Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 February 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 2 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 4 >
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.


February 3

[edit]

01:24:09, 3 February 2021 review of draft by Elizasnook3

[edit]


Hi there! I have an article being published about Caroline Blazovsky and it's been denied due to "unreliable sources" -- I am curious as to what makes something reliable or not. These are articles/references are from well known magazines and news outlets.

It is also mentioning that needs to read from a neutral point of view and I believe it is. Any notes would be much appreciated.

Thanks!


Elizasnook3 (talk) 01:24, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, well, first, in order to be deemed notable at Wikipedia, the draft writer has to demonstrate that the subject has received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Significant coverage means in depth writing about the subject. Reliable sources typically means major mainstream publications with clear editorial policies and established reputations for fact-checking and accuracy. Independent means that the sources should not rely on participation by the subject, or rely on information provided by the subject or entwined entities. So looking at some of the sources in the article, Forbes magazine is a reliable source, but much of the content that appears on Forbes.com is written by contributors, who are often not reliable sources--oftentimes, they are bloggers. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, which reflects the many discussions that were held about this. Forbes even disclaims responsibility for contributor content.
PR websites typically rely on content submitted by primary sources, and thus, probably exercise little editorial control over the content. Do they fact-check? Doubtful. And since they get their information from sources entwined with a subject, that doesn't make them independent of the subject. US Patent Office would be fine for proving that a patent exists, but contributes nothing toward the notability of the subject. Blogs and other faceless websites don't qualify as reliable, because anyone can start a blog or website and publish whatever they want--there is no presumption of accuracy. See WP:UGC. Interviews don't help to establish notability either, even if published in reliable sources, because they are dependent on the subject's participation. So to establish notability, you need to show that multiple mainstream, known sources wrote about Blazovsky in great detail, independently. Hope that helps to explain things. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:47, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:43:54, 3 February 2021 review of submission by JaneK153

[edit]

My article was rejected due to issues with references. What exactly was the referencing issue and how can I correct this to ensure the article is approved.

JaneK153 (talk) 02:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:42:07, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Akhilnair1101

[edit]

Hi,

I apologize for not being aware that Wikipedia did not accept pages with all information coming from a single source, therefore I did more research and improved the quality of this page and added more sources. Please reconsider and publish this page, thank you very much for your time!

Akhilnair1101 (talk) 03:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akhilnair1101 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further at this time. Announcements of routine business(such as the opening of a radio station) do not establish notability, especially when it mostly consists of an interview. Multiple independent reliable sources with significant, in depth coverage of the subject are needed. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Akhilnair1101, I'm not going to dispute the rejection by Theroadislong. Nor am I going to dispute the effective feedback received from 331dot. What I would suggest in the interim (if you can find enough good sources and if you can make the information neutral language) is that you add a couple sentences about the radio station to the existing article about UBCO and media on campus. Bkissin (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:16:54, 3 February 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mahant Dr Yogi Vilasnath

[edit]



Mahant Dr Yogi Vilasnath (talk) 08:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:10:02, 3 February 2021 review of submission by 1amtarunkumar

[edit]


1amtarunkumar (talk) 11:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1amtarunkumar You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review conflict of interest and paid editing. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves; we are only interested in what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say with significant coverage about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 11:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:22:47, 3 February 2021 review of draft by Paa Kwasi

[edit]


Paa Kwasi (talk) 15:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting a help because I know you can help me review/edit my Biography!

Paa Kwasi Please review the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. You would only merit an article if you can show with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that you meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable musician. Ideally, you should not be the one to write about you. 331dot (talk) 16:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:29:53, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Lmselby

[edit]


Kindly help me to know the exact reasons for rejection.Thank you Lmselby (talk) 15:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lmselby You were told the exact reason- the piece is just blatant advertising. It is also completely unsourced; a Wikipedia article summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company.
If you work for this company, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:01:30, 3 February 2021 review of draft by Srapley81

[edit]


This the first wiki article I've ever written, so I'm struggling to know whether what I've produced is acceptable, or what changes I need to make. Can you give me some indication? I've added more references to support the information on the page.

Srapley81 (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Srapley81 Most of the draft is sourced to only one source; most reviewers look for at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 16:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added more references to address this, does the satisfy your comment :331dot? Thanks for your help!

That might help, but you may wish to ask the last reviewer before resubmitting. 331dot (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added two more sources and will be happy to accept if you re-submit. Theroadislong (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Theroadislong I've resubmitted (I think) but nothing seems to have happened to the page? talk

16:06:48, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Lovemyfamilybut?

[edit]


Hello, could you please tell me how RealtyShares is not notable? There are hundreds of articles published about it online. It was a company dealing in hundreds of millions of USD. Fundrise and RealtyShares are much alike. What can be done to make this successful? Please advise.

Lovemyfamilybut? (talk) 16:06, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lovemyfamilybut? Please review the Wikipedia definition of a notable company or organization. The sources you have offered describe routine business transactions(like the raising of capital, filing of bankruptcy, etc.); that does not establish notability. What is needed are independent reliable sources that have in depth, non-routine coverage of the company. For example, Ford Motor Company and Microsoft merit articles because many sources independent of those companies have studied and written about them; they don't merit articles because they release new products or open a new factory or acquire competitors. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Then what about Fundrise?
Lovemyfamilybut? Pings do not work to notify the user unless you sign the post with four tildes(~~~~). What about it? As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. See other stuff exists. That other inappropriate content exists does not mean yours can too. If you are interested in helping us out, feel free to identify these other problematic articles for attention. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:16:18, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Sky445

[edit]


Hello team, I tried my best to provide reliable sources for this artist. I noticed that for some reasons some reliable sources have removed the pages pertaining to Salim. Is it possible to reconsider the rejection?

Sky445 (talk) 16:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sky445 I'm sorry, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further at this time. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:43:33, 3 February 2021 review of draft by JuddTheDearJohn

[edit]


JuddTheDearJohn (talk) 16:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So I just need help that this could be accepted. Like which sentences and sources, I could use for this. Since I'm in my last chance and would be potentially deleted.

JuddTheDearJohn The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further at this time and that no amount of editing can change that at this time. 331dot (talk) 18:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:21:22, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Esmaeili.nooshin

[edit]

Hi, I have submitted my page for review many times and it was rejected. I recently made all the edits and resubmitted the new page. I am still waiting (almost 2 months) to hear from the permission team for some pictures to be published in the article as well as the approval of the article. I appreciate your help. ~~ Esmaeili.nooshin (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Esmaeili.nooshin, you resubmitted the draft and it had been declined by Devonian Wombat 16 days ago for being read like an advertisement. Please have a look at ADMASK. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:49:55, 3 February 2021 review of submission by Syent713

[edit]


Syent713 (talk) 19:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No references at all, what is your question?Naraht (talk) 20:21, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_February_3&oldid=1005835904"