Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 December 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 23 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 25 >
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 24

[edit]

09:06:30, 24 December 2018 review of draft by Nathalieknudsen

[edit]


I don't understand why the page is getting deleted. It/the artist meets the criteria for musicians and ensemble (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles). I get that it needs to have reliable sources, but my sources include reviews from objective websites and music magazines, non-promotional articles and interviews with some of Norway's biggest radio stations and music websites. And so on. I will try and find more sources, but I still feel like this page should get accepted. Nathalieknudsen (talk) 09:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nathalieknudsen: Are the sources specifically and primarily about Schandy, or are they about festivals he's played at or bands he's performed with? (For the record, I'm asking because I haven't checked all of them for myself). Sources like this one are not primarily about Schandy. Not only do the sources need to be specifically about Schandy, they must be professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. They also must not be affiliated with Schandy or any record company he works with or for (I even recommend avoiding interviews for that reason). It's almost never a good idea to cite an artist's iTunes page or one of their Youtube videos -- if the information is noteworthy it will be found in an independent source.
Focus on just summarizing the professional and unaffiliated sources that are really only about him and no one else to get the article approved, then expand using the other sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:36:07, 24 December 2018 review of submission by Harix786

[edit]

Please help me to make a wiki page for my organization my page was rejected because they said that "the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic"

below is my last submission on wikipedia please help me to resubmit a valid wiki page with valid information.

[Article attempt removed - Ian.thomson (talk)]

Thankyou. Haris Naeem 11:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


@Harix786: Phrasing like "where You can" feels like you're directing the reader to use the product, which is advertising. You need to write the article in a way that someone who hates Vinepk can still agree with the basic facts.
You did not cite any professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that were specifically about Vinepk but not dependent upon nor affiliated with it but still specifically about Vinepk. You needed to do that. The article should only summarize professional mainstream sources that are not connected to Vinepk but still about it.
You repeatedly linked to the Vinepk website in the article. Although other articles do not excuse what happens in new articles, you'll notice that we try to remove any such links in .
I'm going to leave a set of specific instructions (only 8 steps) that if you follow, you'll end up with an article that won't get deleted or rejected. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:42:06, 24 December 2018 review of submission by Tm 12172018

[edit]


Tm 12172018 (talk) 12:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tm 12172018: Looking at Draft:Yugen Public Relation, you did not cite any professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about Yugen PR but not affiliated with nor dependent upon Yugen PR but still specifically about Yugen PR. You just need at least three such sources. I'll leave some instructions (just 8 steps) on your talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:34:14, 24 December 2018 review of draft by IAmTheNeil

[edit]


Hi team,

I would greatly appreciate some additional advice on the creation of the DaVinci Resolve article, and ensuring it meets Wikipedia's quality standards.

I strongly feel that this software deserves its own article, given that:

  • It often used in conjunction with various applications which have their own articles (e.g. Media Composer, Adobe Premiere Pro) in the workflows of professional filmmakers.
  • Similar applications have their own articles (e.g. Nuke (software)).
  • Its current primary entry redirects to a company that hasn't owned the software since 2009.
  • Applications that are integrated directly into it as modules (e.g. Blackmagic_Fusion) have dedicated articles for their standalone versions.
  • It is one of the industry-leading products for its field.

I have included multiple articles from established third-party publications to establish notability (a valid concern raised during the first submission); however, despite attempts to maintain a neutral tone, the remaining concerns are that it's too promotional.

Please advise what steps can be taken to increase the level of neutrality of the article to an acceptable level, without removing the articles which demonstrate its notability. I have already made the list of films & TV more concise, in response to concerns over coatrack creation.

Thank you.

IAmTheNeil (talk) 15:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@IAmTheNeil: Re strongly feel: see WP:ILIKEIT.
Re It often used in conjunction with various applications which have their own articles and Applications that are integrated directly into it as modules (e.g. Blackmagic_Fusion) have dedicated articles for their standalone versions: see WP:NOTINHERITED.
Re Similar applications have their own articles: see WP:OTHERSTUFF
Re It is one of the industry-leading products for its field: then there should be plenty of professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not dependent upon nor affiliated with DaVinci Resolve. I've not gone through every single source in the article, but it does seem that you've probably got those.
What to do: Looking over the draft casually, one problem I'm seeing is that you're going for quantity with sourcing, which isn't the same as quality. All a draft to get approved is at least three good sources. Start off just summarizing the best 5-7 sources, following the directions I've left on your talk page. Use the others to expand the article after it is approved. Focus more on the software's history for the draft, and write anything about functionality, reception, or famous use in terms that even a disgruntled employee who left to work for a competitor would have to agree with (i.e. don't write in a way that someone could read and go "that sounds great!"). Ian.thomson (talk) 18:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:13:37, 24 December 2018 review of submission by Editorofstudy

[edit]


Editorofstudy (talk) 18:13, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Editorofstudy: You need to cite professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are not dependent upon nor affiliated with Charu search engine, but are still specifically about Charu search engine. The draft just needs to be a summary of at least three such sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:24, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

23:09:47, 24 December 2018 review of draft by Emmadegrandi

[edit]


Hi

This summer I was asked to write an Wikipedia page on Anthony Pioppi (I was asked by Pioppi himself); he has written several books on golf. My draft has been declined because although he has written a lot, his name is not per-say "notable." I was wondering what the likelihood of him receiving a Wikipedia page is. I do wish to keep trying to get his page out there, but only if possible. Let me know what you think. Thank you.

Emma DeGrandi

Emmadegrandi (talk) 23:09, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Emmadegrandi Welcome to AfC help desk. See below
  1. Since you are associated with Anthony Pioppi which means you have conflict of interest by association/affliation here which Wikipedia do not encourage such action. However, if you would still want to persue this task then you have to declare you associate in "your user page" as well in the "article talk page" If you are a paid editor (someone paid you to write this article) then you have to declare WP:PAID.
  2. Golfer Notability - Subject needs to pass the golfer notability requirements in Wikipedia - see WP:NGOLF
Thank you and do pop back here if you further questions. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2018_December_24&oldid=875937757"