Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 February 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 10 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 12 >
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 11[edit]

02:59:25, 11 February 2022 review of submission by ProGaming683562[edit]

I was wondering why my article declined? I put in some links in for our members as well as I had some references and cited my sources to give credit

ProGaming683562 (talk) 02:59, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this draft is not notable. --Kinu t/c 03:32, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:41:56, 11 February 2022 review of submission by ProGaming683562[edit]

I am wondering why my article got declined. I am talking about a real life hockey esports team. I don't get how it is notable for the platform even though people want to know more about it ProGaming683562 (talk) 05:41, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anything Electronic Arts writes in a presser isn't acceptable as a source. You'd want to look for actual eSports news sources that discuss Merles On Top at length (they exist, but are few and far between). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:06, 11 February 2022 review of submission by Madiad[edit]

I wonder why my recent article was rejected. How can I submit a new article? What should we pay attention to? Madiad (talk) 08:26, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft you created consisted of copied and pasted text from a couple of different websites advertising an upcoming "game" (actually a cryptocurrency scheme, though that was not mentioned in the draft.) Do you not see how that's rather incompatible with an encyclopedia built to share actual knowledge and facts? --bonadea contributions talk 08:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:01:19, 11 February 2022 review of draft by Avindigni[edit]


Dear Editors,

among other comments I received for the draft I submitted on Jordi Bascompte, one concerns the image copyright, which - for my ignorance - I have declared as "own work". This photo was commissioned by the University of Zurich (to a professional photograph called Frank Bruederli) for promotion of new hired professors, at the time Prof. Bascompte joined that Institute. Jordi Bascompte was given the authorization to employ this image for professional uses (like webpages, seminars, press releases, etc.) and passed it directly to me upon request. Therefore, I have Jordi Bascompte's authorization to use it and he has the authorization from his Institution to make that image available on the web. How should I declare the copyright for this image in Wikimedia Commons? Once I know how to declare it, should I restart from scratch with the Wizard or is there a way to update the metadata of the uploaded image?

Another comment sounds: "[the page] requires (...) the addition of relevant WP:IRS—which NONE of the current sources meet." As the subject is a faculty person, the currently cited sources are peer-reviewed scientific articles about his work, which - from the perspective of academics - are the most reliable sources. However, I understand Wikipedia is not for academics only and, probably, it is not in line with Wikipedia’s policy to cite only sources authored by the subject of the Wipkipedia page itself. Should I rather refer to independent sources speaking about Jordi Bascompte’s work, such as reviews, press releases or newspapers?

Thank you for the attention you will give to this pair of questions.

Best regards,

A. V.

Avindigni (talk) 10:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Avindingi In terms of the image, the best thing to do would be to have the person who took the image with their camera upload it and claim it as their own work(while being aware of the consequences of doing so, that it could be used by anyone for any purpose, including commercial). Usually the photographer, not the person depicted in the image, holds the copyright(unless Dr. Bascompte has a contract assigning him copyright) Note that images are not necessary in terms of getting a draft approved, so there is no rush in that regard(only "free" images with no copyright issues can be in drafts)
Yes, the draft should primarily summarize what independent reliable sources say about Dr. Bascompte. He does seem to be notable, so you are partially there- you just need to summarize independent sources instead of merely documenting his accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:23:27, 11 February 2022 review of draft by HutchPJ77[edit]


Hi, my submission for a page about Bedford Independent has been rejected (Draft:Bedford Independent) it seems that the references are not suitable as they are not independent, because they are trade media. I am confused as to why trade media (in particular in the journalism sector) is not considered independent. These are genuine editorial articles, not paid for, and the sources are regulated and independent in their editorial standards.

Can someone please help me to understand what sources are suitable and/or if the articles I have suggested are in fact suitable and the rejection is perhaps an oversight?

Thank you so much, I look forward to your reoly.

HutchPJ77 (talk) 10:23, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HutchPJ77 The issue is not that trade media is used, it is that the specific pieces are based on interviews, or are announcements of routine business activities. These things do not establish notability as they come from the topic itself. What is needed are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this publication- coverage that goes beyond merely confirming its existence or its routine activities. Interviews are a primary source and cannot be used to establish notability. Please review WP:ORG, the definition of a notable organization on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Hi, 331dot, I really do appreciate your quick reply and explanation. This helps a lot. I am a little confused as to why this is the case, surely third party sources, regardless of the content do establish the existence of the subject matter and so, therefore, provide evidence that what is contained is accurate. As a journalist myself, I find this a little odd. However, if this is the practice for Wikipedia, I respect that it's the way it is and will follow it accordingly. Do you have then, please, any advice on how I need to edit the draft so we have a page for the Bedford Independent on Wikipedia. This is vital for us for a number of reasons, not least of all to make sure Wikipedia is up to date too. Your support is appreciated.
HutchPJ77 Wikipedia is not for documenting the mere existence of a topic. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources say with significant coverage; not just those that merely documents the existence of the topic. I might suggest using the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and what is expected of article content. I greatly apologize for being frank with you- and I really intend this as trying to help you- but I must say that Wikipedia has no interest in how the presence (or lack of) a Wikipedia article about your organization may benefit it, or in your organization's online presence. Any benefits are on the side, and not our primary goal. We are only interested in summarizing independent reliable sources.
This admittedly can be hard for media organizations outside of large ones like the New York Times, NBC News, the BBC, etc., as they don't always write about each other- but this is necessary for verification purposes. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thank you and no worries for being frank. What you say is slightly contradictory though in that we're not just seeking a presence for our sake but also to show the evolution of media in the local sphere, this is not just important in our area but the world over. You'll see that two other titles in our area (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_%26_Citizen) and (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedfordshire_on_Sunday) exist on Wikipedia and the draft for the Bedford Independent doesn't seem to be very different from their content and sources. Please be assured I'm not asking for you or anyone else to just allow our Wikipedia article as it is. However, support in editing the draft so it will be accepted would be important. I believe the inclusion gives a genuine record of how local media is evolving and to say Wikipedia would not benefit from that, even in a small way, is not entirely accurate - and I have used independent, reliable sources. I will indeed use the new user tutorial, but if you have any further thoughts that would be a great help, thank you.

13:45:58, 11 February 2022 review of submission by RolandBacon[edit]

The proposed article was refused by the editor with the following justification: 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. 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.

But the proposed article is a direct translation of the same article published since a few years in the French wikipedia pages (after a number of revision to add references). Then I do not understand why it cannot be published in the English wikipedia version. May be you can give me more information. Thanks in advance. RolandBacon (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RolandBacon Each langauge version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. Any article about you on the English Wikipedia must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you. The draft currently just documents your (significant) accomplishments. Please read Your First Article.
Note that you may wish to review the autobiography policy; while not forbidden, writing about yourself is discouraged. 331dot (talk) 13:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:59:55, 11 February 2022 review of submission by JasonMIIPH[edit]


my god, i just want to ask a question, not code an entire encyclopediaJasonMIIPH (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2022 (UTC) JasonMIIPH (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is for Debasish Mridha article. Just want to know if foreign-language references are allowed and how that works. Subject article was rejected because all I had was English-language references. He has many, many more in Bengali. If I post the English translation of the title, are these allowed? JasonMIIPH (talk) 16:04, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JasonMIIPH I assume this is about the draft in your sandbox. See this page, but in short, sources are not required to be in English. 331dot (talk) 16:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:30:11, 11 February 2022 review of submission by WikiJazzHub[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have created a draft for a jazz artist. I believe this draft falls under the guidelines elucidated within WP:Music (Please see Criteria for musicians and ensembles points #2 and #5, questionable yet possible #7). However, my belief does not move the pen here, hence my need for professional opinion/action. Been a Wikipedian for a long time, but new to making actual articles. Your help is greatly appreciated.

In addition and as a courtesy:

  • I am in no way connected to the subject.
  • Nor am I paid to edit.
  • I am but a mere jazz aficionado seeking a little guidance. Looking to finally make an article contribution to the Wikiverse. More to follow.

Salutations, WikiJazzHub (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiJazzHub, I'm gonna punt on #2, mostly because I'm not sure how to interpret WP:CHARTS, I think they meet it with the airplay chart but also can just as easily read that page as they needed to make the main chart. As to #5, do any of those labels have wikipedia articles? If not, little hard to call them major indies. And on #7, there is zero sourcing provided to make such a claim. The Wichita article appears to be the only in-depth coverage provided and its really local coverage, so doesn't show a national prominence. So, yeah I'd say the article as is hinges on interpreting #2 of WP:NMUSIC as current sourcing doesn't support meeting any other criteria.Slywriter (talk) 18:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Slywriter, I agree on all fronts. Another Wikipedian advised that I include the Eagle article to which I wasn't initially aware of as it is not included in my original draft. Seemed solid at the time and does appear local (heavy hitter in the state of Kansas but local nonetheless).

As a side note, some (possibly) useful information contained within and pertaining to WP:CHARTS under specified section Decision tree for adding song charts, Smooth Jazz Songs is listed under Applicable US charts with inclusion on the Airply only charts, albeit dead last on the list! :). The condition is as such: "Regardless of other chartings, you may add any of the charts to the right."

Thank you for your timely response. Is there any further action required on my part or is this now simply a matter of waiting for the other shoe to drop?

Regards, WikiJazzHub (talk) 19:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slywriter Sorry for not addressing #5 of the WP:NMUSIC criteria. I believe the label needs only be major or an important indie: "(i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable)". Just looked them up and quite easily noticed that they have a handful of notable artists on their roster. I'd say it falls under the latter portion of #5. It's a smaller genre, so it's much more difficult to quantify these things. Fortunately, the information is laid out fairly well in WP:NMUSIC. And I agree that #7 is out of the window.

Thanks again, WikiJazzHub (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiJazzHub, sort of wait and see. Hoping one of the reviewers who deals with music more sees this and chimes in. Just not sure whether that inclusion section is also for notability or just a list of what is acceptable to mention once notability is established. NMUSIC probably could use some clarity on #2, though equally possible I am just overthinking it.Slywriter (talk) 19:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Slywriter Certainly. Again, thanks for taking the time to check it out. And yes, NMUSIC is due for an update and also gets some faulty edits here and there. There's also the possibility that we're both overthinking it :). Cheers, WikiJazzHub (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:50:45, 11 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Albarguni[edit]


Hello. My name is Khalid El Bargoni. I'm Azerbaijani-Turkish Singer, Musician,Music producer and Actor. My Google Knowledge Panel: https://g.co/kgs/1keCrK I want to create my own wikipedia page. can you help me please?

Albarguni (talk) 19:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:00:00, 11 February 2022 review of submission by Hamdard media[edit]

Hamdard Media prints newspaper and runs a TV channel. It has many advertisements on TV and paper. I just tried to describe it by giving some info related to the group. But why was it not accepted I donot understand. Hamdard media (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because we're not interested in anything the company says, either on Wikipedia or to the press. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 20:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:11:58, 11 February 2022 review of draft by Garvincarter[edit]


My original request for assistance was archived without answer.

This article entry was declined for sounding like an advertisement. There was no particular reference to content areas in the article that are at fault, just a generalization. This was paired with a comment that it was also declined for not having sufficient independent references. While there is a section of bibliographic works, none of these are used in citations. There are 70 citations with the exception of 3 or 4, from sources the subject does not control. Of these 3 or 4 citations, they were used to confirm an interview topic with a mass market media source the subject does not control. Having seen numerous attorney articles with less citations or relevance, it would be good to understand how to get this article in a better position.

To that end my questions remain:

1) What areas of the entry are violating a neutral statement of facts? 2) There are 70 citations from international media organizations down to local media sources, from broadcast news to industry trades. Are these not enough? If so, what type of citations will be needed?

I appreciate any assistance you can provide.

Garvin Carter (talk) 22:11, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles are not for merely stating facts, but for summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a topic, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Fewer high quality sources are preferable to many low quality sources.
Please read other stuff exists. Each article and draft is judged on its own merits. That other articles exist does not automatically means that yours can too. It could be that these other articles you have seen are also inappropriate. We can only address what we know about; 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. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those that are classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 23:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_February_11&oldid=1072328877"