Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Talk page
ReviewerAFCH
Submissions
CategoryList
Showcase Assessment Participants Reviewing instructions Help desk Backlog drives
Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
  • Bona fide reviewers at Articles for Creation will never contact or solicit anyone for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, please post on this help desk page.
Click here to ask a new question.

A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

Contents


May 23[edit]

05:50:20, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Chrisnadeau1973[edit]


05:50:20, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Chrisnadeau1973

Every time I try to make a page it gets deleted and I always ask for help but no one will help me

Chrisnadeau1973 (talk) 05:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Can someone PMEASSE HELP ME CREATE A PAGE? I'm a huge fan of kris degioia. All her references are 💯 Verifyable! Please help Chrisnadeau1973 (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Chrisnadeau1973, you need to write more than just one sentence for it to be an acceptable article - "This person exists and does stuff" is simply not enough. Verifiability is important, but it is far from the only requirement an article must comply with, see the Your first article guide for the basics. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

12:33:01, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Tobiasbenedetto[edit]


I have edited my sandbox 'Artrooms' a month ago but it has not been reviewed or published. Please advise.

Our backlog for submissions is at over 1300 right now. Please be patient as we attempt to reduce it and get to your submission. JTP (talkcontribs) 14:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

14:15:51, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Historywriter23[edit]


Hamilton (musical) has had a profound impact on our understanding of history. It has also sparked discussions about race relations, immigration, and music.[1][2]

I want to offer an analysis of each of the songs from the musical on the page. I believe that each song conveys important historical information, and each one has been discussed in the news and by critics of the musical. I would be interested in learning more about which songs I can write pages for. I attempted to write one for "What'd I Miss," but it wasn't approved.

Thanks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:What%27d_I_Miss

Historywriter23 (talk) 14:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Do you have a specific question about your submission? JTP (talkcontribs) 14:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

References

14:26:27, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Merfeldkristie[edit]

{{Lafc|username=Merfeldkristie|ts=14:26:27, 23 May 2017|page= Hell0- I have submitted A Perfect 10 Nail & Beauty Bar for submission several times and keep getting denied. I do not understand why. What do I need to do to get it submitted.

Merfeldkristie (talk) 14:26, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Your references do not prove notability. You must include independent, third-party reliable sources to prove notability. JTP (talkcontribs) 14:28, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

17:45:33, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Dufresne tim[edit]


Dufresne tim (talk) 17:45, 23 May 2017 (UTC)


I noticed that my very own, impartial and competent contribution is not published! Why?

Concerns were answered here. Primefac (talk) 17:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

17:45:48, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Zsomko[edit]


The article from my point of view is not based on any original research or opinions, all the statements are backed by published research papers. I do not understand what is the problem. Thanks for your help.

Zsomko (talk) 17:45, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

18:05:04, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Cwacox

FYI, Asked and answered on my talk. TimothyJosephWood 19:28, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

18:05:04, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Cwacox[edit]


Cwacox (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Cwacox. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. I assume your are asking about Draft:Clarence Acox. But an article on this person already exists at Clarence Acox, Jr.. If you wish to edit that already-existing article, there is no need to submit anything here at Articles for Creation. Instead, feel free to open up a discussion on the article's talk page. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

19:34:11, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Rkleegemtsinai[edit]


Please verify that this article has been received by you for re-review. I can't figure it out; it looks like it has and is pending review, but I'm not sure.

I can't tell if I have successfully submitted the draft for re-review. Can you please confirm that you have received it (or not)? Thank you. Rkleegemtsinai (talk) 19:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Rkleege. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Yes, your submission has been received (you can see the evidence of that in the "pending review" box at the bottom of your draft). But right now, there are about 500 submissions in the queue ahead of yours, so I expect that it will be at least two weeks before someone will take a look at it. On a different note, your user name suggests that you might be associated with the subject of your draft. If you have not already done so, I encourage you to read through our conflict-of-interest guidelines. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

20:11:36, 23 May 2017 review of submission by LannaM[edit]


Hi!

I'm having trouble with creating an article. I'd like to know more about what is consider notability.

My article References includes news from various sources around the globe. Also includes articles of reliable sources on the medical field (the person which the article is about is a plastic surgeon) that should prove the notabilty of this person.

I am worried because it seems that the article reviews are taking a while (nearing a month to be exact) and I'd like to make everything right this time so it won't end up declined again.

Thanks a lot!

LannaM (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lanna. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Before posting here, I took a look at your submission and can see why it was twice declined for failing to establish "notability". In the case of a medical professional such as the one you are writing about, you will need to demonstrate that at least one of the criteria set forth at WP:NACADEMIC has been satisfied. And, you need to do so by making reference to reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I don't think you've succeeded in doing that, but there is still time to work on it some more. I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

NewYorkActuary (talk)

Thanks a lot! I will check that out.

(Also, I don't know if this is the right way to reply. Sorry in advance!) LannaM (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC) comment added by LannaM (talkcontribs) 21:10, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. And, yes, that was the right way to reply. But don't forget to sign your postings by adding four tildes "~~~~" after your message. There's even a button at the bottom of the edit window that will do it automatically (it's the one titled "Sign your posts on talk page"). Good luck with the draft. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh I see it now! I also added a few more sources. I'll try to find a few more to cover those criteria.
Thanks for the help! LannaM (talk) 13:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

23:15:40, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Fleejoseph[edit]


Fleejoseph (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Not sure where to go to ask this question....looked all over wikimedia and nothing seemed to apply. The topics seemed to be for general policy user discussions, not for a specific photo submission, which is my situation. On May 9, 2017 the Miami Herald, through its legal representative, David Blasco, registered as a user and then emailed to permissions commons their full copyright release (per Wiki's guidelines) of a photo of Larry Thompson (humorist) and Penny Thompson. The Herald is the copyright holder of these photos. David emailed me that he received an auto response saying thanks, it will take some time. It's only been two weeks, but wondering how can I followup to see if all received ok, any issues, and when might the photos go online? Thanks for your patience! Fleejoseph (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Flee. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. We here at Articles for Creation are definitely not the people you need to be speaking with. I gather that the "permissions" you mention relate to the OTRS system, so I suggest contacting either Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard or WP:OTRSN. I hope this response is helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:45, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

May 24[edit]

00:27:43, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Bailey Rae[edit]


Do images that are added to articles also need to be pulled from credited sources? For example, I am wondering whether an IMDB photo is appropriate to add to an article that is under review. Thanks!

Bailey Rae (talk) 00:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Bailey. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. It is extremely unlikely that an IMDB photo is going to be permitted in the biography of a living person. You can learn more about the use of images by reading our WP:Uploading images, especially section 1.1 ("Determine copyright status"). I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

07:00:07, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Chrisnadeau1973[edit]

User:Chrisnadeau1973/sandbox

I added what you told me to. Does this help?

I'm sorry if it's not I'm trying my best.

Chrisnadeau1973 (talk) 07:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Chris. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. But as things stand right now, your submission will not be accepted for publication. The immediate problem is that you need to use "in-line citations". This means that you shouldn't simply throw a bunch of links at the end of the article and then expect readers to know which linked reference is being used to support each particular statement in the draft. I encourage you to read through our WP:Referencing for beginners, which will provide detail on how in-line citation should be done. You might also want to look at some of our better-quality biographical articles, such as the ones about Anne Hutchinson and Emily Dickinson. By reading through them, you can see how the principles of WP:Referencing for beginners are applied in practice. I hope this response was helpful, If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

07:29:30, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Matt Mountain[edit]


What kind of additional and reliable sources should I add? It is okay if I am told to do so, but I have added a book and several other links. I can't find other sources since I only used these. What else should I add? A detailed description would be nice.

Matt Mountain (talk) 07:29, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

The draft currently cites no references. Some references are listed, but not in support of the statements in the draft. You should read Help:Referencing for beginners, or at least look at some existing Wikipedia article, to see how references should be cited. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

08:09:58, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Semper liber[edit]

Hi I have 2 questions below:

Question 1 - (withdraw submission) Draft:Magomed Bibulatov Draft:Alexander Volkanovski Draft:Luke Jumeau

I have submitted 3 drafts above for review ad understand that the notabilities are not met until more fights have taken place; for such I would like to withdraw the submissions and resubmitted them when the notability are met. Kindly advise how to proceed. Thank you.

Question 2: (waiting for review) Draft:Marco Polo Reyes Draft:Danielle Taylor (fighter)

I have submitted the 2 drafts above (about 10 days ago), and both article met the nobility criteria; however, I have yet to receive any news on their approval. Kindly advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Semper liber (talkcontribs) 08:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Semper. Thank you for your submissions to Wikipedia. I've arranged for the withdrawal of the three submissions listed in your Question 1. Your drafts still appear in the same places -- the only change is that they are no longer in the queue for being reviewed. Generally, they can remain where they are for at least six months. Regarding the other two submissions, we are extremely backlogged and I expect that it will be another two or three weeks before a reviewer gets a chance to look at them. Thank you for your patience. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 09:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi NewYorkActuary. Thank you for your assistance on the removal of articles for submission and information of the backlog. Appreciate it.
Semper liber (talk) 09:56, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

08:32:23, 24 May 2017 review of submission by JoeyJet[edit]

Hi... I am a first timer and would very much like to get my article posted. I fly a private jet and am not much of a wikipedia guy. I think that I am almost there but could really use some expert help at this point. Thanks in advance. I am available by phone if that would be easier but I guess this will work to. Again Thanks

JoeyJet (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Joey. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. However, your draft about George Baldanzi was a verbatim copying of the subject's obituary in the New York Times. Because our copyright rules generally prohibit this kind of copying, I've called for a deletion of your sandbox draft. After that deletion takes place, you are free to start again, but you'll need to write your new draft using your own words. You will also need to assemble more sources than just a single obituary in order to demonstrate that the subject meets Wikipedia's notion of "notability" (for which see our notability guidelines for biographies). I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 09:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

14:22:47, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Milan Reiter[edit]

Dear Devopam or other users,

it would be great if someone could help me to optimize this Wikipedia article. Thanks in advance.

Maybe you can give me an example for a good reference? I don´t really understand what could be wrong with the references I have provided. I feel like these are all reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Is it a problem because most of the sources are in a different language?

I've created this article by this example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Clevers. Should I do more research on the person? Like providing more background information about his career?

Hope to get some advice. Milan Reiter

Milan Reiter (talk) 14:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

An obvious difference between Hans Clevers and Draft:Uwe Marx is that Hans Clevers cites 17 references (using the standard Wikipedia method of doing a citation, which results in a superscripted number in square brackets) while Draft:Uwe Marx cites none. Maproom (talk) 21:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

May 25[edit]

Request on 04:40:13, 25 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Zar chi oo[edit]


The profile I'm trying to create a notable person in our country. He stayed low profile in the fight for democratic transition. That's why there are not many news about him. Now wiki is saying he is not a notable person and his page could not be created. If we don't record his story, that will be the lost for the history as well.

please help me create his page. Zar chi oo (talk) 04:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I have moved the draft to Draft:Myo Myint Nyein. Wikipedia has no article on anyone else with that name, so the "(Editor_and_writer)" in the title is is superfluous. My own, uninformed, opinion is that he may well be notable; but the draft needs improvement. I suggest you remove the references to Wikipedia (which does not regard itself as a reliable source, as this would lead to circularity). You should also start the article by clearly stating what he is notable for. It would help if you broke the first long paragraph up into shorter paragraphs. Maproom (talk) 21:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

12:48:56, 25 May 2017 review of submission by EdwGross[edit]

Hi there, thank you very much for the quick feedback for the draft. I have found many sources that are written in German - is it possible to use these ones? Thank you for your help Edward EdwGross (talk) 12:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Sources in German are certainly acceptable – though in English Wikipedia, sources in English are preferred if available. Maproom (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

19:36:48, 25 May 2017 review of submission by Dansmo[edit]


I'm looking for guidance of the formatting of our references. Please can you take a look at the way the links and sources are set-up and please can you provide some feedback? Or a link to best practices?

Thanks!

Dansmo (talk) 19:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Reply - Hello Dansmo, in terms of reference formatting, I would read the following document: Help:Referencing_for_beginners. Isingness (talk) 22:19, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

May 26[edit]

14:10:32, 26 May 2017 review of submission by Cogic2[edit]



Please help me understand what you were looking for. Also, I looked up several other articles on bishops, and noted that the primary information regarding them was regarding becoming bishops with a little else detailing their notability. Please give clarity as to why a Catholic bishop is considered notable for simply being a bishop but a COGIC Bishop would not be

User:Cogic2 - First, there is a problem with your username if (as it appears) COGIC is a church denomination, because your username appears to reflect the denomination. If your account is used only by one person, please change the name. If it is used by more than one person, please don't; please change the name and choose one person to take over the account. Second, the basic issue about notability of bishops is that the title Bishop is used very differently in different denominations. In some churches, such as Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, and Anglican, a bishop is the head of a usually large diocese consisting of a large number of churches. In such churches, a bishop has extensive authority in a relatively large jurisdiction. However, some denominations give the title of bishop to the senior pastor of a congregation, a less important role. If the Church of God in Christ has large dioceses consisting of large numbers of churches, it would be useful to explain that in the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
user:Robert McClenon Thank you for giving some clarity. Yes, Jurisdictional bishops in COGIC are the equivalent of diocean bishops in the Catholic church. They are responsible for large geographical areas the oversee the churches in those areas. The subject of this submission oversees churches in Nova Scotia, Canada, New York, Pennsylvania, and MA, having oversight of approximately 90 churches. While this may not be as large as some Catholic dioceses, the responsibilities and authority is comparable. Cogic2 22:29:44, 26 May 2017

20:37:53, 26 May 2017 review of submission by Ainullah khN[edit]


Ainullah khN (talk) 20:37, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@Ainullah khN: Hello, Ainullah. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Our apologies for the great delay in response. Did you have a specific question? NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

22:57:51, 26 May 2017 review of submission by Vasilii Tiorkin[edit]


Dear Wikipedia,

Thank you for accepting my first article called "Supersymmetric theory of stochastic dynamics". This article is about a theory that is also called "Supersymmetric theory of stochastics" and "Topological field theory of dynamical systems". My question is as follows. Should I create a "disambiguation page" with an alternative title and then redirect it to the original page or is there a more preferable way to deal with the problem of alternative names ?

Best regards, --I.

Vasilii Tiorkin (talk) 22:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Reply - Dear User:Vasilii Tiorkin, the method you are looking for is the creation of a Redirect page, where the alternative title can be searched, and directs you to the desired page. To create a redirect, simply follow the instructions here Wikipedia:Redirect#How_to_make_a_redirect. Isingness (talk) 23:04, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

May 27[edit]

03:00:51, 27 May 2017 review of submission by Oulipo Oui[edit]


I just would like some help as to what, if anything, can be kept of the article and how to shorten it or fix it so it meets Wikipedia's standards. Oulipo Oui (talk) 03:00, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@Oulipo Oui: Hello, Oulipo. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Our apologies for the delay in response. Before posting here, I took a look at your submission and, frankly, I found it well-nigh unreadable. It appears to be little more than a curriculim vitae expressed in prose form. Three sections devoted essentially to telling the reader exactly what college courses he's been teaching? Some even with course names and catalog numbers? My overall impression is that there is nothing particularly interesting about the subject. I expect that you disagree with that assessment, but you haven't done a good job of presenting the subject as someone worth reading about. And there is a second major problem -- you haven't demonstrated that the subject is "notable" in the sense that Wikipedia uses the word. A person who works and teaches in the field of film should be able to demonstrate satisfaction with the criteria set forth either in WP:NFILMMAKER or WP:NACADEMIC. I think you haven't demonstrated satisfaction with either set of criteria. But maybe you have. Your references are mostly in the form of "bare URLs", a practice that forces readers (including reviewers) who want to know essential bibliographic information (i.e. who wrote an article and when/where it was published) to leave Wikipedia and find out for themselves. I wasn't inclined to do all of that research myself. But I did click through a few of the URLs and found that only one treated the subject in more than passing fashion, and that one exception was an article in a college newspaper. If I missed a more substantial discussion of the subject, please let me know. But right now, I don't see how the subject of your draft merits an article on Wikipedia. I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

May 28[edit]

04:30:40, 28 May 2017 review of submission by Wdsfp[edit]


Wdsfp (talk) 04:30, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Montana Montana Montana[edit]

There are 12 reputed Reference links and written as directed by the Wikipedia guidelines but the page was still declined

Page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Montana_Montana_Montana

Please someone help me to identify the guidelines violation for which the page was declined ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalamya (talkcontribs) 14:08, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

19:01:17, 28 May 2017 review of submission by Smn90[edit]

Hi,

I am in great need of help. Can't really figure out where the exact problem lies. My page Nabeel A. Qadeer is not being accepted. Although Nabeel A. Qadeer is the host and anchor of a popular TV show in Pakistan by the name of 'Idea Croron Ka'. There are links all over youtube which I have added in the references as well. Various magazines and bloggers have featured him as he is the man who laid down the foundation to Pakistan's first business reality show. He is also notable for laying down the foundation of Pakistan's entrepreneurial ecosystem. I have provided all the relevant references to articles, blogs and even youtube links to his TV show. However, I am still getting the same message regarding the notability of Nabeel A. Qadeer. Please let me what is your standard of notability and what references am I missing that makes him notable for Wikipedia? Please help me in this regard. Kindly be specific as to what needs to be added? I shall wait for response on this. Best regards.

Smn90 (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

May 29[edit]

07:46:35, 29 May 2017 review of submission by Louib1986[edit]


this is a real film project with a world famous director please upload it


here are the links to reputable sources i cant add please help

https://au.tv.yahoo.com/the-morning-show/video/watch/34781006/from-the-small-to-big-screen-with-holly-brisley/

https://www.facebook.com/142838319073466/photos/a.755545311136094.1073741826.142838319073466/1413429935347625/?type=3&theater

Hi Louib1986. Wikipedia is a trailing medium, in that it covers topics that have garnered significant attention by independent reliable sources over a period of time. Wikipedia is not the place to "get the word out" about anything. Films often aren't widely written about until after they are released; I suggest you wait until then. And if you have a personal connection to the film or the people making it, don't write about the film here, leave the topic for someone uninvolved. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

12:22:40, 29 May 2017 review of submission by Zsomko[edit]


I would like to find out what do I have to do to get my paper accepted. I have mentioned a bunch of good references, and eliminated the thoughts which I provided to enhance understanding as the previous reviewer said that it was a personal voice. Now what?

Zsomko (talk) 12:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

13:09:41, 29 May 2017 review of draft by Potholehotline[edit]


i fear i did something wrong as the 2 footnotes in the draft didn't generate anything in the references section Potholehotline (talk) 13:09, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Pothole. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. The problem was that you didn't place the references within the "<ref> </ref>" tags. See WP:REFB for more detail and note that you can also use the "Cite your sources" button at the bottom of the edit window to have them added automatically (but you must click that button before, not after, you add the reference). I fixed both of your footnotes for you and, while doing so, I took the liberty of re-formatting the first one using the {{cite web}} template. Giving references in the form of "bare URLs" runs afoul of WP:CITE, because it fails to provide essential bibliographic detail such as who wrote an article and when/where it was published. The citation template simplifies the process of collecting and presenting that essential information. I left the second reference for you to do but, if you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:37, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

20:59:25, 29 May 2017 review of submission by 120.17.29.249[edit]


120.17.29.249 (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2017 (UTC)