Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 393: Line 393:


Also, after reading wiki's policy on "Encyclopedic style" it seems that some articles are better suited for these two formats/styles than others, and seems hard to apply it to ALL articles.....maybe you can give some advice here? Thanks!!! [[User:Avatar317|Avatar317]] ([[User talk:Avatar317|talk]]) 21:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Avatar317
Also, after reading wiki's policy on "Encyclopedic style" it seems that some articles are better suited for these two formats/styles than others, and seems hard to apply it to ALL articles.....maybe you can give some advice here? Thanks!!! [[User:Avatar317|Avatar317]] ([[User talk:Avatar317|talk]]) 21:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Avatar317
:Hi {{ping|Avatar317}}, I'm sorry if my comments weren't enough on the talk page, if you had wanted, you could have asked me directly with the [[template:Ping]]. I'm happy to help. I actually replied to your request earlier with a response, which said


The article is still written more like an essay, than a wikipedia article. The draft starts "Since about 1970", which really isn't encylopedic wording. You also can't say things like "The fundamental cause", as it's not fact. It's a good article, but as if written for a school project, not an encylopedia entry

:The main issue with the article remains the format, and that it reads like an essay on the subject. Irregardless of the subject, we need to keep all articles in Wikipedia in line with the same format. The lead is specifically where the issue is, see [[WP:LEDE]], as it doesn't read like a regular topic on wikipedia. The issue with saying "The Fundimental Cause" is that it's conjecture against another persons opinion. However, if a reliable source says it, it's better to quote the source in this instance, such as "California Legislators say the fundimental cause is...", or similar. Sadly, housing developments aren't my area of expertise, however I am always willing to help. <br> I'd say, if the article was more in the form of a regular wiki article, I'd have most likely have accepted it. Please let me know if you need any more information '''[[User:Lee Vilenski|<span style="color:green">Lee Vilenski</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lee Vilenski|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/Lee Vilenski|contribs]])</sup>''' 13:48, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


= January 12 =
= January 12 =

Revision as of 13:48, 12 January 2018

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply — By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

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


January 6

04:06:36, 6 January 2018 review of submission by Mikeart67


"Mike Anthony Fernando" 04:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I want help in publishing this page. Mike Anthony Fernando even has a YouTube channel which contain his all works . Such a s commercials, Tele series and movies which he has done\acted. please guide me.thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeart67 (talk • contribs) 04:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mikeart67 - You seem to have gone ahead and published the article here, Mike Anthony Fernando, despite the draft being declined. It really isn't suitable as you don't have the necessary references. Of the three, the first is back to Wikipedia, which you can't do as it's circular, the second is to Fernando's YouTube channel which isn't independent, and the third just gives Fernando's name as a cast member, which doesn't show Notability. Lastly, are you connected to Fernando? If you are, you need to declare a Conflict of interest, and you're not best placed to write about him. Without suitable references, the article's very likely to be deleted pretty soon. KJP1 (talk) 08:49, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04:47:17, 6 January 2018 review of submission by SGT1998


SGT1998 (talk) 04:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My draft of Big 10 Conference (West Virginia) High School Football was rejected. I've sighted my main historic sources along with Wikipedia references for the schools involved. Much of the record keeping I've done myself since 1977. The only "peacock" statements I could find was twice using the word "proud." I've since removed the word "proud." Can anyone explain to me why my draft has been rejected? What adjustments do I need to make?

Note: the draft was located at Draft:Big 10 Conference (West Virginia) High School Football. Matthew_hk tc 18:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:32:49, 6 January 2018 review of submission by Prakash iyengar



why the This submission appears to be taken from http://prakashsiyengar.in/ error occurs. This is my website can be copied or not. and what is solution.

Hi Prakash iyengar. If you hold the copyright on the content at http://prakashsiyengar.in/, you may change that website to release the content to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Even if you do that, however, it is unlikely that anyone will be able to copy material directly from there to Wikipedia, because that website has been written to promote Iyengar, whereas Wikipedia is not for advertising, promotion, or public relations. Finally, if you are Iyengar, it's a very bad idea for you to write about yourself here. Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies.
The solution is for you to write about something else, something with which you have no conflict of interest. If you are notable, one of our tens of thousands of volunteers will write an article about you eventually. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:07, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 7

Request on 09:28:11, 7 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Fl82


Yesterday I submitted my first article for review and it was declined. It was difficult to understand all the requirements so it was expected in a way, but now I would like to know why it was declined so that I can edit it and get the article accepted.

This is the draft that was submitted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Camille_Harris


Fl82 (talk) 09:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fl82. The best source of information about a review is usually the reviewer. There's no obvious problem with the density of inline citations, but the first one supports only year of birth, which may leave reviewers wondering where the month and day came from, and whether you know them because you have an undeclared conflict of interest. Also, nickzaino is a self-published blog. Self-published sources may never be cited to support statements about a living person.
Had I reviewed the draft, I would have declined it too, but for another reason. There is no clear claim of notability, no clear reason the subject should be included in an encyclopedia with the likes of Bix Beiderbecke, Diane Schuur, and Nina Simone. A musician may be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources. The only cited source that ticks all the boxes is an article in her hometown newspaper Boulder Weekly. Unless there are more such sources, likely no amount of editing will get the draft accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:04, 20 December 2017 for assistance on the Submission "Ituah Ighodalo"



Hello Admin, I need your assistance in this article, an autobiography of a notable figure. Kindly look through to approve the submission, many thanks.


Ituah Ighodalo (talk) 14:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC) (the submission was requested by using Niyijoseph68 account on 2018-01-07T13:06:03)[reply]

Hi Niyijoseph68. I have submitted the draft for review on your behalf. You can expect it to be reviewed within about two months. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:38:22, 7 January 2018 review of submission by Glenda.S.Howell

I am not requesting a review, but rather, I simply want to post a persona opinion essay. Is this option available on Wikipedia? —Preceding undated comment added 2018-01-07T18:38:23‎

wikipiea is not a web hosting service. Matthew_hk tc 19:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:45:27, 7 January 2018 review of submission by Fforresst003

All of my references get blocked but there aren't any other sources for information on the individual.I'm confused, because how is a post or quote coming from their person's actual twitter or instagram not reliable? I just need help, especially since I borrowed a source from his boyfriend's wiki that is getting denied on mine. Fforresst003 (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fforresst003. Notability is gauged by the depth and breadth of coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. A person's social media presence is a primary source that is not independent of them. You write, "There aren't any other sources ..." Ergo the person is not notable and is unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 8

05:20:33, 8 January 2018 review of draft by Hotdiggityhotdawg3.14


I don't know how to add a picture to a new page I created, also how do I know the picture is okay to use? Also, the infobox for the film of the page I created has "Template:Name" in red text for every name mentioned in the infobox, will that change once it is published? Thank you for any help in advance :)) Hotdiggityhotdawg3.14 (talk) 05:20, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hotdiggityhotdawg3.14. It is unlikely to be okay to use any image you have. See WP:FILMNFI for more information. Non-free images may be used in articles if they meet the ten non-free content criteria, but they may not be used in drafts. The draft cites IMDb. It is user-generated, so it is not a reliable source and should not be used as a reference. The topic does not appear to satisfy the notability criteria for films, so Wikipedia should not have a stand alone article about it. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:10:30, 8 January 2018 review of submission by Dinesh.damse


Dinesh.damse (talk) 08:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC) Why my post can be declined? What changes can i do in my article? What can i do now?[reply]

Dinesh.damse - Dinesh,

Your draft, Draft:Jodi Tuzi Mazi, was deleted for the reasons I suggested it probably would be when I declined it (see 5 January above). It was a wholly-promotional piece, written by you, without any reliable sources, on a non-notable company that you own. It just isn't a suitable article for Wikipedia. KJP1 (talk) 09:21, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:37:35, 8 January 2018 review of submission by 86.141.136.119

I created a page. Someone created a new page and approved it. I've transferred my edits to the new (already existing) page. If the new page is live, I'd like to delete the draft. Thanks for your advice and/or help.

86.141.136.119 (talk) 11:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I have tagged for WP:G7 deletion. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:03, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:44:23, 8 January 2018 review of submission by Farnace


I'm a little confused. In the German wiki this page already exist. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hersilie_Ewald

I've only translated it in English and want to publish it. The submission hasn't be accepted, because of the missing references. Why was this entry on the German site accepted without references, and here isn't? Thank you for your help.


Farnace (talk) 17:44, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Farnace. 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 German Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Also the existence of an article doesn't necessarily mean it should exist, it could mean only that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. It's plausible that Ewald is notable, but you'll need to find and cite independent reliable sources to prove it and to support the content of the draft in order for it to be accepted here. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:33, 8 January 2018 review of submission by BeanstalkHope

This page was quickly deleted by Wikipedia for suspected advertising and promotion reasons. However this page was created to be an encyclopedia page only. I would like to create this page so others with knowledge on the topic can add to it and keep the page up to date. The purpose is so readers can learn about the history and development of the company as well as current facts and information. This was not created for advertising purposes. I denoted a very detailed history about the owner and founder as well as a company history and company overview with facts about the company. There was no sales or promotional information in the text. I would appreciate your input on what part of the article needs to be changed or what needs to be done in order to get this page approved. Your help is much appreciated. Thank you for your time and understanding. BeanstalkHope (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BeanstalkHope. Draft:Beanstalk Web Solutions was deleted for being unambiguous advertising or promotion. Because it has been deleted, I can't see it to comment on it, but normally the violation has to be especially egregious for a draft to be deleted for that reason. That suggests that you have too close a connection to the topic to have any realistic hope of writing about it objectively. See WP:BFAQ#COMPANY for recommended ways forward. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@BeanstalkHope: as Draft:Beanstalk Web Solutions has been deleted only administrators can now view it and comment on the specific content. I am not an admin so will only be able to answer generally. Given your user name I presume you are writing about your own company? This is strongly discouraged - please read WP:COI. Wikipedia's terms of use do not allow you to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes. However if your draft was very carefully written to avoid any bias and statements were backed up with references from reliable sources then your draft might be accepted. You should understand though, that creating an article purely for the purpose of providing readers with knowledge of a topic, and ensuring that everything is factual, isn't enough. The subject you are writing about must be considered notable. To understand the concept of notability in the context of Wikipedia, please read WP:N. Your article will only be accepted if you can show through the adding of references that multiple reliable, independent publications have written in depth about the company. Try this handy article to understand how to add good references that demonstrate notability: User:Joe_Decker/IsThisNotable. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:12:26, 8 January 2018 review of submission by Brad Deberti

I am trying to figure out how to get my page for the Racer Car Driver "Brad DeBerti" up and running and it says that it has been kicked back for articles not being cited properly. I have two questions as I am building this page for him 1. I am having trouble pulling the info from the sandbox straight over to a page that can actually be published and would like help with that. 2. Can you send me a link that can just be copied and pasted into the sandbox that will create a proper referencing section or do you require all citations to be added at the end of each sentence? I have seen multiple other pages where there is simply a citation section at the bottom. Please let me know what to do next. Brad Deberti (talk) 18:12, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brad Deberti. Biographies of living persons have stricter requirements about inline citations. Referencing for beginners explains the mechanics. If you want to avoid inline citations (avoid showing the reader which sources support which statements) and just bullet point your sources at the bottom, you'll have to wait until Deberti is dead. If you are Deberti, then you can save yourself a lot of grief by not writing about yourself. Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. Otherwise, I suggest you start by identifying independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain in-depth information about Deberti. One is [1]. Find at least two more of similar depth and in publications with a similar reputation for accuracy and fact checking. Write the draft (which doesn't need to be very long) using information from those sources. If he meets any criteria of WP:NMOTORSPORT, explain which in the first sentence or two. If he doesn't, you may be better off waiting until later in his career. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:32:20, 8 January 2018 review of submission by Chike Ebose


Hello, I am requesting an Admin to review this article to avoid delete, as stated in the notice i saw before creating it. my regards

Chike Ebose (talk) 20:32, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chike Ebose. The draft is in the pool to be reviewed by an experienced Wikipedian. You can expect it to be reviewed within the next two months. While you wait, check out other ways to improve the encyclopedia at Wikipedia:Community portal. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winning Jah. The subject has been found not to be notable. How has the article improved since it was deleted? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:26:16, 8 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Avatar317


Hello.

I submitted the above article for creation and it was rejected (second time now) with the statement: "This is much more of an WP:NOTESSAY than an article. Please do not include WP:OR in an article."

It was previously rejected with a similar comment, and before I initially submitted it, I was unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Now that I have read those policies, and the one on primary and secondary sources, I attempted to remove any original research from the article and rewrote any statements which might have appeared as OR to properly attribute the source of that statement.

To my knowledge, it now includes nothing that could be claimed as original research, it is all sourced and referenced. The editor unfortunately did not point out any SPECIFIC places of claimed original research.

If those instances exist, could someone please point out the specifics of WHERE they exist in this article so that I can improve it?

Thanks!

Avatar317 (talk) 22:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Avatar317: - The article is still written more like an essay, than a wikipedia article. The draft starts "Since about 1970", which really isn't encylopedic wording. You also can't say things like "The fundamental cause", as it's not fact. It's a good article, but as if written for a school project, not an encylopedia entry. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 9

02:29:29, 9 January 2018 review of submission by KarenPolka


I have started over. What would you do next? I appreciate your advice. Thank you. KarenPolka (talk) 02:29, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KarenPolka. What I would do before what you've done is find three good sources - independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain in-depth information about the subject. One is [2]. Find at least two more of similar caliber. A recommended structure for biographies is {{Biography}}. Use that structure and the information from the three sources to redo the draft from scratch. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:KarenPolka - Your draft is not written in the usual style of a Wikipedia article. First, it has no lede sentence introducing its subject. Second, it is written in a breezy informal tone that is not used in Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia. Third, as noted, it has no references. Read other articles on singers and musicians and see how they are written. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03:31:44, 9 January 2018 review of submission by Kamal Devkota


Kamal Devkota (talk) 03:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC) Hello Admins, How can my page would be approved ? could you give some suitable answers please<[reply]

The draft in question is Draft:Nipesh DHAKA. First, follow the advice of the reviewers and add sources, if they exist. However, second, you haven't established that the subject is notable, and, if so, it won't be approved. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:01:52, 9 January 2018 review of submission by The DaDi

Hello. I submitted a sandbox page for a music artiste and it was rejected due to references. The artist has released an EP and has also received lots of radio airplay from big radio stations nation wide in Ghana but there is no online newspaper to reference in this regard. I need help in getting approval. Thanks The DaDi (talk) 12:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The references do not have to be online. You can also reference offline newspapers, using Template:Cite magazine* or Template:Cite news*. However, simply having had your songs created and played on radio stations does not make the subject notable. I would also worry that you do not fall foul of WP:COI, as your username is the same as that of the subject's nickname. Please comment that you are not related with the subject before re-submitting the draft. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:17:19, 9 January 2018 review of submission by 194.8.88.10

Why this was rejected? 194.8.88.10 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You will find the reason in the big mustard-colored box on your talk page. It is also in the pink box at the top of the draft and in the comment beneath it. The Globes article is a good start on demonstrating notability, but the brief Calcalist piece, about a non-notable business award from a non-notable organization, does little or nothing to help. Novice editors are usually advised to cite at least three sources of the caliber of the Globes one. Because Eizenman is alive, you'll also need to use inline citations liberally. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:45:54, 9 January 2018 review of submission by DROZONE


DROZONE (talk) 18:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC) What changes do I need to make to get my Article published?[reply]

I doubt that there are any changes that would make it publishable. The problem is, its subject appears not to be notable. Maproom (talk) 21:56, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


January 10

01:15:47, 10 January 2018 review of submission by WorldTop20


As the article we prepared been successfully submitted for review?

If not can some one please let us know, what we need to do?WorldTop20 (talk) 01:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC) WorldTop20 (talk) 01:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WorldTop20. I have submitted it on your behalf. While you wait for it to be reviewed (it could take a couple months), check out other ways to help improve the encyclopedia at Wikipedia:Community portal. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:40, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your article was accepted as New Jersey Minority Educational Development. Thank you for your contribution. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03:54:34, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Pdxdoglover


  • @Pdxdoglover: Your draft appears to be an article, thank you for your work! !dave 07:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:55:49, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Cyberknifeindia

This article is about a person. The writing is all about his introduction, achievements and success story. Why was my article rejected? Please help me in rewriting the article. Cyberknifeindia (talk) 05:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyberknifeindia: - as always, the best information as to why your draft was failed was the information left by the reviewer. In this case:
 Comment: Notability, weasel wordings, lack of inline citations, inclusion of honorifics... all these issues need be addressed before resubmitting this draft. 
Businesswire and own website are not good sources by our standards.Trivial awards do not add to notability.

First, you need to prove the subject is notable to pass WP:GNG, and also be very careful to source, and use inline citations against every comment that you make. Unsourced WP:BLP articles are mostly always deleted. The reviewer also mentions that the article is not written in a Neutral tone. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:34:11, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Asif Mahmud Antor


Asif Mahmud Antor (talk) 06:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Asif Mahmud Antor: - Did you have a question? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:15:33, 10 January 2018 review of submission by ValerioPettinicchi

Hi, I would like to publish an article about an e-commerce company (mytheresa.com). I am not connected to the company in any way, I do it because I am asked by my university. I used quotes, sources from the New York Times . Why can not I publish my page? Could you help me get it published? ValerioPettinicchi (talk) 11:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:ValerioPettinicchi - First, why did the university ask you to submit the article? If this is just a random assignment by a professor, you might do well to speak to your professor about the corporate notability guidelines and point out that we do not accept an article simply because it has been assigned, but only because the subject is notable. If there is a conflict of interest, then that is also problematic. The main problem with your draft is that, as the reviewer said, it does not show notability of the company. Also, the name of the draft should be the name of the company, not your name. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:04:10, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Roguebeast


Roguebeast (talk) 12:04, 10 January 2018 (UTC) i have a few questions about why the draft page Rithvik Thammareddy got declined. what kind of specific information were u looking for?[reply]

User:Roguebeast - The draft in question is Draft:Rithvik Thammareddy and has no references. You are trying to submit an article on a non-notable person. Please read the sports notability guidelines and the biographical notability guidelines, and perhaps you will see that your subject does not qualify for a page in Wikipedia. Also, continuing to resubmit it in its current form merely annoys the reviewers and may result in the draft being tagged for deletion, so please don't. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:29:09, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Shdickson


Requesting assistance because I have never done this before and the articles I am finding aren't helpful.

Shdickson (talk) 14:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shdickson - The draft that you submitted was speedily deleted as a copyright violation. We cannot accept material that is copyrighted, even if you are the owner of the copyright (unless you agree to release the copyright under CC-BY-SA, which very few businesses will do). Also, since you are trying to get a business with which you are associated listed, please read the conflict of interest guidelines. Wikipedia is not here to assist you in promoting your client or your business. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:43, 10 January 2018 review of submission by 2601:680:8001:1F5A:C89E:A0D0:EA3E:F947



Hello, my publisher has been working to submit a wikipedia page on my behalf. She received the above response. I told her I would help her with the resubmission, but I am unsure of what exactly you are asking for. Before writing you, I looked at several examples of authors who have pages on wikipedia (see for example, Kathleen "Katie" Fallon). Many of these pages provide fewer references and show less notability, which suggests inconsistency in terms of what editors want. I'd like to know how close this entry is to being accepted. Perhaps it is not worth the time to make the revisions. It's not clear to me if the editor is suggesting major changes or minor ones. Again, for example, my press could list fewer awards or my press could quote from reviews of my work and put those comments into the text itself. Those are minor revisions that I can help her undertake. Or is the editor saying that if I have not been reviewed by the Times then I am not notable, in which case, no more effort should be put toward this. Thank you. 2601:680:8001:1F5A:C89E:A0D0:EA3E:F947 (talk) 15:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Jennifer Sinor? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft reads as though it is being written to promote Sinor and her books. It should be written in a neutral tone. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the conflict of interest guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:55:25, 10 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by KKMI1740

Berdugo is variant of Verdugo, a surname of Spanish origin meaning "butcher" or "executioner" in English. Notable people with the surname include:

  • Fulgencio Berdugo (1918–2003) Colombian football player
  • Salomon Berdugo (1854–1906) was a halakhic authority, poet and rabbi in Meknes, Morocco.
  • Raphael Berdugo (‬‎1747–1821), a son of Rabbi Mordecai Berdugo, was a dayan, a scholar, and one of the greatest rabbis
User:KKMI1740 - Do you want to create a disambiguation page? You have not submitted a draft. This page is for asking questions about drafts that were submitted and declined. You are welcome to submit a draft disambiguation page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:25:46, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Bestword57


Do you know why my article was declined?

I did not write the article in 1930, but I received permission which I submitted to Wikipedia from the Memphis Commercial Appeal to make it free use on Wikipedia. There are several photos that need to be reviewed by Wikipedia staff as well.

It is a direct quote from the Newspaper Article about Archie League's life published in the Memphis Commercial Appeal.

Since it's a quote from a full page feature newspaper article from 1930, it has historical merit. Please reconsider your decision.

Bestword57 (talk) 18:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks,

Bestword57 (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bestword57 (talk) 18:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bestword57 - Your draft has no references, which is why the reviewer said that it was not supported by reliable sources. It also has a breezy informal tone that is not appropriate for Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia and is written in the formal neutral tone. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:55:07, 10 January 2018 review of submission by Bestword57


I need to change the name of the Draft I'm working on from "Archie L. League" to "Achen League" so that it will reflect the birth name of Archie League. This will enable me to insert reliable sources into the document. There is a lot of confusion between his Son Archie W. League (the first air traffic controller) and Archie L. League the radio personality. I will be able to site a reliable source for his name once the draft name is changed to Achen League.

Thanks for all your help.

Bestword57 (talk) 20:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bestword57: Hello, Bestword. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Changing the draft's name is something that can be done at the end of the review process. In the meantime, the current name of the draft will not prevent you from adding reliable sourcing about the subject. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:52, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

22:24:43, 10 January 2018 review of submission by LaCroizy


Hi!

I am trying to make an official soundtrack album wikipedia page for the movie Pottersville. I am unsure of how to go about the proper steps to represent this content and prove that I haven't violated any copyright laws in its content, particularly the page containing the album's cover. Can someone walk me through these processes, as the current systems in place are most confusing. To be quite honest I don't even know if I submitted this post correctly.

LaCroizy (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LaCroizy: Hello, LaCroizy. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. You probably are not going to be able to justify having a separate article on the film soundtrack, because it seems unlikely that you can demonstrate that it has notability independent of the film itself. So why not just add it as a new section of the article on Pottersville (film). If you choose that route, other editors at that article will likely be willing to help with the technical details. I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


January 11

02:31:51, 11 January 2018 review of submission by Jacq mo

Hi! I'm creating the english page of an artist. And most of it is obviusly on videos because artists sing and dance, but it has been not accepted twice. And the reasons are "because the sources are not reliable" and stuff. So i read this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Videos_as_references#YouTube_videos_as_references , and it says that it is ok to cite youtube videos, as long as the main channel is realiable (and in my case it is! all the videos are on the official broadcasting channel). Also, i've been told that imbd cannot be used as a source (but it says it can be used as one, as long as we give more references it's ok), it is an actor, how is it possible that the world's largest media data base cannot be used?. And, last bu not least, is it possible to not accept my article just becasue i didn't cite correctly the sources? I did put them, just not enterily following the format because that takes time and i am still learning it. Thank you

Jacq mo (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacq mo: Hello, Jacq. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Your questions raise some basic issues. I'll start with the overall question of notability. You say that most of your references are on video because the subject is a performer. But this misses a basic point -- truly notable performers have been written about by the press. A collection of performance videos is likely to prove nothing more than that the person really exists. Whether that person should have an article is going to be a much more difficult thing to show. Another basic point is that the subject is a member of the band Seventeen, and so you also face the difficulty of showing that the subject is notable for reasons other than his membership in that band. And yet, most of your draft discusses the band. This, too, is going to be an obstacle to having a stand-alone article on the subject.

As for the question of sourcing, you are correct in believing the YouTube videos can be reliable sources. But most YouTube videos either are not reliable or have been uploaded in violation of copyright (and, hence, can't be used here). But so long as your cited videos don't have these problems, you can use them as sources. But, how is the reviewer supposed to know that they are permissible? You have presented them all in the form of "bare URLs". When you do that, you are telling readers (including reviewers) that if they want to know any details about the provenance of the video, they have to leave Wikipedia and find out for themselves. And that runs afoul of WP:CITE, which requires you to provide -- in the citation -- the essential bibliographic information. For YouTube videos, this can be done most easily by using the {{cite AV media}} template. Later today, I'll drop by your draft and format one of them for you, which you can then use as an example for doing the rest. After you've done that, you'll be in a position to have a more meaningful discussion about the notability of the subject.

One last point. Your draft looks like it contains two separate drafts all on one page. You probably should correct that before re-submitting.

I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:53:04, 11 January 2018 review of submission by SoricaNiChearnaigh


I'm not asking for a re-review as of yet but can you please tell me how to get this article published? This is a national organisation of importance to all nurses working or trying to work in Cyprus. They are noteworthy in the sense that you cannot legally operate as a nurse in Cyprus without going through them. They are not mentioned in many online sources and any newspaper articles I can cite are in Greek. I'd appreciate some advice. I've seen other organisations listed with hardly any information or sources at all, such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Nurses_and_Midwives_Organisation

Really any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

@SoricaNiChearnaigh:, welcome to Wikipedia. First off, do not worry about sources being written in Greek. The language of publication does not affect the reliability, or noteworthyness of the subject. So, add the Greek citations. Obviously, English citations are better for Wikipedia, as a reviewer will be able to find out if they are reliable more quickly. Sadly, you cannot just say that your article is more notable than one that is already on Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is in flux, and articles are deleted/remade/edited all the time, and such, once an article is published, it is only deleted for not being notable, not for lack of sources. If you have some in depth citations in Greek, I would add them. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:19, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:19, 11 January 2018 review of draft by AMOAKO


AMOAKO (talk) 16:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @AMOAKO: did you have a question? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:50:00, 11 January 2018 review of submission by Aaron.Harris

I Have Submitted an article about two months ago and on January 10 it was declined. I just want to know the reason and how I can improve the article. This article is about Rima: The Story Begins (videogame), released on October 10, it does not have so many sources on the web. Please help. Aaron.Harris (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Template:Aaron.Harris, see the reviewers comments. All topics on wikipedia need to be notable, and pass a version of WP:GNG. There are other criteria for video games, but generally you need reliable, secondary in-depth sources that talk about your subject. Looking at the references, they're most either primary (anything from Up entertainment), or not considered a reliable source, which is the Toronto game dev articles), they're likely linked too. I've had a look, and the subject simply isn't notible enough for wikipedia, unless it's had some incredible offline press. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lee Vilenski Thank you for replaying. so what do you suggest me to do? Aaron.Harris (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron.Harris: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Reference library offer recommendations about finding sources for articles about video games. Given the nature and age of the product, if there aren't many sources on the web then there probably aren't many sources at all. If you can find independent, reliable sources, then throw away the contents of Draft:Rima: The Story Begins and start over using those sources. Otherwise move on and write about another topic, one that is notable. We have 5.5 million existing articles to choose from, most of which need improvement. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:28, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:29:54, 11 January 2018 review of submission by Avatar317


Hello all! I am attempting to get the (my) article, up to Wikipedia standards so that it can be published. Two previous editors: SeraphWiki and Worldbruce gave me constructive criticism on how to improve the article. Thank you to both!!

I have now read more of Wiki's policies (SYNTH and Encyclopedia style) and done numerous edits to attempt to get the article to fit those policies, and then re-submitted it for review, but the most recent reviewer did not (in my opinion) give me any CONSTRUCTIVE criticism on how to improve the article. From his comments, it appears that he really didn't spend more than precursory time looking at anything more than the lead. (His comments are on this page at Jan 8, (Lee Vilenski) ) Since both of you: SeraphWiki and Worldbruce clearly read enough of the article and references to specifically explain how some of my statements were either Original Research or otherwise unsupported in the references, if you have time and inclination, could you have another look at the article (now that I've tried to improve it) and give me some more feedback on it? I would much appreciate it.

Also, after reading wiki's policy on "Encyclopedic style" it seems that some articles are better suited for these two formats/styles than others, and seems hard to apply it to ALL articles.....maybe you can give some advice here? Thanks!!! Avatar317 (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Avatar317[reply]

Hi @Avatar317:, I'm sorry if my comments weren't enough on the talk page, if you had wanted, you could have asked me directly with the template:Ping. I'm happy to help. I actually replied to your request earlier with a response, which said
The article is still written more like an essay, than a wikipedia article. The draft starts "Since about 1970", which really isn't encylopedic wording. You also can't say things like "The fundamental cause", as it's not fact. It's a good article, but as if written for a school project, not an encylopedia entry
The main issue with the article remains the format, and that it reads like an essay on the subject. Irregardless of the subject, we need to keep all articles in Wikipedia in line with the same format. The lead is specifically where the issue is, see WP:LEDE, as it doesn't read like a regular topic on wikipedia. The issue with saying "The Fundimental Cause" is that it's conjecture against another persons opinion. However, if a reliable source says it, it's better to quote the source in this instance, such as "California Legislators say the fundimental cause is...", or similar. Sadly, housing developments aren't my area of expertise, however I am always willing to help.
I'd say, if the article was more in the form of a regular wiki article, I'd have most likely have accepted it. Please let me know if you need any more information Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:48, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 12

01:24:56, 12 January 2018 review of submission by Midgeymay

I'm wondering why this page is not being published. The producer has credits sited on other wiki pages and has been referenced on an artist' insert that is published on iTunes. Midgeymay (talk) 01:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Midgeymay: There are no producer-specific notability guidelines, so he would have to satisfy WP:BIO or WP:GNG to justify having a stand alone article about him in Wikipedia. None of the draft's cited sources contain significant coverage of him. Neither being listed on other wiki pages nor being referenced (by which I take it you mean mentioned briefly) on an artist insert on iTunes is any evidence of notability according to the above guidelines. The draft is not being published because it fails to show that the subject is notable. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=819997138"