Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 October 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 17 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 19 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 18

[edit]

01:52:04, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Nitrous1200

[edit]


Additional Sources found and cited.

Nitrous1200 (talk) 01:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nitrous1200: You have already submitted it, please wait for it to be reviewed. Expect this process to take ~2 months. JTP (talk • contribs) 03:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nitrous1200, I have reviewed it. Several issues remain, chiefly the sourcing and the wording. More reliable sources are needed, and as this is a biography of a living person (per WP:BLP) most statements require an inline citation as well. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:15:39, 18 October 2019 review of submission by NickHailey

[edit]

I think the subject is now notable for a page. NickHailey (talk) 05:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NickHailey, I have submitted for review under your name, and I invite you to be WP:BOLD and fix it (one of Wikipedia's core ideas!). If you think this person is now notable, you must improve the article to show that. Find reliable sources and expand the article. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 05:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@NickHailey: - hi there. Reviewers will look at the draft itself - it doesn't need content added directly to the help desk. Best of luck with your editing Nosebagbear (talk) 08:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Review

[edit]

07:50:05, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Mainowner

[edit]

I would like to write few more article about school and temple in my location .But previous article not yet published .Please let me know i can write more article ?.If i maid any error in submitted article , i need to rectify it next article.When my above mansion article reviewed?

Mainowner (talk) 07:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mainowner: - you can have multiple drafts pending. In terms of timing of review of your original draft, - currently we have a major (though shrinking) backlog, with drafts there about 14 weeks last time I checked. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:09:55, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Elenmelkonyan123

[edit]


Hello I need help with Draft:InLobby. My article submission has been rejected for not being sufficiently notable to be included in Wikipedia and the reviewer commented it as basically advertising . However I have done a detailed research on the topic , found notable sources for my article, followed all the guidelines and haven't used a primary source...So please, if you have a time read my draft and explain me, which parts they qualified as advertisment and what can I do to improve it. Your comment on it will be highly appreciated ! Elenmelkonyan123 (talk) 12:09, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Elenmelkonyan123: Sources 1 and 3 look like recycled press releases from non-WP:RS websites to me (press releases are not independent). Sources 2 and 4 are interviews, so they aren't independent of the company either. If these are the best sources you can find, then this company is not notable, and no amount of editing will ever be able to fix that problem. shoy (reactions) 14:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:20:25, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Sanjaysharma5882

[edit]

I just need advice, why my article is rejected.

Please give me feedback so I can work on this and request for re-verify. Sanjaysharma5882 (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sanjaysharma5882, The article is overly promotional, and the subject may not be notable. You need to find multiple reliable sources that mention the subject with significant coverage. If a reference does not mention the subject, don't include it. Regardless, the page is not written like a neutral encyclopedia article and only serves to promote its subject. Please read WP:N to understand the style of writing and presentation expected on Wikipedia. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 16:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:15:21, 18 October 2019 review of submission by JaneShuttleworth

[edit]


Please could you advise how this article could be more 'neutral'. I carefully researched other Wikipedia articles for similar organisations before writing this, and modelled my submission on work already approved and published. The article is an entirely factual representation of a non-profit-making organisation so if you could highlight aspects that are considered not to be neutral, I'd be grateful for the guidance.

In respect of sources, the article references 20 external sources, including the BBC, the Guardian, Classical Music Magazine and local print press.

A number of published Wikipedia articles refer to Samling Institute or its programmes in the body text or in references (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Banfield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuccia_Focile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olga_Jegunova https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justina_Gringytė https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Allen_(baritone) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isobel_Buchanan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_Costa-Jackson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuna_Scott_Sendall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Over https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Wnukowski). Having a page for Samling Institute that these references can linked to would improve the credibility and give greater depth to these articles.

Finally, it seems strange that an organisation that has been given the title 'Institute' in the UK should not be considered worthy of a Wikipedia entry. (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute which says In the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man the term "institute" is a protected word and companies or other organizations may only use the word if they are "organisations which are carrying out research at the highest level or to professional bodies of the highest standing" [1]

JaneShuttleworth (talk) 13:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well for example this "The Samling Artist Programme brings together emerging classical singers and pianists – usually in the final stages of their studies, or the early stages of their careers – with internationally recognised artists, directors, actors and movement and language coaches in a series of week-long, intensive, residential masterclasses. Participants are selected through a combination of recommendation and audition. The coaching is predominantly carried out in private, but the residential week ends with a public masterclass and concert." is entirely unsourced and promotional. Theroadislong (talk) 13:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute

13:49:23, 18 October 2019 review of draft by Johnny234424

[edit]


I don't understand what is wrong with my article that it keeps getting rejected. This article and submission is for a English Course I am taking in college. If this article doesn't get accepted by sunday night then I'll fail my mid-term. Please help or explain why they won't accept it. Thank you. Johnny234424 (talk) 13:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnny234424: - I believe the inline sources are being refuted because you're using primary/non-independent sources, that is, they can't be trusted as independent reliable sources. I personally feel it's pretty close - it needs a couple of sources to support the key things (who he played for etc) and then you can either find more sources to support the other facts or trim them.
Wikipedia cannot run to external deadlines - we specifically discourage courses from requiring acceptance as a minimum criterion. I'd advise raising our inability to guarantee acceptance (or even a review) on a short or medium timescale, rapidly. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnny234424: Like Nosebagbear says, we can't change our guidelines to meet artificial external deadlines. If your professor really wants to assign Wikipedia articles as coursework, then they need to work with WP:WEP in a structured fashion. shoy (reactions) 15:17, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnny234424:, Nosebagbear and Shoy hit the nail (mostly) on the head. At the time, internal citations weren't used. Now they have, which is great! Additionally, Krevis meets our notability guidelines for NFL players, which is awesome. What was concerning to me was some of the sentences in the article that come across as way too informal for an encyclopedia, and can't be backed up with the references provided:
  • According to him, he liked the sport more than studying. He was known for being a punishing lineman and earned himself quite the reputation during his college years.
  • In 2019, his estimated income is $100.000-1 million.[8] He is retired and doesn’t play professionally but is still active on social media and likes to include himself in the sport industry.[9] He prefers to go to the games, rather than watch it on TV.[10]

Did you interview Krevis as part of your assignment? Bkissin (talk) 15:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:00, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Doggygirl1234

[edit]

Hey! I am trying to edit a page for my friend Lauren she has millions of followers online and tons of articles. I have included someone that just mention her but there are a lot of articles fully about her in her references, do I have to shorten the article? Here page was up on Wikipedia for years but was deleted after an editing war. Please let me know if you can advise. Thanks so much! Jenn Doggygirl1234 (talk) 16:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doggygirl1234, We strongly advise against editing the articles of people you know, as that constitutes a conflict of interest (see WP:COI). If you are editing the article, only sources that are reliable, independent should be used. All others, and their information, should usually be discarded. Additionally, several of those sources must have significant coverage of the subject to ensure her notability. If such sources cannot be found or do not exist, then the subject is not notable. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Captain Eek! This was helpful, I have never met lauren but followed her online for years, how do I know if sources are reliable, independent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doggygirl1234 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doggygirl1234, well I suggest you read the policies (linked above) to get a feel for it. In general, a source like the New York Times is reliable and usually independent. It is a reputable major newspaper, and its content is made by its reporters. A bad source would be a press release by a company used in an article for that company: the source is inherently biased towards that company. Social media posts and youtube videos are not usually reliable or independent. Articles that feel like clickbait, or clickbaity websites, are often not reliable either. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:35, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Zionstar888

[edit]


Zionstar888 (talk) 16:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Okay, I have re-edited this article, so I will like you to review it once again... Thank you very much!

You have not re-submitted yet, but the draft is still no where near ready for accepting, please read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources and even if he really is "a dedicated cross-cultural missionary, an Author, and award winning Graphic designer." I don't think he passes WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:52:20, 18 October 2019 review of draft by Vinvibes

[edit]


Hi, its after a long gap that I have made an attempt to publish on Wikipedia, and would like someone more experienced to check my draft and point out how it can be improved, and get published. Thanks in advance, regards User:Vinvibes 16:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinvibes: I'm afraid that draft doesn't seem to exist at the moment, nor do I see a similar draft which you have edited recently. Did you forget to save the draft? Am I missing something? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see that you have just created it. I suggest you submit the draft for review. It might take a bit to get reviewed, as there is a large review backlog, but that'll give you time to keep improving it and working on other articles. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, its great to interact after a long time; so how else can I improve on it? Any suggestions? Thanks in advance, regardsVinvibes 17:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinvibes (talk • contribs)
Vinvibes, I have gone ahead and submitted and reviewed it on your behalf. Main issues here: needs better sources to establish notability. Most of the sources just seem to be interviews of him, which is not sufficient. Also, is overly promotional: the wording should be neutral. The anecdote about wearing his fathers clothes should go. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:23, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay - will remove this part...what else comes across as promotional? If you go thrugh the content, I have tried to just glean the gist of facts and used them, and left out the rest simply because it would seem too promotional. Thanks for the effort, regards Vinvibes 18:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Vinvibes, Both his motive and his tagline should go. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:23, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CaptainEekHi, I have removed whatever you asked me to omit, and have managed to find about 3 more fresh links, which I have added, but am yet to resubmit. The thing is what I have realized about these references is that they are independent alright but mostly relevant to Canada or Nigeria. I explored them around a bit and found that they are typical online mags but not exactly world renowned, they are more country specific or subject specific. Is that why they don't seem valid? And I have also followed your advice and put a message in the Teahouse for help. Thanks & regardsVinvibes 21:10, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vinvibes:Alas, most of the sources do not appear to be independent. Better sourcing will be required. Interviews do not usually count towards notability.Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 08:33, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@CaptainEek:Hi, yes, much of the info is indeed revealed through interviews...so what do you suggest I should do about this on? Can I keep it here as a draft till I am able to find some featured article over the coming week or so? Thanks & regards, Vinvibes 09:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:07, 18 October 2019 review of submission by 2A02:C7D:1A72:8300:FDCA:651E:7029:DACB

[edit]


2A02:C7D:1A72:8300:FDCA:651E:7029:DACB (talk) 18:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:42 to understand the basics of notability. If you can find sources as outlined, the subject may be included. But the current sources do not establish that the person is notable for inclusion. Work to find more, and better sources. But it may be that the subject is just simply not notable at this time, which is common; there are 8 billion people but only very few can make it onto Wikipedia. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:43:12, 18 October 2019 review of submission by ASHUDU

[edit]


ASHUDU (talk) 19:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC) because he is a notable person and we are gathering information for his other sources to edit more parts of this article.[reply]

@ASHUDU: - two things:
1) You say "we are gathering" - are you an organisational account?
2) Nothing in the article indicates that he is a notable individual unless and until he's such a famous political strategist that reliable, secondary sources are covering him Nosebagbear (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:04:20, 18 October 2019 review of submission by Coe-1878

[edit]

Hello, I'm trying to create a new article on Professor Kumares C. Sinha from Purdue University. I've made the title in the article wizard, but when I try to enter text a notice indicates the following: "The page title or edit you have tried to create has been restricted to administrators at this time. It matches an entry on the local or global blacklists, which is usually used to prevent vandalism." Can somebody let me know what is necessary to be able to create this page? thanks. Coe-1878 (talk) 20:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coe-1878, Were you trying to create a draft version? Or a final version? What was the exact title you tried to enter? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Coe-1878 and CaptainEek: This message means that the title was blacklisted locally or globally. AFAIK the title of the page can be found in the logs, but you need admin rights to access it. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:46, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Victor Schmidt mobil, Coe-1878, Yeah its on the local title blacklist as "((User)|(Draft)).*[Ss]inha.* # Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bikram Jit Sinha". Anything with Sinha in a draft title gets flagged. I'll drop a note on the admins board to try to fix the issue. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:34, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:05:34, 18 October 2019 review of draft by Juliaferrari

[edit]


Juliaferrari (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to learn how to make a submission about the small press that I am part of and also to link my name to my deceased partner's website who was Dan Carr. Can you help me?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliaferrari (talk • contribs)

@Juliaferrari: First off, read our conflict of interest policy and our policy on promotion.
If you want to try again, then try following these instructions on how to write articles that won't be rejected or deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_October_18&oldid=985270226"