Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 February 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 14 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 16 >
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.


February 15

[edit]

00:06:03, 15 February 2019 review of draft by WebservAUS

[edit]


Hi, We are trying to get a page published about a remarkable man, a private investigator. He has outstanding media coverage and the submission have been declined a couple of times now. I am looking for advice on what we can do to get the page published. The page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Keith_Schafferius My understanding is that the page does not have enough personal references. My understanding is also the subject does not pass signification coverage to be notable. I appreciate all feedback or advice I can get.

WebservAUS (talk) 00:06, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

01:01:01, 15 February 2019 review of submission by 24.84.211.14

[edit]


We have simply provided some relevant references to the subject.

24.84.211.14 (talk) 01:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

24.84.211.14 Hi welcome to AfC help desk. May I know who are "we" you were referring to? CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:11:46, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Fingman

[edit]


I have added additional independent references to this draft post. I believe that Jack Post is notable enough to warrant having a dedicated article and the article seems to fit within the guidelines. I will continue to work on it if it requires more citation or information. Fingman (talk) 03:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:41:52, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Himeshlala

[edit]


Himeshlala (talk) 03:41, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:19:35, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Comdeptciel

[edit]

I would like to know why the draft has not been accepted. How do I add more "significant coverage" about the subject ? I did add several references (internal and external). Thanks in advance for your help. Comdeptciel (talk) 05:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:11:28, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Yolbotwhit

[edit]


We believe Martin Creamer is notable as he has significant coverage in multiple popular and reliable publication houses: Engineering News, Mining Weekly, Polity.org.za and SAFM. He is covered by SAFM every week for his chat show At the Coalface He is well known in the B2B industry He is considered to have valued and balanced opinions Yolbotwhit (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


08:46:45, 15 February 2019 review of submission by NickBarker123444431

[edit]


This has sought of started a community, and someone has added lots of other reliable secondary sources, I left a message on the help desk, and someone (who i assume reviews articles) said that he wouldn't of rejected the article, but he just didn't know that he was a notable person. the irony is that the Page Cool boys and the frontman(the band that Jack is apart of) is a page. This is Ironic, as people would only have known about the band if they have listened to the Hamish and Andy Radio show, and if they listened to the show, they would definitely know Jack. But Jack also co hosts other radio shows and podcasts in Australia, so his notability in my opinion is enough to deserve a Wikipedia page. I hope you can re-read the article and re-evaulate the article, I believe there is enough secondary sources in the article, to justify the article. NickBarker123444431 (talk) 08:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Help for submission

[edit]

08:49:09, 15 February 2019 review of draft by Juan Santo Domingo

[edit]


Dear Wikipedia Help desk team,

My name is Juan Santo Domingo, and I am creating a new page for a new technique called Molecular Layer Deposition. The draft is approaching submission, and I would like to know some tips on how to make the article adequate for submission, and what editors look for when moderating articles so that to comply with everything properly. Thank you in advance.

Best regards, Juan Santo Domingo Juan Santo Domingo (talk) 08:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Very good page. I identified some mild copyright violations that need some rewording then it is good to put in mainspace. Legacypac (talk) 12:02, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the feedback! I have already made the changes, but now I see that the box to submit it is gone, and don't know what to do. What should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juan Santo Domingo (talk • contribs) 17:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:16:01, 15 February 2019 review of draft by Rittushiv

[edit]


Rittushiv (talk) 10:16, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

why am not able to save mine as draft it shows as error

User:Rittushiv You moved your page twice creating a category by accident. I see why the error. You can't move the page to the correct title because an existing draft is already at the title. We aleady found the subject does not meet WP:NACTOR notability criteria yet. Maybe is she gets another staring role. Legacypac (talk) 11:55, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:58:34, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Californiahotel 01

[edit]


Added links from main stream newspapers Californiahotel 01 (talk) 10:58, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


11:52:43, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Ustadabbaskhan

[edit]


Why My article submission was declined?

Ustadabbaskhan (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:08:24, 15 February 2019 review of draft by Medimauro

[edit]


I submitted a draft for publication prior to being accepted into the "teahouse." it is now "under review." I am new to Wikipedia. Now that I have been accepted, is it possible for me to publish my own article? Or do I still have to wait 7 weeks for review? I have found instructions on how to move a page out of the Sandbox into Wikipedia. DO I now have the authority to do that?

Medimauro (talk) 12:08, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page looks pretty good. Lots of refs. As long as you have 4 days and 10 edits you are free to publish. Legacypac (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It has been moved to mainspace Legacypac (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:12:59, 15 February 2019 review of draft by Neha gupta07

[edit]


Neha gupta07 (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The link is wrong but no matter. Your creation is totally unequivically SPAM advertising Legacypac (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:52:43, 15 February 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Fiona Armstrong

[edit]


Hi - I do work for Tutela which I'm trying to work out how to declare on the page but it's unclear?

In terms of additional articles, we also have been talked about in Fortune and The Telegraph - http://fortune.com/2018/07/26/fastest-mobile-network/ ; https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/smart-living/why-you-dont-need-mobile-signal/. I wanted to check if those would help with the notability side of things? I guess I'm trying to understand why we don't meet notability criteria compared to companies like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OmniSci or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedtest.net ?

Fiona Armstrong (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:26:25, 15 February 2019 review of submission by 72.226.4.83

[edit]


Hello,

I'm requesting a re-review for notable guitarist Daan Kleijn. The last rejection was based on the argument that no reliable secondary sources where provided. I disagree wholeheartedly with this. In my recently changed draft I provided under #5 a source from the biggest newspaper of the netherlands that solely discusses Daan Kleijn's work. Under #1 and #4 lengthy articles from the biggest and most notable Jazz related website, both in length discussing mr. Kleijns work.

I have seen many Wikipedia articles that have far less and less notable references. I would therefore request you to reconsider this draft.

Many Thanks,

72.226.4.83 (talk) 16:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good guidence has been provided on the draft. It is not the references it is that he fails to have enough notability for an article yet. Legacypac (talk) 20:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:02:54, 15 February 2019 review of submission by Daniellesinn

[edit]


I am an employee of the State Representative of Pennsylvania Kristine Howard and am trying to make a Wikipedia page for her. My article was reviewed, rated "Stub-Class" yet a link to Kristine Howard was created. The wiki page reads to the public as "Talk: Kristine Howard" and no information on her is present. I understand that "Stub-Class" means the article is lacking in some sense but I based its format off of other Wikipedia articles for State Representatives. I am new to holding a Wikipedia account and I don't understand what I need to do to make the actual page show up. Since she is someone of importance in this area, I would like to do whatever I can to have her article up and running and get rid of the "Talk" page. Please let me know. Daniellesinn (talk) 17:02, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I created a Wikipedia page for a State Representative, Kristine Howard. Her page has an "undisclosed paid" template on it now. I believe that has to do with me. I volunteer and am not on a payroll for Rep. Howard; I believe that I disclosed the fact that I had a connection to the page when I started it. What can I do to get rid of this template? Daniellesinn (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First you say, "I am an employee"; then later the same day, you say "I... am not on a payroll for Rep. Howard"! Which is it? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Stub or any other class is a fairly meanless internal categorization that most readrs never see. Ignore that. I'll check over the page and remove the template. A State Rep is always notable per WP:NPOL Legacypac (talk) 02:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:04:11, 15 February 2019 review of submission by TrollerTrolledd

[edit]


I believe this information should be public on Wikipedia since it was formatted exactly how ALL the others artists had theirs formatted on this website.

TrollerTrolledd (talk) 21:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it doesn't. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_February_15&oldid=884363727"