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 Like street (talk | contribs) at 10:28, 30 June 2018. 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


June 24

00:19:00, 24 June 2018 review of submission by Sparktorn

Hello, could anyone please help to add on anything to this political ideology and make it "acceptable" for Wikipedia standards? Cheers. Sparktorn (talk) 00:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sparktorn - You'll need more, and stronger, sources if you want to show this is a serious political philosophy. At present, you've three, partisan and POV, blogs and an author who is described on the German Wikipedia as an "activist" and doesn't appear to be either a political philosopher or an historian. That's not nearly enough to show this is a serious political position that has been discussed in credible and reliable sources. As a personal aside, from your description, it doesn't sound very like a serious philosophy. KJP1 (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:49:20, 24 June 2018 review of submission by Srunger72


Srunger72 (talk) 05:49, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]



I am new to creating a page -- Shirtless Violinist (Matthew Olshefski). I received feedback from three reviewers and made changes. People responded within a day to those re-submissions. However, I have been waiting 5 days tor a response to my last submission. I also received another noticed that sounded like my submission was approved in several categories. But I see no change.

Can you look to see the status of my submission and let me know what happens next in the process or what I may need to do. I am really in the dark.

We get to about 75% of submissions within a couple days, but it can take 3 weeks due to the 1000 page backlog. Easy declines often happen quickly but more complex analysis may take longer. Legacypac (talk) 05:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:12:52, 24 June 2018 review of submission by 2405:204:3484:32C:CFB:ABAD:1304:44C

2405:204:3484:32C:CFB:ABAD:1304:44C (talk) 08:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you haven’t got any sources. Sources are the lifeblood of Wikipedia. They demonstrate Notability and they allow readers to Verify the content. Without them, you’ve not got an article. KJP1 (talk) 14:53, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:31:40, 24 June 2018 review of submission by Chezzy79



I'm having trouble understanding what you would consider to be a "neutral" source... I have referred to other already-approved Wikipedia articles when writing this Jon Kuhn article, such as Jack Storms, Gary Beecham, and this Jon Kuhn article contain far more neutral, verifiable, and unbiased sources. Also, I have found Jon Kuhn's mention here [[1]] and that was not added by me, as you can see. However, it clearly shows the need for Wikipedia to have an entry on Jon Kuhn, and most of the artists on that page ALREADY WITH Wikipedia entries, are far less notable artist than Jon Kuhn with much less verifiable contents in their pages. I do not understand the basis of this Jon Kuhn article being rejected, when these articles entries in Wikipedia.

I also would think that PBS, Smithsonian, Henry Ford Museum, etc. are more than credible sources to be used to indicate the notability of the artist, but as a contributor, I would appreciate it if you could explain why you wouldn't agree, and show me an example of something you would consider worthy for Wikipedia.

Chezzy79 (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chezzy79. You asked this question at User talk:The Mighty Glen and received a good answer. To elaborate:
Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines does not mean they have been in any way "approved". It may simply mean that no one has gotten around to deleting them yet. They are not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best.
Sources must be reliable, and the bulk of an article about Kuhn should be based on sources that are independent of Kuhn (i.e. not written by or supplied by him, not from a gallery selling his work, not a press release, not a primary source interview). I've added a couple potential sources to a "further reading" section of the draft.
Sources need not be neutral, but a Wikipedia article must be written from a neutral point of view. In other words, it must represent "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." The draft may not say in Wikipedia's voice things like "renowned as one of the world's leading", "the pioneer behind the now-popular technique", and "Light is an important element in Kuhn's work". Opinions need to be attributed, such as "According to curator so-and-so, ..." or "Art critic so-and-so writes, ..." Any original research does not belong.
Kuhn holds the copyright to his 3D sculptures. To publish a photograph of one requires a license from him. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to do that. The number of photos you have uploaded attributed to yourself, and your single-minded purpose at Wikipedia of writing about Kuhn suggests that you have a close connection to him that may facilitate obtaining and documenting the necessary permissions. That would be wonderful. We love photos that we can legally use. It also suggests that you have a conflict of interest, in which case you should declare that connection and really shouldn't be editing an article about him. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:04, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:59:12, 24 June 2018 review of submission by Audrey1125

I would like to know why the page "The Civility of Albert Cashier (musical!" I put up for publishing has been declined. Thank you! Audrey (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Audrey1125 - The main problem is sourcing, as the reviewer indicated. You've removed the 19-odd from a music uploading site, none of which were reliable, but you're still some way from "significant coverage". Of the five you've now got, three are plain listings and one's not independent. That leaves one, Source 4. That's fine, but it's only one source. You need greater coverage to demonstrate Notability. A few more reviews like 4 and you're there. As a secondary issue, the plot summary is too long. KJP1 (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 25

04:09:03, 25 June 2018 review of submission by Joanneleung36


we have uploaded more media reference about transgender resource center, please check if this help. Also since the media reports about Transgender Resource Center are usually written in Chinese while English reports are usually concentrated to 1 to 2 media only. Therefore, we want to ask if it is ok to add some Chinese media report so as to have a better sourcing.

Joanneleung36 (talk) 04:09, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Joanneleung36 Sources from any languages are permissible in Wikipedia. If you would find "reliable" sources from major newspapers (be it in Chinese or other languages) that talk "directly" about the subject that would be helpful. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:20, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:54:47, 25 June 2018 review of submission by Fernanda Liendo


Hi, I'm sending this paragraph for review since I'm not sure if the information I've written and the references comply with Wikipedia's rules. Fernanda Liendo (talk) 12:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need to post a copy of the draft, the link Draft:PHP Tools for Visual Studio is sufficient
PHP Tools for Visual Studio
Developer(s)DEVSENSE s.r.o.
Initial releaseMarch 2012; 12 years ago (2012-03)
Stable release
1.28.10846 / May 18, 2018; 6 years ago (2018-05-18)
Written inC#
Operating systemMicrosoft Windows
Available inEnglish, Spanish, German, Japanese, others.
TypePHP IDE
LicenseProprietary

PHP Tools for Visual Studio is a commercial extension targeting Microsoft Visual Studio, which adds the ability to work with PHP programming language. PHP Tools integration allows software developers to create and manage projects (computer programs, web sites, web services and web apps), debug and maintain the source code.

PHP Tools provides a code editor for PHP that supports IntelliSense (the code completion component), code refactoring and code validation.[1] It has an integrated debugger that works for local and remote debugging.[2] Additionally, it includes built-in tools, such as integrated support for Composer packages, testing through PHPUnit, support for PHP template engines such as Smarty, on-the-fly code validation, automatic installation and configuration of PHP or deployment through SFTP, FTP, FTPS, File System or Web Deploy which is used mainly to deploy to Azure.[3]

Most of the features in Visual Studio are extended with PHP Tools, such as HTML, CSS, JavaScript or TypeScript support. All the editions are supported including Community Editions. However, it does not support Express Editions[4] [5]

See also

Phalanger (compiler)

References

References

  1. ^ Alexander Schmidt (2013-11-19). "PHP-Entwicklung mit Visual Studio 2013 und TFS". Coding Freaks. Retrieved 2018-06-25.
  2. ^ Dave Ramel (2017-08-23). "New Extension Supports PHP Development in Visual Studio 2017". Visual Studio Magazine. Retrieved 2018-06-25.
  3. ^ Dave Smith (2016-04-26). "Using Microsoft Visual Studio as PHP IDE with the PHP Tools extension". PHPClasses. Retrieved 2017-03-30.
  4. ^ One Code Team Blog (2014-12-10). "Differences between Visual Studio Community Edition and Express Editions". MSDN. Retrieved 2018-06-01.
  5. ^ Vlad Feinstein (2015-07-30). "Visual studio Express Edition vs Community". Stack Overflow. Retrieved 2018-06-01.

Category:Integrated development environments

Category:PHP
Hi Fernanda Liendo. The cited sources are not reliable:
  • Coding Freaks is a self-published blog.
  • Visual Studio Magazine might be reliable, but reads like a press release, bringing its independence into question.
  • The portion of MSDN that is being referenced is the reader comments section, which has no reputation for accuracy or fact checking.
  • PHPClasses and Stack Overflow are user-generated content, not subject to editorial oversight or academic peer review.
Wikipedia is not for marketing, promotion, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:07, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:17:45, 25 June 2018 review of submission by Grapkin


I did not understand some of the feedback I received from the editor: 

- Subject may not be notable enough and better references needed. I included reviews from The New York Times of her books.  Wondering how to improve with other references?

- Too many external links. Do I need to move links to a section below rather than include in body of the text? Will this help/be enough?

- Need to use more formal tone and eliminate laudatory phrases. If I take out words like "award-winning" etc., will that be enough?

Thanks for any and all feedback you can provide. GraceGrapkin (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Grapkin (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't put links in the body of the article. Relevent links can be in an External Links section. If you are linking to something with a wikipedia page you should wikilink with topic without the spaces. Definantely trim laudatory phrases. This is not an ad. Legacypac (talk) 05:16, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 26

04:31:22, 26 June 2018 review of submission by Vannacharal


My Draft page getting Mithun Rajakumar rejected even though i have given proof and reliable reference..I need help to get approval of the draft page Vannacharal (talk) 04:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vannacharal Greetings. The comments have given on the pink boxes on the draft page. The subject has yet to demonstrate the notability as the sources do not support it. Significant coverage from independent reliable sources (secondary source) are need where by the content is written about subject are "directly" and not merely passing mentioned.
  1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com - Kaala movie reciew - is about the movie and not the subject
  2. You tube - You tube are primary source.
  3. Wikipedia - Wikipedia can not be the source -s see WP:CIRCULAR.
  4. http://tamil.thehindu.com/cinema/tamil-cinema/ - is an interview piece - a primary source
  5. IMBD - User generated source (primary)
  6. www.deccanchronicle.com (The TAmil Nadu you have not seen) - article is not about the subject

Pls see actor notability requirements from Wikipedia and see Here, title "Request on 15:31:34, 22 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by SazidKabir", on what is needed for a page to be accepted on notability, types of sources, significant coverage, verification requirements. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer the following Mithun Rajakumar interview published in "The Hindu" page, ..it is written in Tamil, Tamil is one of the longest-surviving classical languages in the world.,Please transalte it to English and read. it clearly.it says everything about the person.DO you need more proof than this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vannacharal (talk • contribs) 06:30, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Vannacharal, Hi, please re-read the message above. Interview is considered primary source. Source need to be secondary and independent from subject - no utube, IMBD, facebook, any user generated content, interviews, home sites. Please see and read the source link above I had provided.Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04:33:23, 26 June 2018 review of submission by AkshayChhibber

I would like to ask the help desk as to why precisely my article was rejected for the submission. Seems that all the valid information about the article was provided along with the references. The references provided are the only ones I have and can also be verified since these are the awards and recognitions won by uCertify. Apart from the 1 reference provided is from PRWeb which is again an online press release. Please explain in detail as to how this article can be edited in order to get it accepted for the submission. AkshayChhibber (talk) 04:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed on the Draft Legacypac (talk) 05:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:42:34, 26 June 2018 review of submission by Techcherio


hello, I need help because my article seems to rejected, I received this feedback, "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." Techcherio (talk) 07:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:51:40, 26 June 2018 review of submission by DmitryXII


I've come to a bump as my submission was denied for the second time. I have stated that I have a conflict of interest, and as such may not be the best person to remove the "reads like an advertising" flaw. However seeing as the similarly-referenced OMAS SRL. article, and the two companies are similar in the interest shown by the community on both brands is similar. I would greatly appreciate any help in making this article more neutral and factual. DmitryXII (talk) 07:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DmitryXII Hi, I could not review the draft article as the source are form Italian books so I would comment only on how the draft article is written at current stage and will leave the review to other reveiwers. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and the content is summaries by reliable and independent source in neutral point of view with only factual of what the sources stated in usually very dull prose instead of written with the sense or connotation to praise the company or appeal to read emotions. Secondly half of content on the "History"section was unsourced and "Material" and "Decoration" sections have no sources at all. If you would find reliable source which independent from the subject such as from newspaper to support the content claimed, then pls cite them in the body text. Lastly, please read Wikipedia notability requirements here - company which a page need to meet to merit a page in Wikipedia. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:40, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:44:14, 26 June 2018 review of submission by Nikhiljain founder


Nikhiljain founder (talk) 08:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:42:03, 26 June 2018 review of submission by Hasekidms


Hasekidms (talk) 12:42, 26 June 2018 (UTC) To whom it may concern,[reply]

We have requested for this page to be published since January of this year. We kept being denied for different reasons. Finally we made a stronger article and submited it for review last week and it was denied yesterday. The decline reason said "Youtube is not a source". We took youtube out and re-submitted again. We are very confused why they are being rejected. We have provided over 20 links to articles written driectly for MIRUD and still being denied we just don't know what else to provide. We have provided so many links to magazines and all of that.

Please someone help us.

Hasekidms,Hi Please note below
  1. sources do not indicate as what content claimed - [2]; song "Puzzle" reach 23 in US Chat - Google search engine is not a source; "Early life" section - Wikipedia can NOT be the source - see WP:CIRCULAR; "Ende Te Dua" reach top 3 in Kosovo Albania - source does not indicate such - [3]
  2. reliable and independent from the subject (secondary) sources are needed to support the notability of the subject. Interviews, IMBD, utube, home page are primary. Source from major newspaper is secondary source
  3. You might have a conflict of interest here as you indicate "we have requested for this page to be published since January of this year" in your message above. You used "We" here. If you are affiliate with the subject either a friends/family member or a paid editor - pls disclose your COI here. Wikipedia strongly discourage COI editor edit on affected page.
  4. Pls note Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia. Content need to be written in neutral point of view. The draft article at the current stage is written with a connotation of promoting the subject and a more factual and dull prose would be needed.
  5. Please read the musician notability requirements needed. If the subject is not notable then no amount of editing and sources provide will merit a page in Wikipedia.
Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:36, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:13:15, 26 June 2018 review of submission by 151.27.138.212


151.27.138.212 (talk) 13:13, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:45:37, 26 June 2018 review of submission by Aalderdice

I wrote a page for the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) and referenced facts to the AFP website, so the draft was immediately deleted. I then went and revised the page to only include information from scholarly journals and submitted it, however I cannot find it anywhere in drafts and believe it has been deleted. I don't understand why this is, since all the sources I used were from scholarly books/articles. Can you please explain to me why my page was deleted again and what I need to change about the second version?

thank you. Aalderdice (talk) 14:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aalderdice Hi, You question has been answered at Not sure where my article is /IF it's been deleted, why.... Please do not post question in 2 different help pages at AfC, and in Teahouse Not sure where my article is /IF it's been deleted, why...for volunteer resources would be waste would be waste for answering the same question in 3 forum. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 00:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 01:58:42, 27 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Maria Lucia Maria Lucia S


I am writing about a person -- Enid Deutchman Zimmerman and having trouble with Reference Citations. For a book or article, how do you reference more than one author? The standard Template to Cite book or journal only has room for one author? RSVP Thank you.


Maria Lucia S (talk) 01:58, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maria Lucia S Greetings to you. What you can do is to addtional parameter for author 1 and author 2 and etc. - Book reference pls see -Template:Cite book. Under the "Examples" section, there are examples on two authors, citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor and etc. Have a good day. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 27

02:55:14, 27 June 2018 review of submission by WhyCue


LOOKING FOR ASSISTANCE WITH Draft:Why_Cue NEED HELP GETTING APPROVED!!

WhyCue (talk) 02:55, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WhyCue On hold pending COI editing disclosure as your username and draft page name is the same. see User talk:WhyCue#Draft:Why Cue. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:49, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CASSIOPEIA "I'm sorry Please explain more of what you mean" -WhyCue
WhyCue, Hi, COI means conflict of interest - pls click here for more information and disclose your COI - see WP:COI. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CASSIOPEIA "What should I do next I'm a beginner?" -WhyCue
WhyCue, Read links provided - clicking the blue highlighted texts as it will bring you to another page with further detail. By the way, Wikipedia strongly discourages a COI editor edit the affected page as content neutrality is an issue. At this stage subject is not notable and no amount of editing will help. Pls see musician notability requirements. Also, pls see message one below yours on the same subject. hank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:31:16, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Gastronautsmp3


LOOKING FOR ASSISTANCE WITH Draft:Why_Cue NEED HELP GETTING APPROVED!!

Gastronautsmp3 (talk) 05:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Gastronautsmp3 The draft article is created by Wikiproducer123. WhyCue joined Wikipedia today and performed mainly the said draft page and asked about the approval on AfCHD WP:AFCHD# 02:55:14, 27 June 2018 review of submission by WhyCue which I believe WhyCue might have conflict of interest and inform them on CIO disclosure at AFCHD WP:AFCHD#02:55:14, 27 June 2018 review of submission by WhyCue, user talk page Draft:Why Cue and my talk page User talk:CASSIOPEIA#Need your help could definitely use your brains!. After my answer to user WhyCue, you registered today and perform one edit on the draft page -see [4] and requested the said article for approval on the AFCHD - see WP:AFCHD#05:31:16, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Gastronautsmp3.
Question, have you register 3 different user names with the motivation to get the draft approve ? Four reviewers have reviewed the article in addition to Maproom and I, the subject is not notable enough to merit a page at the current standing. Please read WP:MUSICBIO and WP:RS. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:04:52, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Kenyanuu

Hi I have tried uploading this article numerous times but to no success. I don't really know what the problem with it is. Can anyone help. Kenyanuu (talk) 08:04, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kenyanuu - The issue, as three reviewers have already said, is that the draft is a weakly-sourced advertisement for a non-notable company. Wikipedia's an online encylopedia, not a marketing platform, and your draft's just not a suitable subject. KJP1 (talk) 20:04, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:51:13, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Mallysally26

Hello, I have been using droptask for a while with work. I am learning how to use wikipedia and can see that droptask has no page, I would like to create. It is a task management tool. Can you please check its articles? I am told it is not notable but believe it to be. I would love to get an article live and become part of your wikipedia community. Thank you! Mallysally26 (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mallysally26 - As two reviewers have indicated, the topic really doesn't seem notable. Wikipedia's an online encyclopedia and topics covered should have "significant coverage from reliable, independent, sources" to show Notability. This doesn't, and I doubt it will as it's an application among millions. There are loads of ways you can become part of the Wikipedia community, even if this article's not suitable. One of the best approaches, for those who are new, is to work on existing articles, rather than trying to write a new one from scratch. That way you learn the ropes and can then move on to creating new articles. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 20:26, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:54:05, 27 June 2018 review of submission by EddyPieHands


Hi Wikipedia team, my draft article Lucille Lortel Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Play has been declined because the "article already exists in Wikipedia" at Lucille Lortel Award. If the contents of my draft are compared to the Lucille Lortel Award it is clear that this is not the case. My draft contains all nominees and recipients of the award for Lead Actress and not a description of the overall award history, voting, hosts and location. I believe the mix-up is due to my draft having an incorrect title when I first submitted it where it was mistakenly named "Lucille Lortel Award".

Please let me know what I can do to get the article published. Cheers

EddyPieHands (talk) 17:54, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

EddyPieHands Hi Good day. The content of your draft is part of what Lucille Lortel Awards articl. What you could do is to expand this Lucille Lortel Awards stub class article by incorporating Lucille Lortel Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Play's content onto Lucille Lortel Awards. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


CASSIOPEIA Hi and thanks for the response. While the contents of the draft are related to the Lucille Lortel Award article I don't see why it should be included there. The article would simply be huge and messy. My draft contains only one of twenty categories and I intend to add the other 19 eventually. All other Wikipedia theatre and film award articles are built this way. One about the award and one for each of the categories. Examples: Obie Award and Obie Award for Distinguished Performance by an Actress. Tony Award and Tony Award for Best Actress in a Play. Academy Awards and Academy Award for Best Actress
Unless Wikipedia is trying to limit the number of new articles created, I fail to see why this structure should change. It works beautifully. Cheers
EddyPieHands (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi EddyPieHands. You are correct. Thank you for your submission, I've left a comment there. A color key for the tables would also be beneficial. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the helpful response Worldbruce. I have added a handful references and a (primitive) colour key. Should I resubmit or will you review it? Cheers, EddyPieHands (talk) 20:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@EddyPieHands and Worldbruce: Believe the article has been accepted. As the current stand it looks more a "List type" and not an "typical article type". Welcome comments from Worldbruce please. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 23:38, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:59:16, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Sjwaddington


The page "Golden Sheen Sapphire" is being continually vandalized by a person with malicious intent that is using only IP address from multiple different IP address - probably Internet cafes.

How can this page vandalism be stopped? It is possible to edit lock the page for a while until they get tired and go away?

Sjwaddington (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sjwaddington Greetings. This the help desk for Article for Creation and it is not the right place to seek help here on vandalism topics. However, just to note a few things here (1) Facebook is not a reliable source, so it would not be necessary for your to revert IP edit and reinsert FB source. (2), if any content change and it is supported by source, do check the source for verification of the content claimed. If editor add content and supported by source that is not a vandalism unless it fall under WP:VAND categories. for content disagreement, please discuss in the article talk page for any by inviting the involved editors (3) Please be careful of violating WP:3RR within 24 hours for a block would be placed on involved editors. A 3RR only valid if it is clear vandalized edit. (4) Do warn the editor if their have vandalized a page and increasing the level each time if their continues. You could report the editor on the their 5th vandalized edit at WP:AIV. A page also could be protected if multiple editors vandalized a page by reporting it to WP:RPP. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:42:36, 27 June 2018 review of submission by Winnipegpost

Please let me know what is wrong with my article and why they article was not approved? Thanks Winnipegpost (talk) 19:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Winnipegpost - It isn't a suitable topic for Wikipedia. It's a weakly-sourced advertisement for a company that's not Notable. Wikipedia's an online encyclopedia, not a marketing platform, and I'm afraid your draft just isn't suitable material. KJP1 (talk) 20:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 28

07:36:12, 28 June 2018 review of submission by Umformtechtum

Hello, Right now I am trying to rewrite my article about tensile specimen since it was declined after the first try. I have already written the equivalent German article on "Zugprobe" in the German Wiki (95%, the first few lines were already created by someone else whom I will make sure to receive acknowledgement also within the English article). However, since I have used many good German sources I am not sure whether those are also valid for the English Wiki. Therefore, I would like to know whether it is going to be a problem having sources in another language when trying to resubmit the English draft of the article? Thank you in advance! Umformtechtum (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Umformtechtum Hi Good day. Welcome back. You could use source from any languages as long as it is reliable and independent from the subject. However, if the source is from a book of a foreign language, than it would take a little longer to review as it is hard to get it translated and after obtain the print copy from the resource center. Btw, you can make your proper attribution on the article talk page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:02, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:47:59, 28 June 2018 review of submission by Ashwath Naganathan


My article is fully about a music director so I just added his earlier life and some of his movie reviews and so on. But wikipedia declined stating that this article appears to read more like an advertisement and also to be written from a neutral point of view. I just gave the suitable reference which is totally related to that music director. Ashwath Naganathan (talk) 07:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ashwath Naganathan Greetings to you. You have submitted the draft article twice and both time have been declined and messages were left by the reviewers on the grey panels. From your message above, it seems like a statement and no question has asked. Not sure how we could help you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:57:58, 28 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Molslater


Hello, I am trying to create a page for mind mapping software I use. I saw it is missing from a list of Mind Mapping Software. It has been rejected for lack of notability, but I believe it to be as notable, if not more notable than a lot of the software listed. Can you please advise why there are inconsistencies in what is deemed as notable?

Molslater (talk) 10:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

hello Molslater - Please make sure you read WP:GNG, so you can see what wikipedia needs for notability. First, if other articles don't meet this, and yours is "more notable", that doesn't mean your article meets WP:GNG. Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, to see why. You need to prove secondary, reliable sources talk about the subject "IMindmap". The first book reference talks about the author creating the software (Or at least working very closely with it); which isn't secondary. The other two sources are ok (Despite the fact I can't check the information on the second), so I'd suggest you weren't far off of proving notability, so keep looking. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:54:40, 28 June 2018 review of submission by Gfriedberg


Submission was declined twice. Curious to know how i could improve the references to prove notability. Gfriedberg (talk) 19:54, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gfriedberg. Billboard and XXL are generally reliable sources for music. However, the Billboard piece is not significant coverage, just two sentences, and categorizes Felly as an "up-and-coming artist", which is the opposite of what Wikipedia is looking for - musicians who have gained significant attention by the world at large. Reviewers may discount the XXL pieces for the purpose of WP:MUSICBIO as "publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves".
Highsnobiety has not been considered a reliable source in the past (see WP:RSN) and I suspect Hypebeast would be regarded in the same way. The two BroadwayWorld pieces read like press releases, which is not surprising as the site encourages people to submit news in the form of press releases. I recommend discarding those four sources.
Perhaps better sources could be found (Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources has suggestions about where to look). But at age 22, with only one album, it may simply be WP:TOOSOON in his career to justify an encyclopedia article. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:45, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 29

14:03:40, 29 June 2018 review of submission by ChicagoSHOUT


Hello, I wrote an article on a historic case in the foster care system, but it was denied for seeming like an advertisement for the acting attorney. I have quoted both parties as well as used all third-party sources. Can I get someone else opinion and feedback on this please? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hudson_v._Lutheran_Social_Services_of_Illinois

ChicagoSHOUT (talk) 14:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This question was also asked at Wikipedia:Help desk#Can I get feedback as to my article wad denied?, where there have been some replies. In the interest of keeping discussion centralized, please contribute there, or simply review the draft (which the author has resubmitted). --Worldbruce (talk) 23:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:56:47, 29 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by SheynePunem


Thank you so much for taking the time to review my submission.

I have edited my entry according to the guidelines kindly provided by Robert McClenon on May 15. All article points are verifiable facts. However, on June 1, Shadowowl, who generously gave his time to review the entry, felt that there were not enough "independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject". I have provided fifteen external independent, reliable, published references such as institutions websites like the Juilliard School of music, its French equivalent the CNSMDP, major media publishers like the New-York Times, the Jewish week, France Musique (THE national radio station dedicated to music), RCJ (the main French Jewish radio station), actual references to the subject's publications on the publishers websites, all the exact references of his recorded material, and announcements and reviews of some of his performances. Further included are internal links to the Wikipedia pages to the personnalities with whom the subject frequently works. Finally, only 2 links are productions of the subject of the article: the official website and the youtube channel. The number of external independent, reliable, published references of this article by far exceeds the number of references that I have seen on most wikipedia articles meeting the standards. I have only stated facts. I am at a loss on how to go from here. Sorry to take some more of your time, but could you help me here? Thank you very much in advance. Esther.

SheynePunem (talk) 15:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:00:17, 29 June 2018 review of submission by Ian.Kirkland76

I am unsure of why the footnote references have been rejected. I have purposefully tird to make sure the references follow your guidelines. Is it just a matter of where the . , and spaces are placed or am I missing something deeper. A little assistance would be gratefully received. Thank you Ian.Kirkland76 (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ian.Kirkland76 - I think there are two main issues. The first is a lack of inline citations. The first, second, third, fifth, sixth and seventh paragraphs don't have any at all. Actually, the first shouldn't as it's the lead. But basically, you've a bunch of content that isn't sourced. The second issue is how you've done the sourcing that you do have. It baffles me - you seem to have embedded the links somehow. I'll redo Source 10, to show you how they should work. Give me a shout if you need more. All that aside, it's a very well-written, well-structured draft and much better sourced than much that we see at AFC. It can easily be got to an Acceptable state. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 17:57, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:35, 29 June 2018 review of submission by Easternfreestate


I am trying to make a page about myself, Etienne Kallos. The first draft was rejected for insufficient references, so I added two references to most pieces of information- but this seems like overkill and I would like to just use one reference for each piece of information but I do not know which references were problematic for you guys. Can you please be specific if there are still any refs that are not working for you? As I would then like to delete some references and make the article seems less laden with links. Thanks! Etienne Kallos

Easternfreestate (talk) 18:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Easternfreestate. The draft is in the pool of submissions to be reviewed and will be evaluated in due course. The longest that any draft has been waiting is about four weeks. Be advised that it is a spectacularly bad idea to write about yourself on Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:20, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:42:59, 29 June 2018 review of submission by Easternfreestate


I recently tried to rework the page for a recent film I wrote, directed and produced called The Harvesters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Harvesters_(film) but my changes were rejected. I am not sure who made this initial page but it does not contain all the information, does not contain all the producers, its very problematic for me! Who do I have to talk to to be able to rework the page of my film? thanks, Etienne Kallos

Easternfreestate (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternfreestate: This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Existing articles are outside our scope, so in future consider asking questions about them at the Wikipedia:Help desk. Editors there will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away.
The conflict of interest guideline very strongly discourages direct article editing, particularly if you have a financial interest in the topic. Editors with such an interest are considered paid editors and are required by the Terms of Use and by the Wikipedia policy WP:Paid editing disclosure to disclose their paid status, employer, and other relevant affiliations before doing any paid editing.
The film may be yours, but the Wikipedia article about it is not yours. If you feel that there is material within The Harvesters (film) which is incorrect, please point this out on its talk page, Talk:The Harvesters (film). Likewise, if you have content which you think should be added, please discuss this on the talk page. Using the template {{Request edit}} will help draw attention to your request.
For more information about your options, see WP:BFAQ. Although written about businesses and other organizations, it broadly applies to products as well. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:47, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:14:03, 29 June 2018 review of submission by Kyle Ellis SF


After initial decline, I have included further third-party references and citations to increase credibility of the article. Please let me know if there are any other improvements I can make to the article to ensure it is published! Kyle Ellis SF (talk) 22:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Kyle Ellis SF#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 30

10:28:58, 30 June 2018 review of submission by Like street


Like street (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


the term `Trimetry ~ presumably - the science of searching for the possible existing structure of the digital matrix. one example:

as is known that if the complete solved equation has its integrity of the answer then the solved answer has a unity to unity and if to add, then let it be zero and for example 2 + 4 = 6, and 6 = 0, << - like something like this .. and that's my topic about just about. we take for a basis, and more correctly not for a basis as I think and it is better so to accept, that the certain basis in etem paragraph as current does not exist and more to install the science of studying mm, So we take two oppositions from a certain free number of its equality, and toest by the method of addition and subtraction:

Example: 2 + 4 = 6 - and continue the task in this way ..                                                    8-2 = 6 = 2 + 4 - we get our short form of a one-number ..... what's next.. and if we continue in the same direction, then approximately the derivation is formed and presumably such that the number and each number of the known and which only 10 has a negative direction and positive solvability of the equation, that is, to the side of the addition of which it is formed from the numbers by the method of elimination. . well, what then is next - we take the number 6 and we set up something like this: -6+, and then so = (-) 6 (+) =  mm .. . that is, two directions - <6> + .. and that it is possible from this to create further - in a positive and negative direction - but it will come as follows: ..          ; (-) .. 6 + = 1 + 5 = 2 + 4 = 3 + 3 | <- and as I understand that from this side - all further away. and this is the so-called `face` or the` solvability point`

further -> in the positive direction the number has an orientation to the point of solvability and creating a preposition to the negation of which, as is known, is infinite, and we create our solvability in a sequential order and equal to the solution of the positive direction, So :

                             `` 9-3 = 8-2 = 7-1 = -6 + = 1 + 5 = 2 + 4 = 3 + 3``  .. // the conclusion from this is that each number has its own digital signature. and this is something about what Gipsyta Hodja used to say - that there is a cycle in the digital sequence, and that's about the same, and gets it, which leads to the Riemann about the digital sequence, and if further then on the basis of this, since this is the system, algorithms can be constructed, though simple so far, but verification is needed and most of all I think it is, and indeed. .. why trimetry - the word came as something affected, and science - perhaps, but more is obtained - an exploratory search for a possible digital structure, say geometric conjunctions and the search for their possible relationships ... oh. .. I made several examples and almost every one had quite interesting and copious results with each other .. - that is already close and very probably concerns the first task of the Millennium the equality of the classes p and np .. I mentioned above that for each number there is a digital signature, and later when I decided to call it a sequence and put it not as a multiplier on the right, but on the left. Here's an example:

he received a very interesting one, one such was found and I stopped so remember the number 4, this is 1 + 3 = 2 + 2 = from the starting point, the contact face with the original .. mmm .. 4pe = is aligned with the opposite direction to the exact same ratio from the positive arithmetic summation to the negation side - where we we get this number by the subtraction method - then we have a complete cycle of clearance mm I do not know - the equation - the equality of the boundaries of intersectability, for example .. that is | `1 + 3 = 2 + 2 = 4 = 6-2 = 5-1` | that is, the sequence of the number `4` equals to two (2), equal to arithmetic actions by their ratio, and completely the equation is its digital signature or the algorithm of the number itself - the matrix. / is naturally considered for integers in this case. and all the numbers have their own so-called sequence to the touching face, the large ones have several faces, for example the touch face (7 + 8 = 8 + 7) <this is also very interesting and if you continue then to the existing end point of contact with the original one, there is still one digital face of the tangency is possible in the digital structure in the equation which can be given to us, let the number, for example, the number `15` has two of its digital cycles in to each of the directions and two faces - if one can say concomitant crossed and in this area the entrant and the one and only integer - the point of contact equal to the original - (0) - zero. .what I found:   - here are the numbers- .4, .17, .18, .32, - and their equal sequences-.2, .8, .9, .16, - so - `4 ~ 2`, -` 17 ~ 8`, - `18 ~ 9`, -`32 ~ 16` ~` 4 = 2`, - `17 = 8`, -` 18 = 9`, -`32 = 16`, we get an example of such complexity .. ....... on the picture  p / s; if you add, then the unit is the first number with its constant and unique sequence in the whole numbers decree is equal to one. and this example is equal to mine on all sides I'm sorry. p\s: Valkov Dmitry Vladimirovich, October 4, 1978, was born the Cherepovets

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=848194694"