Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
CategoryList
ShowcaseAssessmentParticipants
Talk
Reviewing instructions
Helper script
Help deskBacklog 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


September 13[edit]

Request on 01:11:21, 13 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Shibainu21[edit]


This is for "Switchboard Live" Thanks for reviewing my article. Could I get some assistance about my references? What criteria is fulfilled and what isn't from the references that are currently there? Thank You!

Shibainu21 (talk) 01:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

02:03:08, 13 September 2018 review of draft by Thegooduser[edit]


Will my article be accepted? Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 02:03, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

How could it be accepted? There are no notability references. All of your references are to the publication itself or its publisher. Some independent coverage is required to establish WP:notability. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 02:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

04:28:55, 13 September 2018 review of draft by Harwn733[edit]


Is this the only way to get some attention around here? It said it could take days monthes even at afc. Harwn733 (talk) 04:28, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Harwn733 (talk) 04:28, 13 September 2018 (UTC) http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/joseph-okumu/profil/spieler/453376 Harwn733 (talk) 04:36, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Harwn733 see the message posted to the draft by the reviewer. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

05:41:25, 13 September 2018 review of draft by Musicant.oren[edit]


My contribution “Edna Schechtman” is waiting very long time (>2 months) for the review process. How can we promote the review process? Musicant.oren (talk) 05:41, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I've improved the layout, formatting, added wikilinks and a few other minor fixes, but you've got some way to go to demonstrate her notability. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:55, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

12:50:32, 13 September 2018 review of submission by 114.240.224.165[edit]


114.240.224.165 (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Please I have written this article for to be submitted for publication. Please is there a breach. I need your help .

17:19:52, 13 September 2018 review of draft by 38.142.24.194[edit]


This draft is supposed to be a disambiguation page because there are two meanings of "phlashing," one related to phishing and one related to a denial-of-service attack. Both of these meanings are sourced on the pages I mentioned. However, "phlashing" currently redirects only to to the "denial-of-service attack" article. If the disambiguation page is accepted, how will that affect the redirect? Is there a way to remove the redirect? 38.142.24.194 (talk) 17:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC) 38.142.24.194 (talk) 17:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Done! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

22:52:24, 13 September 2018 review of draft by 68.103.78.155[edit]


What's Taking So Long It Needs to move into article space now. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 22:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

68.103.78.155 (talk) 22:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

We have no deadlines here and in any case the draft violates the WP:NOTGUIDE rule. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

September 14[edit]

01:10:25, 14 September 2018 review of draft by The Rank and File[edit]


We created a User Page in the Sandbox and it was flagged for immediate deletion. We are unsure if was created correctly as a User Page or if it is an Article and thus under more stringent or different rules? In any case we edited to remove our fundraising website and our social media links and resubmitted it.
Now we realise we can have one link to one official website? Not sure if we should edit again or wait for a reply.
Thank you for any advise.

The Rank and File (talk) 01:10, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 02:48:27, 14 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Troy Sheehan[edit]


I am needing some assistance to create an infobox for a band's wiki page I am wanting to publish.

Troy Sheehan (talk) 02:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Troy Sheehan Greetings to you. pls see For articles about musical groups for group musician infobox. In addition please note to cite reliable, independent sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject such as sources from major newspapers especially from ANZ. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

04:18:00, 14 September 2018 review of draft by Summerintx[edit]


I would like to make sure my citations and references are formatted correctly. There's a list of four References, consisting of links to news articles, but bylines are not shown for the most part. There are External Links to government sources. Finally there are ten specific full citations (including bylines if any) linking to news sources for the history and other information about the station. That part hangs below the External Links without a heading so it looks busy and not well organized. I don't know if there's a way (or if it should) replace the four items listed under References. But it does not look good as is. I suppose it could be cut to look better, but it's documentation that shows the new article has high validity. Please advise. Thank you. Summerintx (talk) 04:18, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Summerintx (talk) 04:18, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Summerintx Greetings. I have reviewed your draft article and please see below
  1. Please read WP:Your First Article and WP:Referencing for Beginners to familiar yourself on how to write an article and provide inline citation.
  2. Article needs to be written in Neutral point of view. At current stage it reads like an advertising piece.
  3. Please remove all external links in the body texts.
  4. Left only one external link on External section - see WP:ELMIN
  5. All content need to included inline citation. Unsourced content would be removed.
  6. I added {{reflist}} - inlined references could be viewed under "References" at the bottom of the page.
Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:39, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

05:47:30, 14 September 2018 review of draft by MerlijnTurn18[edit]


I have re-submitted a text after theroadislong placed comments. I believe it complies with the rules of wikipedia now. But this has been a while ago when I resubmitted it, and it still hasn't been published yet. Please give me clear instructions on what to do next in order to have it published a.s.a.p. Many thanks, kind regards

MerlijnTurn18 (talk) 05:47, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

MerlijnTurn18 Reviewed and declined. Pls see comment on the draft page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

07:19:13, 14 September 2018 review of submission by JafarHasnainKhan[edit]


JafarHasnainKhan (talk) 07:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:09:03, 14 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Rayner111[edit]


I keep getting warnings that my post "Theoretical Behaviorism" is a copy of a paper by B. F. Skinner, which is nonsense. The piece is completely original but it does cite the Skinner paper-- as it should, given the topic.

Is this comment from a bot? Why I am getting this crazy objection. HELP! JS

Rayner111 (talk) 09:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Rayner111, Greetings. You were informed by a few reviewers that you have violated the WP:COPYRIGHT infringement prior it was tagged for CSD G12 and the article was deleted - see HERE]. Please write the article in your on words next time to avoid such incident again. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:11, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

13:56:24, 14 September 2018 review of draft by Mughees963[edit]


Please check my draft. Mughees963 (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, @Mughees963:. Firstly, all drafts in AfC will get reviewed - there are currently just under 4000 drafts, which means it can take anywhere up to a little over 2 months to process them. They're not done in order, so yours may well be done before then.
However, your draft doesn't currently satisfy notability rules. A town has to meet lower sourcing requirements, but neither of your two sources clearly shows that Muqeem Shah exists and that it is a town. While your draft is pending, it would be worth you finding a couple of additional sources to clarify this. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

16:29:43, 14 September 2018 review of submission by Wikiwriterpro[edit]


Dear Wikipedia, I've been trying to publish an article about a person who is notable enough to get into Wikipedia. But, the article submission is constantly being rejected by the Wikipedia Editors who think the person isn't notable enough. The fact is that they are only accepting the articles of the person whom they know and unfortunately, their knowledge seems to be under a rock and not knowing some key persons of the internet doesn't mean that the world will now know the person. I have added all the required details and citations to the Article, So, I request you to add this person (Draft: Rishav Kumar) to your Wikipedia Articles.

Thanking You, Daniel Chris Professional Wikipedia Writer Italy, Europe

Wikiwriterpro (talk) 16:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikiwriterpro Greetings to you and pls see below:
1. Those editors who rejected your draft page are AfC (Article for Creation) reviewers.
2. The subject (here is Rishav Kumar) needs to meet the notability requirement in order to merit a page in Wikipedia.
3. Content of draft need to be supported by (1) significant coverage with at (2) least three independent(secondary source) , (4) reliable sources where by (5) sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and no only passing mentioned.
4. Press releases, interview, home page, sources affiliated/associated with subject, listing, user generated sources and etc are considered primary (not independent) sources and they can NOT be used to demonstrate the of the subject.
5. Sources from major newspaper (not interview /press release) article would be considered independent and reliable sources.
6. The sources you provided do not pass the requirement of the above for such the draft article were rejected.
7. Please read WP:Your First Article, referencing for beginners and WP:NPOV to familiar yourself on how to write a neutral point of view article and cite with inline citation.
8. Please refer to Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything if the above is not clear to you.

Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

17:20:17, 14 September 2018 review of draft by Kmk01188[edit]


I received this message about the current page I am creating, Salvatore "SoccerSam" Fantauzzo. Can you please help me to make sure that this does not get deleted? I have tried to reference many articles to make it correct. message received: "This draft does not appear to meet biographical notability, but I am leaving it to another reviewer. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)"

Kmk01188 (talk) 17:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Your draft wouldn't be deleted, but it would be declined if it was viewed as failing notability when reviewed. This would mean you'd need to alter it and then resubmit it to the AfC process.
Your sources struggle to satisfy the triple requirement of: Significant Coverage (in depth reporting on Salvatore himself); reliable sources and independent (which also rules out interviews and when newspapers construct articles from press releases). Nosebagbear (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

September 15[edit]

16:35:28, 15 September 2018 review of draft by 108.204.65.73[edit]

help

108.204.65.73 (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

23:15:54, 15 September 2018 review of draft by UnivacTechDweeb[edit]


Hi there. I was wondering as to the status of this page. It was reviewed by User:Catrìona and declined on August 11th. I have submitted changes based on her recommendations and am still awaiting further notice of edits needed or publication. CitationBot did some further edits on August 24th. Can you look into this for me? I understand you are all very busy, but any light you can shed on this would be great. Thanks!

UnivacTechDweeb (talk) 23:15, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

September 16[edit]

06:20:50, 16 September 2018 review of submission by 103.42.217.73[edit]


103.42.217.73 (talk) 06:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

20:15:34, 16 September 2018 review of draft by Mary Henrietta Graham[edit]


Hello,

I submitted a revision of the article for Detroit Study Club two months ago and just wanted to check in on its status. Do you know when I can expect to hear back about this most recent revision.

Thanks

Mary Henrietta Graham (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Mary Henrietta Graham You article has been reviewed by one of our reviewers, pls check the draft page to see the comment. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 14:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

September 17[edit]

05:17:13, 17 September 2018 review of draft by Ahnaf Lion[edit]


I submitted an article that was declined. However, suggestion were made how i could improve the article so that it can be published. Following those guidelines, i resubmitted it. Usually,how long does it take to review a re-submission? Ahnaf Lion (talk) 05:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ahnaf Lion. The duration of a submit-review cycle is currently running 2-3 months. Use the time to make the draft the best it can be. For example:
--Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

05:45:51, 17 September 2018 review of submission by Quazarrr[edit]


Hi there, this page easily satisfies WP:BAND and there should be no question that a Wikipedia page should be created considering their size, influence and notoriety in the music industry. (A list detailing how they satisfy this criteria is on Cullen’s talk page). Just because the page has been created very poorly multiple times by overexcited fans in the past (and rightly rejected, as these articles were not up to Wikipedia standard) doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t deserve an article now - billions of streams, headlining at the most prestigious international concerts in the world, EPs charting on the Billboard and a debut album at number 6 on the iTunes charts evidence this. Could you please elaborate? Thanks. Quazarrr (talk) 05:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Your sources on Cullen's page were wildly misrepresented and as I broke it down on the talk page of the draft and on my own talk page, they were present in prior AFDs, which gives us no reason to think this is any different. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

11:32:27, 17 September 2018 review of draft by Aanuarif[edit]


I am unable to understand why my submission was rejected considering the fact that artists of the similar nature have their pages on Wikipedia and I do not see any "Reliable Sources" on their pages as well. I can give as many examples as you want but for reference, I am giving the link to Sara Haider's page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Haider. All I can see here are the interviews which are not reliable and independent. If there is a set criterion, it should be similar for all pages. I'm very disappointed but I would really like to know how I can improve the article to make it acceptable in your views. Looking forward to your kind response.11:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Aanuarif (talk) Aanuarif (talk) 11:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi. But Natasha Khan appeared in two seasons of Coke Studio i.e. Season 9 and Season 10. Can you please tell me which links are reliable and which ones are not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aanuarif (talkcontribs) 12:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

 Declined for the reasons explained on the draft. See also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

13:54:56, 17 September 2018 review of draft by Smeilychanel[edit]


Last time I submitted the page, it was declined because it needed more reliable sources. Now I have added a few references, but I don't know if I hve made correct citations or whether more references are needed in order to consider this article more reliable and accurate. Smeilychanel (talk) 13:54, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:37:44, 17 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Ringreiril Ranglong[edit]


COPYVIO REMOVED

References: In 1880 G.H. Damant, the then Political Officer of Naga Hills, in his research paper, "Notes on the locality and Population of the Tribes Dwelling betweenthe Brahmaputra and Ningthi Rivers" in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Page 237, Published in Stanford University, USA, Put the Ranglong Community under Old Kuki.

C.A. Soppit (1887), the then Assistant Commissioner, Burma and Sub-Divisional Officer, North Cachar Hills, Assam, in his research works ‘A short Account of the Kuki-Lushai Tribe on the North-East Frontier’ published at Harvard University, USA, clearly mentioned about the community of Ranglong in his preface on the account of the tribes.

G.A. Grierson (1904), one of the most renowned linguistic scholars, in his extensive research works, ‘The Linguistic Survey of India, 1904’ in Volume III, Part III – ‘Tibeto-Burman family’ had identified the Ranglong as separate community and accordingly undertook detailed linguistic research on Ranglong language. As per his record in 1904, the Ranglong populations were about 6,266.

T.C Hodson (1911), the then Assistant Political Agent in Manipur and Superintendent of the State, in his book, ‘The Naga Tribes of Manipur’ published in University of London, also identified the Ranglong as separate community as against Halam, Rangkhol etc., and put it under Old Kuki group. It could be viewed in page 19.

Colonel Shakespeare (1912), in his extensive works on linguistic co-relation among various tribes namely ‘The Lushei Kuki Clan’ published in the University of California, highlighted Ranglong as distinct to other tribal languages. It could be viewed in page 227 & 225.

Kenneth VanBik (2009), in his research works on, ‘Proto-Kuki-Chin: A Reconstructed Ancestor of the Kuki-Chin Language’ published in University of California, Berkeley, grouped the Ranglong with Old Kuki as against Halam Rangkhol, Aimol etc. It could be viewed in page 20.

M.K Bhasin (2006), in his research works, ‘Genetics of Castes and Tribes of India: Indian Population Milieu’ published in Int J Hum Genet, 2006, clearly identified the Ranglong as separate community alongside Lushai/Mizo, Rangkhol, Halam etc. It could be viewed in page 268, Volume 6(3).

Ringreiril Ranglong (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

The above is a reposting of User:Ringreiril Ranglong/sandbox, which itself is a copyvio of http://e-pao.net/epSubPageExtractor.asp?src=news_section.opinions.The_imbroglio_of_ethnic_identity_of_Ranglong_By_Antiarbum_Ranglong . --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:48, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

17:15:28, 17 September 2018 review of draft by 68.103.78.155[edit]


They Are 3 References on that article but I hope it's enough to make it in to Article Space. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 17:15, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

68.103.78.155 (talk) 17:15, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

  • It is unlikely to be accepted until February 2019. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

18:27:42, 17 September 2018 review of draft by TheChau26[edit]


I submitted an article a while ago and was told I had to make changes. I made the changes and resubmitted for review, but have not gotten any feedback as yet. The article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jet_Setting_Jasmine

I would like to get an update, if possible, from an alternate reviewer from my original reviewer. Can that be done?

TheChau26 (talk) 18:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi @TheChau26: The article is submitted for review and will be reviewed at some point. I will point out that the overall tone of the article is still advertorial and the references should be inline. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

September 18[edit]

15:05:17, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Mchargcenter[edit]


Is it possible to have multiple drafts going at once? I'd like to be working on my next article while my first is awaiting review... Mchargcenter (talk) 15:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC) Mchargcenter (talk) 15:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

OK Mchargcenter, I moved your current sandbox to the draftspace so you can work on it there! Bkissin (talk) 18:24, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

15:45:02, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Ithorpe508[edit]


I am requesting help with an article I am writing about an up and coming Hip/pop musician. The artist doesn't have extensive information in one place but rather a variety of platforms including his own cite. One of the comments an editor left on my submission was that I didn't have musical notability and general notability but I looked into those and I don't know enough about it to fix the problem.

Ithorpe508 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

22:46:11, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Rontl[edit]


Rontl (talk) 22:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I made some edits and included information about the fact that large corporations such as "Best Buy, Cisco, Dell, FedEx, Google, GoTRG, Home Depot, HP, Intel, and Walmart" all pay good money every year to maintain their corporate memberships in the organization, and serve on the board. These companies would not pay for corporate memberships and have their busy staff participate in the organization if they were not getting value out of their participation in the organization.

Also, the organization has created a new product-identification barcode standard which has been approved by the MH10, the organization given jurisdiction over barcodes by ANSI. This new barcode standard has been chosen for use in bringing devices onto the Internet of Things by the Open Connectivity Foundation.

I can understand the requirement for profile articles about people, because other people like to read articles about famous or notable people, so many such articles are written every day. But I'm not convinced that's always the case about organizations. If the hard and fast rule is that you can't have a Wikipedia page until someone writes an article that is only about your organization, then I guess our next job is to get someone to write such an article. Although, I have looked at pages about other organizations where they don't have an article profiling the organization, just a mention in an article. It seems to me that such an article is only one proxy for the real question as to whether an organization is significant enough to merit a page.

Short of such an article, are there other ways that the significance of the organization can be demonstrated? As I drafted it, I was trying hard to stick to the admonitions for brevity in the instructions for creating pages. If there is anything else I could or should add, I would be happy to. Thanks Rontl (talk) 22:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi @Rontl: the requirement is only for significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Unless the company has a multi-billion dollar turnover then you do need to show it meets the requirements outlined in WP:ORGCRITE. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:43, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

23:04:51, 18 September 2018 review of draft by WikiBPAN[edit]


Thank you for the feedback, I will work on your suggestions. I really think he should be in Wikipedia. He was behind the research that conducted to the establishment of Gullah Geechee Corridor. Can you Help me to understand why the cites are unreliable. There is more articles related to him and his work but I don't want to insert them without knowing what is consider unreliable. Thank you! WikiBPAN (talk) 23:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

September 19[edit]

13:09:56, 19 September 2018 review of draft by Scaur[edit]


Sorry, I think I accidentally added a new section by changing my subject/headline when submitting a page for review. Any way I can reverse this and try again? or will it be alright? Thank you.

Scaur (talk) 13:09, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Scaur. Drafts related to cryptocurrencies must be backed by independent reliable sources. Full articles in mainstream financial media are reliable sources (think The New Zealand Herald, National Business Review, The Wall Street Journal, etc.). Anything less will be seen as promotional spam, and will be summarily deleted. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:01, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 18:02:34, 19 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Bernie Max 2018[edit]


i want to have a copy of my deleted article and know what are my mistakes so I can improve them. also, would like to know if there is an assistant that can see my work and then correct what is wrong.


Bernie Max 2018 (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

  • @Bernie Max 2018: The submission was a copyright infringement and cannot be restored. You can still write an article which is not a copyright infringement. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)