Help desk
< April 30	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 2 >

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.

May 1

02:53:56, 1 May 2022 review of submission by Cmykpoly

Cmykpoly (talk · contribs)

When the article had sources, it was rejected for reading like an advertisement. Now, it's being rejected for reading like an advertisement and not having enough sources. Is it the choice of words that are being used?

I'm trying to create a page like this one: Unirac

Thank you!

Cmykpoly (talk) 02:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmykpoly Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about a company and what it does. That's considered advertising even if you are not soliciting customers or selling something. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. It should not just document the existence of the company and describe its activities. Staff interviews, press releases, announcements, and the like do not establish notability. Please read Your First Article.

It could be that the other article(not a mere "page") is also inappropriate and simply not addressed yet. (I haven't looked at it yet) 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, make sure that they are classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I see. I guess I was confused because that page had been approved and published and I did try to follow it as a model. Is there a reporting process for inappropriate articles? Thank you for your feedback! Cmykpoly (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmykpoly: It wasn't, actually. (Created 2011/05/25.) See User:Jéské Couriano/A brief history of AfC. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jéské Couriano What are you referring to in your reply that wasn't approved? I know that the article I was trying to create was not approved. However, in my reply, I'm referring to the article I used as a model: Unirac. Is it not approved either? But it comes up in Wikipedia searches. How can you tell if an article is approved or not? Thank you. Cmykpoly (talk) 23:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmykpoly: Unirac predates AfC as it is used today, and therefore did not go thru a drafting process. As such, it was never "approved" because drafting as it is today just did not exist at that time. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jéské Couriano Oh I see. I thought articles pre-AfC were just auto-approved (like a bot scanned it or something. I don't know what I was thinking). I didn't realize that because there wasn't a process in place at all that means that it's technically not "approved" by today's drafting standards, even though it's published. Thank you for the explanation. If we come across articles such as these that aren't appropriate, are we supposed to report them or anything like that? Also, is there a way to tell if an article was approved by today's drafting standards or is it just by looking at the references? Thank you! Cmykpoly (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pages that went through the drafting process will have been moved out of draftspace or a user's sandbox as part of approval, and the mover will indicate it's an approved AfC submission in the move summary. As for older articles, we generally encourage people to bring them up to modern standards if they're able or send them to deletion debate if this is impossible. Wikipedia is a work in progress, after all, and no article can ever truly be considered "complete" by any definition of the term. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:10:17, 1 May 2022 review of submission by Koqkpa

Koqkpa (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Soumita Mondal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Koqkpa (talk) 05:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Submit

This is an attempt to shame a person. Should be speedily deleted. TechnoTalk (talk) 10:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We do have a speedy deletion criterion for pages like this: WP:G10. I've tagged the draft accordingly, which also entails blanking it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoTalk: re-signing for ping —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:17:13, 1 May 2022 review of submission by Ploreky

Ploreky (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!

Hello, i have a question, I made a draft site about the National Shrine of Ina Poon Bato, but it was declined due to some issues. I am eager to change it, but I discovered it was Deleted, and it took me 5 hours to make it. I you have a copy, can I please copy it?.Ploreky (talk) 07:17, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ploreky: We can't restore copyright violations. While you could in theory look at the (alleged) source, doing so will not help a new article in any way, as any new version would have to be different from the deleted version, both on grounds of copyright and because of Wikipedia's content policies, amongst other things verifyability and Neutral Point of view. Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay okay. I'll wright another one that doesn't violate the rules.

Thank you Ploreky (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:26:21, 1 May 2022 review of draft by Aamarafa15

Aamarafa15 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:AMINA YUSUF GARBA,MON, mni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Aamarafa15 (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aamarafa15: We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim in the article that could potentially be challenged for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to a in-depth, non-routine, independent source about them written by an identifiable author and published with editorial oversight that fact-checks, discloses, corrects, and retracts that can verify the claim or (if no such sources can be found) removed wholesale. This is a hard requirement when writing about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is NOT NEGOTIABLE. On top of all that, the article is hagiographical in tone; we have no tolerance for this and our readers generally hate attempts to use Wikipedia for promotion. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:46, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:59:56, 1 May 2022 review of draft by CollectiveSolidarity

CollectiveSolidarity (talk · contribs)
- Draft:WikiMime (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How do I publish an article in the Wikipedia namespace? I have a WikiFauna that I would like to submit called the WikiMime. Thanks, CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC) CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I have published it here. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 01:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]