Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 March 10
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < March 9 | << Feb | March | Apr >> | March 11 > |
| 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. |
March 10[edit]
02:49:23, 10 March 2019 review of submission by 141.0.155.187[edit]
141.0.155.187 (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- @141.0.155.187: - the original reviewer was correct in this not meeting corporate notability, remember that sources have to be secondary (newspapers, books, journals, etc). As such, this draft is not notable Nosebagbear (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
02:52:32, 10 March 2019 review of submission by 141.0.155.187[edit]
I disagree with this article being rejected. This business is a well known one within the Linux community and others like it with equal notoriety have a Wikipedia entry. They have appeared in technology news numerous times and Forbes was even sourced for this article. I would appreciate it is this article is reviewed again. Thank you for your time.
141.0.155.187 (talk) 02:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- www.forbes.com/sites by contributors (rather than Forbes staff) are not the same as Forbes magazine. They are blogs, so not reliable sources for facts, only for the opinion of the author. As for articles similar to the draft, see the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to understand the flaw in that argument for inclusion. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
11:27:05, 10 March 2019 review of draft by Pequena Princesa[edit]
1. Is YouTube not a reliable source for the creation date and number of views on a YouTube Channel?
2. Is YouTube not a reliable source for the fact that the subject appears in a number of videos on YouTube doing a certain thing?
3. Is the subject's website not a reliable source for a photograph of the subject?
Pequena Princesa (talk) 11:27, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Pequena Princesa. YouTube can be a reliable source sometimes. See Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites for a fuller discussion of the problems with YouTube as a source. What is perhaps more relevant in this case is that being on YouTube does not help establish that a person is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Nor is it usually worth mentioning in an encyclopedia biography, unless the presence on YouTube has been discussed in mainstream media (think Billboard, Rolling Stone, Slant Magazine, and the like). --Worldbruce (talk) 14:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
14:36:01, 10 March 2019 review of submission by Ritu67[edit]
Ritu67 14:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- This is a recurring (near)blank submission Nosebagbear (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
14:37:47, 10 March 2019 review of submission by 117.234.121.8[edit]
Draft has been rejected for no reason. There is also a proper reference in the draft, which is worth making the article, all the references are official, I tried to get help from the English Wikipedia Helpline, I was blocked from there, if this article is not made If you do not want to do it, please continue it, thank you
117.234.121.8 (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- @117.234.121.8: - this individual does not meet the requirements for musician notability. You can add loads of sources, but you just end up duplicating the same issue. Lots of sources don't cover him at all, which makes them rather pointless.
- There is, in fact, a notability grounds that covers performing in films etc - criterion 10:
- Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).
- However, there are two main flaws. 1) Your own source indicates that he was just a playback singer for one of the tracks. To qualify under this ground he'd need to be the primary singer for the whole film's music. 2) As the grounds says, this is currently his own claim, so it makes more sense to add him to the film's article, rather than generate a new article just for this.
- He may in the future perform more and surpass both of those issues, but at this point, that has not been satisfied.
- Finally, what do you mean by "English Wikipedia Helpline"? We have several help groups - chats, boards, email etc, but I've not heard of that one.
- Nosebagbear (talk) 18:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
18:17:36, 10 March 2019 review of draft by NorthPark1417[edit]
Hello, I am the writer of Dagger that was recently deleted, and I've expanded the article, for review at Draft:Dagger (zine). - NorthPark1417 (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Wrong venue. You need WP:DRV. We can't override the deletion discussion. Legacypac (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
18:48:39, 10 March 2019 review of draft by Esmemusic[edit]
Esmemusic (talk) 18:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
to check the new refrences and see if it is enough to publish the well known bachata artist Esme wikipedia page.
22:15:26, 10 March 2019 review of submission by Fyzix[edit]
I recently discovered this small and interesting up and coming band called Cvlt Ov The Svn. I fell in love with their music and wanted to honor them by creating a Wikipedia article about them so that others can find all and any information about them in a concise format on a well known website. The thing is, this band is brand new, and there's no information about them aside from their social media pages. There are only a few web articles that have been made about them but they all say the same thing. I was informed that social media is not a valid source of information for a Wikipedia article so I took all necessary information from one of these articles. As I then submitted my draft for review I was told that this isn't the type of article Wikipedia desires. Despite the fact that there are plenty of articles about even more trivial subjects, with no sources stating where the information is from, I was told that this isn't good enough.
I just wanted to make a Wikipedia article about this cool band that I discovered. But my requests were denied. For what reason? Because the editor who happened to review it decided so? Because it's not what Wikipedia wants? Because who would care about some no-name band? Well let me tell you. I care.
Fyzix (talk) 22:15, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Topic must be WP:Notable. If you see pages about non-notable topic send them to WP:AFD Legacypac (talk) 22:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
22:40:21, 10 March 2019 review of draft by Mkukuchka[edit]
Need clarification on my submission of Brian B Springer. First is it being treated as an article or a biography? It's a biography and I patterned it from another on Manny Marroquin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manny_Marroquin
"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."
Does he need to be the subject of interviews from studio executives, or others he has worked with? I included references listing him from Billboard, and other books.