Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 October 8
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 7 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 9 > |
| 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. |
October 8[edit]
17:41:17, 8 October 2017 review of submission by Ogodej[edit]
I have completed the references, now the band's wiki page is accessible in English as well. The band in question is a widely known one, we could even call them famous. Several international newspapers have published interviews with them. They are about to go on tours with many famous musicians, and they are valued and acknowledged by professional blues musicians and experts (see reflist). Claims and facts in the article are well supported by the references and the website of the band (see ref. 1). I do not see which facts are the ones that are not supported appropriately by the references, but I am happy to add the links if required. All the best: Ogodej (talk) 17:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ogodej: I see that Draft:Mojo WorKings still cites no sources. There's a list of references at the end of the draft, but none of them is cited within the draft in support of the statements there. Moreover, most of the references are not independent of the subject, and so would do nothing to vouch for the subject's notability even if they were cited. Maproom (talk) 20:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Maproom: The provided references are all independent, high quality, international journals. These prove all the claims made in the article. I cannot point to any facts that is not supported at least by one of the provided references. The band is famous, they are going on a European tour in the upcoming weeks. Based on the fact that the uploaded article was rejected only a few seconds after it had been uploaded, I only can conclude that it has not been thoroughly inspected and read. As a result, I cannot take the inspection procedure seriously. I will stick to my opinion even if after all this you would take an actual look at the atricle and would cherry pick some details that you do not like. I do not wish to discuss the topic any further. :( All the best: Ogodej (talk) 11:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- The first reference is to MoJo's own web site, and so not independent. The second is about an interview with band members, so also not independent. And none of the references is cited. No statement in the article is followed by a citation of a supporting reference. Maproom (talk) 06:44, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
- Maproom: The provided references are all independent, high quality, international journals. These prove all the claims made in the article. I cannot point to any facts that is not supported at least by one of the provided references. The band is famous, they are going on a European tour in the upcoming weeks. Based on the fact that the uploaded article was rejected only a few seconds after it had been uploaded, I only can conclude that it has not been thoroughly inspected and read. As a result, I cannot take the inspection procedure seriously. I will stick to my opinion even if after all this you would take an actual look at the atricle and would cherry pick some details that you do not like. I do not wish to discuss the topic any further. :( All the best: Ogodej (talk) 11:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I need help getting this page up and running. The news links are at the bottom of the page labeled news.
Zacharymoskow (talk) 22:58, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Zacharymoskow. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch article is a solid start, but the Montco Today piece is merely a recap of it, and so doesn't count as a second source. As for the other two sources, when evaluating notability, reviewers may discount student publications such as Student Life because they're produced by people still learning their trade and because they have a limited circulation and audience. To demonstrate the notability of an organization, at least one regional, statewide, national, or international source is necessary to show that the organization is not of purely local interest.
- Reviewers are also weighing whether the organization has had any significant or demonstrable effect on culture, society, entertainment, economies, history, or education that would justify inclusion in an encyclopedia. That may be difficult to show because of the nature of the business, or may only become apparent some years from now. At this time the subject does not seem to be suitable for a stand alone encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is not for marketing, promotion, or pubic relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:45, 9 October 2017 (UTC)