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 Rogerroger3782 (talk | contribs) at 06:31, 26 November 2017. 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

Why was my page declined?

November 20

02:26:21, 20 November 2017 review of submission by Rachelharrisla


Hello, I would like to ask for a re-reviewal of my article draft, on New York-based post-conceptual artist, Skye Nicolas. A previous review was declined on 19 August 2017 (by Wikipedia editor Chris troutman), as the "submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability."

The current article draft focuses on the artist's 'Fukushima Nuclear Disaster tribute artwork', which made front page news in the March 31, 2011 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer is the nation's largest and premier newspaper, comparable to the New York Times in Southeast Asia. Wouldn't being on the front page of a major newspaper suffice as a substantial source to validate subject's notability? Other independent sources have been referenced, including a recent interview with Art Week magazine, an extension of the fine art world's leading publication source, Art Forum.

A re-review, as well as comments on editing the article for final approval would be very much appreciated.

Thank you.


Rachelharrisla (talk) 02:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rachelharrisla. Simply resubmit your draft for review, and it will be placed back in the queue. Please be patient, however, as the queue is extremely backlogged at the moment. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

06:05:19, 20 November 2017 review of submission by SajniHaswani


SajniHaswani (talk) 06:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I want to know why my article is not approved https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mumbai_Challengers can you please tell me the reasons so that I will change accordingly

@SajniHaswani: Hello, Sajni. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Our apologies for the delay in response. The best source of information as to why your submission was declined will be the reviewer who looked at it. You can find that person's name and Talk page link in the "decline boxes" near the top of your submission. But before posting here, I took a quick look at your submission and found that I too would have declined it, for at least two reasons. First, very much of your material is unsourced. And second, much of it is not written in the neutral, formal tone that is expected on an encyclopedia. Indeed, some of it seemed like it was written for the sports pages of a newspaper. This type of writing has no place on Wikipedia. Finally, I didn't investigate the quality of your sourcing, so I'm offering no opinion as to whether this two-year old team has achieved encyclopedic notability. I encourage you to engage in discussion with the reviewer and to take into consideration the concerns that I've stated here. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 00:32, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:09:37, 20 November 2017 review of submission by Debabrata777

My new page request for port Connectivity Road Visakhapatnam was not accepted though it fulfilled all conditions. I just want to know to know why it was done so that my page gets created next time

Debabrata777 (talk) 14:09, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Debabrata777. Your submission, Draft:Port Connectivity Road, Visakhapatnam contained no references. Wikipedia requires all articles to have secondary, reliable sources. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:57, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:38:12, 20 November 2017 review of submission by Jtoddalgami


Jtoddalgami (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I submitted an article and it was declined because it did not have enough references. I updated the references list, added more citations of the proposed article and resubmitted it, but its been about 2 weeks now and there hasn't been someone who reviewed it. It just needs another quick scan then I can get it up. Anyone help?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bunq_(bank)

Hello, Jtoddalgami, there are over 2,000 submissions waiting right now. Please be patient as we attempt to lower the backlog. JTP (talk • contribs) 16:58, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jtoddalgami (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

( i heard that the submissions are randomly selected?

19:34:18, 20 November 2017 review of submission by Cffg9979

Hello,

I recently submitted an article about a company, which was rejected because "it appears to read more like and advertisement than a Wikipedia entry." I'm wondering whether this needs a few tweaks or is not even close to approval, and whether any more detail can be provided about the issue. Is it the sources, is the content, is it that subject matter is undeserving of a page?

Thanks for your assistance. Cffg9979 (talk) 19:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cffg9979: Hello, Cffg. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Our apologies for the delay in response. The best source of information as to why your submission was declined will be the reviewer who looked at it. You can find that person's name and Talk page link in the "decline box" near the top of your submission. But I took a look at your submission before posting here and found that, out of the various possibilities suggested in your question, "undeserving of a page" looks to be the best assessment. Two of the seven references are for the company's founder, and not the company itself (I'm speaking of the award nomination and the article written by the founder). Three others are either passing mentions or appearances on a list. Another is just a routine announcement. And the last (actually, the first in your submission) is a press-release type of write-up that was published five years ago. In all, I don't see in-depth discussion of the company by reliable independent sources, and I certainly don't see that kind of coverage being given on anything approaching a sustained level. I recognize that this is a negative assessment, but it does reflect my opinion as to whether this company is sufficiently "notable" in the sense that Wikipedia uses the word. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19:45:31, 20 November 2017 review of submission by Vinhloc30796


I'm writing the draft for Republic (crowdfunding platform) under COI. My most recent rejection was due to lack of neutrality in the draft. I rephrased and reordered several things, and added costs to fundraise on the platform, controversies surrounding the Crowd Safe and SAFE investment vehicle (which I think should also be added to the Simple agreement for future equity (SAFE) article). Still, I'm not sure yet about whether the neutrality in the article can be further improved, and if yes, how, hence I'm asking for re-reviewing.

@Vinhloc30796: The way to get the draft reviewed again is to click the blue "Submit" button on the draft, within the pink box from the most recent review. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:10, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:01:06, 20 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Crystalhartwell


Hello, my article keeps getting declined, first because the reviewer said it was too promotional. I edited the article, then another reviewer stated that there might be a notoriety issue, and that I should include more references. Is there a way for me to send my article to someone to review to get more feedback about specific edits that can be made so that the article will be accepted, before I submit the article using sandbox? The article is about an automotive company that is often cited in automotive trade outlets, including Automotive News which is a well respected publication.

Thanks in advance for your assistance. Crystalhartwell (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC) Crystalhartwell (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Crystalhartwell: There is no mechanism for getting feedback before submitting a draft. If by "often cited" in Automotive News you mean:

CEO Mark Maida of AutoBuy, a Florida company that buys used vehicles from consumers and resells them to dealers nationwide, said used-vehicle demand didn't pick up much until October, but now it is strong. He expects AutoBuy's shipments to dealers in Texas and Florida to peak in late October. "Pickups and SUVs are the hottest segments," Maida said. [1]

and the like, such material does nothing to establish notability. It isn't independent, it's the CEO talking about the company. Based on my own searches, the company does not appear to be a suitable topic for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not for promotion, marketing, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:04, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

21:52:08, 20 November 2017 review of submission by WidgetFan1234

Why was my article declined???????? WidgetFan1234 (talk) 21:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WidgetFan1234:. In short, because it cites no sources!!!!!!!! A more complete explanation is on the draft and on your talk page. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 21

00:02:07, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Marcjport


I want to create a brief page about my professional standing; both as a mechanism to demonstrate online content and reputation development competencies, and to secondarily assist in managing my own reputation. I imagine others have done this and I of course want to abide by all relevant and applicable best practices. Please advise on the best course of action/next steps. I know your time is valuable and I know how important Wikipedia is as a public resource and service; I am very grateful for your guidance.

Marc

Marcjport (talk) 00:02, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcjport: Best practice, best course of action? It's pretty simple, don't write about yourself. Wikipedia is not Facebook or LinkedIn, and is not to be used to manage your own reputation.
WP:BFAQ#COMPANY is written about organizations and companies, but applies equally well to individuals. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

05:44:51, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Ife1599


Ife (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC) i dont know how to cite and a page needs it[reply]

Hello, Ife1599, please see WP:Referencing for beginners for basic information on referencing. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:39, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ife1599. It looks like you tried copying a reference from another article. That can work, but you have to be on the "edit source" tab of the article you're copying from rather than on the "read" tab. I've redone the first citation in a recommended way, and left the second citation for you to fix as an exercise. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10:06:37, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Reka Moksony


Hi All,

Thank you for the feedback to my article codeBeamer ALM draft. Hereby I need your feedback if I understood well the improvement proposals. This external link at Infoq was found very useful to explain the content therefore I would integrate an outline of it into the article: https://www.infoq.com/articles/alm-safety-critical . I found further great sources to improve the article: https://www.infoq.com/articles/tool-integration-hard-truth - that refers well to Tasktop and API based integration of ALM to the toolchain.. which is also in the upfront development of codeBeamer ALM, therefore this content can be also integrated in a section : "ALM/development Toolchain integration"- via APIs or Integration Hubs. Further content for consideration: https://www.infoq.com/articles/evaluation-alm-software - which talks about ROI issues of ALM.

Can you please confirm those sources could lead to improve my article?

Thanks Reka

@Reka Moksony: Hello, Reka. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. I must confess that I'm a bit puzzled by the suggestion that the "Safety Critical" article will make a useful addition to your submission's sourcing. That article appears to be a discussion of application lifecycle management (ALM) in general, whereas your submission is intended to be about one particular software product that might be used in that field. It seems to me that whatever material can be usefully gleaned from the "Safety Critical" article ought to be added to our ALM article, and not to your submission (and this is especially so given that the article is written by the founder of the company that developed this particular software application). I have the same concerns with the other articles linked in your question here -- none of them appear to be giving in-depth discussion to your particular product. But maybe I'm missing something and you might get a more helpful response from the reviewer who made the suggestion. You can find that person's name and Talk page link in the "decline box" near the top of your submission. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:54:32, 21 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Adarshpadukone


I tried many times to submit a page sub reviewers are declining my submission

Adarshpadukone (talk) 11:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adarshpadukone, you recieved the message DO NOT RESUBMIT twice. Wikipedia is not a social networking service like Facebook. This is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please stop resubmitting it. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:15:58, 21 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Shriya Sheetal



Shriya Sheetal (talk) 12:15, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Shriya Sheetal: Hello, Shriya. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Did you have a specific question? NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14:01:11, 21 November 2017 review of submission by A.w.i.au


I am new to creating contents on Wikipedia, so I am not very well-versed as other users. Since the decline of the first draft, I have made some revisions on "Health Ecosystem". Would you please kindly give me some feedback on what to improve?

Thanks! A.w.i.au (talk) 14:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, A.w.i.au, the best way to ask for feedback is to resubmit your draft and await review from a reviewer. JTP (talk • contribs) 14:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

17:11:35, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Luminum

I am not familiar with Wikipedia's new policy restricting new users from directly creating articles. After overhauling a previously deleted page, I inadvertently submitted it to draft, but based on my experience as an editor, believe that the article is sufficient to go directly to article space (though review is always appreciated). Since draft review is so backlogged, and I feel the article is sufficient as is, and any other issues can be handled via page tags, I'd like to remove it from draft review. Is there a formal process for doing so? Am I in violation of any policies if I directly move the article to article space via the article wizard? Thanks!Luminum (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Luminum (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Luminum: Hello, Luminum. You appear to be permitted to create articles directly in Main space, and there is no requirement that you continue to participate in the Articles for Creation process. If you'd like to have this moved into Main space, I'll be happy to do that for you. Be aware, however, that it will NOT be logged as an article "accepted" by us. But if that's not a concern, I'll be happy to move the page on your behalf. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@NewYorkActuary: Thank you! That would be helpful. I was less clear on the process for removing the article from AfC.Luminum (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Luminum: The page has been moved. I leave it to you to add appropriate WikiProject banners on the Talk page. You might also want to modify your Sandbox to reflect the new location of the draft. Happy editing! NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:16:31, 21 November 2017 review of submission by ErinD22

Many different sources were used to draft this Wikipedia entry, including the one from Select Sacramento. There was no copying and pasting, although many details are the same since they are biographical. We are submitting this on behalf of Kevin and can likely get permission from Select Sacramento if there is a copyright issue. I'd like to know more about next steps so we can get this live.

Thank you ErinD22 (talk) 20:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC) ErinD22 (talk) 20:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ErinD22: Hello, Erin. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. There are two things you might try. First, you can talk to the good folks over at WP:Copyright problems to find out how to get a suitable license for the material. Or, you can contact the reviewer who declined your draft and discuss how their concerns can be addressed. You'll find the reviewer's name and Talk page link in the "decline box" near the top of your submission. I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:53, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Katcrowe


I have three issues:

(1) How does one insert the template for the information box into an existing draft?

(2) How does one get the proper formatting for the lead into an existing draft? Is there a template?

(3) I have my "Citations" heading appearing last in my submission. I have my "External Links" heading appearing second to last. I wish to have my "External Links" as the last heading. I cannot seem to switch these two heading. How is this accomplished?

Thank you for your assistance in advance.

Sincerely,

Katcrowe


Katcrowe (talk) 20:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Katcrowe: Hello, Kat. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. I took care of the lede and the reference section for you. As for the information box, you'll probably want to use either {{Infobox person}} or {{Infobox artist}}. Clicking on these links will give you instructions on how to use them. I hope this is helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:23, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:46:06, 21 November 2017 review of submission by Chockguzell

The article was declined on the grounds that the page already exists. There are 3 other articles on someone called Artemidorus but these are not the same people as Artemidorus of Knidos (there was someone called Artemidorus of Ephesus, who was also around in the 1st century BCE). From my reading of the instructions I thought I should not try and disambiguate this myself. How should I resubmit yet make clear that the article is about another person called Artemidorus? Chockguzell (talk) 20:46, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Chockguzell. I'd just go ahead and re-submit your article, as the reviewer was mistaken in thinking that these people were the same. I'll leave a comment to reviewers on that page noting that they are not the same. Thanks. ProgrammingGeek talktome 23:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 22

03:11:06, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Ajdeluca4

Hello, I recently submitted the article above and it was not accepted. I was a little confused as to why it was not accepted and any suggestions on improvements I could make would be greatly appreciated! Thank you. Ajdeluca4 (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajdeluca4: Hello, AJ. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. The best source of information as to why your submission was declined will be the reviewer who looked at it. You can find that person's name and Talk page link in the "decline box" near the top of the submission. But I took a quick look at it and I think I know what the reviewer meant when mentioning WP:TOOSOON -- although this high-school athlete probably doesn't meet the criteria set forth in WP:NHOOPS just yet, he probably will meet them eventually (at which point an article here would be appropriate). But I encourage you to confirm this with the reviewer. I hope this response was helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:01, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:18:27, 22 November 2017 review of submission by User457b


Hi Hamtechperson, Thanks for reviewing my submission on "Ammar Ahmad". Just a question on this. I'm going to change the content into more formal and neutral tone. Do I have to change the sources as well?

Regards, User457b

User457b (talk) 04:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

05:01:16, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Mitchmedina


I'm trying to write a Wikipedia article about myself. I've led an interesting life, but there is no published work about it.

I've written 4 Christian books, but they are not really germane to my life's story. I'm writing an autobiography, but it's a work-in-progress, and hasn't been published.

I have 30 U.S. Patents, and I suppose that I can cite them as references. But once again, they do not illuminate my personal life.

What should I do next?

Mitchmedina (talk) 05:01, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't write an article about yourself. This is an encyclopaedia, not social media – would you trust an encyclopaedia where all the articles were written by their subjects? If you are notable by Wikipedia's standards, a volunteer will write an article about you eventually. – Joe (talk) 13:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:07:27, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Newamsterdam2017


Dear Wikipedia,


As a new editor I would like to add more pages about ongoing developments in my town Amsterdam. A growing trend in Amsterdam is the changing pattern of consumption towards conscious consuming. More and more organizations are part of this growing trend. I wanted to add the Aesthetic Stories organization, but found this article was declined. I was therefore wondering: how could I improve the article? I have already added a few primary and secondary sources.

Looking forward to hear from you,


Kind regards,

Wais

Newamsterdam2017 (talk) 08:07, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:13:52, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Hawkeyedeep


Hawkeyedeep (talk) 08:13, 22 November 2017 (UTC) I want to add image in my new article from android but i don't know how to do it.[reply]

Hi Hawkeyedeep. I would focus on getting your draft accepted before trying to add images. There are a number of outstanding problems with it, detailed in the templates at the top of the page. – Joe (talk) 13:17, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:02, 22 November 2017 review of submission by SciFive


Hi, I translated a page about the Journal of Magnetic Resonance, from the French edition of Wikipedia into English and when I submitted it for review, it was rejected for failing to establish the notability of the journal. My question is: do different language editions of Wikipedia have different criteria to accept articles? While doing the translation, I added some references and updated some out-of-date information but from what the reviewer wrote it seems that I should write the page from scratch. There is no doubt in my mind that the Journal of Magnetic Resonance should have a page in Wikipedia since it is one of the leading scientific journals in its field (MRI,nuclear magnetic resonance, etc.). Your input is greatly appreciated. Thanks--SciFive (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SciFive. Yes, the different Wikipedias do have different criteria. I don't know anything about the French Wikipedia's but, as I understand it, here at enwiki we're on the strict side.
We have specific criteria for the inclusion of journals at WP:NJOURNALS. Perhaps Sulfurboy was not aware of them, because I think JMR quite clearly passes them – it has a JCR impact factor and many highly cited papers. I will go ahead and accept your draft now. – Joe (talk) 12:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SciFive. Thank you for your contribution. I concur with Joe Roe that your draft is an acceptable stub. Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Writing guide contains suggestions about how to write about academic journals that may help you make it even better. See Genes, Brain and Behavior and The BMJ for practical examples. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:49, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:53:36, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Skdwived

Hi, can anyone please check the page & provide feedback on this subject write up.

Skdwived (talk) 16:53, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:33:08, 22 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by IsaNew


My article was reviewed by Chrissymad. Unfortunately, I don't understand why Chrissymad thinks that "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." I had read the guidelines for referencing thoroughly before submitting the article and cited 7 print media sources (magazines). Why are these not considered reliable? Or what would I need to change? Thank you in advance for your help, IsaNew (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IsaNew (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:44:19, 22 November 2017 review of submission by Heatherbridge88

My first attempt at publishing was rejected. I just resubmitted, but am looking for some tips/suggestions to make sure it passes Wikipedia's standards. Any help is appreciated!

Heatherbridge88 (talk) 20:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing you need to do is to declare your conflict of interest as a paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 23

04:02:42, 23 November 2017 review of submission by Shanthini29


Hi, I would like to know which are the exact statements that may need citation. Presume I have included all relevant ones. Appreciate advise.

Shanthini29 (talk) 04:02, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Shanthini29: Hello, Shanthini. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. In brief answer to your question, all of the statements need citations. This does not necessarily mean that every sentence needs an individual citation -- if all of the material in a given paragraph is coming from the same source, then putting a citation to that source at the end of the paragraph will be acceptable. But this is just a special case that doesn't change the basic rule -- everything in your article needs to have come from a reliable source and you need to tell the reader where you got that information. I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:49, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04:17:43, 23 November 2017 review of submission by Lil'Latios


Is there a way to group the references by letters, like a, b, and c instead of repeating the same reference multiple times? I know it is possible, but I am still confused how. I've tried referencing the same source as just a link, but it adds it to my reference list as a different and new material. Thank you! (like references 1, 3, and 5 are all the same link, instead of reference A of the same source, reference B of the same source, and so on.)


Lil'Latios (talk) 04:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lil'Latios: Hello, Latios. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Yes, there's a way to consolidate what we call "multiple-use references". You can read about it at Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:34, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

05:08:35, 23 November 2017 review of submission by Ignore All Rules


Ignore All Rules (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should accept this article! It has over 1200 references. It is about a notable topic. It contains views pro and con (neutrality). It has everything you'd want in an encyclopedia article. You'll laugh, you'll cry, but best of all, you'll learn something. Accept today!Ignore All Rules (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

05:59:25, 23 November 2017 review of draft by Lea.palomba.doc


How do I submit my article for review?

Lea.palomba.doc (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Lea.palomba.doc: Hello, Lea. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. You already have submitted the draft for review. It will likely take a few weeks (perhaps as much as two months) before a reviewer gets a chance to look at it. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:01:40, 23 November 2017 review of submission by Hpresswala


Hetal Presswala (talk) 08:01, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please help to know weakness of page submitted to publish. Kindly direct how to make page as per your expectation

There are many weaknesses. It is excessively promotional. It is full of unreferenced claims. It appears to be an autobiography. It provides no evidence that its subject is notable. Maproom (talk) 15:35, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12:11:16, 23 November 2017 review of submission by VBS-GBS1050


I don't know why the article About professor Gruwez, one of the pioneers of medical surgery in Belgium is not accepted. I have checked other pages about surgeons on Wikipedia, i have tried to write in the same style but the article is refused. Can you help me?

VBS-GBS1050 (talk) 12:11, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is explained in the rejection notice. That is the grey box inside the pink box at the top of the draft. Maproom (talk) 15:29, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 24

07:19:02, 24 November 2017 review of submission by Norie Goto


I posted an article on Wikipedia for the first time. I have several questions now. At the first, I'm not sure I could post properly. At the second, if there is a possibility which my article will be rejected, I want to know and improve those mistakes beforehand not to be rejected. Is it possible? At last, I 'm not sure after my article was rejected, what I should do the next.

I'm not a native speaker, so it is helpful for me that you use simple and easy English for your explanation. Thank you.

Norie Goto

Norie Goto (talk) 07:19, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:57:39, 24 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Adam Sir Jr.



Adam Sir Jr. (talk) 09:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)Template:Adame sir jr.:Void[reply]

Syringeal

Why is this not allowed an entry exactly? Syrinx the Nymph (talk) 18:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19:29:37, 24 November 2017 review of submission by Jkarsh

Why was it rejected? Jkarsh (talk) 19:29, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:02:47, 24 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Elena.griguol


Hi I need help to understand why the reviewer says the article seems an advertisement. I've changed some parts using a neutral tone and added new references from third relevant parties not directly connected to the original organizer of the event. Please concrete suggestions are very welcome.

Elena.griguol (talk) 20:02, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:11:27, 24 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Csgoldberg


Hi There - I tried creating a page that described a company called Pulse Microsystems. This company was integral to the creation of the machine embroidery industry, but does not have a wikipedia page. It was taken down for it was labelled as advertising. I used 3 other company webpages in its creation, and was very objective in listing patent numbers, sources from articles, and the like.

How do I create a company webpage without it seeming like advertising, when there are in fact sources cited? Csgoldberg (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 25

01:35:01, 25 November 2017 review of submission by Mw17


I am writing an article for a class and am trying to publish it. I have had my account for more than 4 days and received a notification that I had made more than 10 edits. Do I still need to go through the review process? I thought I could post it directly given the above criteria. Thank you for your help. Mw17 (talk) 01:35, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You will see that I dream of horses moved your article back to draft space. The subject is not one I'm familiar with, so perhaps an expert here can judge whether it is ready for publication? As I think you probably know, Wikipedia is not the place to publish original research, but if your article is just a summary of published sources, then it should be acceptable under that criterion. Dbfirs 08:25, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 03:01:19, 25 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Drewzab


Helpers! I have a question about notoriety. My article on the Daisygrinders found here: [1] has been rejected due to notoriety. I contend that in the 1990s when they were active, they were instrumental in the fledgeling 'Grunge' movement. They were signed recording artists and their catalogue is still available for purchase. The band appeared on the front page of The Drum Media magazine with a full article about the band on page 12. This magazine had a distributorship of 120,000 issues. I can provide evidence but cannot find a way to do this through the wikipedia website. There is reference to the DM article here: [2] The band was published by Universal Music, has currently available published works and is available on Spotify. They were signed to a subsidiary of Regular records and Mercury Records - Major Labels. Their back catalogue can still be purchased through Half A Cow music. During the 1990s the band was at the forefront of the Australian Music Scene, playing across the country, supporting Major artists and playing a major festival. They have been cited in the Who's Who of Australian Rock. Is this not sufficient to prove notoriety? Any assistance you can provide to help have this band listed on Wikipedia would be greatly appreciated.

My article has been reviewed many times but is always rejected due to notoriety. I have articles on the band but these are no longer in print nor available online. How do I reference these articles to prove notoriety if they cant be checked by reviewers? Thanks Drewzab (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC) Drewzab (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Daisygrinders
  2. ^ https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10155788055109328&set=pcb.10155788065804328&type=3&theater

05:54:41, 25 November 2017 review of submission by Apsia


Apsia (talk) 05:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC) Hello,[reply] 

      How can I get my article accepted?

Please see below for details, Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Drewmutt was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. The comment the reviewer left was:

References currently only point to the subject, not independent media coverage of it. Additionally, Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about topics you're close to or created.

How to fix this article? This is my first time doing this in wikipedia.

Thank you,

A P Sia Apsia (talk) 05:54, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Apsia. I've replied to the same question at the Teahouse. It's far too early for an article. You will need to wait until independent reviews of your work are published, then collect these and summarise what they say. Dbfirs 08:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dbfirs,

What independent reviews are acceptable? Can you give some of these independent review?

Thank you,

A P Sia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apsia (talk • contribs) 00:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

06:20:17, 25 November 2017 review of submission by Avantgaertner

Hello, how do I resubmit my edited article for review? I do not see this option. Thanks!

Avantgaertner (talk) 06:20, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avantgaertner. An editor has added to the draft a template that has a "Submit your draft for review!" button. Click it to resubmit. Normally the "Submit" button is embedded in the box explaining the reason for the most recent decline. In future, do not remove prior reviews and reviewers' comments. They will be removed automatically if and when the draft is accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:11:39, 25 November 2017 review of submission by Pvchandramoulli


Pvchandramoulli (talk) 08:11, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:15:25, 25 November 2017 review of submission by Nemo8130


Thanks for accepting the article on the Complementarity Plot. We hope that this is useful to the audience of wiki and particularly to the structural biology community. I shall be grateful to learn further whether all subsequent edits to this page will be auto-updated to the public domain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarity_plot

Thanks and Kind regards, Sankar

Nemo8130 (talk) 08:15, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 26

02:39:44, 26 November 2017 review of submission by 66.190.13.95


66.190.13.95 (talk) 02:39, 26 November 2017 (UTC) Hi My name is Rosalind Kealiher, I am an acquaintance of Valentina Peguero and really wanted to create a page in her honor. She is a semi well known author in the US and especially in the Dominican Republic. Obviously I am not a good writer and I also don't have a lot of time. Is there someone out there who would be willing to write a wikipedia page about her? How would I go about finding the right person?[reply]

05:08:57, 26 November 2017 review of draft by Julia mji


Julia mji (talk) 05:08, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

05:10:12, 26 November 2017 review of submission by Julia mji


Julia mji (talk) 05:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

06:31:09, 26 November 2017 review of submission by Rogerroger3782


It was mentioned to me that I can ask here for more information about why the page was declined. I know I did not have a lot of content for the page yet, as I am new to this.

For notability, I see you want news sources, but all I really have are gaming sources. The only thing I know of is they were in a printed version of the indie game magazine.

I guess I can just include the links I have?

https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/3dpd8n/remembering-from-softwares-forgotten-mech-classic-chromehounds http://www.gamestar.de/artikel/mav-kickstarter-aktion-fuer-mech-actionspiel-gestartet,3032537.html https://www.engadget.com/2014/02/09/mav-follows-in-the-giant-robot-footprints-of-chromehounds/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/05/01/mav-released-steam-early-access/#more-204833/ https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/07/28/87-bazillion-mechs-m-a-v-is-a-gearheads-dream/#more-117964/ https://kotaku.com/http-www-youtube-com-watch-v-w00hp8nraxe-this-is-m-a-1517297863 https://www.pcgamesn.com/indie/mav-lego-mech-games https://www.pcgamesn.com/best-new-indie-games-pc-november-05-17 http://archive.beefjack.com/index.html%3Fp=138607.html http://www.nerd-age.com/m-v-kickstarter-spotlight/ http://cliqist.com/2014/02/07/old-is-new-again-in-m-a-v/

I am not sure if any of these count.

Rogerroger3782 (talk) 06:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=812145110"