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 Nithin Rock (talk | contribs) at 16:14, 18 December 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)		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply — By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


December 11

01:21:09, 11 December 2018 review of draft by 68.103.78.155


The Template I Made was the 2019 American Athletic Conference football standings template was not responding. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

68.103.78.155 (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:11:12, 11 December 2018 review of draft by Abskiee

  • [[User:abskiee

Abskiee|abskiee Abskiee]] ([[User talk:abskiee Abskiee|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/abskiee Abskiee|contribs]]) ([{{safesubst:fullurl:User talk:abskiee Abskiee|action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&summary=You+have+a+new+reply+on+the+%5B%5BWikipedia%3AWikiProject+Articles+for+creation%2FHelp+desk%7Chelp+desk%5D%5D%21&preload=Template:AFCHD/u/preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=&preloadparams%5B%5D=05%3A11%3A12%2C+11+December+2018+review+of+submission+by+abskiee%0AAbskiee}} TB])


When i saw the other articles like about indie films they are the simplest article that i saw but when i created an article like them they always request to delete it i know im not a good writer,blogger or something but i like when i do article's because i feel like i have a contribution in the Wikipedia and in the world Please save my article :(

Abskiee (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:14:43, 11 December 2018 review of submission by Shivkarandholiya12


Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 06:14, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


06:55:41, 11 December 2018 review of draft by Marcelju


The "further notes" has all the announcements of the awards to rely on (rather than ref's to the content). This is enough evidence. I have direct connection to the committee that have worked on this award for years.

Marcelju (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:23:53, 11 December 2018 review of submission by TIEMSOMAN


Tiemsoman1 (talk) 07:23, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


08:01:03, 11 December 2018 review of submission by Technical .k


Technical .k (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


08:01:19, 11 December 2018 review of submission by Technical .k


Technical .k (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

09:43:58, 11 December 2018 review of submission by MrMohammedJanjua


MrMohammedJanjua (talk) 09:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


10:49:04, 11 December 2018 review of draft by Acolombohm


Hi there, I have just published an article from Sandbox instead of Drafts, I wanted to ask if that will create problems with approval? Also, how will the title of the article be decided as it has my user name from Sandbox? Thank you Acolombohm (talk) 10:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Acolombohm (talk) 10:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Acolombohm The draft was moved to Draft:Home Made. When the only references available are about a young company raising funding, you can be sure that it's a non-notable topic that shouldn't have an article in Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:31:20, 11 December 2018 review of draft by User:Robert_McClenon

Hi Team I have created an article for review but has been declined and a bit scare to resubmit it as I am new to the wikipedia can some give some hint as what I need to do

Warsamedhuje (talk) 12:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be scared to resubmit. What do you specifically want help on? Legacypac (talk) 00:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:28, 11 December 2018 review of submission by PRCaseStudies


Thank you for reviewing the draft article "CVS_Quits_Tobacco." The draft got rejected for "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Appears to be a simple advert for a Pharmacy range in the US. Might merit a single sentence inclusion in CVS Pharmacy but not an article. Pure promotion". I would like to introduce myself, I am a student at CSULB and my team and I are working on a this Wikipedia article to educated students on this Public Relations Case Study. I would like to make it clear that our intention is to not to pose "Pure Promotion". We believe from a neutral standpoint and we are determined to work with the Wikipedia team in establishing a professional and acceptable article. Can you please help us in achieving this goal. If there are any areas that need to be to changes, please let us know. We will be more than willing to edit the article for it to be approved. Thank you and just want to remind you that this article is for educational purpose only.

-Joe Velasquez PRCaseStudies (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User blocked as a shared account and promotional edits. Legacypac (talk) 00:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

02:43:58, 12 December 2018 review of submission by Warsamedhuje


Hi team I have created the above article with that i beleived has a suficent soucre with variety of source the media in question has been on top of google news for over 17 years and thought it worth noting. What AM I making wrong here .can any one advice


December 12

02:43:58, 12 December 2018 review of submission by Warsamedhuje

Hi team I have created the above article with that i beleived has a suficent soucre with variety of source the media in question has been on top of google news for over 17 years and thought it worth noting. What AM I making wrong here .can any one advice


02:43:58, 12 December 2018 review of submission by Warsamedhuje


Warsamedhuje (talk) 02:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


11:44:05, 12 December 2018 review of submission by Dragon Genoa


Content added. Dragon Genoa (talk) 11:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


13:09:03, 12 December 2018 review of submission by XzavierRamphal


What needs to be changed to make this article acceptable. The article is about a public well publicized annual event for Canadians who are being honoured for their work and service. Please help advise.

XzavierRamphal (talk) 13:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


14:55:00, 12 December 2018 review of draft by Mrshood13


I'm new here and this is my first article. It was declined and I wasn't given any advice or direction on what to do to correct the issue. It was declined because some of it reads like the bio of the person on another site, which of whom sent me the information to submit to Wikipedia. If the bio here reads like the persons' bio on another site, should the bio be deleted from said site in order to be posted on Wikipedia? Will it be best if the person submits their bio on their own? Do the bio have to be different from site to site if it's that persons' bio?

Thanks in advance for giving this newbie clarity and any further assistance.

Mrshood13 (talk) 14:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mrshood13 (talk) 14:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:57:14, 12 December 2018 review of draft by Ian.Kirkland76


I am struggling to understand why the reviewer thinks that this draft page on Arturo Bignoli is not adequately referenced. I have quoted extensive sources on his life and work. It is true that I contacted his eldest son to check some details but all facts included in the article are referenced and available on line as shown.

Please help me understand what more is needed. This man is clearly worthy of a wiki page as a very senior Argentinian engineer and academic.

Ian.Kirkland76 (talk) 17:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:12:58, 12 December 2018 review of draft by Axnikomou


What exactly do I have to add to have the article accepted? Like exactly, not just references or sources. I have added the official website of the festival. Doesn't it count as source? Axnikomou (talk) 18:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:28:33, 12 December 2018 review of submission by Amgray19


I am requesting advice on how to get this article published. I have tirelessly worked to include *every* print and other reference on this topic that I could find, as per the previous advice I requested. Items that read as promotional were removed, and it's frustrating to do everything asked and not get any input other than just rejecting the draft article. Thanks for your time. Amgray19 (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amgray19 (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


23:17:33, 12 December 2018 review of draft by Hetorito3

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

FIRST TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING HELP ON THE LINE BELOW THIS LINE. My article was declined. I just want to add this info to the one is already there. Please just do it, I just want to improve an article. HC (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HC (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hetorito3. So just do it, yourself. Anyone may edit Doctor of Public Health. If you think you can improve it, edit it and make your changes. This help desk (and the entire Articles for Creation process - submitting drafts, reviewing them, accepting them) is about creating new articles. Enhancement, expansion, correction, and updating of existing articles is outside our scope. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:06, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:19:27, 12 December 2018 review of submission by 2605:E000:214B:E700:38EF:5815:145D:F754


Hi, hope you are doing well, I wrote an article about Amin Shahrbanoo, because his known as Young Iranian Director who made a film "The Stranger" in Hollywood, according to IMDB and the way I found about him is on Instagram, , there were few pages on Instagram with over 400k followers who have posted video about him, and the reason they use Instagram for news these days is that due to filters and some restrictions in our country, most websites are not coming up in Iran, and that's the only way to share news, however, I was also wanted to make an article about him that way we can help and support him too, but you have denied the article due to IMDB is not a good reference, is the way you can help us,

please search his name in google and see few websites has wrote about him, 2605:E000:214B:E700:38EF:5815:145D:F754 (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 13

00:26:40, 13 December 2018 review of draft by Rontl


It was earlier decided that this organization does not meet the standards for Notability, and it is true that the Wall Street Journal only has had brief mentions of the organization. However, the WSJ only asks for information from recognized experts in a given field. The fact that the Wall Street Journal and Forbes have turned to the Reverse Logistics Association, multiple times, for information, is what should validate the organization as being thought leaders in the field. The Wall Street Journal didn't just make a passing reference to the organization or something it did, it turned to the organization for its expertise and knowledge of the field.

Quoting from the page on Notability WP:ORGIN, “Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. “

This organization has not only attracted the attention of reliable sources, these reliable sources clearly believe the organization is, in turn, a reliable source, having quoted it so many times. It is true that we do not have a long article about the organization in the WSJ, but no trade organization gets that kind of article written about itself. The fact that the WSJ and Fortune find the organization to be a reliable source of information seems like “verifiable evidence that the organization has attracted the notice of reliable sources.”

Moreover, my claim that Notable trade organizations do not get long articles written about them seems to be supported by other pages, as well. It seems that the standard for professional organizations that is in use is not the one outlined in the Notability page, and I would say that this is a good thing.

I just looked at some of the organizations listed here: List_of_industry_trade_groups_in_the_United_States

I only looked at National organizations, and I only looked at the first column of “Advertising, Business and Marketing” organizations, representing 13 organizations. (There appear to be 14 organizations, but “Ad 2” redirects to American Advertising Federation, so there are only 13 unique organizations there) However, all of the following 10 articles, I would argue, have received less media attention that has the RLA, and have less to point to, in the way of “substantial” coverage.

These 10 organizations don’t provide links to any substantial coverage anywhere outside of their own publications. In this very small sample, the RLA has more media coverage than over two-thirds of the trade association organizations’ pages I looked at. A small number of those organizations are able to point to something outside its own publications:

In short, it would seem that the de facto standard for professional and trade organizations is not as stringent as that which is described on the Notability page.

Either 2/3 of those organizations have to have their pages taken down, or it must be admitted that the standard for trade organizations is not as stringent as the general standard for organizations. Because the RLA has more evidence for significance than these organizations, I would argue that either the RLA page needs to be allowed, or else these other groups need to have their pages taken down. And I believe that these other organizations deserve to have their organizations listed in Wikipedia.

I would argue that a different standard should be applied to not-for-profit trade associations than for other organizations. Every adult in the US is a potential customer of a car company or electronics company, so magazines like to publish articles about them, because people like to read articles about them. For trade associations, however, there is a very small number of people who might be interested in any one organization, so there is no incentive for magazines to publish articles about them. Magazines just don’t write in-depth articles about trade associations the way they do about companies or other groups like the League of Women Voters or AARP, etc.

Notability is an important criteria, because it prevents someone from writing an article about their favorite bowling alley. But I would argue that for professional organizations, notability should be based on what an organization has done, and who else finds it credible and notable, not just where it has been profiled. And if the Wall Street Journal and Fortune think that an organization is notable enough to cite as a source for information, it seems to me like that should be enough.

Thanks.

Rontl (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:26, 13 December 2018 review of submission by Shivkarandholiya12


There is a lot of buzz for the show. It is going on-air in 2 days. There could be many edits to make the page proper if it comes online before the show. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 13:07, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 13:25:36, 13 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Veltriwolf


 Hello, I am hoping you can help me tweak my article so it is no longer delayed in getting published.  The musical album and band that I have written about is clearly an ensemble of notable musicians who are already listed on your Wikipedia site.  Also, I included multiple citations and/or references including Billboard magazines recognition, praise and ranking.  This combined with the ensemble of world famous musicians should be more than sufficient.  It captures an album created by some of the leading artists in the industry.  Artists who were popular in the 50 and 60's and combined together under a hot label in the 70's. Also, observe where it was recorded.  It would be inaccurate not to capture and log this real and unique record that may interest many.  What more do I need to ommit, revise or include?


Veltriwolf (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:26:28, 13 December 2018 review of submission by 41.78.82.102


41.78.82.102 (talk) 13:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


16:50:34, 13 December 2018 review of submission by Warsamedhuje

16:50:34, 13 December 2018 review of submission by Warsamedhuje


Warsamedhuje (talk) 16:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


18:35:19, 13 December 2018 review of submission by MaryGaulke


Hi! This draft was rejected on grounds of insufficient notability. The subject has been the focus of extensive coverage in La Información, CIO Mexico, Forbes Mexico, and La Segunda, and all of these pieces are used as references within the article. Furthermore, he is a corporate vice president of Microsoft, and four other Microsoft CVPs have their own articles—Gabe Aul, Joe Belfiore, Richard Rashid, and S. Somasegar—with, as far as I can tell, comparable or even slightly lower levels of media coverage. In my opinion, Mr. Cernuda clears the bar set by WP:BIO. Could someone please take a look and help clarify where there is room for improvement here?

Please note, I have a conflict of interest: I work for a communications agency for which Microsoft Latin America is a client. However, I never draft and submit an article on behalf of a client if I don't believe that the subject has encyclopedic value. If nothing else, I would really appreciate any feedback that can help me realign my expectations for future endeavors.

Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:11:03, 13 December 2018 review of draft by Junaid428


Junaid428 (talk) 20:11, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested to Learn to use Wikipedia Editor but its very complex. I have a School Project to complete but I don't know how to publish it. I did write some of the information about a Famous Person but I am not sure how to publish it.

Creating new pages - finding a notable topic that does not exist and correctly putting it all together - is one of the hardest things at Wikipedia. Try getting permission to expand an existing page about someone/something already notable. Some inhabited place near you that needs more detail would be a useful project. Good luck. Legacypac (talk) 22:59, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:30:18, 13 December 2018 review of submission by Tealkimball


I have been confused and there is no real help to figure this situation out. this seems to be a pain and waste of 3 hours out of my life i will never get back.

Teal Kimball (talk) 22:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tealkimball Stop spamming your personal info and links all over the place. Your account should be blocked. This is not facebook or linked in Legacypac (talk) 22:56, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


December 14

00:22:29, 14 December 2018 review of submission by 2604:6000:110D:43FB:B052:8556:4787:3480


This person has a long-term standing in the arts community in excess of 20 years and has a more than adequate amount of recent verifiable and independent press coverage, both online and in print and radio, in recent years to justify inclusion in Wikipedia, based on the standards of notability.

2604:6000:110D:43FB:B052:8556:4787:3480 (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It will be re-reviewed by another editor. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:51, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note, this draft is currently going through a deletion process at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Thomas W.P. Slatin Nosebagbear (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04:45:17, 14 December 2018 review of submission by Underlybill


Underlybill (talk) 04:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


So my submission was rejected for not being basically important enough. You though list Indiana defunct department stores. One of them was Brite-Way. Being from the area and era of the store, I wrote about the store. I would assume if you list something in one article, you would like to have a reference for that listingUnderlybill (talk) 04:45, 14 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Underlybill, thanks for getting involved. It's reasonable to think that the red link for Brite-Way on List of defunct department stores of the United States means that an article is needed on the topic, but it's a little more complicated.
That list needs a source that says Brite-Way is a defunct department store in South Bend, Indiana. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability requires published, reliable sources. Even if you're sure from personal experience that something is true, you may not add it unless you can attribute it to a reliable, published source. (An editor broke that rule by adding it to the list without citing a source, which is why it has a citation needed tag. If a citation isn't provided, Brite-Way is likely to be deleted from the list.) A good source would be a local newspaper article. You might find one by searching on-line, or you might have to visit a local library and search issues from 1989, when Brite-Way closed. If you find a source, Help:Referencing for beginners explains how to add it.
A red link on a Wikipedia page means the topic might merit an article. Before creating an article (or removing the red link), one should research the topic to determine if it is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone topic). It appears, for example, that someone researched Fetla's in Valparaiso and concluded that although it is a defunct department store in Indiana (and thus merits inclusion on the list), it is not "important enough" to warrant an entire article, so they delinked the name. My guess is that, like Fetla's, Brite-Way is not notable, and should be delinked, but the only way to be sure would be to try to find sources that would demonstrate notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:08:24, 14 December 2018 review of submission by LaerkeM1


I do not understand why this site has not been published yet - why is it repeatedly declined? It does not differ from other alike and many links and references have been added. Please help me on this!

LaerkeM1 (talk) 10:08, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LaerkeM1: - it is frequently declined as the sourcing quality is insufficient. There are lots of sources but they are either a) Not independent (the company itself, or from one of the clients etc) or b) Not actually covering HOR - the company can't inherit the films' notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:52:48, 14 December 2018 review of submission by Revparker


"This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." That is the reason why my article was denied. However, multiple other similar articles have been approved for years. (My article is about an Continuing Anglican church.) The thing is, the nature of what I am writing about doesn't get much third-party citation: who writes about independent churches??

Here's my link as proof: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Episcopal_Catholic_Church

Now look at these other churches and see if this feels like discrimination to you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuing_Anglican_movement#Other_Anglican_churches

I am at my wit's end and need help!

Revparker (talk) 12:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your question has already been answered at the Teahouse. For future reference, only ask questions in one place. Thanks, JTP (talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:44, 14 December 2018 review of submission by Revparker


After comparing my article to other similar articles about churches, I have added the "Unreferenced" template. I ask that either my newly created stub for the Episcopal Catholic Church or the "Unreferenced" original article please be accepted in light of many similar articles that have gone uncontested on Wikipedia for years now under the Continuing Anglican Movement.

Revparker (talk) 14:15, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on December 14, 2018 for assistance on Bobby Simpson submission by IrishKopey


Assistance is needed to add a picture to the article on Bobby Simpson. I have not been able to figure out how to do this. How does picture need to be formatted?

IrishKopey (talk) 17:03, 14 December 2018 (UTC)Template:Irishkopey[reply]

Hi IrishKopey Now that Bobby Simpson (golfer) is an article, it is no longer within the scope of this specialized help desk (Articles for creation). But briefly, adding an image is a two step process: first upload it, then use it in on a page. I see that you've successfully uploaded to commons.wikimedia.org File:Robert Simpson, winner of two Western Open Golf Tournaments.pdf. Uploading an image in pdf format is unusual, normally one would upload a jpg. There is a dedicated help desk for image uploading.
After uploading, the picture tutorial can guide you through how to use the uploaded image in an article. Please consider asking any further questions about the process at the Wikipedia:Help desk, where volunteers will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for any help related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps! --Worldbruce (talk) 18:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:20:46, 14 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Gravitoelectrotensor


Greetings, I just had my first article: Draft:AI peer review declined for copyright violation. OK, but now I do not see the Draft article anywhere to edit and rephrase the reference to the Scientific American article content. How can I edit the draft to comply with guidelines?

Gravitoelectrotensor (talk) 17:20, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gravitoelectrotensor The blue-topped "Investigation of potential copyright issue" box on Draft:AI Peer Review is long and complex, but contains all the answers you need. You may temporarily read the original text through the draft's page history. Further down, the third blue-highlighted way to resolve the issue is to write new text that doesn't infringe copyright. Click the [show] link at the end of that line to see the steps to follow. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:38, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:02:35, 14 December 2018 review of submission by Aryanshukla9936

I want to know the meaning of reliable content and why am i not able to publish this page anyone can google that clash night tv is a band spread over saavn itunes ayoutube and everywhere Aryan 18:02, 14 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryanshukla9936 (talk • contribs)

spread over various sites is not a WP:NMUSIC criteria. Legacypac (talk) 09:34, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:01:18, 14 December 2018 review of draft by Ryozzo


Is there a place to get co-authors. I have updated the Draft article and would like to discuss the updates or collaborate with someone to refine the article.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:S.7000-A_Real_Property_Tax_Law_in_New_York_State Thanks Ryozzo (talk) 21:01, 14 December 2018 (UTC) Ryozzo (talk) 21:01, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:05:02, 14 December 2018 review of draft by Danceawe


I am new to wikipedia. I have submitted my draft for review but if its not accepted can a professional take the information from my page and make a professional proper actual published page on Briar Nolet?

Danceawe (talk) 22:05, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too problems - it was a copyright infringment and written like an Advertisement. Legacypac (talk) 09:33, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

03:44:10, 15 December 2018 review of draft by Farooqahmadbhat


Farooqahmadbhat (talk) 03:44, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Farooqahmadbhat: - this draft hasn't yet had a review: it will be reviewed in the next few weeks. Nosebagbear (talk) 11:18, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:31:16, 15 December 2018 review of submission by Gladderstock


Dear Colleagues,

I work next to G.P. Gladyshev in the same organization for more than 20 years. I am interesting the work in the field of hierarchical thermodynamics. I follow the publications in this new field of knowledge. I have no joint works with Professor Gladyshev. I would like to draw your attention to the works of G.P. Gladyshev, which concern hierarchical thermodynamics. There are many references (independent sources) in well-known journals and books. The authors of the submitted works do not have joint publications with Professor Gladyshev. The greatest number of references concerns the monograph: Gladyshev, G.P. 1988. Thermodynamics and Macrokinetics of Natural Hierarchical Processes, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1988, 288 p. ISBN 5-02-001424-9, Institute of Chemical Physics, USSR Academy of Sciences. (in Russian) https://www.twirpx.com/file/2329675/ https://www.ozon.ru/context/detail/id/135917727/ , As well as the underlying article: Gladyshev Georgi P. (1978). On the thermodynamics of biological evolution, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 75, Issue 4, Dec 21, pp. 425—441 (Preprint, Chernogolovka, Institute of Chem. Phys. Academy of Science of USSR, May, 1977, p. 46). Some examples of citation of Georgi Gladyshev's works In the textbook Physical chemistry of Kharitonov Yu Ya there is a section "The Law of the temporal hierarchies of Gladyshev". This law is the rationale for hierarchical thermodynamics. http://artlib.osu.ru/web/books/content_all/3042.pdf Yu. Ya. Kharitonov. - Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2013. - 608 p. : or; 21 cm; ISBN 978-5-9704-2390-5. https://search.rsl.ru/ru/record/01005501776

Professor V. A. Etkin repeatedly referred to the works of G. P. Gladyshev in the field of hierarchical thermodynamics in journals of the Russian Academy of Sciences. See: Etkin V. А. Energodynamika, “Nauka”, 2008 https://www.amazon.com/Energodynamics-Valery-Etkin/dp/0557955653 , Etkin V. A. Actual problems of thermodynamics (Actual problems of thermodynamics) http://samlib.ru/e/etkin_w_a/aktualnyezadachitermodinamiki.shtml


Professor V. S. Ivanova and her colleagues repeatedly referred to monographs and articles of G.P. Gladyshev in the field of hierarchical thermodynamics. For example: Metal Science and Heat Treatment September 2006, Volume 48, Issue 9–10, pp 390–396| Cite as V. S. Ivanova. An interdisciplinary analysis of dissipative state of physicochemical systems in the course https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11041-006-0105-z V. S. Ivanova, V. U. Novikov, A. A. Oksogoev. Fractals, Applied Synergetics and Structure Design.


V. S. Ivanova, V. U. Novikov, A. A. Oksogoev. Fractals, Applied Synergetics and Structure Design https://books.google.ru/books?isbn=1590339649 https://www.amazon.com/Fractals-Applied-Synergetics-Structure-Design/dp/1590339649 Ivanova V.S. et al. Synergetics and fractals in material science 1 V.S. Ivanova, A.S. BaIankin, I.J. Bunin, A.A. Oksogoev.- Moscow: Nauka, 1994. - 383 p. ISBN 5-02-001818-X In the part 1.3, p. 14 there is the citation 3 times.

In the leading physical journal of Russia there are links related to macrothermodynamics (hierarchical thermodynamics). There are the quantitative calculations. - Козлов Г. В., Новиков В. У. Кластерная модель аморфного состояния полимеров (рус.) // Успехи физических наук — Т. 171, № 7. — С. 717—764. G.V. Kozlov a, V.U. Novikov b A cluster model for the polymer amorphous state https://www.ufn.ru/en/articles/2001/7/b/references.html http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1070/PU2001v044n07ABEH000832/meta

Dr. El-Diasty. F. discussed in detail the main provisions of hierarchical thermodynamics in the article: El-Diasty. F. , 2011,  Origin of Order: Emergence and Evolution of Biological Organization as a Problem in Thermal Physics. Advances in Life Sciences, 1, 30-39 http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.als.20110101.06.html

Mathematician Eloshvili S. A. presented the mathematical substantiation of the hierarchical theory: Eloshvili S.A. (Tbilisi, Georgia). On the mathematical foundations of hierarchical thermodynamics http://ispcjournal.org/journals/2008/2008-1-9.pdf http://www.bazaluk.com/conference/o-matematiceskih-osnobah-ierarhiceskoy-termodinamiki.html

Professor Stanley N. Salthe repeatedly referred to the works of G. P. Gladyshev. He considered the principle of substance stability, which is an integral part of hierarchical thermodynamics. For example: Stanley Salthe, Toward a Natural Philosophy of Macroevolution, In book: Macroevolution, February 2015, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-15045-1_5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302498445_Toward_a_Natural_Philosophy_of_Macroevolution ; Stanley Salthe, Hierarchical Structures, September 2012, Axiomathes 22(3), DOI: 10.1007/s10516-012-9185-0 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257522907_Hierarchical_Structures

Professor Yuri Lipatov outlined the brief foundations of G.P. Gladyshev and gave them an estimate: Yuri S. Lipatov, Book Review «G.P. Gladyshev, Thermodynamic Theory of the Evolution of Life Forms»,   J Biol Phys . 1997 г .; 23 (2): 129—131

Professor V.N. Anisimov, President of the Gerontological Society of the Russian Academy of Sciences, points out several main theories of aging. The "Science" site of all the theories of aging highlights the thermodynamic theory of aging G. P. Gladyshev, which is based on hierarchical thermodynamics. Professor V. N. Anisimov repeatedly refers to the work of G. P. Gladyshev. See pleas in English: Theory of Aging Biological Organisms | Science | FANDOM ... Translate this page

The book by Yuri Zuev is devoted to the principle of relativity, which is discussed from the standpoint of hierarchical thermodynamics. Book published: LAMBERT Academic Publishing Omni Scriptum GmbH & Co. KG. ISBN 978-3-659-47125-4 Findbook.ru

There are many sites on the Internet in Russian, where links to hierarchical thermodynamics are given (for example, http://mash-xxl.info/info/738014/ ) However, in many works (Western and Russian researchers) the basics of hierarchical thermodynamics (as well as classical thermodynamics) are distorted. This is the result of numerous errors in thermodynamics and unprofessional authors. In this regard, in my opinion, the article "Hierarchical Thermodynamics" should be published in Wikipedia.

Gladderstock (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


08:28:48, 15 December 2018 review of submission by ImprovedWikiImprovment


It is only salted because kids were making terrible articles, and it was rejected purely on the basis that it was salted so I request a re-review. This series has over 1 billion views, inspired an award winning documentary, and was nominated for an award itself so I can’t reasonably see that A7 still applies here. IWI (chat) 08:28, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted this page needs a review by an Admin. I suggest finding an Admin and posting you case on the Draft talkpage. Legacypac (talk) 09:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:21:00, 15 December 2018 review of draft by Caw35slr


My initial submission was rejected:

"A substantial amount of this is a copyvio from https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/17295328.obituary-c-r-whitfield-professor-of-midwifery-known-for-his-pioneering-work-in-fetal-medicine/ You must rewrite that section, and ensure that nothing is copied or closely paraphrased from any other source"

Some background:

- The subject of the Wikipedia article in question is my father. - The obituary cited in the submission rejection was written by one of his colleagues.

So, my father worked mainly in Belfast then in Glasgow. I had gone some way into the draft of my wikipedia article (I had all but completed the Belfast section, had gaps in the Glasgow section, and had all but completed the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists section.

We were then told that a chap called Alistair Miller, who worked with the subject in Glasgow, had been asked to write an obituary. I sent him the link to my draft Wikipedia article so that he could fill in his early life and the Belfast part of his career.

When the obituary was published on 13 December it was clear that Alistair had copied some of my text (which I was not unhappy about).

Question: does this remain a barrier to getting my article published?

Second, I then copied some of Alistair's text to flesh out the Glasgow section of the Wikipedia article. I have since revised or deleted those sections.

Question: is this section satisfactory now?

Finally, I have included two quotes made by my father, in both cases I have referenced the article/journal containing the quote.

Question: is this permissable?

Your assistance appreciated. Thank you very much!



caw35slr (talk) 11:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:26:37, 15 December 2018 review of submission by IlkinShukurov

IlkinShukurov (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So far the only submission was a blank page. Legacypac (talk) 21:20, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:58:18, 15 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Danceawe


I am making a Briar Nolet page and I don't think I can make it publish worthy unless someone helps tell me the exact parts that need to be removed or re worded for it to be published. please help. Also, how do you request an article. One of my friends created an Alec Gray wikipedia page that has been removed and she told me to ask why. Please help with my 3 queries. Danceawe (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:49:51, 15 December 2018 review of submission by Piercav


Piercav (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:53:27, 15 December 2018 review of submission by Piercav

I am not a young man, and find the coding system a bit difficult. i am not certain why this page on Artist Phillip Martin has been rejected. Also, i find it difficult to insert photographs.

thank you Piercav (talk) 22:53, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


As it says at the top of your draft, it is not 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. Theroadislong (talk) 17:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


December 16

00:07:04, 16 December 2018 review of submission by MartinaConley


MartinaConley (talk) 00:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I am confused as to why my article was declined. I am not posting to being an author o Wikipedia this is an assignment for my grad class and my professor needs to be able to read my information on my link in order for mw to receive credit and a grade.I have a a few more parts to add to my post. My class ends on Tuesday December 18, 2018. This is my final if I could just post the rest of my information so I can receive credit I would really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinaConley (talk • contribs)

Your draft has been tagged for speedy deletion, because it is a copyright violation of [1]] You need to write in your own words not copy and paste. Theroadislong (talk) 17:22, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04:34:34, 16 December 2018 review of submission by Gins98n1


I don't understand how this list is fundamentally different than many of the other lists on Wikipedia that use copyrighted sources. There are already many lists on Wikipedia that detail the largest law firms by lawyers in a certain geography (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_United_States-based_law_firms) Gins98n1 (talk) 04:34, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:20:31, 16 December 2018 review of draft by Webmasto


Hello, I created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Symbolic_Rite a month ago, following the content of italian version https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rito_simbolico_italiano that has been created more than 10 years ago. The page has been converted to draft for a lack of sources (my fault), but after that I added a reference to an article of Treccani Encyclopedia, the most prominent and institutional italian encyclopedia, and an article on the website of one of the most relevant Lodges in Italy. I know that this masonic appendant body is not well known out of Italy, but it has been a fundamental part in birth, constitution and unification of official italian freemasonry Grand Orient of Italy after the turmoil of Risorgimento, as you can read on the external links. The original admin that drafted the page said that now he's satisfied with improvement, but don't feel confident in the topic. I'm afraid that the page would stay in draft for good, what can I do? Webmasto (talk) 16:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Webmasto, there are several things you can do: you could find and add enough independent reliable sources to your draft to convince reviewers that it is notable. A couple of sentences in L'Unificazione are not enough; please note that the Massoneria page in the Enciclopedie on line ("the most prominent and institutional italian encyclopedia") has no mention of this topic. Or you could try adding a sentence or so about it to our page on Freemasonry in Italy; or otherwise choose a topic for which sources are easier to find and write about that instead. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer Justlettersandnumbers, but I'm sorry I must disagree: there is a reference to the same encyclopedia you cite, a quote to a book of Albert Mackey (with link to the page on Google Books), that is one of the most notable authors on the topic of last century, and a link that list references to Italian Symbolic Rite on grandeoriente.it (official website of italian larger masonic body). Sincerely I don't know what else I can do. Webmasto (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Webmasto. The draft references three sources, clustered together at the end of the first sentence of the body, leaving 90% of the draft unreferenced. For all the reader knows, that 90% could be made up.
The only obvious statement the first source makes about the Italian Symbolic Rite is, "I massoni torinesi decidono di adottare quello che poi diventa il Rito simbolico italiano, formato dai soli tre gradi di apprendista, compagno e maestro, per ribadire la loro lealtà alla corona e alla linea governativa, e dichiarano di volersi uniformare al Rito francese, per sottolineare i loro legami con Parigi". This is a passing mention that does not demonstrate notability (and doesn't support any of the content where cited).
The second source is not arms-length from the topic, so it doesn't help establish notability.
The only obvious statement the third source makes on the topic is "A Grand Lodge of the Italian Symbolic Rite and a Grand Orient of Italy have been organized separately distinct from each other and there is also independently at work a Supreme Council of Italy, Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, founded in 1908". Again, this is a passing mention that does not demonstrate notability (and doesn't support any of the content where cited).
Some of these problems may be misunderstandings that can be cleared up. Wikipedia:Citing sources explains when and why to cite sources. Possibly you can move the references to statements they support, reuse them to support more of the draft's content, or rewrite content so that it is supported by the sources. It's also possible that I'm misunderstanding the depth of the first and third sources as a result of my weak Italian and unfamiliarity with the context. To aid readers, especially when you cite non-English or offline sources, use the quote parameter of the cite templates as described in the additional annotation section of the aforementioned Citing sources guideline.
However, unless you can show that there is a great deal more coverage of Italian Symbolic Rite than there appears from the above, the topic is a non-starter for a Wikipedia article. As Justlettersandnumbers suggests, you could add a sentence or two to an existing article on a broader topic, or write about a different topic (we have 5.7 million to choose from, most of which need improvement). Another option would be to submit the content to an alternative outlet with different inclusion criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:15, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:00:01, 16 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Hettie.epstein


The editor SITH kindly reviewed my submission and wrote that I had established notability but not met the criteria for verifiability and suggested I add inline citations to the draft article Joshua Epstein, violinist. I added about 30 inline citations to the draft article and would now like to know what I can do next to have the article published. Heather EpsteinHettie.epstein (talk) 19:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hettie.epstein (talk) 19:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hettie.epstein. I have submitted Draft:Joshua Epstein (violinist) on your behalf, so it is in the pool of drafts to be reviewed. The current backlog is about 4 weeks. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:18:47, 16 December 2018 review of submission by MiketheJackal


The sources and references for this submission seem no less credible than similar companies in this industry. Compared against https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeley_Electronics, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TC_Electronic and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JHS_Pedals it would appear that this submission is perfectly valid. Please be more specific with examples why this submission is not valid for inclusion. Thank you. MiketheJackal (talk)

I'd agree with the Decline. The problem is that the references don't all work and some are of dubious value. I know it's frustrating to see the decline but had I reviewed it I would have came to the same conclusion. It might need some work. I am going to source search and see if I see anything that could save it. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:12:56, 16 December 2018 review of draft by EmpereorPaul


I would like to know why my page is not going through unlike other micro-nation ones. EmpereorPaul (talk) 23:12, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EmpereorPaul. The reasons the first version was declined and deletied are stated on your talk page. Because it has been deleted, I can't see it and therefore can't comment further on it. The current version, if it were submitted for review, would not be accepted because it cites no sources and thus does not demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 16:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 17

03:22:43, 17 December 2018 review of draft by Luther Aragones


Luther Aragones (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am writing to talk about this article that I have been creating for several months ... Mundo De Cristo. I understand that at the beginning I did not have all the references I needed, but over time, I added more, in total we have 16 references placed and I still can not understand why it does not meet the necessary references to be in Wikipedia.

On the other hand, I am the creator and director of this medium, all the information I have used in it, are totally real. Another point is that the last time we sent the application, several days later they put in a token, which is still ... saying the following: "An important contributor to this article seems to have a close connection with his subject." to this file, I was answering in the discussion section, requesting help and at the same time information to get to put our article on the platform. In addition to this we could see that the article, that person who is said to be an important contributor, improved certain information, and therefore I came to think that it would be available.

Concluding I just need to know what other information is missing from my article to be available and if I can have help from you to put it. I would appreciate it enough, I have tried it in different ways.

Thank you very much and I hope for your help. Luther Aragones (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:14, 17 December 2018 review of submission by NELSON VIJAY05


NELSON VIJAY05 (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


07:12:21, 17 December 2018 review of submission by Amekh


Hello, I built upon the list I submitted initially with 6 additional websites and 3 additional descriptors. Please provide advice on how I can improve the content further to get approval on wikipedia. The goal is to provide a list of data analysis tools for League of Legends players. Thank you. Amekh (talk) 07:12, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


09:58:45, 17 December 2018 review of draft by Kisscsi

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Could you please specify what's wrong with this article? It was written neutral pont of view, contains facts and lot's of sources. Hungarian version is already submitted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:MET_Group

Kisscsi (talk) 09:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:53:58, 17 December 2018 review of submission by MaciekKubiak


MaciekKubiak (talk) 10:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:20:02, 17 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by 69.157.202.50


Hi,

My draft was rejected due to: "Draft lacks independent reliable source references." I have sited a Canadian government website as a reference which includes a description of the organisation and a link to the organisations website. I am confused as to how much more reliable a reference you are wanting. why is this not enough? Thanks,

69.157.202.50 (talk) 13:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One of the standards used to demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia) of charitable organizations is, "The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization." Citing one government webpage, which appears to contain information supplied by the organization, proves the organization exists. It comes nowhere near demonstrating significant coverage from a variety of independent reliable sources over a period of time. See Seacology as an example of the breadth of information and sources Wikipedia is seeking for a charity. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:18:35, 17 December 2018 review of draft by IAmTheNeil


Hi team,

I would greatly appreciate some additional advice on the creation of the DaVinci Resolve article, and ensuring it meets Wikipedia's quality standards.

I strongly feel that this software deserves its own article, given that:

  • It often used in conjunction with various applications which have their own articles (e.g. Media Composer, Adobe Premiere Pro) in the workflows of professional filmmakers.
  • Similar applications have their own articles (e.g. Nuke (software)).
  • Its current primary entry redirects to a company that hasn't owned the software since 2009.
  • Applications that are integrated directly into it as modules (e.g. Blackmagic_Fusion) have dedicated articles for their standalone versions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAmTheNeil (talk • contribs) 16:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is one of the industry-leading products for its field.

I have included multiple articles from established third-party publications to establish notability (a valid concern raised during the first submission); however, despite attempts to maintain a neutral tone, the remaining concerns are that it's too promotional.

Please advise what steps can be taken to increase the level of neutrality of the article to an acceptable level, without removing the articles which demonstrate its notability. I have already made the list of films & TV more concise, in response to concerns over coatrack creation.

Thank you.

IAmTheNeil (talk) 15:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:56:59, 17 December 2018 review of draft by Tyler Durd


I need help for creating new sections for the filmography of the company REAL by FAKE which the company wiki page draft is pending review. I want to create something similar to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNEG

Tyler Durd (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tyler Durd Welcome to Article for Creation help desk. Please read Wikipedia:Your first article to familiar yourself what is needed to create an article. Once you have done that then go to Article_wizard - Here] and start drafting. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:09, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 18

04:46:42, 18 December 2018 review of draft by Deerlaos


Deerlaos (talk) 04:46, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:20, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Doman tudu


Doman tudu (talk) 06:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


10:26:27, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Malek404


Malek404 (talk) 10:26, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


11:55:58, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Clive sweeting


Importance of the subject undeniable. Check with Greek Wikipedia. Bishops are deemed notable and Meliton certainly was. Subject needs a more open discussion open to all who wish to judge it.

Clive sweeting (talk) 11:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:15:36, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Vrgamer


Hi sufficient coverage and proof of exposure and notability internationally has been presented. Notability being very subjective it would be best to provide specific reason or improvements needed to accomplish the minimum required. Vrgamer (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


14:29:31, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Translationservicessingapore


I'm new to wikipedia. I would like to give some details of translation services in Singapore in wikipedia. There are lots of users enquire about translation services and guidance on the process of getting their documents translated. I would appreciate if you could give me some advice on how to publish on wikipedia. thank you. Translationservicessingapore (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


16:14:53, 18 December 2018 review of submission by Nithin Rock


Nithin Rock (talk) 16:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=874332995"