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 Charlie063 (talk | contribs) at 05:32, 26 August 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


August 20

Request on 03:49:37, 20 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by LucyNakahara



LucyNakahara (talk) 03:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LucyNakahara, Please ask a question Fiddle Faddle 08:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:18:01, 20 August 2020 review of submission by Alvin kipchumba kosgei

{{Lafc|username=Alvin kipchumba kosgei|ts=08:18:01, 20 August 2020|page=it is a notable project as it is widely used by very many people. its soureces range including;google[1],safaricom[2],citizen[3] and its own webpage.

References

  1. ^ [www.google.com/viusasa "google"]. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  2. ^ [www.safaricom.co.ke "viusasa"]. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  3. ^ [www.citizen.co.ke "viusasa"]. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Alvin kipchumba kosgei (talk) 08:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alvin kipchumba kosgei, Then please follow the comment of the reviewer and make the improvements required Fiddle Faddle 08:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alvin kipchumba kosgei, Asking the same question twice is not appropriate. Fiddle Faddle 08:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:45:38, 20 August 2020 review of draft by PaulXR


Notability

Hello!

I have a question related to the notability criteria... Few days ago, my request was declined even though it had some references, but if we look at some other articles, like Subhuman (film), it has no references or notability at all, how is it still on Wikipedia. Just a question. Thank you! :))

Warmly, Paul XR PaulXR (talk) 10:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have tagged it for deletion, please see other stuff exists. Theroadislong (talk) 10:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PaulXR, No article on Wikipedia ever sets a precedent for any other article. If it did we woful have a very fast descent into idiocracy
We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 11:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:05:36, 20 August 2020 review of draft by 2409:4066:103:B9B7:0:0:255D:60B1


2409:4066:103:B9B7:0:0:255D:60B1 (talk) 13:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you were told in the decline notice " the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Internet censorship in India instead. Theroadislong (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:00:27, 20 August 2020 review of submission by ClaireMarieV


ClaireMarieV (talk) 14:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ClaireMarieV, I imagine you have a question, Tradition dictates that you should ask it since this is a help desk. I'm afraid our telepathy interface is still in alpha testing Fiddle Faddle 14:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:28:01, 20 August 2020 review of submission by 98.247.16.10


Drastic edit down based on reviewer comments. Tried to remove everything but the verifiable and focus on the notable... what do I do now to resubmit? Thanks!


98.247.16.10 (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are MargaritaLover, remember to log in before posting so that your edits are properly attributed to you. The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please read the comments left by reviewers in the draft. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:34:20, 20 August 2020 review of submission by Jasonreed1828


Since this review, 1828 has been covered by many national news outlets - the Guardian, the Times, the Telegraph, Sky News, the Independent, the Mirror, the Express, the Morning Star, etc. - I believe it is now noteworthy enough.

Jasonreed1828 (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


17:46:10, 20 August 2020 review of draft by The Bored History Kid


How to find reliable sources The Bored History Kid (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Bored History Kid A subject merits a Wikipedia article if it has significant coverage in published independent reliable sources that have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control. These would be things like books, magazines, reputable websites, etc. I might suggest that what you are trying to do might be better suited as an addition to an existing article. 331dot (talk) 19:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:15:59, 20 August 2020 review of submission by KNivarthy


Hello. This draft has been revised to reflect the general notability of the subject. The subject is notable because of her extensive experience in tax policy law, as displayed by her experience developing legislation on Capitol Hill, working in top consulting positions in numerous prominent firms, and her ongoing work in establishing and serving on high-level positions in several notable non-profits. The coverage of the subject has also been revised to focus on her noteworthy career as opposed to her candidacy.

Furthermore, the sources have been edited to reflect a neutral point of view, in that they are reliable and independent of the subject. The sources have extensive coverage of the subject’s career and notable work, and the subject is widely mentioned among several prominent sources.

I implore you to publish this draft, as it provides an important addition to Wikipedia and is a satisfactory summary of the subject’s career and work.

KNivarthy (talk) 22:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. The sources you have added do not establish general notability; and as a politician she would only merit an article if she wins her election. The only reason for the vast majority of sources is that she is running for office. Many of the other sources are press release type stories or merely citing that what she has done in her life, and are not significant coverage. If she wins, a fresh draft will probably need to be written. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:KNivarthy - You posted a similar request on my talk page. I rejected the resubmission of the draft for two reasons. First, Wikipedia very seldom accepts drafts of biographies of candidates for office who have not been elected. We have found that such drafts are almost always non-neutral, and are focused on using Wikipedia to publicize the campaign. Second, the draft was resubmitted with very little change since it was last submitted and declined. Resubmitting a draft with very little change after it has been declined is a waste of the time both of the author and of the reviewer. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 21 August 2020 (UTC) reply[reply]

August 21

Request for Review

Dear Reviewer,

I would like to bring to your notice that the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adeeb_Ahamed was deleted using deletion review was because due to a spelling mistake in the article name the reviewers were not able to access any of the sources. When you check with the right name Adeeb Ahamed there are plenty of independent sources available to support notability. I humbly request you to reconsider. Thank you (Kuruvillac (talk) 05:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@Kuruvillac: Doesn't look like, does it? I haven't looked into sourcing right now, but it doesn't appear that you changed anything since the last rejection. May I ask you to list the sources that you regard as reliable here, preferably without spelling mistakes in the url?. Keep WP:NPERSON in mind. @Robert McClenon: for your notice. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:20, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi (talk),

Thank you for responding. Thats what happened during deletion review, the article was created using a name with a spelling mistake, so during review the sources were not showing, hence it was deleted. For the correct name Adeeb Ahamed, we have the following sources

https://www.arabianbusiness.com/lists/408686-indian-rich-list-2018-14-adeeb-ahamed https://gulfnews.com/business/remittances-go-digital-1.1597425005076 https://www.arabianbusiness.com/banking-finance/443348-abu-dhabi-stimulus-package-to-mitigate-panic-says-lulu-financial-boss https://www.arabianbusiness.com/business/425981-investing-in-the-future-adeeb-ahamed-managing-director-of-lulu-financial-group https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/297987 https://www.arabianbusiness.com/retail/421501-turning-tablez https://www.weforum.org/people/adeeb-ahamed

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/retail/turning-tables-how-adeeb-ahamed-of-the-lulu-group-is-foraying-further-with-food-toys-and-fashion/articleshow/60136087.cms https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/kochi/2020/may/06/uae-bizman-adeeb-ahamed-appointed-trustee-of-kochi-biennale-foundation-2139583.html https://www.arabianbusiness.com/business/425981-investing-in-the-future-adeeb-ahamed-managing-director-of-lulu-financial-group https://www.gulftoday.ae/business/2020/02/02/budget-evokes-mixed-response-from-nri-community https://www.fortuneindia.com/bengaluru-buzz/lulu-group-bets-on-india-despite-slowdown-woes/103560 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/lulu-group-to-build-a-hotel-in-amsterdam/articleshow/73187415.cms

https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/corporate/lulu-opens-great-scotland-yard-in-london https://www.gulf-times.com/story/650023/LuLu-s-Twenty14-Holdings-completes-300mn-UK-invest https://www.gulf-times.com/story/635428/Adeeb-Ahamed-honoured-as-NRI-Businessman-of-the-Ye https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/lulu-group-arm-plans-to-open-20-toy-stores-in-india/article27004961.ece https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/lulu-group-to-build-a-hotel-in-amsterdam/articleshow/73187415.cms https://gulfnews.com/business/banking/expats-switch-to-lulu-money-for-a-superior-money-transfer-experience-1.1590057170340

https://www.arabianbusiness.com/retail/420531-lulu-groups-tablez-plans-75m-investment-in-india https://gulfnews.com/business/lulu-international-exchange-valuing-your-trust-across-nations-1.1566820470943 https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/retail/lulu-groups-retail-arm-tablez-launches-chinese-lifestyle-brand-yoyoso-in-india/articleshow/70994496.cms

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/hotels-/-restaurants/lulu-unit-plans-to-invest-rs-1000-cr-in-india/articleshow/67877403.cms https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/banking-finance/12-major-companies-to-accept-indias-rupay-card-in-uae https://www.thenational.ae/business/markets/lulu-exchange-acquires-al-falah-exchange-1.614213 Thank You (Kuruvillac (talk) 12:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

User:Kuruvillac - This is a URL Dump, and is ugly and difficult to read. I will take another look within 24 hours, but I will not try to parse the URL Dump. Providing a URL Dump wastes your time and that of the reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon ,

Thank you for reconsideration. I made a spelling mistake in the initial article and hence it caused the article to be deleted in deletion review.

Sorry for providing too many references. I am not an experienced editor. Hope you will forgive my ignorance. Thank again for your time. (Kuruvillac (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

User:Kuruvillac - You say that the article was deleted in deletion review because you made a spelling mistake. Do you mean an error in spelling the subject's name using the Latin alphabet? If so, we are aware that his name is written in English either as Adeeb Ahmed or Adeeb Ahamed. I don't think that will change the result. Also, you say that the article was deleted in deletion review. You probably mean that it was deleted in a deletion discussion. That is not the same as a Deletion Review. I see no indication that there was a deletion review. You might consider requesting a deletion review, which is a different proceeding, but only if you can provide a stronger argument than you have provided here.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon ,

The two cases I would like to bring to your attention are

1. The current draft of Adeeb Ahamed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adeeb_Ahamed is vastly different from the earlier deleted article in article for deletion process.

2. Secondly article for deletion discussion was faulty due to a mistake I made. I created the earlier article in the name Adeeb Ahmed where as his actual name is Adeeb Ahamed. Since the name Adeeb Ahmed does not throw up an sources it was deleted during deletion discussion. If the correct name was used instead it would have give numerous independent sources to establish notability as Mr Adeeb Ahamed is among the top 5 industrialists in India and humbly suggest that notability should never have been in question. Thank you for responding and reconsidering. (Kuruvillac (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

07:01:18, 21 August 2020 review of submission by FARNSWORTH9999


Good morning. I tried to submit a page that I was editing on my sandbox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FARNSWORTH9999/sandbox) about the actress Betty Foxx but it was declined due to reliable sources. I have serched in other pages about other actors or actress and I think they have the same amount of information. I have linked interview, a link to the piece of new when she was nominated, her link on databases. I would like to know what can I do in to get published the page. Than you in advance

FARNSWORTH9999 (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FARNSWORTH9999: this needs reliable sources that are independent of the subject (i.e. no intervies or press releases) and have some coverage of the subject (not yust passing mentions). Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:01:14, 21 August 2020 review of submission by Davidbonbright


I took out any references that touched on my neutrality as an author. There is lots of reliable independent reference in the piece so it should stand now. Davidbonbright (talk) 14:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DavidbonbrightThere are actually zero reliable sources in the draft. Where do you think they are? Theroadislong (talk) 14:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:37:24, 21 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Venkatasaikatepalli

NOT DONE
not done, Wikipedia doesn't help you to advertise your website. Where is your WP:COI disclosure btw? Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This is my own source. Please help me to add this article. I will make time to time changes.

Venkatasaikatepalli (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Wikipedia doesn't want to help you advertise your website. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

15:54:10, 21 August 2020 review of submission by Pupuce2020


I have reputable music news sourcing documenting the bands latest album. Please take another look. Pupuce2020 (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC) Pupuce2020 (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook and blogs are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:40, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:01:26, 21 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 68.102.42.216


The 2020-21 NBA Transactions page needs to be a article now Because the 2019–20 NBA regular season has ended Last friday. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 16:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

68.102.42.216 (talk) 16:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:48:00, 21 August 2020 review of submission by DJ888kmg

Hi, I think the submission references do show qualification for a Wikipedia Article. They show significant coverage in independent and reliable source and are independent of the subject (Phonographic Performance Limited is a separate entity and whilst VLP is mention on their website, it is not a VPL website. Now cited, House of Lords, Companies House, Bloomberg, Academic article...Certainly think this is worthy of a Page. DJ888kmg (talk) 16:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing any in-depth coverage in independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:48:35, 21 August 2020 review of submission by TheNobleBug

I am attempting to create Draft:Charlotte_Football_Club to redirect to Charlotte_FC; however, even with a source from Charlotte FC's official website, it was declined. I have now added a second source from MLS's website. TheNobleBug (talk) 17:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheNobleBug it was declined because AFC is not concerned with redirects. Please just go ahead and create it, redirects are not subject to review at AFC. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will move it to mainspace for you, and remove the unnecessary references. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Dodger67, is there a better way to make redirects without submitting AfCs? TheNobleBug (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TheNobleBug simply create it directly in mainspace. A redirect is such a simple page that it's not worth the bother to create as a draft. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:17, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TheNobleBug just so you're aware, there is an AfC process for redirects at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories. But once your account is autoconfirmed - which happens after 4 days and 10 edits - you can create redirects directly. Spicy (talk) 12:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:53, 21 August 2020 review of submission by Fernandesrohit

Made changes to the page to not seem like advertisement, though that's what it came across as. Fernandesrohit (talk) 19:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Still reads like blatant advertising with no independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:00:59, 21 August 2020 review of draft by Ireneangelico


Hi Wikipedia,

As you suggested, I have deleted the IMDb references and replaced them all with newspaper and journal references instead.

My article Irene Lilienheim Angelico was written by the academic, journalist, and film reviewer Maurie Alioff. He knows us because he has reviewed a couple of our films over the years. He also did the article about Abbey Jack Neidik. When he was finished , he asked me to provide a lot of the references, because many are old and I have copies in our physical archives and on our website. i did this and submitted the articles. I realize after reading your guideline more carefully, that this was a mistake and I should have sent it back to Maurie Alioff to contribute himself. Can I still do that now?

Thanks and be well,

Irene Lilinheim Angelico ```` Ireneangelico (talk) 21:00, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It reads exactly like an autobiography full of hagiography “ prestigious”, “winner of numerous international award”, “ international critical acclaim and many awards”, “highly regarded film”, “write award-winning series”, “endorsed by Nobel Peace Prize Laureates”, “created uniquely for” etc. Theroadislong (talk) 09:27, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 22

08:28:58, 22 August 2020 review of draft by MediaManager1


Hi. I need help with references. Should the material be exactly relevant to the source used? I changed some of the unreliable source by editing the text/facts to match ghe source reference. Is that how it is supposed to be? Thanks

MediaManager1 (talk) 08:28, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MediaManager1: Yes - if someone wants to check that what you've written is factual they should be able to click the reference and clearly see where you've sourced the information from. What you should be doing is starting with a list of sources which talk about the subject in depth. Then write the article in your own words based on what those sources say. This way you will find it easy to add appropriate references. To do it the other way around, writing something and then trying to find a source for it is much harder and may indicate that you're writing the article based on your personal knowledge rather than from what you've found in reliable sources. The following may be helpful: WP:WHYCITE and Wikipedia:References dos and don'ts. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:46, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:16:23, 22 August 2020 review of submission by Psyzone222


Psyzone222 (talk) 09:16, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Psyzone222 Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for musicians to promote their careers or for people to write about themselves. Please review the autobiography policy. As a musician, you would only merit a Wikipedia article if you receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. If you do, you shouldn't be the one to write such an article. Someone who takes note of your career will eventually choose to write about you. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:25:33, 22 August 2020 review of submission by 2405:205:1085:ECCA:2CD2:370B:D3E3:43C3


2405:205:1085:ECCA:2CD2:370B:D3E3:43C3 (talk) 09:25, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You do not ask a question, but what you wrote is a very long way from a Wikipedia article. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. You offer no sources at all and no content beyond telling what the subject does. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:36:42, 22 August 2020 review of submission by Syedmehmood11


Syedmehmood11 (talk) 09:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why its rejected?

Syedmehmood11 Your draft was rejected because you do not offer anything beyond telling that the company exists. Wikipedia articles must do more than merely tell that the subjects exists. An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article for more information. If you work for this company, you need to review conflict of interest and paid editing and make the required declarations(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement if you are a company representative). 331dot (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help me to make it able to publish Syedmehmood11 (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Syedmehmood11 The draft will not be considered further. You must make the declarations required by the paid editing and conflict of interest policies now. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:17:31, 22 August 2020 review of submission by Charlie063

Sir she is noted person her movies have been released its pages is also there also few upcoming movies also facebook has verified her page request you to kindly review again.. Charlie063 (talk) 11:17, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie063 The draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. The actress appears to not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actress. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Her movcies has been released movie pages is also there in wikipedia request you to re review Charlie063 (talk) 11:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie063 Please edit this existing section by clicking "edit", instead of creating additional sections. The draft will not be reviewed again, you are only wasting your own time, and that of others, by repeatedly asking. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:12:37, 22 August 2020 review of submission by 195.132.158.100


I believe the draft is now much more complete and contains reference showing clear objectivity and not any promotion.

195.132.158.100 (talk) 12:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have added YouTube links and interviews neither of which change the fact that the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:56:17, 22 August 2020 review of submission by SeanFitzjohn


Hi there! I have attached the following 2 sources from IMDB which should verify Zaur as a Wikipedia-worthy article.

1. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm11643919/ 2. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12469952/

Hope this suffices, thank you in advance!

SeanFitzjohn (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that IMDb is not a reliable source as it is user generated, so has no bearing on any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:09:11, 22 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Officialtollu


I do not understand what my reviewer, M-Mustapha means when s/he says that the references I submitted for my article Template:Jamil Muhammed Abubakar doesn't have significant coverage. I'd appreciate it if this can be expatiated on and possible solutions suggested. Thank you

Officialtollu (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:04:09, 22 August 2020 review of submission by Ankitjdv


Ankitjdv (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ankitjdv: This would need reliable sources (no user-generated content such as most social networks) that are independent of the subject (no interviews or press releases). Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:11:08, 22 August 2020 review of submission by Ankitjdv

I am back with refrences. Ankitjdv (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No... you haven't added any thing that looks like a reference, sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


August 23

02:39:06, 23 August 2020 review of draft by WikiJSPN


My article was rejected because it sounds like advertising. I do not understand why it sounds like advertising to correct it. Also, my references were not considered valid, and I do not understand why. I only used articles coming from the authors site as a reference for her personal information. The other links, to my knowledge are independant, etc. I found the authors name in the Wikiproject women authors list needing a page and this is my first article. I really need some help. Thanks.

WikiJSPN (talk) 02:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:56:15, 23 August 2020 review of submission by Saamimarine


Saamimarine (talk) 07:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SAAMI MARINE SERVICE I WILL REMOVE ALL LINKS I USED. PLEASE APPROVED MY PAGE. I REALLY INTERESTED TO BE PART OF YOU..

Wikipedia doesn't want to be used to spread the word about a company. Note: OP was blocked as {{uw-spamublock}}. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:45, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:17:18, 23 August 2020 review of submission by 103.132.88.82


103.132.88.82 (talk) 09:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:59:40, 23 August 2020 review of draft by WikiJSPN


I had to edit an article for resubmission, and now I am getting red text "check date values in: |access-date=" I haven't changed how I am adding sources, and all of the others are fine. I can't see my mistake or tell what I am doing wrong. Can someone please help? Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Katya_Cengel

WikiJSPN (talk) 16:59, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done You had written "8" instead of "08". Theroadislong (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiJSPN (talk • contribs) 18:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 24

04:15:56, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Sheshanks2020

I'm confused why it was rejected again. I had rewrote it so that it doesn't look like an "advertisement", but it looks like it was rejected for the same reason. Can someone help me? Sheshanks2020 (talk) 04:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:00:29, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Komalsharma664655


Komalsharma664655 (talk) 05:00, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Komalsharma664655: This needs relibale sources that are independent of the subject (no interviews or press releases) that have some coverage of the subject (not yust passing mentions). LinkedIn and other user generated content sites arent considered reliable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:24:59, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Rixle


It has taken a long time to get to where I am with my article, and on July 22nd it seems that all that was needed to be done was: "Please remove the external links in the text and convert them to wikilinks, if possible."

I did this and now I seem to be back to where it all started with a new rejection on August 22 based on: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article"

I was already pass this step, so it is very confusing that this is the reason for non-acceptance. (??)


Rixle (talk) 06:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't know, but I would like to note that TheImaCow (talk · contribs), who declined the draft for the external links, was blocked from editing for accpting drafts for pay. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:23:54, 24 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jianmarin


Good day. I am writing to you regarding two articles I wrote about 2 Greek writers Maria Papayanni and Vassilis Papatheodorou. I wrote the 2 articles using identicall information and sources and (at least in my eyes) I wrote them "in the same way". the article for Mrs Papayanni was accepted while the article aboyt Mr Papatheodorou was declined twice. I would like to correct the article of Mr Papatheodorou but I do not know what more is needed (inline citations) especially when I compare it with Mrs papayanni article. Can you pleae advise?

Best regards John Marinos


Jianmarin (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:49, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Flooyd7


Dear Editors, My draft has been declined and it says I have undisclosed paid editing, can someone help explain what I should do next?

Thanks in advance! Best regards, Mate

Flooyd7 (talk) 07:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Flooyd7 You should read and make the declaration required by the paid editing policy, or if you are not paid, explain any conflict of interest you might have. 331dot (talk) 10:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:17:19, 24 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Puffymuffinz9


Hello Wikipedia Staff, I'm really trying to make a wiki page for our upcoming game Scars of Honor. But it seems that I am not really able to make it properly. It is important for us to have a Wiki page so we can be more discoverable. I will really appreciate all help you can give me. I am directly involved in the project. Thank you in advance!

Puffymuffinz9 (talk) 10:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puffymuffinz9 Wikipedia does not have a "staff", just a community of volunteer editors. Wikipedia, to be frank, has no interest in helping you get the word out about your game or to help potential users of your game find it. Those are promotional purposes and not permitted on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources how the subject meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia has no interest in what an article subject wants to say about itself. Your draft reads as an advertisement for the game; any article about your game, if it meets the definition of notability, should only summarize what independent sources have chosen to say about your game.
I see you declared a COI, but if you are compensated in any way for your work with the game(not just money), you must make the stricter paid editing declaration required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:10:59, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Csvijay141987


Csvijay141987 (talk) 12:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't for promoting or "spreading the word" about something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:07, 24 August 2020 review of submission by 0rk2

I have updated the references and strengthened citations to show that this topic is notable enough for inclusion. 0rk2 (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


15:26:08, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Peanutbutterwikipedia1230


Peanutbutterwikipedia1230 (talk) 15:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC) I recently created the page 2022 United States Senate Election in Ohio, and it was successfully approved. However, I now see that the correct capitalization, which is consistent with other pages about similar elections, would have been "2022 United States Senate election in Ohio", with a lowercase e for election. I attempted to move the page to reflect this change, but it will not let me. I think this is because the page 2022 United States Senate election in Ohio redirects to the Ohio section of the 2022 United States Senate elections page. Would a Wikipedia administrator be able to assist me and be able to move myge by changing the title to "2022 United States Senate election in Ohio". Thank you very much.[reply]

User:Peanutbutterwikipedia1230 - Sandwich created. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:48:08, 24 August 2020 review of submission by 2409:4054:215:674B:1139:9E61:9F61:BC3B


2409:4054:215:674B:1139:9E61:9F61:BC3B (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but what you wrote is not an encyclopedia article. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:29:17, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why has my entry for the earlier Mark Saber series been rejected? It's not a duplicate but rather a new entry entirely.

@Glammazon: Well, it probably was a bit confusing that you were writing about two series with similar names, and that one of the titles has an 11 in parentheses, which looks like a Roman numeral 2, which could be look to someone like a duplicate. You know how when you create multiple files on your computer desktop it will often number them, like New folder, New folder (2), etc? It probably also didn't help that none of the web references you added seem to resolve and none of the other references seem very certain. I personally thought these were hoax articles until I happened to find a Mark Saber video at archive.org. So what I'd recommend, is that you try to beef up the references in the article and establish proper notability before resubmitting. That might mean having to go to the library or something. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minor tweak to the above, I guess they're lower-case Ls, not 1s. Still confusing, though. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:36, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Humanrabbit96

Hey i created the {[Draft:collegeinsider.in]] but it was rejected for notability reasons i read about the notability but i am unable to understand it someone kindly help me to how to make it as article what changes i have to do to make it as article Humanrabbit96 (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Humanrabbit96: our general notability guideline can be found at WP:GNG. The more specific guideline for corporations can be found at WP:NCORP. They both basically say that in order for a subject to be notable, you have to demonstrate that several mainstream sources independent of the subject (no interviews, no press releases, etc.) have written extensively about collegeinsider.in. We want to see bona fide news or magazine articles from known sources, for example, not dead links to Google Play or links to a web hosting Whois page. I performed a Google News search and found nothing on the site, so I think it will be very hard for you to demonstrate notability. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

very much thanks you cyphoidbomb i am very much glad that u made me understand how it works thank you so much love from india. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanrabbit96 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 25 August 2020‎

17:34:07, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Alex Rutu

Hi,

This article is not about promotion. This article about a person. I know that person closely that's why i write a article about his and want to publish this article please review the article and publish it. Or advise me how to write the perfect article for publishing I need to publish an article.

Thank you.

Alex Rutu (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex Rutu: Subject is a 17-year-old. How exactly is he notable? I don't see any hits at Google News. Looks like a vanity article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:36:28, 24 August 2020 review of submission by Soibangla


I tried to created a shortname, TRUMPECON, to redirect to Economic policy of Donald Trump administration. On other database systems, shortnames are routine and, while they may not be initially widely known to many, they become known as others use the system more. Also, the shortname would be picked up by googlebot such that googling the shortname would take a user straight to the article. For example of what I'm getting at, googing USPRIV takes a user directly here on FRED, while googling TRUMPECON would take a user directly to Economic policy of Donald Trump administration. Isn't that the point of shortnames? I'd like to create a whole bunch of them. It would be nice if, as on FRED, an article's shortname would be displayed at the top of the page (upper-right corner?) so users could see it and learn it. soibangla (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

soibangla (talk) 22:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Soibangla: I don't think that Wikipedia is the right place to create a bunch of neologistic shortcuts, especially ones for implausible search terms like "TRUMPECON". Who uses that? Also, per your USPRIV example, there is no USPRIV redirect at Wikipedia, (note the red link) so whatever algorithm Google is using to point to the article you desire to wind up at, has nothing to do with Wikipedia as far as I know. I guess I'm just generally confused as to what value this would have here. 22:43, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
I suggest that the reason people would not use such shortnames is simply because they are unaware they exist. If they become of their existence, they discover shortnames are an enormous time-saver and adopt them, then wonder how they ever got along without them. And, as on FRED and other database systems, the shortname is displayed on the page as a cue to users that it’s a faster route to find what they’re seeking. I used USPRIV simply to illustrate this concept, which is widely used elsewhere; I did not mean that it’s a WP shortname. soibangla (talk) 17:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:50:23, 24 August 2020 review of draft by Lwazilwenkosi Mpofu


I am wondering if a ZIMA award (among many others) won by a Zimbabwean music artist is not enough to warrant a Wikipedia article? I ask because the article Draft:Sandra Ndebele has been rejected several times yet it is backed by a lot of independent sources from Zimbabwe

lwax malax (talk) 23:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 25

02:00:46, 25 August 2020 review of submission by NimmaPawanprs


NimmaPawanprs (talk) 02:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NimmaPawanprs, your submission was rejected and tagged for deletion as WP:SPAM. You appear to have a undeclared COI as well. Eternal Shadow Talk 03:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well... got themselves indeffed... Eternal Shadow Talk 02:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:52:33, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Contributers2020

I want to know that whenever a write an article, it gets declined. Despite taking all citations and all references as I can which is available publicly, it always gets declined. This is very wrong on the user. I think if this happens, in 100% of articles, only 2% gets selected. My article, despite having all information I have, was rejected 8 times. Please resolve this issue and accept my article as soon as possible. This Article is mine.

Contributers2020 (talk) 04:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:30:05, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Vanos777


I am an independent article writer with no COI. The biographical article in question has been said to read like a promotion; however, I fashioned it in the likeness of many other articles that I read prior to drafting - namely Dan Bongino’s page for example. This biography does have independent sourcing as corporations are “people” in the United States, and the corporation known as Arlumen Health is an actual Heath system in Texas. Therefore, its webpage is independent of the CEO due to the fact that a corporation would not publish about a person who was not its CEO as if they were. Furthermore, this article references the nationally notable organization Future Physicians of America, which is one of the country’s largest pipeline organizations for premedical and medical student going into the medical profession. The reviewer is mistaken by his own bias of hunting for promotional materials, so much so he has made a fundamental attribution error in assuming that organizations and companies are not independent of their employees. The Texas Tech article also independently verified that this individual did graduate there and was the number one graduate of his class. Yes, some of the minor articles are harder to connect, but the individual known in Texas as “Mac Ewart” is very notable, as proven by an entire corporation and one of the medical community’s largest organizations. I strongly believe this article needs to be published. Vanos777 (talk) 05:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vanos777. There are several problems with Draft:Mac Ewart.
  1. Several of the cited references, specifically those from Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer. (#5), Rutledge Cancer Foundation (#6), Observatorio Venezolano De La Salud (#7), McLennan Co. Mosquito Project (#8), and National Cancer Institute (#9) do not even mention Ewart's name. These are surely not "significant coverage" of Ewart. In some cases the web pages cited are general, if there is discussion of Ewart on deeper pages the link should be to the specific page where he or his work is discussed. If his work is discussed, he should at elast be named, or there must be some way for the reader to verify that it is in fact his work.
  2. Organizations with which Ewart was associated, such as Arlumen Health and Future Physicians. are not independent sources This includes any of his current or former employers, and and organization that sponsored his work, or which he founded or helped organize. Nothing from such a source counts towards notability. Independent coverage, that is about Future Physicians., from sources in no way associated with him, that have nothing to gain by promoting him, and are not based primarily on his statements (as interviews are) are needed. There seem to be none in the current draft, and there should be at least three.
  3. Statements such as Ewart graduated number one in his class at Texas Tech University from the College of Biological Sciences with a 4.0 GPA are of limited relevance to his reasons for notability, and are ratehr promotional.
  4. The entire "Entrepreneurship" section is promotional in tone, and supported only by closely assoiciated sources, it seems. An organization's self-proclaimed mission interments is rarely encylopedic, unless independent sources quote or refer to it. Phrases such as has grown from an idea into a future for health i do not belong in a Wikipedia article except possibly as part of a quotation, proiperly attributed and cited, from an independent person, and even then might be dubious.
  5. In reference citations, please only wiki-link sources if an article about the source already exists.
Please understand that on Wikipedia "promotion is not limited to commercial advertising, but includes anything intended to promote or praise an individual or organization, or bring it to wider notice, rather than to summarize what independent reliable sources have already published about it. Wikipedia articles should never include judgements of value or opinions in the editorial voice, only ones directly attributes to named and cited sources. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:14, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DESiegel, thank you for your guidance on this and my stated position. I need to do a better job with the links. Would you be willing to work on some other form of chat besides Wikipedia? If not, I understand. I have questions about how to cite institutionally-protected journals and medical/academic findings: 1) How do we cite information printed and/or presented without internet publication? For example, Ewart presented wrote Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer. (#5) Note: I will work to find the print-only title of this work, was sponsored by Rutledge Cancer Foundation (#6) Note: I will find the deeper source, contributed to the data of the Observatorio Venezolano De La Salud (#7) Note: I am having trouble on this one due to the government of Venezuela’s malevolent nature towards scientific freedom currently, wrote the entire for scientific presentation only McLennan Co. Mosquito Project (#8) Note: this was scientific presentation-only also, and is cited deeper into National Cancer Institute (#9).

How do we prove print-only, or presentation-only works on Wikipedia? They no doubt carry more influence over Texas’s regional epidemiology and medical communities than other sources external to the State.

Lastly, I will continue to follow the works of Ewart, as I have come to knowledge of his notoriety regionally via Adolescent Young Adult Conferences, Galas, and other scientific presentations of which I personally attend for these reasons.

My personal goal is to ensure that this encyclopedia does not lose-out on the contributions of regional individuals, companies, and organizations specifically from the State of Texas, USA. I would appreciate guidance, as I am just beginning this journey!

To expand on this, I believe there needs to be articles for Arlumen Health, and the Future Physicians of America organization. However, now I am cautious to even attempt. There is also a vacant space concerning Venezuela’s epidemiology findings and organizations. Tropical Medicine of Venezuela and Texas share much information! Therefore, there are no in-wiki citations available due to these large gaps and lapses of information in knowledge found in Wikipedia. I am passionate to not let a dictatorship exclude the science of an entire nation and its relationships with the USA/Texas go undocumented. How do I proceed with such a large task?

Again, if you’re willing, I would love to have some Wikipedia mentorship throughout this task.

Thank you kindly for the time an thought you provided in your response! Vanos777 (talk) 13:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vanos777 I do Wikipedia work on Wikipedia only, in part for transparency. I have in the past done detailed collaboration over Wikipedia talk pages, and it can work well. Draft talk:Mac_Ewart would be a possible place to hold such discussions. To answer your specific questions:
  • Print sources are cited much like online ones, but without a URL. You may use {{cite book}} for books, {{cite journal}} for scholarly journals, {{cite news}} for newspapers, {{cite magazine}} for print publications that are neither books nor journals nor newspapers. Provide the title, author (when known), date of publication, name of the publication, name of publisher (when relevant), ISBN or ISSN when known, page number, and DOI or other identifier when available. In general there should be enough info to find the source in a library. You can also use the |quote= parameter to provide a short quotation from the source in place of being able to read the source online. As long as the source is published, and could be found and checked with some effort, there is no need to "prove" the content of the source. See also WP:RX.
  • A for possible new article on Arlumen Health, and the Future Physicians of America, please read WP:NORG. Again independent reliable published sources that discuss the organization is some detail would be needed. Sources need not be online, or in English.
Is that helpful? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:54, 25 August 2020 review of submission by LucyNakahara


hello I am requesting some advise on this article. why do you think this article is not good?

LucyNakahara (talk) 07:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You were given the reasons the draft was rejected; do you have questions about those reasons? 331dot (talk) 09:50, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motizin: Disagreement (Epistemology) Submission declined

08:19:57, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Motizin

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

A reviewer has rejected my submission of Disagreements (Epistemology). The claim is that that the page is essay-like and no encyclopedic. I firmly disagree. I was very careful not to include any "original" content. What I included is just an exposition of existing issue in epistemology literature. Any philosophical issue may look like an essay. Examples: Internalism and externalism, Justification (epistemology), Philosophical skepticism,Bayesian probability and many others . It seems that the reviewer is not familiar with philosophical content. I request that my submission will be reviewed again by a reviewer with the necessary background like a person from the Philosophy workgroup.

Motizin (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it reads like an essay, I don't need to have a philosophy background to see that. Theroadislong (talk) 08:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If specific editors or someone from a specific field needs to be the one to review your draft, there's something wrong with it. Articles need to be accessible to all, as they can be edited by anyone, not just people who are knowledgeable about a field. It's also good for outside eyes to see the subject. In addition, the group you speak of is not necessarily large and may not have many users who volunteer to review drafts. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a naïve approach. There are many articles in math, physics, chemistry, etc. that are not accessible to the general user and you won't expect that a "general user" will review , accept or reject them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motizin (talk • contribs) 10:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motizin That's exactly what Wikipedia expects. Please see WP:EXPERT for guidance for editors who are experts in a particular field. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:41, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Jediwriter1975

The comment was that this is "essentially(sic) a press release", though I followed the article format and wording for other similar business figures, such as Tony Robbins. I'm happy to make changes to better comply with the guidelines...I just need to know what I did wrong specifically. All copy was drawn from content within the approved news/magazine articles. Thanks for your help! Chip Jediwriter1975 (talk) 11:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jediwriter1975 The draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It was rejected because it was loaded with promotional/embellishing language like "In January of 1995, he joined Dale Carnegie, a leader in professional training programs"; "During his stint with Dale Carnegie, Tyson got his foot in the door with sales coaching for professional sports teams when he offered his services to the Philadelphia Eagles in exchange for game tickets. That small move was about to pay off in a big way." The sources you gave seem to all be based on interviews with him. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone says about themselves or their own work. Wikipedia primarily summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how they meet(in this case) the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.
I noticed that Mr. Tyson is the only subject you have edited about. Do you have a connection with him? 331dot (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:56:43, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Userths

I am new in wikipedia. I created the draft and submitted. But it was declined and I was told that I had to add more citations. I have added 7 references and resubmitted it. Can you help about publishing the article. Userths (talk) 11:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userths If you have resubmitted it, it will be reviewed in due course; please be patient. I notice that the draft does little more than tell of the existence of the college and what it does; Wikipedia articles must do more, they must show with significant coverage in independent reliable sources how the subject(in this case an organization) meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. The sources you have offered do not seem to be such sources. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:22:09, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Martin1094




I have tried to sujbmit this article fopr review, but I can;t tell whether I have been successful as it keeps returning me to a page which says the article is not yet submitted for review.Martin1094 (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Martin1094 (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for review. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Martin1094: I have submitted the draft on your behalf. While you are waiting for review, please have a look at WP:REFB on fomatting the refs, and it would also be nice if you would add some internal links to other Wikipedia articles. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Note: @331dot: that wasn't me, that was I.)

13:25:03, 25 August 2020 review of submission by 50.250.100.49


This is a very important cultural institution in our community that has stood up for LGBTQ in a right wing neighborhood. They also support artists in a culturally devoid neighborhood and fought for a female muralist to paint the first grafitti mural in Boca. This places is not a museum but there is art everywhere inside and it means a lot to a lot of people here and deserves to be on Wikipedia. It is important to our community and a safe haven for marginalized people. Lee gives out interest free loans to the poor, his family is so generous and they deserve to be noted on Wikepedia. I am not a pro so maybe I wrote things wrong but they deserve to be here way more than other people that are on here.

50.250.100.49 (talk) 13:25, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the puffery was already pointed out by Theroadislong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Do you have a WP:COI with this? Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's good that you want to tell the world about the good work this organization does- but that's not what Wikipedia is for. See WP:NOBLE. Social media would be better suited to that. The only concern with regards to who "deserves" an article is if it meets the notability criteria, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:56:22, 25 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Pruthiviraj Nahak



Pruthiviraj Nahak (talk) 13:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pruthiviraj Nahak You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about an organization; a Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. You only cite the Trust's website, which does not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:32, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Pandey Family


I need help because I created a page on "Stranger than Fiction (TV Series)" with only on reference. I did a lot of research, but could only found info on IMDb. I request you to please do some more intensive research and cite sources. And it's my first attempt of creating an article, so I am just a beginner. The rules are quite confusing and too technical for me to understand. Well, I would to urge the respective user and Wikipedia to pass my article, rest is your decision on the basis of rules and guidelines.

Pandey Family (talk) 15:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pandey Family If you are writing a draft, it is up to you to make it meet standards for sources and notability. There is no deadline for this, feel free to take all the time you need to learn about Wikipedia first. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:44:17, 25 August 2020 review of draft by Justin Crow Asuka


Hello, i have created a Wikipedia page for Denis Zhivotovsky from the band Amatory on the occasion of his birthday on August 28. I know that the verification takes a long time but if someone has a possibility to verify and publish it before August 28, i kindly ask you to help me. Sincerely, Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)Justin Crow Asuka[reply]

Justin Crow Asuka (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:31:00, 25 August 2020 review of submission by Thespiansapien


Hi. Please help. I received feedback from a reviewer who was unclear how Chido is a notable actor. He is a series regular on a major network television show and also had a recurring role in other major network television shows. He also has a large following on his social media and many interviews and appearances that I linked in external links. My confusion lies within the fact that on the show series wiki, Sistas, many actors that have wikipedia pages have less film and tv credits and little to no citations, yet their articles were still approved. I also noticed an actor wiki with "This article about an American actor or actress is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it." Should I include in this article? Can you give me advice on what else I need to include or is this a lost cause? Thanks!

Thespiansapien (talk) 19:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thespiansapien, the references do not indicates that the subject meets WP:NACTOR. Eternal Shadow Talk 20:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 26

05:32:59, 26 August 2020 review of submission by Charlie063

When topic is not notable y dont u help me to delete this draft its not drafted properly i am using delete tag some one wil re store it i m trying to redraft complete article by making corrctions in it all other contributers accounts has been blocked due to stockpuppet kindly help me in deleting this draft


Charlie063 (talk) 05:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=975005726"