Help desk
< June 12	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 14 >

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.

June 13

04:44:14, 13 June 2018 review of submission by FeWorld

FeWorld (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Ice Poseidon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My article was recently declined Draft:Ice_Poseidon on grounds of notability. I would be grateful if you could provide feedback on why this article wasn't notable so I can improve it as I have sources from Rolling Stone, Vice, CBS, Polygon, Fox and others which are directly about the subject.

I tried contacting the reviewers for feedback but the first reviewer refused and I have not received a response from the second.

Any help would be appreciated. FeWorld (talk) 04:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FeWorld. Based on a random sample of the cited sources, I disagree with reviewers who have found the topic non-notable. The Rolling Stone source is a strong one. Player.One, although not as deep, is significant coverage, and reliable. International Business Times was dismissed when Ice Poseidon was seen as notable only for the bomb threat, and all the sources were about that single event. Now, coupled with sources that are not about that event, IBT should be fine, but I recommend using only the most reputable 1-2 sources about the bomb threat.

Not all the news is good. Twitter is a lousy source. It's self published and primary. The factoid it supports, and indeed the entire "In the media" section, is not encyclopedia-worthy content. Delete the section and the source. Dexerto and Right This Minute are dead links. That's a bad start for an article. If my random sample is representative, half the draft's sources should be thrown away. That will concentrate focus on the best sources, and make it clearer that the subject is notable.

The previous, now deleted, article was the frequent target of vandals. If the draft is accepted it's safe to assume that it too will be targeted. The best defense against it being completely trashed is to start with as robust a version as possible. For this reason I encourage you to improve it as much as you can in draft space and not to rush to get it moved to article space. I've left some specific comments on the draft, but they're just a beginning. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:02, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I very much appreciate your feedback and will work on all you have listed FeWorld (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:35:33, 13 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by MachineMGMT1

MachineMGMT1 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Cam O’bi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

MachineMGMT1 (talk) 15:35, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=InsertName|U1-employer=InsertName|U1-client=InsertName|U1-otherlinks=Insert relevant links, such as relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts written by paid editors, or diffs showing paid contributions being added to articles.}}

15:39:41, 13 June 2018 review of submission by MachineMGMT1

MachineMGMT1 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!

MachineMGMT1 (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to figure out if my wiki page needs more references, more notable references, or is just referenced wrong - is anyone able to help me? :)

Also will adding an image, or a contents box make it more likely to get approved?

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE!

@MachineMGMT1: Draft:Cam O’bi doesn't need more references, an image, or an infobox. Possibly fewer, better references would help. More importantly, it needs to be accurate - he isn't a Grammy Award winner. And most importantly, you should disclose your connection to the subject. --Worldbruce (talk)

Hey Bruce,

Thanks for getting back to me!

I'm not being paid to write the article, as I'm an un-paid intern for the company that manages the producer. He was part of a Grammy award winning team - so I will try to make that clearer, and I will try to reduce the references. Are there any which are particularly irrelevant or perhaps lowering it's verified score?

Thank you so much, Louise — Preceding unsigned comment added by MachineMGMT1 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few amends (let me know what you think?) and have re-sent for approval. Fingers crossed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MachineMGMT1 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey this keeps getting declined for not showing the subject's notability well enough. Please can someone help me understand why this is?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cam_O%E2%80%99bi

Thanks, Louise — Preceding unsigned comment added by MachineMGMT1 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MachineMGMT1: Interns, even if not paid in pounds sterling, receive compensation in the form of experience, networking, etc. They are considered employees for the purpose of WP:PAID, and must comply with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Failure to diclose your employer, client, and affiliation is a violation of the Wikimedia Terms of Use, and can have severe consequences. The template {{Paid}} may be used on User:MachineMGMT1 to make the disclosure – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MachineMGMT1|employer=InsertName|client=Cam O'bi}}.

Because of your conflict of interest, you are strongly discouraged from editing Draft:Cam O’bi. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. See Help:Talk pages for how to use talk pages effectively, especially how to notify users and how to sign your posts.

Error in Template:Reply to: Username not given.

@Worldbruce: Completely understand.Thanks for the advice& tips. I've placed a disclosure on the main page. Even though I'm strongly discouraged from editing this further. Can I resubmit now that I've declared, or in your opinion is there still other things prevent this article from being accepted? Is my involvement in this despite being declared still preventing this being accepted?

(MachineMGMT1 (talk) 14:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC))[reply]

@MachineMGMT1: Thank you for your declaration. It was a step in the right direction, but may be too little too late. The draft has been declined twice more in the past 12 hours. Several experienced volunteers have looked at the subject and not found it notable. The Law of holes applies. Continuing to press the subject might be seen as tendentious editing. That sort of behavior can lead to blocks, article deletions, and saltings, not to mention rigorous examination of other topics where Machine Management may have engaged in undisclosed paid editing. There are more than five million articles on Wikipedia; stick to editing the ones with which you have no conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:39, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:40:48, 13 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Jmsmrchn

Jmsmrchn (talk · contribs)
- User:Jmsmrchn/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! I want to ask why this particular article was blocked. On which chapter un the article "What wikipedia is not" I should pay attention?

Thank you in advance

Jmsmrchn (talk) 18:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jmsmrchn, I believe it is the "primary research" under WP:NOT#OR. Please read Wikipedia notability requirements - see here WP:N and WP:Your First Article. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]