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 Arno. (talk | contribs) at 07:04, 28 May 2019. 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

13:54:49, 8 May 2019 review of submission by Musa lawi mafolo


May 22

00:27:45, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Basem3.Azez1990


Basem3.Azez1990 (talk) 00:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


01:57:59, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Stanfordai


Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I hope this message finds you well. I am new to Wikipedia, is there someone that could possibly help me as to create the article in question?

Thank you kindly in advance!

Stanfordai (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Standordai: Hey Standorfai, just so you know I denied the draft creation because of insufficient sourcing for a biography of a living person. Of the sources provided, 2 of them are simply directory listings that do not help to establish notability (crunchbase and the CM listing), one is a primary source written by the subject himself which doesn't help establish notability (it's like saying "I'm notable because I say I'm notable"), one is to a local resource (globalpittsburg) which is really just a profile posting, and the last, the link to economictimes.indiatimes.com, just mentions him in passing, quoting him in reference to another subject, rather than discussing him in particular. You need to find reliable, secondary sources that discuss the subject. You should also review WP:NPERSON. If you have questions, let us know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:37:22, 22 May 2019 review of draft by Bagotroad


Bagotroad (talk) 02:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm following up on the response from editors re significant coverage in reliable and independent sources.

The references include an independent article by Julie Hosking (6). I note that I have used this article as a reference only once. This article could also be used as a reference in relation to a number of other sections including:

(a) the opening sentence: "Sharon Faye is a practicing organizational psychologist (* Hosking), who developed the theory of emotional strength (Faye and Hooper)." (b) opening paragraph: "She is managing director of corporate psychology firm Clear Perceptions (Clear Perceptions website) and founding director of the Sharon Faye Foundation (SFF website; *Hosking)" (c) Professional history; third sentence. "In addition to her academic work, Faye is a successful practicing organizational and clinically trained psychologist with twenty years experience, currently working in private practice in Subiaco, Western Australia (CP website; Hosking)" (d) professional history; sixth sentences: "Faye is the founding chair of the Sharon Faye Foundation (SFF website; Hosking) (e) Theory of emotional strength par: "With ES, Faye proposed to change the way emotion is understood and experienced in everyday life" (Faye & Hooper; Hosking).

I'm wondering if including the additional Hosking references would go some way to addressing the concerns re referencing?

Secondly, are there any sections in particular that require referencing (for example, "Clinical Use" ) which if removed would address concerns.

Thank you and regards

Hi Bagotroad. Citing Hosking more often would be a good idea. I think what the reviewer was asking for, however, was two more sources like Hosking - independent and reliable, so that the article is not just what Hosking thinks is important about Faye (and what Faye and entities close to Faye think is important). For a living person, reviewers expect an inline citation for almost everything. So removing the clinical use section would be a plus if you can't find any reliable sources to support it. The fact that you know her date of birth and educational details, but cite no source for them suggests that you have a close connection to the subject. That presents a conflict of interest, and you should disclose it. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:34:54, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Immuthuppandi


Immuthuppandi (talk) 03:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Immuthuppandi: - hi there. Unfortunately, there isn't anything that indicates the subject is notable in the way that wikipedia defines it. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:22:37, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Lesenwriter


May i kindly request you to review , i have made necessary changes but i haven't heard for sometime now. Could someone please help me with this article. I hope i can do better in Wikipedia,but all i need some guidance . Many Thanks !!... Lesenwriter (talk) 04:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lesenwriter. The draft is in the pool to be reviewed. With the current backlog, reviewers are likely to reach it within the next three months. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:27:52, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Kirsty Liu

I am trying to set up a Gourmet Escape page for the company I work for IMG (International Management Group) that owns the rights to it (they are the owner and organizers) so the article i created is content we have the right to use. How can i indicate that I have the right to use their content on the page? as well as all the images? Kirsty Liu (talk) 06:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:02:44, 22 May 2019 review of submission by SYED JAVED HAIDER


Sir, I would like to kindly request for a review (for Wikipedia) with consideration on following points: (1) I feel that my achievements are sufficient enough in my field for your approval. (2) It will be a source of inspiration for the individuals working in my profession and the society. (3) My position has been referred in the website of King George Medical University, Chowk, Lucknow (Home page  Faculty of Medicine  Anatomy Department – Introduction page) Thanking you very much in anticipation for the kind review.

SYED JAVED HAIDER (talk) 08:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


08:02:47, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Samirsangroula


i need wiki page for getting resister in international writer association please review it. Samirsangroula (talk) 08:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Samirsangroula: Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:03:13, 22 May 2019 review of submission by SYED JAVED HAIDER


Sir, I would like to kindly request for a review (for Wikipedia) with consideration on following points: (1) I feel that my achievements are sufficient enough in my field for your approval. (2) It will be a source of inspiration for the individuals working in my profession and the society. (3) My position has been referred in the website of King George Medical University, Chowk, Lucknow (Home page  Faculty of Medicine  Anatomy Department – Introduction page) Thanking you very much in anticipation for the kind review.

SYED JAVED HAIDER (talk) 08:03, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:34:09, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Dolphin Scholar


Dear Supreme Arbiters of Human Knowledge,

Can I please have some more detailed feedback about why Awards International is not sufficiently noteworthy for inclusion on Wikipedia?

They are a multinational company that runs the biggest customer experience awards in the world. That seems noteworthy to me.

If this article is not permitted, I respect that. Perhaps I'll apply the same logic, however, and suggest a list of articles that should also not be on Wikipedia if 'noteworthiness' is a concern for you.

Kind regards,

Dolphin Scholar

Dolphin Scholar (talk) 09:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on Wikipedia must be adequately supported by reliable sources so that information can be verified.

We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. Your draft has no reliable sources at all, so notability cannot be established. You are free to suggest other articles which don't meet the criteria, and we can delete them if needed, thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 09:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:28, 22 May 2019 review of draft by Dgold11


I am a newbie and need help figuring out how to improve my sources to a place where my draft can be approved. That said, there is not a ton of published info about my topic. Most of what I've acquired I've requested from the institution itself and it's not published in places that would make for a "good source," but the information is true and verifiable as it came directly from the subject. Help!

Dgold11 (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dgold11 Articles on Wikipedia must be adequately supported by independent reliable sources so that information can be verified. Their own website is not a suitable source for establishing notability. We only summarise what reliable, independent published sources have to say about a subject. If there are no such sources, then we cannot have an article. Theroadislong (talk) 15:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:13:14, 22 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Mukkera Kranthi

tell me how to get verified Mukkera Kranthi (talk) 17:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Mukkera Kranthi: Wikipedia does not have a process for verifying editors. Editors are "confirmed" after a certain amount of time and making a certain number of edits.
That said, you appear to have attempted a couple of times to post a biography of yourself and a plea for medical help. Wikipedia is not a social network, and is not the place to post this sort of content -- try Facebook instead. Articles about people are only included here if the person meets the standards laid out in the guideline at Wikipedia:Notability (people). --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:35:51, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Ryan Mindo


Please see if I have added the citations correctly and if this is acceptable. thank you

Ryan Mindo (talk) 19:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ryan Mindo: The citations are formatted correctly, but they are not sufficient to show that this company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Simply participating in a notable event does not make a company notable. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:52:08, 22 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Nikko Curtis


I've made so many edits to this article in hopes that I could do some good and educate people about a cleaner energy company I stumbled on. I write articles regularly and am still a bit confused to why this article keeps getting denied. Not sure how this is sounding like an advertisement. I have only said facts and quoted many external sources that aren't associated with Petroteq Energy Inc. I would really appreciate your help getting this article published. Thank you, Nikko

Nikko Curtis (talk) 19:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:40:26, 22 May 2019 review of submission by Swordswfriends


User DGG rejected this proposed entry with the claim "Advertisement for non-notable product line." However, the entry is in line with other entries on distillers and liquor companies, and I have no relationship with the company. My intention is to flesh out this category of spirits, and I chose this small company to start with.

The rejection does not provide any constructive feedback, and seems rather flippant. Perhaps someone with a focus on alcohol-related topics could take a look and either approve or provide instruction on how to improve the entry.


Swordswfriends (talk) 21:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Swordswfriends: - as an initial note, if you'd like additional feedback I suggest going to DGG's talk page and asking is a good step - he's normally quite happy to answer questions.
As my $0.02, I would say your sources are currently unsuitable. They are all either non-independent (linked to the seller or written in a publication that has a vested interest in the products or companies included in doing well) or don't satisfy significant coverage. For something like a rum (which as a product is relatively rare to meet notability (usually its a company)) more neutral reviews are a better method to find suitable sourcing. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: - Thanks for your reply, I have contacted DGG. Regarding your feedback, I suspect I have misrepresented the article -- it is not just a rum, but rather the company as a whole that I'm writing about. If I just titled it "Distillerie Neisson" rather than "Neisson (rum)", that would probably fix that issue. In regard to sources, while two are indeed links to a seller (the only online source with the cited product details, unfortunately), I disagree that the others are non-independent. An article in Saveur would seem to satisfy significant coverage, and LuxuryExperience.com has been nominated for a Tales of the Cocktail award for its cocktail writing.
Would it be preferable to leave out the Recognition section? I suppose that does seem less neutral as an inclusion.Swordswfriends (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Swordswfriends: - the recognition section is pretty small so I wouldn't say it's too problematic - it can be a major issue for company articles, but if I were reviewing I wouldn't be too concerned by it. I'd missed it were a company - in which case you should read Corporate Notability up to the end of section 3. Companies have a higher requirement for notability - multiple (I'd suggest 3 high quality sources) are needed to demonstrate sufficient notability. There's also a thing called WP:CORPDEPTH that you don't yet seem to fall into, but rules out some of the sources that are common add-ons to company articles. It could be worth dropping your thoughts on the talk page on why Saveur/LuxuryExperience satisfy the independent requirements. Nosebagbear (talk) 07:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: - Thanks again for your advice. I've edited the article to include additional high quality independent sources, and posted a justification for the ones previously included. I've also moved the article to "Distillerie Neisson" so as to make it clear this is a company entry rather than a product. Would it be better to submit the article as a new AfC, or plead again for a re-review? Swordswfriends (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 23

00:45:30, 23 May 2019 review of draft by Jenoa9


I have a draft page in for review by the editors but I want to know how to move the CONTENTS box. It is too high. Thanks for all your help!

Jenoa9 (talk) 00:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:51:05, 23 May 2019 review of submission by Streamingriver

why was this page deleted Streamingriver (talk) 09:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was asked and answered at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Page deletion. --Worldbruce (talk) 11:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:46:32, 23 May 2019 review of draft by Zimou Yuan


Zimou Yuan (talk) 12:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now an accepted draft Nosebagbear (talk)

13:47:06, 23 May 2019 review of draft by Gilcrease1227


Gilcrease1227 (talk) 13:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to why it keeps getting turned down for reading like an advertisement. I've frequented other pages based on other entrepreneurs and there's read the same way. Basically I'm not entirely certain how you can make a page for an entrepreneur without it sounding like an advertisement. Especially when they already have an established wikipedia page for their business. Are there any tips as to how it can be fixed because it seems subjective as to why it keeps getting declined.

Thanks!

16:47:22, 23 May 2019 review of submission by Ryan Mindo


My article was rejected due to lack of cited sources to indicate notability. I'm a little unclear on what this means. I guess I just need a solid definition of what you guys consider "notable" so I can work on getting reviewed, etc, by the right people and organizations.

Ryan Mindo (talk) 16:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ryan Mindo. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) explains the notability guidelines with respect to companies. Most businesses are not notable. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:06:30, 23 May 2019 review of submission by Ericawallace35

Hello, I am trying to assist the creation of the company page for X-Scan Imaging Corporation. My draft got flagged, and I need some advice on how to move forward and prevent deletion again.

Ericawallace35 (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:15:42, 23 May 2019 review of submission by Bigzeus


I dont understand why "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." Have you ever tried to type in Google and/or in Youtube at least once "sonoff firmware", "sonoff installation", "sonoff smart home" ? And the community projects "sonoff tasmota", "sonoff esp easy", "sonoff arduino" ? many people work on those projects.

Could it be that... the problem is only that the manufacturer is Chinese? and is it not a good historical moment?

My 2 cents, from an italian guy

A.

@Bigzeus: - AfC reviewers aren't required to go hunting for sources - the issue is the state of sourcing that it currently has. All the current sourcing is either non-independent (company site, etc) or non-reliable (like Wikipedia, if it's generally editable, it isn't reliable). I actually did some searches of the primary company name and didn't get sufficient to satisfy the "in-depth/reliable/independent/secondary" requirements. Remember that companies have higher notability requirements than most articles.
Please don't start implying that our reviewers are racist until you have cast-iron evidence that is the case. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:54:12, 23 May 2019 review of submission by LOBOSKYJOJO


Thank you. I wish to request for pointers in creating articles if possible. LOBOSKYJOJO (talk) 22:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LOBOSKYJOJO. See Wikipedia:Your first article. Successful article creation generally requires considerable experience making constructive edits to existing articles, and a good grasp of policies and guidelines. Your contribution history suggests that you may not be adequately prepared to create new articles. It might be to your advantage to make more small improvements, see Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. Or if English is not your first language, you may feel more comfortable contributing to a different language version of Wikipedia, there are many others to choose from. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:36, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 24

03:30:28, 24 May 2019 review of draft by IronDerBear414


IronDerBear414 (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I created an article for a successful a cappella group from Ann Arbor, MI, called Skyline Blues. They are very successful and have been the subject of multiple news articles from valid organizations at the district, city, and state levels, as well as national a cappella newsfeeds. They have been featured on regional television and competed at national-level competitions, all of which are cited. I am confused because there are many a cappella and other musical groups whose articles have been accepted which have not achieved similar levels of success or recognition.

Organizations that have published articles, listings, or broadcasts featuring Skyline Blues include: - AAPS District News, the Ann Arbor Public Schools newsfeed - WeLoveAnnArbor, a local news publication from Ann Arbor, Michigan - MLive, a statewide Michigan news organization - WDET Channel 7, regional television programming based in Detroit - FloVoice, a national a cappella news publication affiliated with FloSports, Inc. - Varsity Vocals, the parent organization that oversees the ICHSA, the ICCA, and the Aca-Open - Acaville Radio, an Oregon-based radio station specializing in a cappella music and commentary

I feel like this is a fairly credible group of publications and I would like to know why my submission was declined.

Hi IronDerBear414. The draft has been declined three times in a row because you are not using inline citations. For example, the draft states, "Skyline Blues often establishes a theme that can be seen throughout their ICHSA competition sets." Which of the 54 general references says that? --Worldbruce (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is helpful thank you

08:22:32, 24 May 2019 review of submission by Dolphin Scholar


Dolphin Scholar (talk) 08:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I have made changes based on the feedback. I would appreciate it if you can review this piece and decide if it's worthy of publication.

Many thanks

@Dolphin Scholar: - two notes.
Usually if you've had to improve an article post a decline/rejection then you need to resubmit it (in the case of a rejection we can help with that) - we can't do immediate re-reviews, which are mainly limited to checking a previous reviewer was correct
In your case, your sources still don't actually discuss Awards International itself in enough detail. Being referenced or used as a source about other companies is not enough. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:31:49, 24 May 2019 review of submission by Terrence Dewar


Terrence Dewar (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Terrence Dewar: - as the reviewer said, this reads like an advert, instead of a neutral encyclopedic article. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:23, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:32:00, 24 May 2019 review of submission by Creativefabien


Creativefabien (talk) 11:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I created an info page for the first time - and got rejected It's under the Fabien Lainé name - could you please provide me help or explanation?

@Creativefabien: - the easiest way to get specific feedback on a review is to go to the reviewer's talk page (User talk:Theroadislong). However, I'll have a go in it in anycase,
The draft (which is presumably about you) is very advertorial, reading somewhere between a CV and an advert. Wikipedia requires neutrally written encyclopedic content. If you do have a connection (or are) the individual, please don't write about them - this is a clear demonstration of how a connection makes it hard to write neutrally. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:23:02, 24 May 2019 review of draft by MintentDS


Hello, We have submitted an article on behalf of one of our clients but have noted the conflict of interest. It was still flagged. What more do we need to do to make sure that the conflict of interest is noted.

Thank you!

MintentDS (talk) 16:23, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MintentDS Greetings. You need to disclosure your WP:PAID WP:COI on your user page and the article talk page. Pls follow the instructions as per links provided. Wikipedia is strongly discourage editor with COI to edit/create affected article as editor would find it is hard at times to write the content in neutral point of view without any WP:PROMOTION or WP:PUFF manner. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:43, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:06:26, 24 May 2019 review of draft by SD1014


SD1014 (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to follow up to see if my latest draft (pending review) passes copy based on feedback and revisions made.

May 25

05:54:51, 25 May 2019 review of submission by JoeGhantouss


JoeGhantouss (talk) 05:54, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I want to add a biography about an entrepreneur and digital marketing expert, but i don;t know why it is being declined.

please help me how to make this page accepted

JoeGhantouss The subject of you draft page does not meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia. For a page to be acceptable into mainspace, the subject needs to be notable and the content need to be supported by multiple independent. reliable sources. Pls read WP:Your First Article and WP:GOLDENRULE for more information. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:48, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:35:19, 25 May 2019 review of submission by Naveen93080


Naveen93080 (talk) 06:35, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


07:14:04, 25 May 2019 review of submission by Naveen93080


Naveen93080 (talk) 07:14, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:17:13, 25 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by SvenskDJ


Hi, I don't understand why my article was denied. Everything that is written about the artist Globina is correct. What kind of prove to you need? Also there are many secondary sources for her being a musician, such spotify, beatport, soundcloud, facebook, Instagram and other sources where her single is sold. She has also trademark for her artistname Globina in Sweden. Please assist me and help me in this. Thanks and kind regards

SvenskDJ (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SvenskDJ. It was declined because the cited sources are not independent of her. None of the sources you listed above would be independent, nor would they be secondary sources. An independent source would be something like Svenska Dagbladet or Sydsvenskan. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources lists sources other Wikipedians have found useful in writing about music. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:09, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Worldbruce

Please check this article that I attached "Nöjesprofilen"

15:17:14, 25 May 2019 review of submission by Basem3.Azez1990


Basem3.Azez1990 (talk) 15:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:18:43, 25 May 2019 review of submission by Byadamfitch


Hey! This draft has been rejected a couple of times now and, if possible, I'd just like some feedback as to exactly why. I'm not entirely sure what needs changing to make it eligible to be published - thank you.

Byadamfitch (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:13:26, 25 May 2019 review of submission by SvenskDJ

But Globina has been featured in Nöjesprofilen in a wellknown Swedish news paper and there is article about it that I can attach here. Please check it.
File:Nöjesprofilen.pdf
Nöjesbladet tidning

SvenskDJ (talk) 21:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:18:49, 25 May 2019 review of submission by 103.60.175.112


He is a renowned celebrity in Bangladesh. One of his famous work is Bishaash

103.60.175.112 (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:26:02, 25 May 2019 review of submission by Florafro2


He is a renowned celebrity in Bangladesh. One of his famous work is Bishaash Florafro2 (talk) 21:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


May 26

00:01:26, 26 May 2019 review of draft by Addisonandros


I can't find the code to attempts to submit the page i've been working on Addisonandros (talk) 00:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

00:05:50, 26 May 2019 review of submission by Basaintl


Basaintl (talk) 00:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently my article was declined, but Casseopea didn't say why. Please elaborate.

Basaintl Hi, Good day. Comment could be found on the grey panel on top of the draft page Draft:HEB Tennis Center, and if you click on the blue highlighted texts, it will lead you to another page for more detail information. In brief, an article could make it to Wikipedia main space if the subject is notable and the content needs to be verified by multiple independent, reliable sources which the source talk about the subject in length and in dept and not only passing mentioned. You draft was declined because it did not meet the requirements above. Please read WP:GOLDENRULE for further information. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:17, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:36:12, 26 May 2019 review of submission by LOBOSKYJOJO


I wish to ask how Education Freedom Scholarships (My article) can be revised.

Thank you.

LOBOSKYJOJO (talk) 07:36, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


23:15:28, 26 May 2019 review of submission by BananaSlug


I am so confused. I read this article: Quantum mysteries dissolve if possibilities are realities and wanted to learn more about Ruth E. Kastner, the lead author of the recent paper Taking Heisenberg’s Potentia Seriously. I started with a Google search, expecting her Wikipedia article to be near the top of the results, it was not so I went to Wikipedia and searched for her name. The closest result was an article about a field apparently related to her work Transactional interpretation. That page contains a stub link to her nonexistent page.

I followed a link about requesting that page be created. I do not see a way to do that. As near as I can tell, I am being encouraged to create a draft for that page. I feel totally unqualified to do that. After all, I came to Wikipedia to learn who Dr. Kastner is. Or is the notion that I create a blank page with her name on it, and hope that someone more knowledgable than I comes along and fixes it?


BananaSlug (talk) 23:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BananaSlug. The main page for requesting that an article be written about something is Wikipedia:Requested articles. I've had mixed success requesting articles there: Ralph Harris (journalist) (requested 2015, written 2016), Hinners Organ Company (requested 2016, written 2018, but likely created by someone who never saw my request), Lawrence Ziring (requested 2017, not written yet), all topics I've been too busy to create myself. It's a slow process, and only works if the requester has a solid grasp of Wikipedia's notability (inclusion) criteria. Wikipedia doesn't try to have articles about everything that exists, only about things that have attracted significant attention from the world at large and over a period of time.
Looking at Kastner's publication history in Google Scholar - one book and one published journal article, with others at various stages of peer review and available only as pre-prints, it's unlikely that she meets WP:PROF at this point in her career. If you can find three independent, reliable, secondary sources that prove she does, go ahead (request an article or write a two-sentence one yourself). but if you can't find three, do nothing. If and when she clears the bar of notability, someone is bound to write about her here. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 27

03:16:43, 27 May 2019 review of submission by Lolos2508


How can I improve this page to make it better.

Lolos2508 (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has no references and no indication as to why it might be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:45:06, 27 May 2019 review of submission by Mifriend3


I have removed any information that would suggest this is a "Promotional article in disguise" as indicated by the previous reviewer. Please take a look again. Thanks!

Mifriend3 (talk) 08:45, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The topic is not notable and has only a single (spam) reference. Theroadislong (talk) 11:07, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:14:34:05, 27 May 2019 review of submission by Dinakarr


Hi CASSIOPEIA,

Many thanks for your suggestion. Actually I did click on the "Resubmit" button you mentioned but instead of giving me a confirmation of submission, it takes me to the page with the following title -

<<Editing Draft:Widow of Silence (new section)>>

So I am not sure if the article is now being reconsidered. Is there a way to confirm this?

Also many thanks for your Talk-page. It looks like a place where I can learn lots of new things!

Regards, Dinakar Dinakarr (talk) 14:34, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]





Hi, I just submitted a completely revamped page for "Widow of Silence" with credible references and citations on this award-winning film. While I did click on the "Resubmit" button, I am not sure if the revised article has gone for the review process. Would you please check and let me know?

Thanks, Dinakar Dinakarr (talk) 09:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Dinakarr (talk) 09:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dinakarr Greetings. You have not yet to submit the draft for reviewed. Pls click the "Resubmit" button on the left bottom pink panel on top of the page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:44:30, 27 May 2019 review of submission by LLcentury

LLcentury (talk) 13:48, 27 May 2019 (UTC) !-- Hi! Nice to meet you! I've done my best, could fine nothing more about him, if declined, deleted or rejected I will take it positively as experience as beginner on editing. Thank you so much. Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 13:51, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:38:45, 27 May 2019 review of submission by Gesielgbernardes


Hi, The Hogzilla IDS was marked of "not notable". And I don't understand why. The Hogzilla IDS is the main software usabled as concept of IDS using machine learning and big data. The Hogzilla IDS was plublishided in many cientistics articles and Master's and PhD theses around the world. In references is including various link's that confirm this. Please note that Hogziila IDS is NOT COMERCIAL, and developed by University of Campinas (Unicamp).

Gesielgbernardes (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


21:27:19, 27 May 2019 review of submission by Jessiecarbone3


Hi - I am having trouble understanding why my article is still being reject. Do you have advice on how I can improve this to make it more notable?

Jessiecarbone3 (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:08:40, 27 May 2019 review of submission by 89.164.167.75

My article was rejected as it does not show significant coverage... Many current Wikipedia articles on Croatian architects don't show significant coverage (especially in English) see for example Hinko Bauer and Nikola Bašić yet no one should question their notability. Ivan Vulic (along with several other major Croatian architects) was mentioned in Vasko Lipovac and Split Airport article so I decided to submit short article about him. Croatian architects are generally poorly represented on Wikipedia and those that are have poorly written and referenced articles. 89.164.167.75 (talk) 22:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:50:07, 27 May 2019 review of draft by AminNash


Thank you for taking the time to review my draft.

I am writing an article on Evelyn Shakir's "Remember Me to Lebanon". The book was published by Syracuse Press in 2007 and won the Arab American book award in 2008.

I referenced a link to the Award website on my page.

My article was rejected due to references. Here are links to scholarly articles that discuss the book:

http://ccl.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ccl.idm.oclc.org/docview/897936818?accountid=10141

http://ccl.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ccl.idm.oclc.org/docview/203711805?accountid=10141

http://ccl.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ccl.idm.oclc.org/docview/356821662?accountid=10141


These are from ProQuest and there are also articles available on JSTOR and World Cat.

Please instruct me on how to properly add these references to the article. This book has been studied and I am trying to write this article without any sense of bias.

AminNash (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AminNash. The draft already uses the template {{cite web}} to cite one source. I've added examples of how to use other templates in the same family, {{cite news}} and {{cite journal}}, to cite the Boston Globe obituary and a JSTOR article, respectively. ProQuest urls are not very useful in citations because they are library-specific, and few Wikipedia readers use the same library as you. A free url is available for the obit, so I've used that instead of the ProQuest url. The MELUS article is also on JSTOR, so it can be cited in the same way as Modern Fiction Studies. For the thesis, use the {{cite thesis}} template and leave the url blank (sources needn't be available online). I hope that helps. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 28

00:23:23, 28 May 2019 review of draft by Gilcrease1227


Gilcrease1227 (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm requesting help to see how to make an entrepreneur's wiki page not sound like an advertisement. I saw that Alli Webb redirected to Drybar and figured she'd be an easy wiki to start with since I'm a new editor. All the similar entrepreneur pages I've seen could subjectively read like advertisements and I'm currently stating facts relating to things Alli Webb has created. Are there suggestions on which items should be taken out or make it seem like an advertisement? Currently, I'm unsure what it means if I'm just talking about things she's made.

Thanks for any advice!

07:04:06, 28 May 2019 review of submission by Arno.


I just want to use this space to express my disappointment in the editing process of wikipedia. I tried to add a page about a major mountain in a major US national park. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Corkscrew_Peak). There are literally dozens and dozens and dozens of independent articles about it on Google. But the article was rejected because the article is not notable enough.

I used to be an early contributor, but stopped contributing in 2006, because the layers of bureaucracy was becoming a burden, and was making it difficult for me to actually add content. I feel saddened to see that this problem has not been fixed, but on the contrary seems to have increased.

I still wish best of luck to Wikipedia which is an amazing project.

Arno. (talk) 07:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=899158129"