Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 December 19
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < December 18 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 20 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
December 19[edit]
08:55:45, 19 December 2016 review of submission by Elizayass2014[edit]
My article was declined and I want to know how to make it sound more like an encyclopaedia than an article. Elizayass2014 (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Eliza. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. I'll leave some comments on your draft later today. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
15:45:32, 19 December 2016 review of submission by 180.246.181.135[edit]
Is the tallest man in a country not notable to be an article? 180.246.181.135 (talk) 15:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, IP address. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. As for your question, I don't know whether being the tallest man in a country counts as a "credible claim of significance". But more to the point, I'm not sure that the Wikipedia community knows the answer to that, either. A look at List of tallest people shows that some of the entries have stand-alone articles, but many do not. Your contribution history suggests that you are an experienced Wikipedia editor, so you might be aware of the hellacious debates that took place last year concerning biographies of people whose only claim to significance was being very old. The result was the deletion of most of those articles, and it seems to me that the same result would be obtained if ever the "tallest people" criterion were to be debated. Then again, that debate has not yet taken place (as far as I know). And so, I really don't know the answer to your question. But I suspect that, if nominated for deletion, it is more likely than not that the result for your submission would be "delete". If you want a more definitive answer, you'll probably need to start a Request for Comments at the appropriate forum (perhaps, the Talk page of WP:Notability (people)). I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
16:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC) review of submission by ProgrammingGeek[edit]
Why was this page rejected? This is the official reason given: "This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."
However it is a scientifically informed piece, and is certainly not subjective! I have read some other wikipedia entries and I cannot see that the style is unlike that of other articles.
Can anyone help give any insight to get this page accepted? It is valuable information from a scientific/conservation point of view.
- NOTE TO REVIEWERS: Discussion with the draft's creator has begun on the draft's Talk page, as well as on my own. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:38, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
17:10:53, 19 December 2016 review of submission by Kmccook[edit]
A library serving blind people is not notable, perhaps to the sighted but of great importance to the people with low vision. This article leads the general florida public to a life enhancing resourceKmccook (talk) 17:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC).
- Hey Kmccook. The draft wasn't declined because the library is inherently non-notable, but because the draft doesn't currently contain sufficient citations that qualify under Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources, so that it demonstrates the notability of the subject. For example, it looks like a lot of the sources are links to generic web pages about talking books, but not necessarily coverage, like a newspaper article, about the Bureau that the draft is supposed to be directly about. TimothyJosephWood 20:47, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
18:04:12, 19 December 2016 review of submission by Wordsighn[edit]
Wordsighn (talk) 18:04, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Wordsighn
Article
Hi I would like to know why my article was declined?
- Hello again Wordsighn. It looks like your draft was declined because it's a bit more like a how-to guide than an encyclopedia article, and Wikipedia isn't really the place for guides like that.
- Before you try making your first article (which is a hard thing to do), it might be a good idea to hang out a while on articles that you are interested in, and try to see if there are ways you can help improve those. That way it will help get you used to the way articles are supposed to look and, and what types of topics Wikipedia articles normally cover. TimothyJosephWood 20:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
18:30:51, 19 December 2016 review of submission by XanderPSamaras[edit]
Hi! I am very confused why the page I submitted on Gabo Arora was not approved. The comment I received was "there's nothing for a notable article in our policies because there's also no automatic inherited notability from the UN itself, it's clearly too soon." I do not understand what that means. Gabo is a well-established VR filmmaker, so I'm not sure what the issue is here. Please let me know, so I can make the necessary adjustments. Thanks!
- Hey XanderPSamaras. It looks like, of the sources you currently have in the article, a lot of them seem to be about the video or about the UN, but not necessarily about the individual. At least one source didn't mention the individual at all.
- So in order to demonstrate that this person is notable, you need to try to include more/better sources that are really about the person, and maybe rely less heavily on sources that are related to to them, but not necessarily really about them. TimothyJosephWood 19:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)