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 CraigMc1979 (talk | contribs) at 14:08, 8 December 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


December 2

06:53:40, 2 December 2019 review of submission by TimBray


First of all, thanks to User:AngusWOOF for suggesting I raise this issue here. I have been editing on and off irregularly for many years, and am the initial creator of two very small lightweight articles, Rose_Harbour,_British_Columbia and East_Van_Cross. But nobody would call me a serious Wikipedian. Recently my book club read Heartland_(nonfiction_book) by Sarah Smarsh - it was a finalist for the National Book Award, reviewed in loads of prestigious publications, and quite controversial. We asked ourselves "who is this woman?" and then the whole book club was shocked that Ms Smarsh didn't have an article. A bit of poking around revealed she had a solid track record as a journalist (NY Times, New Yorker, Guardian) and had been a subject of discussion as a Democratic candidate in the 2020 US Senate election in Kansas. I (perhaps naively) thought this, along with the publication of a widely-reviewed and widely-read book, sounded pretty notable so I pulled together a draft entry which was however rejected. Along with the rejection were some helpful notes about citation errors on the journalist side, I had simply used her publications as citations of that role.

Anyhow, I was pretty shocked that this did not pass the notability bar, particularly in the context where her book did. I'm not sure what my goal in posting this is; maybe just a sanity-check. Tim Bray (talk) 06:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Tim Bray (talk) 06:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TimBray, Too many of the sources are just articles that the subject wrote. Ya need to find some more coverage of her, that is independent of her. She may be notable, but the existing sources are not quite enough. As a side note, if she were to actually run for senate, that would likely catapult her to notability. But on her writing alone, you need to show that she passes WP:NWRITER, or the general notability guidelines. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:33, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:17:14, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Prachurapp


Prachurapp (talk) 07:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has no content apart from your name? Theroadislong (talk) 08:51, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:27:00, 2 December 2019 review of draft by Nikhil1123

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Please help me to create a Wikipedia page, which is showing as subject not qualified. Please let me know the reasons why it is showing like that.Can you please show some examples of subjects.

Nikhil1123 (talk) 09:27, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nikhil1123, I caution you to not write an article about a subject to which you are related. That represents a conflict of interest, which you would need to disclose. Also, note that if you have been compensated in any way for these edits, such as being an employee of the company, you must disclose that per WP:PAID.
In terms of notability, you need significant news coverage. You need more sources, and you also need to include them inline. See referencing for beginners for a handy guide. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:13, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Janne Jacks


This is an informative article corresponding to the category and does not pursue advertising purposes

Janne Jacks (talk) 09:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of the subject in three of the references, it fails WP:GNG and is just blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:49, 2 December 2019 review of draft by Bending genres since birth


How do I delete the draft?

Bending genres since birth (talk) 14:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bending genres since birth, I have put it up for deletion at your request. If you would like it to be not deleted, you may edit the talk page of the draft and say as such. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No no, that's fine. Thank you for your help. Bending genres since birth (talk) 11:24, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:59:27, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Matralala

Just need help getting this published. Have had some helpful hints from users, but need help getting over the finish line. Thanks! Matralala (talk) 14:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have reviewed and accepted. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:15, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:04:34, 2 December 2019 review of submission by RobLewis8

There are teams with significantly less coverage who have articles that have been approved. The Niagara Regional Raiders of the CJFL had their article approved and their article has little to no information. I actually put work into this article, and to be quite honest I find the fact that this article hasn't been approved yet so many others have is ridiculous. This hockey team plays in the PWHL, which is the female equivalent to the OHL. My sources are reliable as PointStreak provides accurate statistics for this team, BayToday.com is one of the most reliable news sources in North Bay and they're talking about this team from a city 3 hours north of Barrie, BarrieToday.com is one of the best places to go in Barrie for sports and news coverage and do I really have to explain CTV News? I genuinely hope you reconsider your decisions on this article as I feel that it is sustainable enough to be on Wikipedia. RobLewis8 (talk) 18:04, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked over the article as well as the comments from Curb Safe Charmer. The issue is entirely Notability, so basioally boils down to (more or less) secondary coverage of the team, for example by the local newspaper or television stations. Unlike individual players, the Notability of Teams is more or less the same as it would be for other organizations in the town. I'm sure it is covered more than the local Civitan though. The fact that three other teams in the same league have pages about them fall into WP:OTHERTHINGSEXIST which more or less says that each one stands or falls on its own, and the fact they exist may just boil down to the fact that no one has proposed deleting them. I'm not sure why WP:EVENT was mentioned, but that may have to do with the state of the draft at that point. So my advice is the following. Check in with the people at the Hockey Wikiproject Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey, they know the situation better than most and may have even better advice. Have specific facts about the team specifically referenced in the three external media sources that you have covering it. And it may simply fail Notability, I don't know.Naraht (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Naraht: Thanks for your comments - we're on the same page, as it were. The reason for the mention of WP:EVENT was that Rob had added a reference to this news article about a young lady that died in a car crash. That the girl was the captain of the Sharks is incidental and does not help establish notability about the club.
Addressing RobLewis8 now - your conviction that the team is notable and should have an encyclopedia article about it speaks to the reason that we discourage WP:COI editors from writing articles about themselves, their family, their friends, their clients, their employers, their teams or their clubs. It makes it that more difficult to be objective. As someone living the other side of the Atlantic I can look at the draft impartially and weigh it up against the criteria that the Wikipedia community has agreed upon by which all articles about organisations must meet (WP:ORG). We encourage new editors to practice editing Wikipedia and learning the numerous guidelines that we work to through making small edits. I think part of the difficulty here is that rather than do that you've dived straight in creating an article about a subject that is close to your heart. You fall into a category of editor that we call Wikipedia:Single-purpose accounts - you're conflicted. I welcome you to stick around and contribute to Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia), but I recommend you find another way to promote your team.
Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:16, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:42:21, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Preecesmith


Preecesmith (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Preecesmith, We strongly discourage folks from writing autobiographies on Wikipedia. Be cautioned that only folks who have been covered in the media are usually eligible for inclusion in Wikipedia. With luck, you'll be famous for something someday, and someone will write a Wikipedia page about you! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


18:50:52, 2 December 2019 review of draft by Vvong519


I was informed that the page I created reads too much like an advertisement. I would like suggestions on how to improve this to meet Wikipedia's requirements. I have provided a range of independent, reliable, published sources for as much as I can.

Vvong519 (talk) 18:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vvong519, For starters, remove all external links in the body. External links should only go in an external links section, and are usually tightly controllled. Please also see referencing for beginners for how to properly format and use references. The speaking events section should be removed. In general, the article ought be written like an encyclopedia, not a resume. You need more prose, and likely some better sources. Please read the notability guidelines for people about exactly what is needed to show that a subject can have an article. I'm not yet sure if the subject meets those guidelines. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:53, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Rtist4Rtist

We were declined; how then can we submit a page for Ragga Lox, Reggae artiste?

Rtist4Rtist (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rtist4Rtist, Well it was declined because you had no sources. If you can find enough sources that are reliable and independent, you could get them an article. But the article also is written like an ad, and it seems that your account is that of a promoter. You will likely need to change your username. You also must read and follow the guidelines at WP:PAID, which stipulate that any editors which are compensated in any way for thier edits must disclose that fact. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:57, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:32:50, 2 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Nabatoff


I am trying to publish an article the first time under title "Perspective Geological Correlation"I got a quick answer from Captan Eek. He rejected the article as too technical and lack of cross-references. I reworked the article, published it, and send my comment to the reviewer Captan Eek. After two months I am not sure that my response reached Captan Eek. Please, advice how to check that my message reached the reviewer, and where is the right place to put my message to the reviewer? Thanks


Nabatoff (talk) 19:32, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nabatoff: Your draft is in the queue again. First time, it likely was a quick review because of obvious issues. This time, the reviewer likely needs to spend much more time. It's understandable that Captain Eek may not be familiar with the topic or simply not want to review something in-depth. However, anyone who is a reviewer can review a draft and someone will get to it eventually. There is always a massive draft queue, which is reviewed in no particular order, so I'm afraid sometimes you have to wait a long time. I took a quick look and it looks like you don't have a WP:LEAD for the article. A lot of content doesn't have a citation attached. It's all written more like an academic paper than encyclopedic article. It's likely the draft would be declined again. I think you should check out some other articles (like Category:Featured articles) on Wikipedia to see what to aim for. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:03, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nabatoff, Howdy hello! Sorry if I didn't get back to you, the review queue is quite large and I get an awful lot of questions about things I've reviewed, and things sometimes fall through the cracks. Looking at your article again, I have to agree with Hellknowz. It reads more like a scientific paper than an encyclopedia article. See Radiocarbon dating as an example of a featured article (the best we have!) on a very technical subject that is easy to read, still sufficiently detailed, and presented in an encyclopedic fashion. Oddly enough, your article actually suffers from too many images, an unusual issue here. I would say cut them in half and just keep the best. I also think that many more citations are needed. Only 12 papers for an article of this size is unusual. Find more please. Also, do not use bolding to show emphasis. Hellz is also right in that you need a lead. All in all, some work to do, but it should be notable. Please drop a new question on this page if you have any issues as you work on it! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:53, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:00:24, 2 December 2019 review of submission by Sponge333


Sponge333 (talk) 20:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sponge333, Howdy hello! Wikipedia does not allow autobiographical articles. Only folks who have been covered in the media can have pages. But with luck, you will someday become famous, and someone else will make an article about you! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:37:38, 2 December 2019 review of submission by ShimmyCharlotte


Hi,

Page: Rose Feller - Artist

I had this page rejected for two reason. One was there aren't any references. I'm not sure how to get around this, as the artist herself asked me to set the page up and everything I have written was from a private interview with her.

I have linked everything online about this artist - she is trying to raise her profile which is why she wanted a wikipedia page but you say it was rejected because there's not enough secondary stuff online.

How do I resolve this?

Charlotte

ShimmyCharlotte (talk) 22:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ShimmyCharlotte, Ah, well theres the issue. We don't allow original research, such as you have proposed. Only folks who have been covered with secondary sources may have articles. If a subject hasn't been written about in media, books, papers, etc, then there is nothing about their life that is verifiable and that we could write about. We strongly discourage and tightly control the sort of thing that you are seeking to do. Wikipedia is not used to raise people's profile, as we are not an ad platform. If you want this person to still have an article, you must find sources. If sources do not exist, we cannot write about them.
If you have been compensated in any way to make these edits, you must disclose that by following the guideline at WP:PAID. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page Rose Feller - Artist

December 3

04:09:03, 3 December 2019 review of draft by Nawab Afridi


Nawab Afridi (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nawab Afridi, You might wish to ask MJL, the reviewer who looked at your draft last, for feedback. They are very friendly and would almost certainly review it again if you left a note on their talk page. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Please guide me if the following profile OK?

06:37:19, 3 December 2019 review of submission by Xayns


Xayns (talk) 06:37, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

i have now added notable references

Xayns, The draft has been deleted so we cannot help you.Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:33, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:28:16, 3 December 2019 review of submission by Aheisk


Hello Wikipedia, my submission of an entry on Christopher Lloyd sometime ago was rejected. Christopher Lloyd is a very prominent Australian-Finnish professor with many achievements, including election to the Finnish Academy of Arts and Sciences. Now I have discovered that there is an entry for a young English person – Grace Blakeley – whose achievements are very scant compared with Christopher Lloyd's achievements yet she has an entry and he doesn't. Can you explain this to me please? Thank you. Aheisk.

Aheisk (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, Grace Blakeley is well sourced and passes notability guidelines. 12:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Request on 08:53:34, 3 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Megha101


Can i share the school establishment document with the support team of Wikipedia as a proof of existence as we don;t have much of presence online since it is a new school. Megha101 (talk) 08:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Megha101, That is not sufficient. We need published sources in order for them to be reliable. If published sources do not exist, the subject is not notable. Also, there is no Wikipedia support team that does what you suggest, just volunteer editors who review these articles. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:42, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:08:56, 3 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Sunnymish


Hi I got rid of the copyrighted material from the article I want to create, and was wondering how to try and get it published again, currently the edited version is in my drafts. Thanks any help would be great.

Sunnymish (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sunnymish. If you are asking about Draft:Manju Sheth, there is now a button on it that will let you submit it for review, but it would not be accepted in its current state. You may find Help:Your first article helpful. Concentrate on finding independent, reliable sources which prove that she is notable. Remove statements from the draft for which you cannot cite reliable, published sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:41:19, 3 December 2019 review of draft by 73.215.83.120


Hello, I am puzzled as to why my new page creation did not pass. Can you please let me know which references are needed? This page is for a company that has split from an existing company - Williams Lea Tag -- which already has an existing Wikipedia page. There is plenty of evidence of the company split, as seen in the references provided. These references are from neutral third parties including PrintWeek, campaignlive.co.uk and Marketing Interactive - none of which are "passing references", as the sources only talk about the company split. Please let me know what more I am supposed to provide.

73.215.83.120 (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the comments provided on the draft, in particular WP:NCORP. Mere existence of a company is not enough to prove notability, and the fact that it split from a company with a company with a page already does not matter, because WP:Notability is not inherited. All of your sources are coverage of routine business activities and press releases, which do not contribute to notability. See WP:CORPDEPTH. shoy (reactions) 15:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:53:25, 3 December 2019 review of submission by Tedfmyers


Hello, I would love to have some feedback on my article. I previously asked for help, but my question was archived before anyone was able to give me any comments. See here for my previous question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_November_15#22:19:34.2C_15_November_2019_review_of_submission_by_Tedfmyers

To summarize my prior question, I believe that the subject of my article passes WP:NCORP due to sufficient number of significant, independent, reliable, and secondary articles cited. Would one of you kind reviewers take a look and give me your opinion on the matter?

Tedfmyers (talk) 20:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tedfmyers: Given you're asking for a second review, which means looking through all sources again, could you link here 3 (best) sources that you believe pass WP:GNG and thus WP:CORPDEPTH that are 1) reliable/reuptable 2) secondary/independent 3) significant/in-depth. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hellknowz: Hi Hellknowz, thanks for the quick response! The three sources I'd choose are Source 7,[1] Source 13,[2] and Source 19.[3] (The Marketplace, Harvard Business Review, and Science Magazine articles). Hope this helps with the review process! Tedfmyers (talk) 23:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Kim, Jed (February 23, 2017). "Changing carbon from waste into gold". Marketplace. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  2. ^ Satell, Greg (April 5, 2018). "Why Some of the Most Groundbreaking Technologies Are a Bad Fit for the Silicon Valley Funding Model". Harvard Business Review. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  3. ^ Service, Robert (September 19, 2019). "Can the world make the chemicals it needs without oil?". Science Magazine. Retrieved 14 November 2019.
marketplace source is not in-depth; there are only a couple paragraphs about the company and half is by Kuhl. hbr looks decent; the article isn't directly about the company, but it ends up basically talking for half of it, including company's founding, funding, prototypes, plans. sciencemag is also not in-depth; there are barely two paragraphs about the company and aren't even exclusively about the company. I'm afraid that's one decent source (although I imagine editors may argue even in that one the company isn't the subject of the article, although I would argue that it's on the threshold of significant coverage). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 10:18, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hellknowz: Thank you for the evaluation, you’re helping me better understand the rules; especially the threshold for significant/in-depth coverage. I agree with you that the subject of an article doesn’t need to be main topic of the source material (as the WP:GNG states) - so the HBR article is a passable source (if not the other two I proposed earlier due to lack of coverage). Here are two different articles I believe are significant enough, and fulfill all other requirements: source 8[1] and source 11[2]. (Greenbiz and Vice articles). Both these articles spend multiple paragraphs discussing the environmental and business impact of the company.

References

  1. ^ Soltoff, Ben (October 16, 2019). "Opus 12 is one startup on a mission to convert CO2 into useful products". GreenBiz. Retrieved 14 November 2019.
  2. ^ Fekri, Farnia (April 28, 2017). "Kendra Kuhl Is Building a Device That Turns Pollution Into Products". Vice. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
These do look pretty good to me. They are heavy on quoting the company/persons but that's more or less fine. They are focused on the company's work and provide a good deal of detail and history. So I'd say this reaches the bare minimum threshold. Plus, there are a bunch of other sources to supplement. I might take a look at the draft later. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 4

04:06:29, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Suhriyani tribe


Suhriyani tribe (talk) 04:06, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suhriyani tribe, This page already exists in the mainspace as List of Baloch tribes. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:49:09, 4 December 2019 review of draft by IJK193


I have cleaned up the article and I would like an extra hand to check it out. According to Wikipedia, it should be written from a natural point of view, I have addressed this. The article doesn't look promotional in content but written from the natural point of view but I still need an extra hand to check it out.

IJK193 (talk) 04:49, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IJK193, Perhaps you mean a neutral point of view? Regardless, I see the issue as one of notability, i.e. who gets to have an article. I'm not sure what this guy has done to warrant a Wikipedia article, he doesn't appear to meet the musician notability guidelines. Some more sources are needed. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:36, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:12:49, 4 December 2019 review of submission by Sonu07091996


Sonu07091996 (talk) 05:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that this article will not be published. The company you are writing about does not seem to be notable. Sorry. I recommend you find another area of Wikipedia to edit, and hone your skills there! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you guide me what should I do to publish the article, as I am unable to make it Out?

Publish it somewhere other than Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 May 6#04:46:51, 6 May 2019 review of submission by Krutika Samnani. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:15, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:59:25, 4 December 2019 review of submission by Ayushchandrakala


Ayushchandrakala (talk) 06:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ayushchandrakala, This seems to be an average person, which we do not cover. Wikipedia only has articles for notable people. That usually means that said person has received significant coverage in the media. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:20:42, 4 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Priyanka8971


I need to know why my drafts, articles are being rejected by the wiki, as there are many pages, articles of individual companies and brands, so don't they do the marketing and promote themself over wiki? Example links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_4_Less


Priyanka8971 (talk) 08:20, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Priyanka8971: Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written by volunteers, not company representatives. They are not social media pages or profiles that represent a company directly (see WP:NOTPROMO). Such editors are WP:PAID editors with a conflict of interest. The company you are trying to promote here was founded this year and the article has zero reliable sources to prove notability. shoy (reactions) 15:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also asked and answered at Teahouse and at Priyanka8971 Talk page. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:48:42, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Devanshmrc


Devanshmrc (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on this draft past six months, striving hard to publish it. OTRS is also recieved. Please help to get it published.

09:41:12, 4 December 2019 review of submission by Andreabartoli


This is my very first article on Wikipedia. I think now I have understood what was the problem. Please allow me to resubmit the edited article. Many thanks.

Andreabartoli (talk) 09:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:48:54, 4 December 2019 review of submission by Jain13tushar

Hi there, Shubham Mishra is one of the youngest security leaders in India. He is associated with many governments like U.P police, CBI and training many officials in various sectors of cybersecurity. Do consider this article for creation.

Thank You Jain13tushar (talk) 11:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jain13tushar, Have considered. This person is not notable for inclusion, as he does not have enough independent coverage of him. We only write articles about a small number of people, and this dude does not meet our standards. I recommend you focus on another area of Wikipedia to edit, where you may hone your skills. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 12:32:12, 4 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Pageturners


The Wikipedia entry for Cyclingworks Dublin has been rejected, on the basis that it's not notable enough for Wikipedia. Surely this isn't correct? Multinationals, universities, unions and firms representing over 400,000 people in a city with a population of 1.5 million have asked the Government to provide safe cycling infrastructure, in a drive that is continuing with new organisations joining - surely this is notable.

Pageturners (talk) 12:32, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pageturners:, please read WP:NORG which explains that we assess notability by to what extent other reliable, independent publications have already written in depth about the subject. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

== Replying to this (I'm Pageturners) - here are some links about the project. It hasn't had a lot of press coverage, but on the website of the project itself you can see the logos of the 101 companies and organisations that have so far written to the Irish Government seeking safe infrastructure for cyclists in Dublin. A little of the press coverage: The Irish Times last year: "Dublin businesses call for safe cycling infrastructure in the city" https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-businesses-call-for-safer-cycling-infrastructure-in-city-1.3550891 ; the newsletter of Fórsa, the second-largest union in the country, representing civil servants: " Fórsa backs cycle network plan" http://forsatradeunion.newsweaver.com/designtest/14fjh4llsk8?a=3&p=54228001&t=30058761 ; Orwell Wheelers, Dublin's largest cycling club (Cyclingworks Dublin was started shortly after one of the club's members was killed on a training run) "Cycling Works Dublin Initiative: https://www.orwellwheelers.org/forum/8-miscellaneous-club-chatter/6845-cycling-works-dublin-initiative ; Dublin Chamber of Commerce: "Dublin Firms Join Forces to Demand Better Cycling Infrastructure" https://www.dublinchamber.ie/media/news/july-2018/dublin-firms-join-forces-to-demand-better-cycling ; Trinity College Dublin (the country's oldest and most prestigious university, founded by the English queen Elizabeth I) "Trinity supports campaign for improved cycling infrastructure" http://trinitynews.ie/2018/05/trinity-supports-campaign-for-improved-cycling-infrastructure/

I hope this sample is enough. Pageturners (talk) 08:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pageturners. The size, popularity, or virtuousness of an organization is not what determines its suitabiliy for being a stand alone article in an encyclopedia. A good example of an article about an organization is Seacology. Contrast it and WP:WHYN with the reliable and independent information available about Cyclingworks Dublin. All that The Irish Times says about CyclingWorks, for example, is that Stephen McManus is its co-founder. Based on the sample you've provided, I concur with the other reviewers that the organization is not sufficiently notable for inclusion at this time. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:31, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:46:41, 4 December 2019 review of submission by MarcoLaudato


Hello :)

I have amended the article according to the reviewers' criticisms. In particular, I have added two secondary sources (from European Mathematical Society) and I have removed the Mission Statement section. Moreover, all the external links have been removed from the body of the article.

Please, let me know if something else needs to be done!

Kind regards, Marco MarcoLaudato (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MarcoLaudato, This institution does not appear to be notable. I.e. there are not enough sources that cover the subject with significant coverage. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:53:22, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Jtorpy


Jtorpy (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your feedback on the most recently submitted draft. I am wondering as to which statements (a couple examples would be helpful, not necessarily every case) qualify as "individual statement[s] of importance of judgment" to be removed might be? Much of the information in the article is most readily available via internal sources, but knowing which remaining aspects are problematic would help target the search for external sources

Hi Jtorpy. Avoid stating as facts things that are opinions (as to importance, as to why, and as to other matters of judgement). Furthermore, do not state opinions in Wikipedia's voice. Examples:
  1. "Perhaps most importantly, ..."
  2. "Due to the relative seclusion of Ann Arbor, ..."
  3. "From this legislature grew a tradition ..."
  4. "Hindsdale, like most of the early museum researchers, made important contributions ..."
  5. "This contribution ... cemented his legacy as a pioneer in ethnobotany."
--Worldbruce (talk) 16:07, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:04:34, 4 December 2019 review of submission by Jordifernanjo


I'm studying a web develope course in english and we have been asked to post an article in wikipedia or other wiki sites. I have choose the this topic as it's a game im playing rigth now. I have base the article in the information of the developer page and some articles as well as my own experience. I have been asked to provide some links but as im using my own experience and developers information, I don't reallly know what to provide. Jordifernanjo (talk) 17:04, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are based on independent reliable sources, we have no interest in what the developer says, or in what you or I know about the topic. So the draft cannot be accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:27, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:40:57, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Josef Hoffman

How to create an article ?

Josef Hoffman (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Josef Hoffman, Howdy hello! You will need to submit the article for review through the Articles for Creation process. You can do that by clicking the blue submit box on your draft. But I recommend you don't do that yet, as your article is not yet sufficient. It has no sources, and will likely be failed promptly. You need at least 3 reliable and independent sources in the article. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:22:11, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Amgad Mohb Amin Lewaia


Amgad Mohb Amin Lewaia 18:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

1:1

مساحة الارقام = 1 + 1 = 2

طول ضلع الارقام = 1 ÷ 2 = 0.5

0.5 : 0.5

مساحة الارقام = 0.5 + 0.5 = 1

طول ضلع الارقام = 0.5 ÷ 1 = 0.5


طول ضلع الارقام للارقام المتشابهة يساوي النصف

This is just nonsense. Ask in English or we can't help you. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:30, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:54:34, 4 December 2019 review of draft by AleLagos77


I would like to have my article for creation reviewed again. I made the requested changes and I think now it is good to be published. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:George_Hammer_III

Best Regards,

AleLagos77 (talk) 18:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AleLagos77, See my comments on the draft. In essence, this article is still overly promotional, and I see no special reason why this dude should have an article, i.e. they do not meet any part of the biography notability guidelines. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:46:00, 4 December 2019 review of draft by Vickymarco01


I don't know how to make good references. Especially the little number that appears on a word and clicking on it you can directly go to the link or notes at the end of the page. Vickymarco01 (talk) 20:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vickymarco01, Please see referencing for beginners. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 5

09:37:25, 5 December 2019 review of submission by Smc institute


Smc institute (talk) 09:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft rejected, it is blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 09:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:02:23, 5 December 2019 review of draft by Cheznous88


Is there an update for this page please?

Cheznous88 (talk) 10:02, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheznous88. Draft:Abass Dodoo has been in the pool to be reviewed since 30 September. The current backlog is between four and five months, so you can anticipate a review by some time in February 2020. You may continue to improve the draft while you wait. I've left a welcome basket of links on your talk page that may help you. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:57:39, 5 December 2019 review of submission by Ashleylutaylor

The drafted Forester Life Wikipedia entry was rejected. A new entry has been made on this account which has been rejected due to the previous drafted version. Can the previous drafted entry be deleted and for the version submitted by this account be reviewed please. Ashleylutaylor (talk) 10:57, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correction it has been rejected because the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:19:43, 5 December 2019 review of submission by Linda dominic

13:19:43, 5 December 2019 review of submission by {{SUBST:REVISIONUSER}


Linda dominic (talk) 13:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has no sources and no indication of how he passes WP:GNG which is why it was rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:48:41, 5 December 2019 review of submission by Maceone


Misfit soto is an artist that is gaining momentum in los angeles hip hop music hes released 3 albums this year, i see other artists that nobody cares about on here. Why was misfit soto rejected?

Maceone (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists, your draft has two sources, his own website and a Facebook page, articles require there to be multiple in-depth coverage in reliable independent sources such as newspapers or magazine articles. Theroadislong (talk) 16:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:34, 5 December 2019 review of submission by 95.205.101.145

why da fac i know clutch pop clutch go throttle bam drifting in 69moh


95.205.101.145 (talk) 19:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, and we welcome neutral and well written encyclopedic content. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:05, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:27:05, 5 December 2019 review of draft by Cheznous88


The wikipedia page of Abass Dodoo has followed the exact same format as his fellow band members I.e Ginger Baker, Pee Wee Ellis and Alec Dankworth. Abass Dodoo is even referenced on those published Wikipedia pages. It does not make sense that those three pages are accepted and published but Abass Dodoo's page is not being published. Even though it is the exact same format, style and content.

Can the inconsistency be explained and if it can not then the page needs to be published.

Cheznous88 (talk) 22:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cheznous88, It is in the review queue. Please be patient for someone to review it. Also, be careful about comparing your article to existing ones. Many of the articles on Wikipedia were created before we began the rigorous Article for Creation process. That means a lot of ...honestly junk articles were created, and many of them have slipped through the cracks. You can read more about the logical fallacies involved in article comparison at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


December 6

01:50:46, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Waveygrapes1001


I want this to go through to main page. Waveygrapes1001 (talk) 01:50, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Waveygrapes1001, Two words of content does not an article make. You need prose, you need references. You need to actually have content before it can be published into the main space. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:20:25, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Rajanm99


I request more editors to review and verify the facts and publish in article space.

Rajanm99 (talk) 05:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rajanm99, Your initial reviewer was correct. Heed their words and improve your article, then resubmit it. You have only one source that is not independent. You need at least 3 reliable and independent sources, and currently have zero. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:51:03, 6 December 2019 review of submission by Jpncan

I have added some references in order to pass the check, so please review again. Jpncan (talk) 05:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jpncan, He still does not appear to be notable. Please see the notability guidelines for academics. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:48, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:59:00, 6 December 2019 review of submission by Sanjaysingh4334


Sanjaysingh4334 (talk) 06:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjaysingh4334, This person is not notable, per our guidelines. We don't cover everybody. I suggest you find another area of Wikipedia to work on. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:36:36, 6 December 2019 review of submission by Linda dominic


Linda dominic (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linda dominic, Has no sources, and no obvious reason why they are deserving of an article per our notability guidelines. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:50:56, 6 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Sucker28

{{SAFESUBST:Void|


I am requesting an assistance because the recent article that I Published was rejected.

It had no content, and was of course rejected. If you'd like to make some edit tests, you should use your sandbox, accessible in the top right of your browser. If you'd like to write an article on a notable subject, we can guide you. But if your article has nothing meaningful in it, we can't do much. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hari Krishnan Nair born on 11/10/1976 in India. He completed his Masters degree from Mumbai. He is the son of late K K Nair a profound trade union Leader from Naval Dockyard Mumbai. Mr.K K Nair is well know among the trade union leaders he also served as Naval Dockyards Co-operative bank's Director Post in the year 1988. He worked very closely with other famous trade union leaders like Samuel Augustine and Datta Samanth who was the leader for Kamghar Agadi union. Mr. Hari krishnan Nair also followed his father's principles but he was quite good at writing. He is the Author for WHO AM I which is been published on Kindle bookshelf even had pen down few Life Inspirational Quotes on kindle bookshelf. His passion towards singing and even released an Album called Ormakal which got above fifty thousand views on social media and over 1000 comments. He is the founder for an eCommerce platform in India called Jummanji.

His vision is to build the future infrastructure of commerce. Aim is to enable hundreds of millions of commercial and social interactions among the users, between consumers and merchants, and among businesses every day. Quite Aggressive person and razor focused towards his target.

Early Life Hari was born in mumbai, India, on october 11, 1976.[3] His father use to work in Naval Dockyard and mother, a homemaker.[8] Hari krishnan Nair attended R K Talreja college and graduated as a BA in economics in 1994. He even completed MBA from Indian Institute of Business Management.


Work profile: Currently in Kenya(Nariobi) working with a Office Automation company since 2015. He is passionate about writing composing and singing.He is the author for "WHO AM I" and "My Best Friend" which is published in amazon Kindly bookshelf. Even written few Life Inspirational Quotes can share one quote “We experience our lives like able persons. But end up with inability of taking the risk” ― Hari Krishnan Nair, He is even the founder for eCommerce platfrom in India called jummanji


Personal life

Hari Nair is married to,Prinitha a gold medalist in Master of Commerce from Salem Periyar university(Tamil Nadu). They have two kids a daughter and son. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda dominic (talk • contribs) 11:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linda dominic, Please don't post article content here, only links to pages with content. Are you asking a new question? What do you need? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:29:38, 6 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Bibeksijapati



Bibeksijapati (talk) 11:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:32:18, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Smwoolen


Can someone please help me with this article? I’m new to drafting articles and not really sure why it has been declined. I very much would appreciate any help given. Thank you.

Smwoolen (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Smwoolen, Please see Fall Out Boy for an example of a good article on a band, which you could in part emulate. Your article does not currently meet our standards for formatting, writing quality, and neutrality. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:18:33, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Emery.geyer


Greetings, I am trying to get an article published that is just a factual statement about Vola Guitars and their CEO Shawn Cho. Although they do not have the historical background as other guitar manufacturers such as Fender, Gibson, etc., they still are a guitar brand led by an industry pro in Shawn Cho. Plus, since they are a younger company, the internet is not littered with third-party articles that I can use as references, but there are a few.

I understand that "notability" and "reference-able" information is required, however, if you look at some other guitar brands on Wikipedia - Caparison Guitars as an example - their Wiki article was accepted, but is now flagged as "contains content that is written like an advertisement", yet is still up & live. I just think that a double-standard exists here and would love some help on creating a factual article, that passes the requirements to be accepted and published as a Wiki article.

I have updated my last denied article. Where can I show people this updated article and get some help on it without it being deleted before someone can help?

Please understand, I am not trying to be difficult and I LOVE Wikipedia!!! Maybe I am just bad at word-smithing ??  :/

Thank you!!!

Emery.geyer (talk) 14:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Emery.geyer. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article does not mean it meets Wikipedia's requirements, has been "accepted", or should exist. It may mean only that no one has gotten around yet to fixing it or deleting it. Existence is not a good excuse to create additional unsuitable pages. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. Wikipedia is not a business directory and may not be used for advertising, promotion, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:30:31, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Aryeh2


Aryeh2 (talk) 14:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:International_Association_of_Coaching

appears linked to the profile for Thomas J. Leonard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Leonard

There is another organisation this man founded which also has a profile on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Coach_Federation

The page above, named 'Draft:International_Association_of_Coaching' appears to be set for a review. I have added to the original draft and wonder whether it is best to await a Review, or simply delete it and recreate it as a new page??? Haven't dealt with a Draft page before so don't fully understand the best way to proceed.

Thanks. --Aryeh2 (talk) 14:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aryeh2. You many continue to improve the draft while you wait for it to be reviewed. There is no reason to delete it. You can find more information about drafts at Wikipedia:Drafts. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:38:41, 6 December 2019 review of submission by Sucker28


Sucker28 (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sucker28: Do you have a specific question? JTP (talk • contribs) 19:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:00:56, 6 December 2019 review of draft by Grasarlia


My favorite color is the color of the clouds during sunset. I eventually decided I should name it, so I was going to put it on Wikipedia for the world to see. But I'm wondering if I should scrap it because it seems that if I'm going to make a new article, it must be about something that already exists. Grasarlia (talk) 19:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Grasarlia: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. JTP (talk • contribs) 19:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grasarlia (talk • contribs) 19:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 7

03:23:41, 7 December 2019 review of submission by LonB

User:Theroadislong kindly reviewed my draft for a new article about a new company here in NYC. I would appreciate a bit more specific feedback about which aspect of this article seems to not be neutral. I spent a lot of time trying to research reliable news sources. This company has ads all over the New York City subway and bus system and I felt this was well worth inclusion in Wikipedia, especially since I was able to find so many articles about them. I'm happy to do the leg work and to try to adjust tone or to do more research, if you wouldn't mind helping me understand which areas to clean up. Thanks! --LonB (talk) 03:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LonB (talk) 03:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is promotional... "The website's insight engine analyzes thousands of datasets in real time to assist customers when buying or renting a home" sourced to a press release, press releases are not reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 08:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:50:08, 7 December 2019 review of submission by 115.118.115.46


115.118.115.46 (talk) 06:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deemed purely promotional and there's no further assistance we can provide unless you have a specific question. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:42, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:27:36, 7 December 2019 review of submission by 37.41.145.246

I want to see this article as an encyclopedia article with it's original content.Please help me rectify this article before it is deleted, post me some tips into my Mac. 37.41.145.246 (talk) 07:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well what you need here are some sources. Wikipedia articles are built on sources, such as book reviews. If you can look up and find at least 3 book reviews, we can go from there.You may wish to read the Wikipedia article for Diamonds Are Forever (novel) or The Fountainhead to get an idea of how an article about a book should be written. The article as is needs to be entirely rewritten and structured like a typical Wikipedia article. You cannot just have a plot summary. You need at least a reception section, discussing reviews of the book. If you cannot find reviews, then the book is not notable, i.e. we cannot give it an article. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:55, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:59:04, 7 December 2019 review of submission by Shaik Safiya


Shaik Safiya (talk) 10:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May i know why my article was rejected, the reason behind that and what are the sufficient notabilities for an article to include in wikipedia

@Shaik Safiya: The rejection links to the page that explains what is expected. You would need proper sources, like described at WP:GNG: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:47, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:23:15, 7 December 2019 review of submission by Nawab Afridi


Nawab Afridi (talk) 13:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I hope you have done much better than this guy but I think a person who has dedicated his life for well-being of underprivileged and marginalized communities and who daily faces threats for being an advocate of religious minorities at least deserved to be highlighted on wikipedia. I wish we could be able to honour such person in his life, not after his death.

@Nawab Afridi: Wikipedia has precise guidelines for miniumum article criteria, which are outlined in notability. We are an encyclopedia and this means having quality sources for all the content. There is the bare minimum of sources required for a stand-alone article and the vast majority of people do not reach this threshold, many whom happen to be distinguished persons by outside measures. But Wikipedia does not base articles on any such (subjective) criteria like someone's fame, importance or the need to honor them. This simply is not the purpose and goal of Wikipedia and we cannot accept articles unless they are sourced by at least multiple independent reliable in-depth sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:13, 7 December 2019 review of submission by Anaya1970


Hello I want to know with more details why my submission was denied. Thank You.

Anaya1970 (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anaya1970. Draft:Fabian Alexander Ortega was declined because Wikipedia doesn't publish biographies of all authors, only those who are notable. The draft supplies no evidence that he is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:56:32, 7 December 2019 review of submission by 2409:4042:271C:617E:908E:1618:E20E:C5F1


2409:4042:271C:617E:908E:1618:E20E:C5F1 (talk) 18:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be an average person, like you or I. We don't cover everyone, only those who have recieved notable coverage in reliable sources, i.e. the media. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:18:25, 7 December 2019 review of submission by Olle0031

I think that since James channel dead meat has more than 3 million subscribers i think that this article should be allowed on wikipedia Olle0031 (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Olle0031. That rationale does not follow consensus. See the essay Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability#Principles and more importantly the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (people). --Worldbruce (talk) 00:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 8

01:16:22, 8 December 2019 review of draft by Mdsjm


Hi, I did editions on the article I am working on, based on the comments from the reviewer. I wrote a text addressing issues asked by the reviewer in the same draft I am working on, is the reviewer going to be notified so he/she can see the text? Or I have to contact the reviewer in a different way?

Thanks!!!

Mdsjm (talk) 01:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mdsjm, If you'd like to talk to the reviewer, you should leave a message on their talk page. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:24, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Ok @CaptainEek Thank you very much!

--Mdsjm (talk) 02:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:03, 8 December 2019 review of draft by Dani Ivanov

Dani Ivanov (talk) 10:54, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dani Ivanov (talk) 10:54, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:23:59, 8 December 2019 review of submission by Alieneggs


Alieneggs (talk) 13:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:08:29, 8 December 2019 review of submission by CraigMc1979


Have added multiple citations to meet criteria of notable, as well as references to other relevant achievements.

- first Nigerian to have obtained a PhD in Computer Science - responsible for the creation of Nigeria's first internet registry and Top Level Domains (TLDs)

referenced https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenike_Osofisan who odly enough credited this articles subject with her being able to be the first Female Nigerian to do Computer Science http://ir.library.ui.edu.ng/bitstream/123456789/1471/1/ui_ina_transforming_osofisan_2011.pdf CraigMc1979 (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=929828175"