Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 July 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 17 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 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.


July 18

[edit]

03:34:53, 18 July 2021 review of submission by 137.119.18.197

[edit]

I want people to know about my passionate, amazing father who, forever, will go down as one of the best designers for importing needs. He could fall under the category for Business Figures. He would love to spread his light. He also was on Wife Swap which was really a kicker. I appreciate the time you take. It means a lot. Thank you! 137.119.18.197 (talk) 03:34, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Take this somewhere else. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 04:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:04:40, 18 July 2021 review of draft by Abdulqadeer1

[edit]


Abdulqadeer1 (talk) 05:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No sources, no article, no debate. We have very little tolerance for autobiographies; we're not a social media site. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:36:03, 18 July 2021 review of draft by Okadiputera

[edit]


Hello, my draft submitted for review was recently rejected, and was tagged "not adequately supported by reliable sources". I was wondering if I could get a further explanation on the decision? I have asked this because the sources I have referred to included articles from National Newspapers, a journal article from a University Database, as well as articles from the local government and the Indonesian Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology. Only one of the sources are considered primary (website of the hotel) and that was used to cite basic information. I just would like to request further clarification, as it is in my honest belief that apart from one source, all the others are verifiable and independent of the organisation/hotel in question.

Thank you.

Okadiputera (talk) 09:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okadiputera I can't examine the sources as they are in Indonesian, but the most common reason for such a decline is that the sources are announcements of routine business activities, which do not establish notability. You may wish to ask the reviewer directly. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 331dot, I will try that.

10:17:21, 18 July 2021 review of submission by 100.2.238.109

[edit]

I do not get how any of the following articles are copyright violations (List of Virgin Galactic launches, List of Delta 4 launches, and List of Atlas LV3B launches) 100.2.238.109 (talk) 10:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO: The above should not have been declined as copyright violations. They copied text from other Wikipedia articles, and attributed the copying on the destination talk page. At worst, the attribution was insufficient - normally the copying is attributed in an edit summary and on the source talk page as well. When an attribution is insufficient, it can be repaired by following WP:RIA.
Other websites have also copied Wikipedia without attribution, and that may have made these lists look like copyright violations, but Wikipedia had the text first. If it had been a copyright violation, it would not be enough to decline the draft as a copyvio. The offending text would also have to be removed from the article and article history. Detailed instructions are here. The revdel script simplifies the procedure. If you want to use it, add the following to User:AntanO/common.js:
importScript('User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js' ); // Backlink: User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js - Revision deletion request under 'Move'
--Worldbruce (talk) 12:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you say it was copied from Wiki? --AntanO 14:29, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AntanO: Yes. The text has been in Delta IV since 25 August 2019. It was copied to www.simplerockets.com eleven months ago (August 2020). --Worldbruce (talk) 15:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:04:54, 18 July 2021 review of submission by 137.119.18.197

[edit]

I want show the world his amazingness 137.119.18.197 (talk) 14:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This has been rejected three times, please stop. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken it to MfD. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 15:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:40:21, 18 July 2021 review of submission by Letterwriter2021

[edit]

Hello, thank you for some of the things you pointed out to me, but when it comes to references, they are usually in Serbian and in writing. Let's say 3 out of 5 references are from articles that do not exist on the Internet but are printed. Please consider that, thank you anyway. Letterwriter2021 (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Letterwriter2021 Sources do not need to be in English, and do not need to be online(but do need to be properly cited with publication information). That isn't really the issue; this person you are writing about does not meet the definition of a notable person, and no amount of editing can confer notability on someone. I'd suggest that if you were specifically paid to write this draft, that you return the money. 331dot (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, now you have offended me. I'm a volunteer on WP just like you. This is my first article and I picked someone who has had major impacts on environmental law and currently impacting 1st amendment policy related to social media platforms. For you to say that Alison Morrow "does not meet the definition of a notable person", is coming from a position of ignorance. She has had more influence on American society than over half of the journalists on WP that have articles. Tim Pool has had less impact, less reference, and less notoriety, but somebody wrote an article on him.
What is the objective measurement required to pass your myopic definition of "notable"? Please give me an example of another journalist in her age group that is more notable. Stocatta (talk) 02:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Stocatta: you are responding to a reply made to a different editor. This section is about another draft (see the heading) and the section about the draft you created is further down on this page. --bonadea contributions talk 08:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can you know if he is a notable person, in addition to all those awards and all things. Please do not answer questions 331dot.

Awards are a dime a dozen, and we only recognise those that have at least regional-level recognition. Two of your sources are stated to be "in written form" but are lacking critical bibliographical information (outlet, outlet edition, page(s) the news article is on and publisher, year of publication, page(s) being cited and ISBN/WorldCat# for the book). https://mladiberana.me/vasilije-joksimovic-mislim-da-se-svaki-ulozeni-trud-isplati/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject) as an interview, https://www.vijesti.me/ is completely useless as a website homepage (you need to be citing specific articles), and the same applies to http://radioberane.me/ (you need to be citing a specific programme airing). Considering only one of your sources even comes close to usable and the rest appear to be lazily done, it's no wonder 331dot believes the subject is not notable; with the sources as presented I agree with their take. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:03, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you are referring to my article. I don't have any of the references you are citing. My article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alison_Morrow
She has two Emmy awards. What isn't significant about an Emmy? She has the Sigma Delta Chi award which is a coveted national award for journalists. I provided the actual links to each of the governing bodies for these awards.
Every link I provided is a third party link to a vaild source. Did you read someone else's article when opining on my article? Stocatta (talk) 02:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Stocatta: Indeed, this discussion is not about the draft you created. The section you started is further down on this page. --bonadea contributions talk 08:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:00:23, 18 July 2021 review of submission by Indiansocialwork

[edit]

While I respect the decision by the reviewer, I would appreciate he/she can take a clear look at the article. While earlier review said the sources are not properly sources but this reviewer seems like reviewing without considering earlier comments. Most importantly, the subject in this article is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, which is the highest award given to the individuals recognized by the Royal Society as made a considerable contribution to social development. this one point is more than enough to support this article while there are many other reasons that can be considered. I hope the reviewer takes a nonbiased look! Indiansocialwork (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indiansocialwork Please do not accuse others of bias unless you have direct evidence- which is more than a mere draft rejected. Even if a topic meets the criteria, if the reliable sources are not there, then they are not there. The only change you made in between the last two reviews was removing a few links. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:18:08, 18 July 2021 review of submission by Stocatta

[edit]


I've written a draft article on Alison Morrow and the article was declined for lack of notoriety. I've found many biographical articles on WP that are far less notable than Morrow. For example, Cecilia Balli has not won any awards in her professional life and has not made any notable contribution to journalism in recent memory; yet, she has a page. Morrow has 2 Emmy awards and won the Sigma Delta Chi award which is specifically positioned to recognize notable journalistic efforts. Morrow appears to be right in the middle of the growing drama between massive social media companies, the 1st amendment, and section 230. One of these three pillars is going to fail because content creators are being censored without objective justification. And the last six months has demonstrated that the "truth" is being conjured and framed by powerful entities in order to control the public square. There are several journalists at the center of this action including Tim Pool, Glenn Greenwald, and Alison Morrow, among others. Morrow is notably absent on Wikipedia. I was simply trying to get the data collection on her work started by highlighting her most remarkable achievements and then let the public contribute as desired. I thought this was the whole point of Wikipedia.

I have no pride of ownership on this and can accept any critical commentary on my writing style. I've provided 11 references in my article. She is a current and popular personality on many platforms. And she is a veteran of traditional television news after 12 years with virtually every major network.

Morrow has a larger platform than some of her past employers. She seems worthy of a WP article on that basis alone. What do I have to do to convince the reviewers that she is worthy of note and why do I have to do so in the first place? Anyone with three awards in their field probably deserves a pass on a single reviewer's myopic perspective.

Insight on what I'm missing is welcome and appreciated.

Stocatta (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stocatta Please read other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. We can only address what we know about. Article standards have also changed over time, so that what was once acceptable may not be any longer(and vice versa). This is why each article or draft is judged on their own merits. Sources can also be different for different people in the same line of work; not every member of a field merits an article.
This draft just reads as a resume; it does not summarize significant coverage of Morrow in independent reliable sources. You have cited the specific points discussed in the draft, and on the surface she may meet the definition of a notable person(not "notoriety") but independent sources need to have given her significant, in depth coverage of her, not just call out what she has done in her life. Please see Your First Article. The good news here is that the draft was only declined, not rejected, meaning the reviewer felt it is at least possible that the article can be improved. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the quick response. And I appreciate your time toward this project. I donate to WP every year and I'm trying to increase the amount of time I contribute to adding to existing articles. I recognize the power of this platform and how disruptive it has become.
That said, this is my first article, and I just don't understand how much more notable somebody has to be to get consideration. I've provided the sources from all three awards, a half dozen articles highlighting her work, and the rest are third-party sources referencing her or her work. Frankly, she is famous but any definition. Her work is referenced by larger platforms on a regular basis. I started with Tim Pool's bio article as a starting point for Morrow's. His article is lengthy and I figured it would be wiser to keep it pithy for starters.
Can you point me to another journalist's bio article that isn't ultra-famous, like Tom Brokaw, so I can determine what I'm missing? I know she qualifies, so anything missing here is my lack of experience writing these articles.
I have added some references to her environmental work to bring it line with some no-name journalists that have bio articles on WP. Maybe you could check it out and see if I"m on the correct track?
Thank you for your help. Stocatta (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stocatta As I said above, I don't really dispute that the person may be notable- but there needs to be sources with significant coverage of her, not just citing her work and accomplishments. People don't merit articles, even if they are notable, if no one gives them significant coverage. The new information you added is a start, but you need sources that show particular actions or policy changes were attributed to her journalism(I haven't examined the sources so maybe they do). 331dot (talk) 07:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_July_18&oldid=1035160215"