaking about themselves. Interviews cannot be used to establish notability(though they can be used for other purposes). You need to show with independent sources that he either meets the narrow notable creative professional definition or the broader notable person definition. 331dot (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just checking, @Miamireader, did you read my decline comment directly below the decline notice? Qcne (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:40, 18 September 2023 review of submission by London7308

Hello!

Wondering about the notability claim? Attached are other Wiki pages of similar persons.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley_Bass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Howell_Warner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Mbabazi

Most firsts in female aviation have been approved for Wiki pages. London7308 (talk) 19:40, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists, your draft doesn't show how they pass wP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 19:48, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@London7308, if you can find multiple sources that cover Janet in detail but are not interviews or connected to her in some way, and can re-write this draft to include them, drop me a message on my Talk Page and I will review again. Qcne (talk) 20:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks will do. Do the newspaper articles need to be achieved online? Or can they be older? — Preceding unsigned comment added by London7308 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@London7308 References need not be online. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
London7308, your draft lacks a lead section which explains why the person is notable, and summarizes the rest of the content. When I read your draft, I think, "OK, she has been an airline pilot for a long time. So what?" The vast majority of airline pilots are not notable and do not have Wikipedia articles. Cullen328 (talk) 05:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As for Bass and Howell Warner, the references in those articles are vastly superior to the references in your draft. High quality references are like gold on Wikipedia. Everything else pales in comparison. Cullen328 (talk) 05:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:46, 18 September 2023 review of submission by Artieboy07

I’m kinda new, I want to make something about this cause it’s for a good cause, you know? I’ve been a wiki reader for a few months, and I think, that Wikipedia gives me, and other viewers, too much power to edit things. So, me and my friend made this. I hope for a response soon. Thanks! Sincerely, artieboy07 

Artieboy07 (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Artieboy07 This is not notable even though it might be interesting. It has been rejected, whcih means it will not be considered further 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned on your talk page, the ability for people to edit articles is a fundamental principle of this project. If you have suggestions about policy/guidelines please make your case at WP:PUMP. It's not appropriate to make an article draft about your association. Qcne (talk) 20:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:22, 18 September 2023 review of submission by GiovAngri

I would like to have your opinion on this draft, I'm putting a lot of effort into its creation, I'm also removing secondary sources from its quotes, as notes I mean. GiovAngri (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:50, 18 September 2023 review of submission by VJKarinka

Hello! I edited the article, double-checked it 25 times. The person I am writing about is very famous and popular. Big articles are published about him. And some users, who approve your articles, reject it on purpose, and then offer in private messages to publish the article for a fee in wikipedia! This is impossible already... VJKarinka (talk) 22:50, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone offering to publish for a fee is trying to scam you. Do not give anyone money. See WP:SCAM. 331dot (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@VJKarinka: that's a very serious slur to make against any reviewer, and given that I was the first one to decline this, I'm going to take it personally whether it was actually aimed at me or not. I request you to withdraw this accusation at once, or else present evidence to corroborate it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 19

03:21, 19 September 2023 review of submission by MARcreative

How do I get my draft accepted for review? Also, what sources are needed to get accepted? The person I am writing about is a violinist. Is IMDB an acceptable source to cite? MARcreative (talk) 03:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MARcreative. What is your relationship with this violinist? IMDb contains user generated content, and is therefore not a reliable source. Read WP:IMDB for details. Your draft is entirely unreferenced which is a policy violation. It cannot possibly be accepted into the encyclopedia in its current form. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes the significant coverage that independent, reliable published sources devote to the topic. Your draft is like a human body without a skeleton. It is not viable. Cullen328 (talk) 04:56, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:42, 19 September 2023 review of submission by 101.2.164.14

I cannot identify sources which are considered reliable for Wikipedia articles and are independent of the subject, and I cannot understand how I can write the article from a neutral point of view. 101.2.164.14 (talk) 04:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

then don't write the article. ltbdl (talk) 04:50, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:57, 19 September 2023 review of submission by IlistenClassicalMusic

I got notification that "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." Can someone tell me whats wrong with my article? IlistenClassicalMusic (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The draft does little more than document the existence of the festival and who has performed there. Instead, it should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the festival, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable event. Please just take your three best sources that describe how the event is notable and summarize them- not every performer needs to be documented as notability is not inherited by association. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:52, 19 September 2023 review of submission by 85.14.12.200

I need advise how to get the article posted, what needs to be improved, as this is just a small article, the person did not have a significant football carrier, but still? 85.14.12.200 (talk) 08:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. There is no possibility of publishing even a short article ('stub') that lists two sources, neither of which is actually cited. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:16, 19 September 2023 review of submission by RJ SR-NL

My draft was declined because a moderator said a similar page already exists in the database. I disagree. It is almost the same but STILL 2 different types of ACADEMICS.

How to dispute? Please a new review. RJ SR-NL (talk) 15:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should first attempt to appeal to the reviewer directly to see if you can persuade them to see it your way. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:25, 19 September 2023 review of submission by MichaelAM

Hi, I submitted a page on 25th April. I know there's a large backlog but wanted to check that everything is ok or if there is something I need to do. Many thanks, Mike MichaelAM (talk) 15:25, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You submitted it and it is pending. The only thing you need to do is continue to be patient. You are also free to edit the draft further if you need to. 331dot (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:43, 19 September 2023 review of submission by Summitcunc

I recently submitted a page which unfortunately has been declined. I am curious as to how this is a conflict of interest, as this article only includes facts about our credit union, not derived from biased notions.

If it is deemed a true conflict of interest, I would like specific examples of items that need correction. It does not help to just state an article and say this is the reason why.

Thank you. Summitcunc (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Summitcunc It is a COI in the basis that you have stated. I see you have been blocked. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:49, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draft deleted as promotional, user blocked. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:26, 19 September 2023 review of submission by 160.39.69.28

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Natali_Bravo-Barbee was declined due to inline citations. I don't see anywhere that's missing a citation. Can someone point me in the right direction? 160.39.69.28 (talk) 17:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For example, the 'Notable Works' section has eight paragraphs, four of which don't have any citations. As a bare minimum, a paragraph should have at least one citation, otherwise it is by definition unsupported.
Another example: the first paragraph says she was born in 1983, but the only citation in that para doesn't mention her year of birth. In articles on living people (WP:BLP), every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details must be clearly supported by inline citations to reliable published sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:38, 19 September 2023 review of submission by AnnLWSFebruary84wiki

I am unclear why my article on the LESBIAN WRITERS SERIES has not been accepted. I is referenced in a number of publications including:

IN A DIFFERENT LIGHT Clothespin Fever Press1989 SUNDAYS AT SEVEN Alamo Square Press/Androgyny Books 1996 - page 9 The Los Angeles Times - https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-mar-29-me-lit29-story.html


Please be so kind to let me know how I can have an article on the LESBIAN WRITERS SERIES that launched at A DIFFERENT LIGHT BOOKS on February 18, 1984 and ran till November 1998, published on WIKIPEDIA 


AnnLWSFebruary84wiki (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AnnLWSFebruary84wiki: looking at Draft:The Lesbian Writers Series, it seems your draft has been repeatedly abandoned, deleted (drafts which aren't edited for six months get automatically deleted), restored, and abandoned again.
On a separate point, it would seem you have a conflict of interest (COI) with regards to this topic. I will post a message on your talk page with advice and instructions for managing it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:44, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:29, 19 September 2023 review of submission by Renilo77

I am new to creating page in wiki. I want to submit a biography of a living person however it was declined. And i need help as to how it can be refined and made acceptable for publishing. if anyone can guide/edit my draft for re-submission for acceptance, please. Renilo77 (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Renilo77 First, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures; I assume you have a conflict of interest because you took the photo of him and he posed for you. If he compensates you in any manner(not just money), the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed.
Please read Referencing for Beginners to learn how to format references. Please also review the message left by the last reviewer. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:59, 19 September 2023 review of submission by NickLagos1

can you be more specific about the part of in "depth" i understand it sounds like an advertisement which is a mistake for all NickLagos1 (talk) 22:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NickLagos1: Because it does sound like an advertisement. This is the problem that many people have with a conflict of interest. It sounds neutral to you, but reality is it is an advertising piece. "...features that make it a popular choice...", "... known for its fast delivery, competitive prices, and good customer service.", "...wide range of products at discounted prices." The article is dripping in advertising feel. This is not the neutral, dispassionate tone we expect in our encyclopedia articles. Further, you haven't provided any references to reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. A draft will never be accepted without that. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:27, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ohh i see ok im going to change that completely NickLagos1 (talk) 09:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


September 20

02:21, 20 September 2023 review of submission by Naniu9hei

I work in the Taiwan film industry and recently read Jake Pollock’s Chinese Wikipedia page. I felt that it hadn’t been updated recently and took it upon myself to edit the page. Afterwards, I decided to create an English entry to complement the original Chinese entry.

I voluntarily created this page, but I also understand the requirements of Wikipedia’s term of use , and I didn't see the template of Connected contributor, so I took your advice , and I’ve updated my user page. Please let me know if there's anything else I need to do for approval. Thanks for your time and attention. Naniu9hei (talk) 02:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

03:27, 20 September 2023 review of submission by Poodle drool

What is a good way to document notability when information is behind a paywall? For example the page I am working on has had a review in the Wall Street Journal, but that is not free/accessible. Similarly there is a good biography page in an database that is not free. Poodle drool (talk) 03:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Poodle drool, paywalled articles contribute to notability the same way unpaywalled articles does, please see WP:PAYWALL. There is no requirement for sources to be free/accessible. Justiyaya 03:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great--thanks for the response. That was helpful in trying to figure things out. Poodle drool (talk) 03:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:53, 20 September 2023 review of submission by HiAariv

Hello,

My draft title is Tyron Munro, but his actual name his TYRONE MUNRO,

how do I change it

thank you HiAariv (talk) 08:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The specific title is not important right now- you may just leave a note on the draft talk page so that, if accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. Note that Wikipedia does not necessarily use official or legal names, or the name preferred by the subject- it uses as a title the most commonly used name. See WP:COMMONNAME. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:09, 20 September 2023 review of submission by Samdodd82

Hello, the Wikipedia page I created was rejected. I understand that the page was overly promotional and have rewritten its contents to make it neutral for everyone who reads it. I believe the information provided on this page is worthy of a Wikipedia page. There are many other real estate companies, larger and smaller which already have Wikipedia pages. Please have another look at my submission. I will be very grateful if you can tell me how I can further improve it. Thank you for your time. Samdodd82 (talk) 11:09, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Samdodd82: it's not enough for the draft to not be promotional, and it's not enough for the company to exist; we need to also see that the subject is notable in Wikipedia terms, which means citing multiple sources that meet the WP:GNG standard for establishing notability.
And whether or not articles exist on other companies is not relevant; see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:14, 20 September 2023 review of submission by HiAariv

Hello,

Can you please delete the "Draft:Tyron Munro and not the Draft:Tyrone Munro one. I made a mistake on his name. So can you please delete the draft Draft:Tyron Munro and NOT Draft:Tyrone Munro. 


HiAariv (talk) 11:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HiAariv: this is not the place for requesting deletion. Assuming you're the only editor to have created substantive content in these drafts, you can request deletion yourself, by either blanking the draft that you want deleted, or placing the {{db-author}} tag on top of the page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:17, 20 September 2023 review of submission by Wikiuser8787

Please check this article I'm trying to create this article iv got multiple notable sources and it keeps getting rejected from the same reason that this artist does not eligible for an article even though it got multiple sources (14) that most of them are in depth coverages for his album Draft:decreek Wikiuser8787 (talk) 12:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikiuser8787: this draft has been declined by four different reviewers, each time for lack of apparent notability, which is demonstrated through sources. Since the last decline, you've deleted one source, and resubmitted. Can you help me understand how that could possibly help establish notability? Please note that no draft gets infinite chances, and after four earlier declines (and a fifth one being only a matter of time), this is starting to get to the point where it may be rejected outright. So if I were you, I wouldn't want to risk those remaining reviews. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that i published the same source twice so i removed it.
And i also added a few sentences that obviously shows notability
i dont understand how can 13 different source that most of them in depth coverage articles doesnt meet notability Wikiuser8787 (talk) 12:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiuser8787: it's not the number of sources that matters, but their quality; three solid sources may be enough to establish notability, whereas 13 weak ones aren't. I've just gone through the sources in this draft, and I couldn't find one that meets the WP:GNG standard for notability.
Also, don't confuse the notability of the person with that of some of his music: you say "My Story has got the attention of multiple music magazines" – that may help make My Story notable, but notability is not inherited or transferred by association. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see
so basically i came here to send you to the article so you can decline as well.
This community is really funny
You all doing whatever you like
i bet if someone will pay some amount to get an article done you would accept it under the table and approve his article.
Seems like i chose the wrong topic:Music Which was always matter of money and corruption
Lucky i didnt choose politics as well.
Another corrupted reviewer who does what he likes.
Im done here. Wikiuser8787 (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiuser8787: I would advice you not to hurl around personal attacks and accusations, or you may soon find that you are, indeed, "done here". -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You just want to make new users edits very hard even though the articles and the sources are eligible for creation.
I bet if you were the one publishing this article it would get approved in no time.
Oh no please dont block me from this corrupted community please dont Wikiuser8787 (talk) 13:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiuser8787: it's interesting how well you know what is or isn't notable, considering that your editing career is less than a month long. Or have you edited under different accounts previously? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Finally we can see the true colors behind the review you and the other gave to my article "Considering that your editing career is less than a month long"
im a fast learner. and dont worry this article will get approve sooner or later but it would probably need to come from the right user not from me.
You said "My Story" is eligible by itself i guess that means if ill create a an article only for the album you wouldn't've take pleasure in declining it would you? Wikiuser8787 (talk) 14:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Wikiuser8787. I am an independent reviewer and have not looked at your draft before today. I will go through your sources one by one:
1) This looks to be regurgitating a press release, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
2) This looks to be regurgitating a press release, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
3) This is an interview, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
4) This is just a link to an embedded music video? Not sure how it is relevant, but the video is primary so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
5) This works as a source
6) This source seems to be malformed- it's just a link to a random assortment of articles with a tag?
7) This is an interview, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
8) This is an interview, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
9) A trivial source that provides no analysis, interpretation, or context and is just an announcement of a track, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
10) A trivial source that provides no analysis, interpretation, or context and is just an announcement of a music video, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
11) A trivial source that provides no analysis, interpretation, or context and is just an announcement of a music video, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
12) A trivial source that provides no analysis, interpretation, or context and is just an announcement of a music video, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
13) A trivial source that provides no analysis, interpretation, or context and is just an announcement of a music video, so doesn't count towards the WP:NMUSIC criteria
If you now check the WP:NMUSIC criteria, I hope you can see how your draft with it's current sources does not pass the guidelines stated there.
Let me know if you have any questions, Qcne (talk) 16:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draft deleted, user indeffed as sock. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:18, 20 September 2023 review of submission by GDevincenzi

I'd like to delete my submission. GDevincenzi (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a deletion tag. Qcne (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:38, 20 September 2023 review of submission by MKD789

I want Public my article MKD789 (talk) 18:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MKD789: this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further.
And please don't open multiple threads here, this is a help desk, not Twitter. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 21

03:48, 21 September 2023 review of submission by Iamjep1987

I have made some changes on the bio. Can you please let me know what I am lacking for this to be approved as an article of a living person in wiki. aside from the documentation what else should i include and not. Iamjep1987 (talk) 03:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iamjep1987: this draft has been rejected as non-notable, and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
can we request to delete the article and create a new one? Iamjep1987 (talk) 07:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:58, 21 September 2023 review of submission by ManaliJain

Draft:Babil Khan was rejected more than six months ago due to notability issues.

  • I'm unable to resubmit it for AfC review since it has already been rejected. I tried approaching the last reviewer by posting a message on their talk page, but I haven't received a response yet. Furthermore, their last contribution was four months ago, indicating their inactivity.
  • The draft has undergone significant improvements since its last submission, which was poorly written earlier. It has now been constructed and meets the guidelines including WP:ENT, WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV.

I kindly request that this matter be reviewed. Thank you. ManaliJain (talk) 04:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ManaliJain: firstly, you contacted the rejecting reviewer only a week ago. Yes, you're right, they haven't been active recently, but I'm not aware that they've retired, either. Perhaps you can just wait a bit longer – or are you in a particular hurry to get this draft looked at?
Another thing: you have extended confirmed rights, so if you're confident that the article wouldn't be deleted, you can of course publish this yourself; not advisable, but allowed (assuming you don't have a conflict of interest?). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: I understand your point about the rejecting reviewer's recent inactivity, and I'm open to waiting a bit longer for their response. I'm not in a particular hurry.
Regarding the possibility of publishing the article myself with extended confirmed rights, I appreciate the reminder. While it's technically allowed, but since the draft was rejected earlier, I wanted to follow the standard review process to ensure the article meets the community's standards and addresses any concerns or feedback from the initial review.
Lastly, I don't have a conflict of interest in this matter. I am committed to contributing to Wikipedia in a neutral and impartial manner. My primary motivation for wanting the draft to be published is because I believe it addresses a notable subject that adds value to Wikipedia's content. Thank you. ManaliJain (talk) 13:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:24, 21 September 2023 review of submission by Baruch Benedictus Spinoza

I would like to know how to improve this page to get it accepted as an article. Baruch Benedictus Spinoza (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like it would be more appropriate as a category instead of a list article. There needs to be some evidence in independent reliable sources that this(Jewish leadership of international organizations) is a topic of note. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I assumed until I read 331dot's comment that this must mean "leaders of Jewish international organizations".
Now that I have read it, I would argue that the whole thing is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. WP:OCEGRS says Do not create categories that intersect a particular topic (such as occupation, place of residence, or other such characteristics), with an ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or disability, unless these characteristics are relevant to that topic. While that is talking about categories, I think this should apply to list articles as well, though the nearest thing I can find on that specifically is WP:BLPLIST. (It's complicated in the case of "Jewish", because that can refer to ethnicity, religion, or culture, and they don't always go together). ColinFine (talk) 20:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:08, 21 September 2023 review of submission by BhikhariInformer

I want to modify the name of the page from "Manush (film)" to "Manush: Child of Destiny". But I cannot find any option to do it. Is there any way to do it or should I make another draft with the correct title by just copying all the info from my this draft ? BhikhariInformer (talk) 07:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BhikhariInformer: it doesn't matter what title the draft is at, it will be moved anyway if/when accepted. And no, you very much should not create another draft on the same topic. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:16, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. In that case I would submit the draft with the title it has now. BhikhariInformer (talk) 07:24, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:18, 21 September 2023 review of submission by BhikhariInformer

I have attached all possible primary and secondary sources of information with this article. There are no other articles left on the internet to attach to this .

The other Filmfare Awards Bangla before this 6th one have their pages on Wikipedia with a meagre of 5 citation or even just 1 citation. Compared to them, I have attached more citations including the Filmfare official website , which is the organisation providing the awards and hence is reliable.

Also, since it is the largest Film Awards in the Bengali film industry and all its early versions have pages, I would request to publish this page or else kindly help me and let me know what more can I do to improve this article. BhikhariInformer (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is all the sources that are available, then this subject does not merit a Wikipedia article. Based just on your description, it sounds like none of the other occurrences of this awards ceremony merit articles either. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The other articles are indeed very poorly referenced. I've tagged them for notability; they should probably be deleted at some point, if better sources don't appear. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:04, 21 September 2023 review of submission by Wwarodom

Dear Sirs, 

  I have updated our Wiki page following comments, do I miss somethings or need to edit?

Best regards, Asst.Prof. Dr. Warodom Werapun Wwarodom (talk) 09:04, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are associated with this college, you must read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. Wikipedia does not have "wiki pages", it has articles.
Your draft article was rejected, and will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:09, 21 September 2023 review of submission by Maqi123

Kindly can you please tell me about the particular issue i have to resolve on this? Maqi123 (talk) 09:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer informed you of the issue at the top of your draft, both in the decline message and a personal comment below it. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Your first two references are to interviews, so are his words. The third does not even mention him, and the fourth has a single paragraph (and I'm not sure it's a reliable source: it seems to invite readers to "submit your article"). There is therefore almost nothing cited on which an article can be based.
I see that the Reviewit.pk paragraph says Umer Darr’s acting is being praised as the ASI Ilyas in the recent hit drama serial Kabli Pulao. Where? If there are reviews in major newspapers or magazines (with a reputable editorial policy), they may be enough to establish notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:50, 21 September 2023 review of submission by OndrejKotek23

Hello,

I am new to Wikipedia. I would like to really publish my content becasue in the Czechia there is a lot of misunderstanding in this industry. Me myself I have scalp micropigmentation and many of people suffer becasue of they do not visit professionals in the industry. My goal is to give people valid information about the technique so they know what they will undergo.

Please can you tell me what do I have to do to get my article in Czech wikipedia validated by editor.

Tahnk you so much

Kind regards,

Ondre j OndrejKotek23 (talk) 09:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @OndrejKotek23: this is the English-language Wikipedia, and all the various language versions are entirely separate projects, so you would have to go to the Czech one and enquire there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OndrejKotek23 (ec) I fixed your post to provide a link to your draft. It is in Czech; you need to translate it to English. That said, we already have an article about this topic at permanent makeup. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:40, 21 September 2023 review of submission by 196.118.152.188

hello can i Know why my article was rejected thank you 196.118.152.188 (talk) 11:40, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because, as mentioned already, per WP:NOTGUIDE Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a guidebook or manual. (Also, please don't add links to your own website, they are considered promotional.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:37, 21 September 2023 review of draft by TeslaTruck


I want to Add WikiProject tag "WikiProject Synthesizers" to Draft:Kodamo but the Synthesizers tag is not available at the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Add_WikiProject_tags?withJS=MediaWiki:AFC-add-project-tags.js&title=Draft:Kodamo though clearly shown at the page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Directory/All TeslaTruck (talk) 16:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TeslaTruck: you're right, that template doesn't seem to exist. In any case, there's probably not much point in adding it, as the WikiProject Synthesizers is inactive (the last edit to its talk page was in 2015) so you're unlikely to get much input from them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK , thank you ! TeslaTruck (talk) 17:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:39, 21 September 2023 review of submission by SEEZASAROJ


Need Support too publish Biography Article

Sorry if i am asking basics, i am new to Wikipedia article creation, pls help with your specifics inputs/actions.

1.Do you want me to attach all the references available on Google about Seeza Or 1-2 more to qualify? 2.Do you want me to attach external references like Instagram & Facebook, where media tagging is there? 3.What is considered as independent sources, i have attached News references, independent media references who has published article about Seeza, which as per my knowledge should qualify independent coverage category? SEEZASAROJ (talk) 18:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the quantity of sources that is relevant, but the quality. Few high quality sources are preferable to a large number of low quality sources. You have not established that this person meets the definition of a notable actor or the broader definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 18:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SEEZASAROJ: I should also add that you have not yet explained your relationship to the subject of this draft, despite this having been requested. You're writing about someone named Seeza Saroj Mehta, and your username is SEEZASAROJ. This suggests an obvious connection. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thanks for the response. Not sure where i missed it, Seeza is my daughter. She has played a significant role in worldwide released movie and i have added citation of various renowned News Medias and Entertainment websites (DNA News, Bolywood Bubble, Shoutstar, Times of India (released 20.09), and other places - search on Google with 'Seeza Saroj Mehta'). Before this movie, she has been doing Ad films since last couple of years, released at national level Or on Digital platforms - videos can be searched on YouTube using 'Seeza Mehta Worklinks'.
I am also associated with IT field and i can very well understand the need of validating references before publicizing the articles. But i also feel the same 1-2 good links should be sufficient to proof the notibility. What i am missing to understand the issues with shared links [ first 3 are independent media references, last 2 are mentions/blogs ]. Let me know if you are looking for something specific in cited references ? I can also add YouTube links, Instagram ID, Facebook ID for reference if that can help.
Really looking for good inputs here ... information place around wikipedia is little unstructured and finding it difficult to address the concerns if not getting specifics from the Reviers of the Article.
Thanks in advance, Hardas Mehta
SEEZASAROJ (talk) 20:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You must formally declare your conflict of interest on your user page, see WP:COI for instructions. If you act as her agent or manager and are compensated for that role, you must declare as a paid editor. You've been given specifics- please tell us specifically how your daughter meets WP:NACTOR. You must provide and summarize sources that discuss your daughter and what makes her important/significant/influential. You mention praise she received, but do not discuss it in detail. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SEEZASAROJ, the final sentence of your draft says that her performance in Jawan was critically praised, and there are two references to film reviews. That statement is incorrect, and the reviews mention her only in passing, with no assessment of her acting whatsoever. Cullen328 (talk) 00:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:14, 21 September 2023 review of submission by DWBarbour

Hey there. I submitted the above page about the poet David Young. I was told 'This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources." I can't tell which sources are unreliable, since everything is vetted with an actual source. Can you advise? Is it merely a matter of cutting something? Thanks. DWBarbour (talk) 20:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if you formatted your sources correctly, see WP:REFB for help with that. Theroadislong (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like you copied this text from elsewhere? I see footnotes but no references. 331dot (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:25, 21 September 2023 review of submission by 2600:1002:B01E:E59E:E966:44AA:313B:2F3C

Hello,

I submitted a Wikipedia page about the author Brittney Morris and it was deleted. I would like it to be posted. Please tell me why it was deleted and what I need to do to get it posted? 2600:1002:B01E:E59E:E966:44AA:313B:2F3C (talk) 22:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Brittney Morris has not been deleted. An entirely unrefenced one sentence draft about a living person violates multiple policies, and cannot possibly be accepted into the encyclopedia. Please read and study Your first article. If you are User: ThesaurusRexcellent, then please log in before editing. Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:22, 21 September 2023 review of submission by Mackeymmm

Please delete my draft Matthew_Eric_Mackey as this was rejected by Wikipedia and hence not the property of Wikipedia. Thank-you! Also, please delete my draft: Quantum Space-Time Theory from your records as this is also not the property of Wikipedia. Thank-you! Mackeymmm (talk) 23:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mackeymmm. Your "not the property" statement is incorrect. Whenever you click the "Publish changes" button, you agree that By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and the GFDL. WP:G7 allows you to request deletion of any page where you are the only substantial author. Place {{db-g7}} at the top of any such page. Cullen328 (talk) 00:21, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cullen328, sorry but you are simply incorrect. My drafts are not the property of wikipedia as they were NEVER ACCEPTED. Those conditions are set under the proper terms of "if and when" my articles are accepted, which means that those terms are negated presently. Cullen328, sorry if you were confused there; you may want to ask your supervisor on this before replying to your customers like you did. Cullen328, you may need more training and supervision. Also, the customer is ALWAYS right too in America.
I have already stated and requested what I want. Please refer to my request WIKIPEDIA and try again WIKIPEDIA as my request was proper, reasonable, and valid.
Also, I would hope other more competent workers at WIKIPEDIA could simply direct Cullen328 in a more proper direction. Mackeymmm (talk) 10:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mackeymmm we're all volunteers here, not paid employees with "supervisors" and you are certainly not a customer. I would advise you not to attack volunteers.
In any case, I have added a deletion tag to your draft so they will soon be deleted. The Quantum Space-Time Theory draft has already been deleted. Qcne (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will be checking on this to ensure it is actually done, then! Also, sorry QCne, my comments were no "attack"; they were simply input to WIKIPEDIA for assistance toward WIKIPEDIA's continued improvement. Also, please do not argue with me, as I know I am right in all that I have applied for on WIKIPEDIA including my posts/replies/etc.. Also, I do own my drafts and my account as you, QCne, did not respond to this.
In order to cover what WIKIPEDIA stated to me in WIKIPEDIA's replies/posts/ect., both of my drafts that I submitted on WIKIPEDIA under my account have a DOI (document object identifier), which is attached to me indicating that I as a person own them. Also, the DOI takes precedence and priority over any terms or conditions WIKIPEDIA may or may not have. Also, I inherently own my account and anything I submit under my account (even with any referencing). My drafts are not the property of WIKIPEDIA. My statements here are completely in accordance with the legal system in my favor in America.
I should not have to go to the "ends of the earth" to get a simple request fulfilled on WIKIPEDIA. Please refer to my request on September 21, 2023 and fulfill it in a timely manner, WIKIPEDIA.
Thank-you! Mackeymmm (talk) 12:57, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mackeymmm: I will have to ask that you stop badgering and attacking others. And for your own sake, steer well clear from anything that could be interpreted as a legal threat, which seems to be the direction you're heading with this. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:56, 21 September 2023 review of submission by MrMull

I have submitted this article twice. The first time I used the subject’s published articles in refereed journals as citations and was told these were not reliable sources. The second submission I used published third party references about the subject and was also told these were not reliable sources. I don’t know what else I can do to document the notability of this subject. MrMull (talk) 23:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MrMull, several of your references are not functional. Of those I could read, I was unable to find any references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to H. Wayne Rudmose. Where are they? Cullen328 (talk) 00:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 22

08:31, 22 September 2023 review of submission by Mintack

Thank you for reviewing my draft. As a newcomer to Wikipedia and it being my first article, I'm eager to learn and ensure that I follow the guidelines. I wanted to confirm if my understanding is correct that the artist may not be considered relevant enough for a Wikipedia article, even with the provided references. I appreciate your feedback on what I can do to improve. Mintack (talk) 08:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mintack: for notability per WP:GNG, we would require significant coverage of the subject in multiple (normally interpreted as 3+) secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. Your draft cites three sources, but at least one of them (#2) is not independent. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:03, 22 September 2023 review of submission by Ingridach

Hello, my page has been denied submission several times due to lack of notability. I've been asked to state the three most important references on the talk page, and I've done so - what shall I do now? I really believe in the notability of my subject and page. Other members of the band 'Elastica', with less sources and achievements, have Wikipedia pages and it feels only fair to publish the page of the lead guitarist who is now also successful in the British music industry. Please check out the sources on the talk page and let me know what I can do in order for this page to be considered for publishing. Ingridach (talk) 10:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ingridach: this draft has been rejected, so your only option is to appeal directly to the reviewer to rejected it.
I should warn you, though, that the three sources you've listed on the talk page do not give the impression that they provide significant coverage of the subject, given that they have each been cited only once or twice. And as they are offline, it is difficult if not impossible to verify the extent of their coverage, so you may need to provide additional information about them when making your case; simply saying that they are in your opinion solid sources may not cut it.
Also, whether or not articles exist on the other members of Elastica is neither here nor there, as each article must satisfy the notability requirement and other conditions for publication. I'm just mentioning this so that you don't base your appeal on that argument, as it isn't a valid consideration. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that is helpful. In this case, what do you suggest - should I delete my three sources and add ones that can be verified online, or should I add three more? Ingridach (talk) 10:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingridach: I don't know, as I don't know what sources are available, or what coverage they provide. All I can say is that while offline sources are acceptable, if you're trying to argue that specific three sources establish notability, and none of them can be easily verified, you may have a hard time convincing the reviewer, especially when the draft has already been rejected and you're trying to overturn that decision.
I can also say that adding more sources usually doesn't improve things, in that it's better to cite three really solid sources than thirty weak ones. If you do have better sources than what the draft currently includes, then you may wish to cite those instead of some of the weaker ones. You just need to make sure that the draft reflects what the new sources actually say, not that you're citing the new sources just for the sake of citing them. (This relates to a broader principle, which is that Wikipedia articles should be written by summarising what reliable published sources have said; not by writing whatever one wishes, and then trying to find acceptable sources.) HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:25, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:02, 22 September 2023 review of submission by Monogriff

Submission declined:

Hello,

I am looking for help with he following declined submission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BITE_Guitars

Reasons given: "corp - Submission is about a company or organization not yet shown to meet notability guidelines and adv - Submission reads like an advertisement"

READS LIKE AN ADVERTISEMET: This submission is similar in style and structure to existing bass manufacturers on Wikipedia, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastwood_Guitars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_Rock_Girl_Guitars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadowsky https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fodera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duesenberg_Guitars

Happy to edit anything out that does not meet the guidelines, would very much appreciate concrete hints.

LACK OF NOTABILITY: Notability is substantiated through references to 11 press articles. These press articles contain not just passing references to BITE but the articles are wholly about BITE Guitars and its products. The articles are also from the major internationally recognized and independent news publications about bass guitars, not from unknown local websites.

Looking at other, accepted bass manufacturing companies, some have zero press articles, some have mostly references to their own websites.

Notability is also substantiated through a number of artists who play BITE bass guitars and are either internationally recognized names in the bass world themselves or have a stage and studio history with some of the biggest names in popular music.

Would appreciate any advice, thank you in advance! Monogriff (talk) 11:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Monogriff: I haven't yet looked into this, but just a couple of quick points: don't compare your draft to other articles that may exist; compare it to the applicable guidelines and policies in place today. There are well over 6m articles in the English-language Wikipedia, some of which certainly don't comply with the guidelines. We don't want to create more such problems.
Also, notability is not "substantiated through a number of artists who play BITE bass guitars"; it arises purely out of sources that meet the WP:GNG standard. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:23, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:43, 22 September 2023 review of submission by GoogleBadsha

The draft has not been published or in Review, the information provided all are genuine and counts a great value in Indian MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) Industry GoogleBadsha (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GoogleBadsha: the draft has not been reviewed (or published), because it hasn't been submitted. You need to click on that blue 'submit' button. Other than that, did you have a question you wanted to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I press the submit button and then see it, thank you for the reply GoogleBadsha (talk) 12:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:05, 22 September 2023 review of submission by 176.33.244.251

The suggestion must be accepted, and add some more if you can find. Please accept all the suggestions that do not break any rules, and no contraries. 176.33.244.251 (talk) 14:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1176556377"