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 Bluegene18 (talk | contribs) at 09:00, 19 May 2020. 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


May 13

01:37:10, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Qtd1103


Hello, if you could tell me why this draft was declined, and how I should fix it or your recommendations, I would really appreciate. Thank you Qtd1103 (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 01:45:27, 13 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Knowledgeispower9


I received a message stating I can’t use Wikipedia for soapboxing or advertising. That was not the purpose of the article I posted.. So why did it get rejected ?

Knowledgeispower9 (talk) 01:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:40:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by ArtAfg


ArtAfg (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:57:47, 13 May 2020 review of draft by JCCB1898


hello, i don t understand why my source is rejected. please advise. Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of. thanks Carsten JCCB1898 (talk) 04:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JCCB1898. To illustrate the problem, examine one sentence of Draft:James C. Critchell-Bullock: "In 1950, Bullock left England with his family to live in Kenya where he committed suicide on March 30, 1953 and was buried at the City Park Cemetery of Nairobi, Section 11, Lot 95."[1]
What the archives finding aid that you cite for this statement actually says is: "Around 1949/1950, Bullock moved to Kenya, living at Mbagathi Ridge, Karen, Nairobi, where on 31 March 1953 he died, aged 54."
The source says something similar to what you've written, but it differs in many particulars. You write that the move happened in 1950, whereas the finding aid says around 1949/1950. You say he moved with his family, but the source doesn't mention them. You say he committed suicide, but the source just says he died. You say he died a day earlier than when the source says. Finally, you say where he is buried, which isn't in the source. You must summarize the source in your own words to avoid infringing copyright, but in doing so you may not make statements that are not directly supported by the source.
When you write "Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of," do you mean that you got information from the primary source documents listed in the finding aid, rather than from the finding aid itself? If so, the accurate citation would be to the document, hypothetically: Daphne Critchell-Bullock (31 March 1953) Letter to The Explorer's Club, New York. James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive, Sherborne School. Box 2. Folder 4. "Yesterday my husband took his own life." Beyond the problem of accurate citation, there is the problem that Wikipedia articles should cite mainly secondary sources, they generally shouldn't cite primary sources. This is one of the major differences between academic writing and writing for an encyclopedia.
If independent, reliable, third parties have written newspaper articles, magazine/journal articles, and/or books about Bullock, you may be able to salvage the draft by citing them and rewriting the text to summarize what they wrote. Editors could give you more targeted advice if you explained in a few words on your user page why you're interested in writing about Bullock, e.g. I'm an archivist for Sherborne School, I'm a relative of Bullock, I've written a book about Bullock, or whatever the case may be.

References

  1. ^ "James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive" (PDF). The Old Shirburnian Society.
--Worldbruce (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:58, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Molee4real

Please specify what to improve, because the person I mentioned he is a musician in my country, he is popular not only that he has gaining a lot of respect through his company after helping young generation through sports, I have provided all references to prove my statements, but the answer is ur submission was declined. please help me to know why was declined, and if the reason provided is not really how can I know? because I don't see the reason there for the declination. Thank you. I love EnWiki Molee4real (talk) 05:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me on what to do guys? Molee4real (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I have noticed something, my English is not proper because we use Swahili in my country but, I am in English class ton improve my English. so please Team, if you consider my language to justify please consider the reason I provided. I might be right with my article by I have poor English. but soon or later I will be good. Molee4real (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Molee4real. The reason the draft was rejected is that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the English Wikipedia). Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing can improve the draft to the point where it would be accepted here.
If you wish to improve Wikipedia and your English, consider translating articles from the English Wikipedia to the Kiswahili Wikipedia. Biographies of notable people such as Charles Mangua, Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu, and Collins Ochieng are missing there. The English versions are short, and it should be easier for you to read them than it would be for you to write a new article in English. For more information, see Wikipedia:Translate us. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:59:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Sarupbanskota


I've re-written the article to take out the promotional tone. In April 2020, Next.js and its creator Vercel Inc. received a fair amount of press coverage in publications like Forbes, Tech Republic, The Register UK, etc. I've included links to these references within the article, and more can be found on a web search.

Next.js powers the React websites of companies like Hulu, TikTok, Starbucks, AT&T, Nike, etc.

I believe these reasons make Next.js noteworthy to be considered for inclusion into Wikipedia.

Sarupbanskota (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:19:14, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Bqurtas


Bqurtas (talk) 07:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(For the archive) 10:59, 13 May 2020 Materialscientist talk contribs blocked Bqurtas talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Using Wikipedia for promotion or advertising purposes). More at User talk:Bqurtas. Since the page was deleted as an advertisement in the meantime, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:46:41, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Nitinsainimp


Nitinsainimp (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nitinsainimp You don't ask a question, but your draft is a clear advertisement for what I assume is your school. If it is your school, you must review and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, that's considered promotional. If you just want to tell the world about your school, you should use social media or your own website. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:12:30, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Zagreb12345 (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zagreb12345 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards of having reliable sources and notability. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:04, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ivikaspanwar


Ivikaspanwar (talk) 12:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ivikaspanwar You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:11:52, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


I would like you to review the entire page.

Zagreb12345 (talk) 13:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zagreb12345. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can change that, so volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. Write about something else (we have over 6 million existing topics to choose from, see Wikipedia:Community portal if you aren't sure where to start) or write somewhere else. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zagreb12345 Wikipedia only reports on what reliable sources have said about a topic, your draft has zero sources let alone reliable ones, which is why it has been rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:21, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Hardi Parmar

Harshit Sheth is one of the most dynamic minds in Mumbai.In a town like Mumbai where one finds riches as well as poverty.He since a young age has been trying to blur the lines from educational point of view.I am a Journalist, I came to know about his story when I interviewed him for the portal , the youth.

Hardi Parmar (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hardi Parmar You offer no independent reliable sources with significant coverage(no sources at all, for that matter) showing how he meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone or posting a list of their accomplishments. These reasons are why your draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be sufficiently improved. You are welcome to edit about other topics in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:55:15, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ductus1619


Ductus1619 (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page currently has zero reliable sources. In addition, it reads more like an advertisement, which is contrary to the purpose of wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on =SAFESUBST==time:H:i:s, j F Y}} for assistance on =Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC=submission by 24.122.136.243



24.122.136.243 (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has currently zero reliable sources. All articles on Wikipedia must have at least three reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Note that many articles were created before we started the ridiculous AfC process, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS if you find one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:48:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by 212.103.243.120


There is nothing substantial wrong with the 'Graeme Baber' article. Every statement within it is referenced from web sources from which the truth of its content can be verified. Reviewers have been persistently critical on edits. The penultimate reviewer stopped the article on 1st May, and the final reviewer on 2nd May refused to re-review it and then delete if there is no change of view on the part of the then reviewers, as requested in the delete statement inserted after the penultimate review. One would think that one was trying to post this draft in 'The Lancet', rather than in the main on-line dictionary.

Please make the minor edits necessary to bring the current 'Graeme Baber' article into a suitable form for the draft to become a webpage within Wikipedia. With thanks.

212.103.243.120 (talk) 17:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you attempted to delete the article, but now want it added to mainspace? It sounds like you have some internal conflicts you might need to work out. In the meantime, a fellow editor has rejected the article which means they felt there is no shot of fixing the article enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. As such, it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


19:54:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Teamwizardmedia07

Please review it again we have updated the details about mr aditya belnekar we will keep on updating i requestwikipedia team to review this article once again thankx Teamwizardmedia07 (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

who is "we"? Since the filer has been indeffed, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:33:26, 13 May 2020 review of submission by SdearrSET

Hello I'm new: I'm trying to post an article about and for the company I work for as an objective answer to "who is Set Solutions". My rejection makes sense because the article was empty and poorly formatted, but I don't know what to compare to except for giant organizations like Optiv. Is there a minimum businesses requirement for references? I understand that I can't be impartial as an employee, but I thought that's what the community and moderators are for - how is the information verified which needs to be verified? The short statement on my submission is objectively correct, though I could just copy/paste from a press release on Yahoo if that's more helpful.

SdearrSET (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SdearrSET First, you must review and comply with the paid editing policy; this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. You should also review conflict of interest.
Your draft was rejected, not just declined, which means that there is little to no chance that it can meet Wikipedia guidelines. You seem to have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is; it is not a place to merely tell about a company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable company.(please read) Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it. Because of this, not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:59:40, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Zagreb12345 (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:15:06, 13 May 2020 review of draft by KplusWequalsU

We need help getting this article up to wiki standards to reach mainspace please give informative feedback and edits thanks appreciate your help

KplusWequalsU (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? You have been given advice by reviewers, is there something that you don't understand about it? 331dot (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 14

00:15:40, 14 May 2020 review of draft by Convoeur


Completely at a lost to understand how a submitted article fails the inline citation policy. The citations included are to sources like the New York Times and the Atlantic. From policy: "...they should be reliable; that is, credible published materials with a reliable publication process whose authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand."

Patterned this entry on about three dozen similar entries for other bishops in the Episcopal Church. Unclear what the substantive difference is.

Convoeur (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Convoeur I'm quite sure that decline was an error, it's quite easy for a reviewer to accidentally click the wrong decline reason. Please feel free to resubmit it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:27:57, 14 May 2020 review of draft by CTR117


I've been attempting to create a article on the company Merle Norman Cosmetics but it has been declined twice because of it being judged that it reads like an advertisement, but I didn't include puffery or use any non-cited material/statements that might cause that result.

When the article was declined the only feedback I received was that it "read like an advertisement" and not why or where it did. Could the article have a quick read-through to leave any recommendations or fixes to avoid it being declined for an advertisement again?

Thanks!

CTR117 (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CTR117 It's promotional because it just tells about the company. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:49:09, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Greg c1988


Can I please get someone to re-review this, in light of the additional reference that has been added. Thank you

Greg c1988 (talk) 01:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greg c1988, The additional source does very little. Also, the article has been rejected which means a fellow reviewer has determined there is no hope at this time of demonstrating notability (a decision I endorse) as such it will not be considered further at this time. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:19:49, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Nilabh Shivam 333


Nilabh Shivam 333 (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:18:47, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Jschwarz85

Added references as per requests. Jschwarz85 (talk) 05:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jschwarz85, The article has already been rejected which means a fellow reviewer has determined there is no shot at currently demonstrating notability. As such, it will not be considered further at this time. Even if it was, the added sources are not compelling and would not meet any notability threshold. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia refers to Bubbleblabber multiple times when making references as seen here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Bubbleblabber&go=Go&ns0=1

That enough should make notability threshold.

@Jschwarz85: No it doesn't, as sources need to be reliable to count towards Notability, and Wikipedia doesn't consider itself a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:11, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Richard12x


I request a review, as the editor may not think the article is notable however, in the Caribbean region and an entire country it is very notable. I refer to multiple examples of Hotels in the Caribbean with their own pages setting a precedent;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Lane_(resort) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairmont_Royal_Pavilion_(Resort) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belmond_Cap_Juluca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CuisinArt_Resort_and_Spa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carimar_Beach_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_Aruba_Resort_%26_Casino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_Rock,_St_Barths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheval_Blanc,_St_Barths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Le_Toiny

I believe this is enough reason to re-consider this article for publication

Richard12x (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Richard12x, The article has been rejected, which means it will not be considered further. Notable or not (probably not) the overriding issue is that the page is just a run of the mill advertisement for the hotel. If I had reviewed it I would have nominated it for WP:G11 as being unambiguously promotional. So, in essence, the rejection was probably a pretty friendly response. I would avoid using Wikipedia in the future for advertising. There's better outlets for it. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:52:41, 14 May 2020 review of draft by Daniel Hopwood


I am requesting help as I am not sure why Dhananjay Datar is not Wiki-able. It seems like in the Middle East business world he has had much more than a "passsing" reference. He has been noted by Forbes among other journals. Please explain further.Daniel Hopwood (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Hopwood (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:41:06, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Chetali11

Please help in publish the article as there are many glossary pages on wikipedia. Chetali11 (talk) 06:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chetali11 Feel free to point out these other inappropriate pages so they can be addressed. We can only address what we know about. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate pages to go undetected, even for years. See WP:OSE. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:02:19, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345


Hi, I added a reference for every single citation on the page. Can you please review and let me know if there are any changes needed? Thank you so much!

Zagreb12345 (talk) 07:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:42, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Techniees109


Techniees109 (talk) 13:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:07, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Trashfan


Nora Baldenweg is featured in the article Diego Baldenweg with Nora Baldenweg & Lionel Baldenweg. The purpose of this article is to have Nora Baldenweg added to the categories like "female film score composers" which apply only to her. Thank you for helping me finalise this article to meet Wikipedia standards.

Trashfan (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:06:52, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Doogierev


It would be really useful to know how I can amend the article further to increase the objectivity of the tone of voice. I have removed some additional information which could be interpreted as subtly promotional (i.e. reference to the low-income context of Seddon's background - even though this is well sourced across a number of broadsheet media articles). But it would be good to get any further advice on how to improve the article further. I have ensured I have commented my changes so it's easier for reviewers to see where I have made edits, which may been missed previously due to a dearth of quality commenting on my part.

Thank you,

Doogie.

Doogierev (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:34:16, 14 May 2020 review of draft by EricaVonnn


First Question: My chart was denied for "lack of context." If I am writing a page about the Hite Art Institute, what sort of information is needed to provide context for their department heads? Can I publish components as I go, or do I need to finish the whole page before I publish? I assumed the lacking context was that the page was submitted unfinished, but I wanted to make sure I understood before my content was declined again and deleted. Should I keep publishing items to my sandbox in order to keep them saved and then publish the page as a whole?

Second Question: I have drawn from a fair amount of unpublished historical information from first-hand accounts within the department. For instance, one professor wrote a log from the 1960s of how many classes were being taught, how many buildings we had, the local organizations involved, etc. This was kept as a record for the department, not published. How do I cite this? I have his name and the essay title, and I could find out the year that he wrote it, but again it was not "published" for the remaining portions of the citation.

EricaVonnn (talk) 19:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:54:27, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Umegbewe Nwebedu

I don't really understand why my article was declined i would appreciate if explained properly to me and what to do Umegbewe Nwebedu (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:58:17, 14 May 2020 review of submission by Naaomii9903


I would like to know why my submission was declined. The thing is Mooftsh is a social media news channel and it is bringing a lot of news (local and international) to the society in Kuwait through their accounts in different Social Media because most of the people are active in Social Media nowadays. In the respond I got for this page was that there were not that enough references for this page. Because of this page is focusing mostly on bringing news through Social Media, there are not that many articles about it. Expect for the one where they won the best news page. The only trustful references and information is their social media accounts that I have added in External links. You can check their twitter account https://twitter.com/mooftsh?lang=gu/

Naaomii9903 (talk) 20:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naaomii9903 If this social media channel does not have significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, it would not merit an article on Wikipedia at this time, no matter how well you write it. Facebook merits an article because multiple independent reliable sources have written about it. Wikipedia is not interested in what the channel says about itself, as Wikipedia exists only to summarize what others say about it. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot I have added references, reliable references that has been talking about the news agency. But still it was declined. The only reason I can guess why they were suspected as not reliable is because they are in Arabic. Can it be because of that? Naaomii9903 (talk) 12:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:36:50, 14 May 2020 review of draft by BGT1538


Hello, I am working on the article and I thank you for your collaboration to complement it mainly on the issue of references so that it can be approved, since the cachacos are an important ethnic group in Bogotá.

BGT1538 (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

03:53:25, 15 May 2020 review of submission by 2601:CA:C300:18A0:4CC7:8C08:D57C:4322

Don’t understand how the topic is not notable with a reliable source 2601:CA:C300:18A0:4CC7:8C08:D57C:4322 (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, networthpost.org is not a reliable source. Furthermore, a single source is almost never enough. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, second sources containing significant coverage of their topic. The rejection of the draft is meant to convey that no such sources exist, so no amount of editing will make the draft acceptable. Consequently volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:47:06, 15 May 2020 review of submission by HardiTalwani


HardiTalwani (talk) 04:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC) How do I delete a page on Wikipedia?[reply]

Hi HardiTalwani. See Wikipedia:How to delete a page. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:17:57, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Mintumondal24

Hello Helpdesk,

This is Mintu. I have been on wikipedia since last month. As you might have noticed my contribution on Wikipedia. I have been wondering to create an article that I know very closely. I have tried to modifiy one of the draft page in Wikipedia to enhance my skills. So, I got notification yesterday that my contribution has been declined again.

Could you please let me know why this page declined again? It would be great for me if you can guide me on how to create page or article on wikipedia? I have read all the guidelines here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_create_a_page) and (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Your_first_article) but still I am unable to publish aritcle. I don't know why... I have tried to give proper citation when I write any information.

Please help me!

Prompt reply is highly appreciable

Warm Regards, Mintu Mintumondal24 (talk) 05:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mintumondal24. The reason the draft was rejected is that the company is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Creating new articles is time consuming, frustrating, and overrated. There are millions of easier and better ways of improving the encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. After you've built up a few months or years of editing experience, you will be better prepared to create articles. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi (talk), Thank you for your response and I appreciate it to guide me. I will definitely enhance the editing experience from wikipedia communtiy portal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mintumondal24 (talk • contribs) 06:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:49:38, 15 May 2020 review of draft by Artemes


I am asking for help on references. I have as many or more as other people in this cateory, plus the subject was publishes in the Spanish Wikipedia site with many fewer references. Looking for some guidance

Artemes (talk) 05:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I need assistance on addition references. I added similar references from other peolpe in the category. Also the subject was published in the spanish wikipedia site with less references. Looking for some guidance

Artemes (talk) 05:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Artemes. Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the Spanish Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa.
The quality of references is vastly more important than the quantity. You cite AVN, which is reliable, but you also cite Iafd and Wikipedia, which are not, and should not be cited. It's unlikely that wallofcelebrities.com is reliable either. You may find more guidance on sources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography.
For a biography of a living person, it won't be enough to simply list the references you used in writing the text. You can assume that almost every sentence of the draft is likely to be challenged (reviewers are a skeptical bunch), so must be supported by an inline citation to the source that supports it. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:09:03, 15 May 2020 review of draft by 89.143.175.21


Dear Rewiever,

Thank you for fast and prompt response. However, Probably as many others, I am not familiar with the Wikipedia, since I am a new member. I received a negative response regarding green tribology, however, I would like to ask for help. How to link/merge the short content, which I proposed to the existing article Tribology? I would appreciate your time.

Kind regards, Marko

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Green_tribology

89.143.175.21 (talk) 07:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Markotint: Wikipedia:Merging explains the process. The reviewer has performed step #2 for you. Go back and do step #1: on Talk:Tribology create a new section explaining why Tribology would be improved by merging Draft:Green tribology into it. Wait a week for discussion to take place (step #3). If there is no discussion, or if the consensus is clearly to merge, continue with steps #4 and #5. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:09:35, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Aurélie MDZ


Hi, My page has not been improved by 1292simon, who doesn't give any reason. As I'm a a beginner in creating Wikipedia page, I don't understand how to contact him in order to exchange with him, although its page to contact him is mentionned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:1292simon

How to do that?

Best regards, Aurelie

Aurélie MDZ (talk) 10:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aurélie MDZ. Click User talk:1292simon, on that page click the "New section" tab, and type your question in the large editing window. Help:Talk pages explains in more detail. Before you contact him, it would be helpful to everyone if you wrote a few words on your user page explaining why you're writing about La Muse en Circuit. Perhaps you are a student there, or are employed there? --Worldbruce (talk) 14:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:51, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Poonamchatterjee


Poonamchatterjee (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please help

11:40:04, 15 May 2020 review of draft by Pt8340


This article is written fully Neutral point of view all the information in it is from reliable , information and reputated sources like Times of India, Forbes India, Business Standard, CNBC TV18, Business World, The Economic Times, India Today. So this is notable topic. Anybody can check all the information in the article from reliable source as mention above.so this is verifiable This article has been written responsibly, cautiously and in a dispassionate tone without understatement and overstatement with all information from independent and reliable sources. All information in the article is attributable to reliable and published source. So there is No original research. He has received singnificant coverage in multiple published sources that are independent to each other and independent to the subject. And he has received India's young Achiever 2016, Included in the Forbes 30 under 30 finance list, He was mentioned in Forbes India maiden tycoons of Tomorrow list. So this is notable. This is following every policy and guidelines of Wikipedia. So this should be live on Wikipedia

Pt8340 (talk) 11:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of the three separate reviewers who declined it. The article is sourced from notices, press releases, and promotional interviews with the principals the the company, which also do not count as independent sources. The many 30 under 30 awards are basically promotionalism, and at most show the company might be notable someday in the future. The editor was asked about possible COI, and has not yet answered, DGG ( talk ) 16:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have improved this page after your review. And most of the references are reliable, secondary sources that are independent to the subject written by independent journalist. And his company and brother has already Wikipedia page.Please review this page and it live on Wikipedia @DGG:

Your only two articles are on a financial service and the proprietor of a financial service. You have now declared that you have no coi. My decline is not a veto. In fact, I think it fair that, if I decline to accept an article, another reviewer look at it the next time, to avoid any possible preconceptions or unconscious bias. So any other reviewer who wants to take responsibility can accept it. As advice, it's probably not a good idea for anyone to begin their wiki-career with an article about a er service or executive, or about a noncommercial organization or charity or school. Rather, start with something that will unquestionably qualify, such as a legislator or former legislator. DGG ( talk ) 19:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:09:40, 15 May 2020 review of submission by Tinkunath55


Tinkunath55 (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tinkunath55. Unlike Facebook, LinkedIn, or similar sites, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:45, 15 May 2020 review of draft by QueenSnicklefritz


I have been declined twice. I did add three reliable sources. I am not sure how to disclose my COI. Can you please help? I also would like to know what category to add on the talkpage Template:WikiProject TOPIC to speed up review process. Thanks!

QueenSnicklefritz (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QueenSnicklefritz: I've left more information on your talk page about how to disclose a conflict of interest. There isn't anything that can be added to the draft or talk page that would definitely speed up review, but I've added a Wikipedia:WikiProject Archaeology banner that might attract the attention of someone interested in the field. Don't hold your breath. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@QueenSnicklefritz: It was reviewed 4 days ago and declined. Theroadislong (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:12:35, 15 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by VarlamTikhonovich


A crafted an article in the English language wikipedia.

My article is a translation of an article in the Spanish wikipedia regarding a modestly prominent Uruguayan artist.

The piece was rejected with the statement:

"Wikipedia is not a resume service. Needs more external news sources to show notability for this person."

Yet since the Spanish article has been there for 4 years, why is an English language translation "a resume service" ?

Is there one standard for Spanish language articles and a different standard that excludes many artists who are more familiar to Spanish language users?

If the English language article must NOT exist, why is there a different view regarding the Spanish language article ?


VarlamTikhonovich (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VarlamTikhonovich. Yes, the standards may be different. Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the Spanish Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Another thing to consider is that existence of an article doesn't mean that it meets the policies and guidelines, or that it should exist. It could be just that no one has gotten around to improving it or deleting it yet. You can try to find better sources and rewrite your effort to be more in line with the English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (see WP:FA for examples of high-quality articles). Or you can move on to something else. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hey (talk) How does Wikipedia guard against unconscious bias ? Or does it ?

It is inevitable that editors will attribute greater value or significance to things that English language culture values, and derogate the value of significance of things that English language culture finds less valuable or important.

VarlamTikhonovich

If you think a page shows undue bias, you are welcome to tag it with WP:NPOV issues or discuss it on the article's talk page. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@VarlamTikhonovich: WikiProject Countering systemic bias is entirely devoted to the issue. Many other projects, such as WikiProject Uruguay and WikiProject Islam, involve themselves in guarding against unconscious bias against particular groups. One of the most effective targeted efforts has been WikiProject Women in red. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

00:37:22, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Alivia watkins


Alivia watkins (talk) 00:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

   why was my article declined? I had correct spelling and punctuation. I was not given a real reason why my article was declined. can you please tell me how to fix my article? Alivia watkins (talk) 00:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC) Alivia watkins[reply]
You were given a reason, are you not able to see the decline message at the top of the article?
more precisely, you wrote an extremely negative unsourced article about an organization--an organization about which we already have a properly sourced properly balanced wikipedia article. It would be better to start with some subject about which it is easier to write a neutral article, and to always add references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements DGG ( talk ) 19:31, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:33:33, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Thoufiq313


Greetings I have submitted 2 articles for approval however the articles can be found on google but I have not received any kind of message of approval requesting you to address my query.--Thoufiq313 (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thoufiq313 (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thoufiq313 The messages telling you that your drafts were accepted are on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Sir Some of the Drafts were accepted in my User draft page but for some, I did not receive any such kind of message. --Thoufiq313 (talk) 08:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thoufiq313 You have two drafts that have not been submitted for review. You will need to add {{subst:AFC draft}} to each draft(as you see it when reading this page, without the nowiki tags I placed in the edit window to suppress their function here) and then submit them. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:29:49, 16 May 2020 review of draft by 2405:201:C80D:27EA:3595:79EA:1F39:4106


Hi, This is my first article on Wikipedia. Can you please help me on what is required from my article to get it approved and get published. Or specifically on what information needs citations.

2405:201:C80D:27EA:3595:79EA:1F39:4106 (talk) 06:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is a clear promotional piece for Mr. Dhawan. It reads as a resume and not an encyclopedia article. Please read Your First Article for more information, as well as WP:CITE for information on how to cite sources. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:35, 16 May 2020 review of submission by HandR12

Would it be possible to let me know how I can change the article/ what I can change in it to get it approved? HandR12 (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:29:50, 16 May 2020 review of draft by Shivaghaneesh


Shivaghaneesh (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:40:59, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Knowledgenerd95

Hi, the article was declined because it says it not of notability and YouTube and IMDb are not reliable sources. There are other sources that are not blogs or social media links, they’re articles available on google news. From what I understand, these are reliable sources are they describe the life and career of the person described in the article and they’re present on the news. Knowledgenerd95 (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE READ THE ADDED REFERENCES, 11,12,13,14 to see if they qualify. thank you Knowledgenerd95 (talk) 19:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledgenerd95 Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that the reviewer feels there is little to no chance it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. Please heed the advice you were given by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 22:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Knowledgenerd95: The draft describes the subject as a "rising star", which is generally synonymous with "not notable" (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Medium.com is a blog, not a reliable source. Citing it is another uncannily reliable sign that the subject is not notable. US Times Now, The Open News, and Verna Magazine are promotional junk from him or his publicist, with no signs of independence and none of the characteristics of reliable sources. Rejection (without the option of resubmission) was the correct call on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:41:09, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Shahabtsh


Shahabtsh (talk) 22:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:44:03, 16 May 2020 review of submission by Iapsingh

I want to publish Ankit Prakash Singh page on Wikipedia because he's an Indian journalist and his page should be on Wikipedia. Iapsingh (talk) 23:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iapsingh. Rejection of the draft is meant to convey that the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, whatever your personal feelings are). No amount of editing can fix that problem, so volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 17

01:58:39, 17 May 2020 review of draft by LittleDinghy


Today I created my first Wikipedia account, created my user page and sandbox page, and started editing on my sandbox page using "Edit," which I'm more comfortable with than the "Edit Source." What I've written so far on the page explains how I want to use the page. Using "Edit," I've added two equations on the page, both numbered by using the citation feature. However, the citation list is not showing at the bottom of the page as I expected. Note that I put the equations in the citations as well, so as to have a list of all equations on the page in one place, with a link back to each equation reference on the page.

How can I get the equation citation list to show when published? It shows when in "Edit" mode, but not when published.

Thank you! LittleDinghy from Seattle.

LittleDinghy (talk) 01:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@LittleDinghy: look if you set a custom group attribute on <ref>, you need to add a group to {{reflist}} as well. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:05:18, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Viki Tuber


I want to present Indu Devi Tard on Wikipedia. I want you to improve the article.

Viki Tuber (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Viki Tuber Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning there is little to no chance it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards of notability- this person does not seem to meet the definition of a notable politician. We can't improve your drafts for you- it is up to you- but again, in this case, no amount of editing will help. 331dot (talk) 06:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:38:57, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Brosenow

My question is what is the difference between his page being published and Undrafted free agents from this years draft class Brosenow (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brosenow Please see other stuff exists; as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, and can only act on what they know about, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected. That isn't a reason for yours to exist. If you'd care to give an example of an existing article like yours, we can give you a better answer, but either 1) the existing article meets a different notability criteria or 2) the article is inappropriate and just hasn't been addressed yet. It appears that Malik Taylor does not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable football player because he has not yet appeared in a NFL game. Once he does, he will merit an article. You can certainly maintain your draft until the football season to see if he appears in a game. 331dot (talk) 07:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:00:58, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Ogeode

I am requesting a re-review because my initial copy was rejected. I have made several adjustments to the post so far. I also sorted help from the chat room and made the recommended adjustments. Thanks. Ogeode (talk) 10:00, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ogeode. AllBaze is user-generated promotional content, not an independent reliable source. This Day (via PressReader) is churnalism that briefly quotes Ogboruche; it is not significant coverage of him. The two pieces in The Guardian (Nigeria) similarly quote him briefly but are not significant coverage of him. Gospotainment.com doesn't mention Ogboruche. A personal blog like www.lindaikejisblog.com is not a reliable source, and must never be used as a source of information about a living third party. That particular post is a press release from Tehila Records. If you could prove it was written by Ogboruche, you would be allowed to cite it, but it would not be an independent source, so would not help establish notability.
Rejection is meant to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem, it's hopeless. So volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:42, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your very detailed feedback Worldbruce. I get the picture now. Ogeode (talk) 05:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:45, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Giraffer

Hi,

I tried to create an page for my userbox (in my sandbox) to be published under the name 'User:UBX/CGPGreyCatan' but it got rejected as it was said to be empty. I have already posted about this on the teahouse but I thought AfC might be helpful as well.

I'm not entirely sure why it got rejected. The user (not bot) that rejected it said it was blank but it has a userbox on it. Is this the wrong place to create a userbox?

Thanks in advance, Giraffer (talk) 10:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Giraffer. Potential articles go through the Articles for Creation review process. Userboxes are not potential articles and should not be submitted for review. You can test your userbox in your sandbox, then copy it to wherever you plan to host it, such as User:UBX/CGPGreyCatan. You don't need to involve anyone else. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks Giraffer (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:55:39, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Mdecastrog


Mdecastrog (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdecastrog: Presumably @Theroadislong: has more on this, but I suspect that the sources in the draft are either unreliable or independent of the subject. I have added the AFC template to the top so you can submit it once the issiues are resolved. Note that I know that you can move it back to mainspace whereever you wish, but it's not recommended. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article:AISHL

12:51:53, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Lt.SpectreJinx Valdez

Wikipedia editor have warned me about my article but now I have already changed the issues being mentioned. Will my article be posted or reviewed? Lt.SpectreJinx Valdez (talk) 12:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lt.SpectreJinx Valdez. It appears that AISHL will be deleted. Not only is the group not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia), the article doesn't even make a credible claim that they are important or significant. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:45:39, 17 May 2020 review of submission by Pritesh Lunkad


Pritesh Lunkad (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


15:12:26, 17 May 2020 review of draft by Fraserburgh


Good evening! I am puzzled as to why a reference to an article in the major Hong Kong daily newspaper, for example, is regarded as unreliable or unverifiable. If you are unable to see the article, I can send a cutting as an email attachment. Also, why is a reference to Asian Cha, an online literary journal based in Hong Kong regarded as unreliable or unverifiable? If I provide a reference, do you also require it to be repeated as an in-text citation? Grateful for your guidance! Fraserburgh (talk) 15:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear that anyone has said they're unreliable? BUT YouTube and blogs ARE unreliable, it would help if you removed them. Theroadislong (talk) 15:21, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:48:44, 17 May 2020 review of draft by Dilpreet Singh01


Dilpreet Singh01 (talk) 18:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

03:11:59, 18 May 2020 review of draft by Vannessajg


Hi, I am trying to find out how do I create the reference/source, career and discography sections. Vannessajg (talk) 03:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:13:51, 18 May 2020 review of draft by $2048cupcakes


Why did my Snake Bite article get declined? $2048cupcakes (talk) 04:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. Sulfurboy (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:42:09, 18 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Janu Mehra JM



Janu Mehra JM (talk) 04:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Janu Mehra is an INDIAN🇮🇳 boy.He is Blogger and Influencer.He is Born In JAMMU is Known as The City Of Temple.Born ON 20 October 2001.He completed is Scholling for Bal shiksha kender (B.S.K) chorli Bishnah.He is a Simple and Handsome.

Real Name: Vansh Mehra

INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/janu__mehra/

MOTHER: SMT.Rekha Devi

Father: SH.Ashok Kumar

NATIONALITY: indian🇮🇳

EDUCATION: +2 (2019)

Janu Mehra JM Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, see the autobiography policy. To tell the world about yourself, use social media. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:18:43, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Starsunsmile


Starsunsmile (talk) 06:18, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is currently highely promotional, which is out of Wikipedia's purpose. I've highlighted soem of the problematic text material using a different text color. Note that your draft currently cites zero reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and therefore fails WP:NCORP. If you havent already, I recommend going through WP:Your first article. 217.68.167.73 (talk) 08:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:34:52, 18 May 2020 review of draft by Joocha


Hi all, I add "bio" about some person, but this bio already few times declined, by this reason.

Link: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Giga_Agladze"

Reason: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

Can you help me what i to do, that this article was correct?

Joocha (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Joocha You need to review the Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional and gather independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person that can be summarized in an article. If no such sources exist, this person would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:58:43, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Eliassultan


Eliassultan (talk) 09:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 10:21:19, 18 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Landihan


General advice request on how to show artist's notability. Thanks, --Landihan (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:35:19, 18 May 2020 review of submission by 41.143.109.56

I'm no near to be affiliated with him. But i saw this draft online and edited it. But why you guys keeps rejecting him? I saw other wikis who shouldn't be anywhere but they are on Wikipedia. Sarcastic right? Are you guys even notable to become an admins of Wiki?? I use to be a user with reviewer role i left it because of crapy admins. No offense to you. But that's the ugly truth. I first joined Wikipedia on 2003. 41.143.109.56 (talk) 12:35, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@41.143.109.56: you don't need to be notable to become an admin on Wikipedia. In fact, more than 90% of the editors I interact with are not notable or at least don't have an obvivous article on themself]]. Further, I recommend that you have a read of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As most of the editors here do that in their free time, its entirely possible for inappropiate content to go undetected even for years. We can only act on things we know about. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:43:59, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Koto1749


My draft was rejected by notability, but I don't understand why it is not notable. Koto1749 (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Koto1749 As you were told by the reviewers, it appears that the person you were writing about does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. "YouTubers" rarely do- and only if independent reliable sources have given them significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Well, I showed independent Japanese reliable sources and I didn't only show YouTube page. I think these are understandable by Google translation for English speaker.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Koto1749 (talk • contribs)
Koto1749 You could ask the reviewer directly if they translated the Japanese sources, but it's entirely possible that they did. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thanks for your advice. I asked the reviewer on this issue.Koto1749 (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I added additional information of this person to this draft and I think it meets second criteria for musicians and ensembles of this page.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensemblesKoto1749 (talk) 04:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:50:47, 18 May 2020 review of submission by 93.42.65.231


93.42.65.231 (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:36:04, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Enzz.v

Good afternoon, My article keeps being refused by admins. I now have added 3 sources to prove the information that I have written but it keeps being refused for references reasons. Can I please have some help on the reason why my article is refused and how to get it accepted? Thank you very much in advance Enzz.v (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read WP:NSCHOOL as previously suggested? Theroadislong (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Enzz.v It is not necessarily administrators that are declining your draft. The reviewers have told you why they declined it- is there something that you don't understand about the explanation? Your draft does little more than tell that the school exists. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about the school. If no such sources exist, it would not merit an article. 331dot (talk) 14:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is a useless explanation. I have seen other schools with 1) only their website as a source 2) No more information that this one and they are live on wikipedia. Also all the sources cited provide enough information to prove that the school exists!

@Enzz.v and 331dot: Please have a read of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Many articles on Wikipedia were created before we we began the ridiculous articles for creation process, and we can only act on things we know. If you could provide a link to such article, we could act on this. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Enzz.v Other problematic articles existing does not mean yours can too. See WP:OSE. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. Feel free to point out these other articles so action can be taken. As I said, it is not a matter of proving that the school exists. 331dot (talk) 16:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Hi Enzz.v. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. Articles about schools are an interesting case. They have long been required to be notable in order to be included, but for many years there was a parallel contradictory practice that as long as they were high schools or above and could be proven to exist, they would not be deleted. The inconsistency was more or less resolved a few years ago, and substandard school articles are gradually being improved or deleted. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's current policies and guidelines does not mean they are "allowed". It may simply mean that no one has gotten around to deleting them yet. They are not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:09:58, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Mahawoo


Please re-review my article and let me know why you rejected me. All of this comtents are my own articles and I mentioned external links and other references. There is no problem with copyright issues. Mahawoo (talk) 15:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mahawoo, You are not notable under Wikipedia's standards. The article has been rejected which means that it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:32:32, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Rescuderomonte


Rescuderomonte (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I was tasked by my boss with crafting this page on behalf of our firm's pro bono center. I tried to be as nonpromotional as possible. An outright rejection will put me in a tough spot at work. Anything I can do to boost the chances of having at least something published? Many thanks for your time.

Rescuderomonte I regret to say that Wikipedia is completely unconcerned with what your work has tasked you with doing. Related to that, you must read and formally comply with the paid editing policy; a Terms of Use requirement. You should also read conflict of interest. You wrote a blatant advertisement for your firm. Wikipedia is not a place for organizations to tell about themselves. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable organization, please review). Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it. Typically, articles are written by independent editors that take note of a subject in reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. If you just want to tell the world about this pro bono firm, you should use social media or a website owned and operated by your firm. Feel free to show your superiors this message. 331dot (talk) 20:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:40:21, 18 May 2020 review of draft by Ijazkhusravi


Ijazkhusravi (talk) 22:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC) Hello, I created a page for the author Idris Bazorkin but I cannot seem to get it submitted for review. This text still prefaces the page even after I click "publish changes: "This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review. There are no deadlines as long as you are actively improving the submission. Drafts not being improved may be deleted after six months." How can I get this into the queue for review? Thanks![reply]

Ijazkhusravi Note that "Publish changes" should be understood to mean "save changes". It does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". To submit your draft for review, please click the blue button in the box at the top of your draft that says "submit your draft for review!" 331dot (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:47:24, 18 May 2020 review of submission by Haiqar888


Haiqar888 (talk) 22:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haiqar888 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet standards, and will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

02:29:28, 19 May 2020 review of submission by Brett Pretty

I created the article in good faith and only used publicly available information from their website, Google, and the news publication it is mentioned. It was not intended to be a promotion or advertising. It is only supposed to describe the company, as it is portrayed in the industry and with what is available in the news and doing an internet search. They're a big player in Australia in terms of financial advice and stock advices, I use them myself and I believe they should be mentioned in case potentital customer would like to know more information about them. I'm happy to help update the content that seemed like an ad to you guys or even participate in making a new one. I just think it would be valuable to anyone out there to know more about them before they buy from them. Brett Pretty (talk) 02:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:15:33, 19 May 2020 review of submission by 71.104.11.211


71.104.11.211 (talk) 03:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:02:09, 19 May 2020 review of draft by Michellewiki1992


All of my references and sources are taken from government websites (Hong Kong and China) and news media, how come they are not powerful enough to prove? For the chinese one, I couldnt find any English version but people can use google translate. Please kindly tell me what kind of websites and sources are clarified as strong evident. Thank you Michellewiki1992 (talk) 04:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:39:57, 19 May 2020 review of submission by Ying Pan

Hi, I've adjusted my article and add sources to the content. Although this is an article about company, it is written in a neutral perspective. Pages like ThoughtSpot and Andcards were also written in a neutral view instead of promoting, and they were accepted and published successfully. May I have your help to review my article? Thank you so much. Ying Pan (talk) 04:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:44:45, 19 May 2020 review of submission by Koto1749


Hi, my this draft was rejected yesterday for the reason of notability, but I added additional information to the draft today and I think it meets second criteria for musicians and ensembles of this page.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles Koto1749 (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:40:53, 19 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sogand Kamranii


hello everyone , there is a famous Iranian actress with IMDb - Google Knowledge Panel - and many other news . i was create an article for Tina Akhondtabar but it doesnt accepted . please help me .

Sogand Kamranii (talk) 05:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:42:05, 19 May 2020 review of submission by Sogand Kamranii

Duplicate helpdesk submission
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.




Sogand Kamranii (talk) 05:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:06:15, 19 May 2020 review of submission by JohnMabhegede


I would like to find out why my article was rejected. I got the response This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia

JohnMabhegede (talk) 06:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:00:08, 19 May 2020 review of submission by Bluegene18

Hi. I feel like this new article was unfairly rejected, but I have modified it in any case to include even more neutral sources and more factual information which show the notability of the company. I did not feel that it was ever written from the viewpoint of the company, not least because I have nothing to do with them. I hope that this revised draft now meets the criteria. Thank you for your consideration. Bluegene18 (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=957529933"