Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 July 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 26 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 28 >
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 27

[edit]

01:17:25, 27 July 2021 review of draft by Makominplace

[edit]


Dear Sir/Madam,

I received a request to add sources ("In biographies of a living person, each claim has to have a source or be removed"). My contribution is, however, heavily sourced already. I need specific indications of which statements need sources. Can I talk to a person, or will I keep receiving general, vague messages?

I will appreciate your advice.

Makominplace (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the "Themes" section and count the number of sources compared to the number of claims. Most of the awards/recognition is likewise bereft of sources. Being "heavily sourced" is not enough for a BLP; literally everything that could potentially be challenged for any reason needs to be cited to a source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:05:49, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Gavinburtt

[edit]


I don't understand the reason for declining my submission that I was given. It says that "citing with one's own website do not confer notability." This totally defeats the purpose of "sourcing" if I can't use the original white papers and announcements from the company website. I'm a journalist by day, and we've been told time and time again that the DIRECT source should always be the citation used when available. I understand that it doesn't confer notability, but that isn't the point of sources. I could use social media links to confer notability, but the fact that I have to wait for third-party publications to rehash the primary sources to smaller audiences, such that I can have "acceptable" sources per your standards is just ridiculous. If I get someone to publish all of the relevant information to a separate website, then use THAT as my source, will that validate my submission? Thanks.

Gavinburtt (talk) 06:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gavinburtt please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and make the relevant disclosure since you seem to be associated with Goji Cryopto. We are not interested in what you wish to say about your company. We are only interested in what others say about your company. If you believe that Wikipedia will enhance your corporate reputation please think again. Wikipedia adds no value to you. You must add value to Wikipedia. Passing WP:CORP does that. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 07:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gavinburtt Ah, now I understand. I misinterpreted what you said as being directly associated with the company. All you need to do is to answer the direct question on your talk page.
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It is not a news outlet. The rules are different. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 16:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:04:16, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Khanabdulkadir pro

[edit]


Khanabdulkadir pro (talk) 07:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:45:52, 27 July 2021 review of submission by RJalan

[edit]

I submitted the draft far too early and received a negative review, so I would be very grateful for a read through of the revised draft by an experienced editor. In particular I would like to know what I need to do to improve and reorder the references. Alan (talk) 10:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC) Alan (talk) 10:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:37, 27 July 2021 review of draft by Sutatatabunwa

[edit]


My draft has been repeatedly rejected on the account that it is lacking reliable sources, yet I have enlisted among my sources a national newspaper (The Japan Times), a national radio station (TBS Radio), and nationally available music magazines (Guitar Magazine, Sound & Recording Magazine) that are all widely recognized in Japan. If these sources are not reliable, then what exactly is the definition of reliability?

Sutatatabunwa (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:14, 27 July 2021 review of draft by Sudip jung Kunwar

[edit]


Sudip jung Kunwar (talk) 16:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the reviewer says, a Wikipedia article should ideally be more than two incredibly short sentences, and it needs to have more than one source for all its content (IMDb is not acceptable). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:17:28, 27 July 2021 review of submission by L33tm4n

[edit]

I removed some more irrelevant sources from the draft. I also added a quote to a source regarding him contacting the Toronto and Ottawa Police Services, as well as information regarding him debunking the "Save The Kids" pump-and-dump cryptocurrency scam. L33tm4n (talk) 17:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:00:26, 27 July 2021 review of submission by SuyashVP

[edit]


SuyashVP (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This submission is, for all intents and purposes, blank; it effectively always has been. We are not a substitute for a social network or personal website. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 03:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:52:13, 27 July 2021 review of draft by Trainsandotherthings

[edit]


This is my first ever attempt at creating a new article from scratch, so I would appreciate some feedback on what I have so far (style of writing, organization of the page, information included in the article's infobox, etc) and what changes I should make before submitting the draft to give it the best chance of being accepted. Currently the article only has two references, and I've ordered a book that covers the subject as well which I will be able to incorporate as another reference once it arrives. I'd also appreciate any advice on finding more references for the article. Thanks! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:30:41, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Chicago Smooth

[edit]


Why was the article for Alan Roger Currie approved in February of 2015, and the article was allowed to exist for 5+ years?? I fail to understand how this person was ONCE considered "notable" enough to have the article approved, but now all of the sudden, this same person is now deemed "not notable enough" for an article to exist. Initially, the article was only criticized for "reading like an advertisement," as opposed to the entire article being deemed "not notable enough." I would like an explanation on this, as well as an advisement on how to improve the article for re-submission Chicago Smooth (talk) 19:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Smooth (talk) 19:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Smooth Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Regarding the prior article, that an article exists does not necessarily mean it was allowed or approved by anyone. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. We can only address what we know about, and it is not unheard of for an article to exist for years before being detected. In addition, article standards have changed over time; it is possible that what was once acceptable is no longer. 331dot (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is why I stopped being a financial supporter of the Wikimedia Foundation. You all are so incredibly inconsistent with what articles you approve, and what articles you delete, you all lose credibility. There are articles on this site of people (particularly, life coaches, book authors, and YouTubers) that have way less credibility and notability than Alan Roger Currie it's ridiculous. But I bet if Currie went out and committed a crime, such as murdering a well-known politician or celebrity, you all would be the first ones to publish an article about him. This is how African-American men are treated. This is disgusting. Chicago Smooth (talk) 20:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Chicago Smooth The race of the subject is not pertinent to the status of any Wikipedia article, what matters is notability and coverage in reliable sources. I didn't know what his race is. People work on what they want to work on. Until we are all paid to work on the 6 million plus articles here 40 hours a week, that's just the way it is. If you have ideas on improving participation, please offer them. You are welcome to help us out and identify other articles you feel do not meet guidelines for possible action. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 23:00, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, the reason I bring up Currie's race is because I find it incredulous that many Caucasian pickup artists, dating coaches, and life coaches who are associated with what is known as the "Dating & Relationships Advice Industry" are highlighted on this site, but Alan Roger Currie is considered to be one of the most influential Black men in said industry, but yet he is excluded from this site? That makes no sense to me. Chicago Smooth (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:59, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Dungaluni

[edit]


Dungaluni (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Your "sources" are all a single word - no links, no bibliographical information, no attempts at SCP Foundation'-style footnotes, nothing. This is not acceptable for any sort of article, let alone a biography. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:02, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:54:20, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Potatobabe

[edit]


Potatobabe (talk) 21:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. See Help:Referencing for beginners. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:15:35, 27 July 2021 review of submission by Supermann

[edit]


I have added answers to WP:THREE on draft's talk page. I have removed possible citation spam suspects. If there is still survivor, please let me know and I will kill them myself. The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. It also has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. And he has also "received a well-known and significant award or honor" per Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Any_biography. Thanks.

Supermann (talk) 22:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_July_27&oldid=1036666917"