Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 July 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 24 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 26 >
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 25

[edit]

05:27, 25 July 2023 review of submission by NegativeMP1

[edit]

I feel as if this article was rejected in the past for reasons that were unjust. There is no clause under the notability guidelines that makes the rejection reason a fair reason to reject a notable topic, it was clearly covered extensively within articles that definitely "bothered to play the game" and discussed it as a standalone subject.

They were right that it could be merged into List of Roblox games, but the subject meets the general notability guidelines to be separate just like Adopt Me!, as it has several articles talking about it as a standalone subject and therefore more coverage than every other entry in that list. Is it possible the reviewer was enforcing their own perception of the notability guidelines instead of what the guidelines actually are? NegativeMP1 (talk) 05:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NegativeMP1 Have you read the comment left by the reviewer? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and that's the part that I'm requesting help over. The comment doesn't make much sense as I explained, the sources definitely "bothered to play the game". NegativeMP1 (talk) 00:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:42, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Brian.butt

[edit]

The article has sources found from reputable sources, I cannot not understand why it keeps beeing rejected. Brian.butt (talk) 05:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the comments left by myself and others when it was declined. The page went through a deletion discussion a few months back. Are there any references since that time showing how this meets notability guidelines? --CNMall41 (talk) 06:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:12, 25 July 2023 review of submission by RenukaNambiar

[edit]

Suggestions required to submit the article RenukaNambiar (talk) 07:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I am terribly sorry to ask for help, but as this is the first Wiki article that I am creating from scratch, I need some experienced hands to guide me to make the article look presentable. If someone would have 2 minutes to spare.... Osreismagos23 (talk) 07:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about yourself, while not forbidden, is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves and their accomplishments. An article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. This will require you to set aside everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent sources with significant coverage of you. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely documenting activities and accomplishments and goes into detail about what makes the subject important/signficant/influential as the source sees it. Please read Your First Article, and also read about how an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. 331dot (talk) 08:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:23, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Contataravi

[edit]

Hi, May you please guide me on what extra source I need to add to get it published? where I have missed? Contataravi (talk) 07:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing is not so much the issue as is the layout. You've been advised to look at the Manual of Style, but you could also look at some other articles about villages/other communities to get an idea over how they should be structured. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:50, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Kalr93

[edit]

I was provided the following explanation for why my created article was rejected:

"This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

"This submission appears to be a news report of a single event and may not be notable enough for an article in Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#NEWS and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event for more information."

The only text I used that I can see required more reliable sourcing are transfer fees, but I'm happy to remove them; beyond that, anything I wrote was sourced and the match events were also sourced to reputable coverage e.g. BBC Sport, Sky Sports, and I'm not sure what more I could possibly provide.

As for the notability, it is the biggest match in the Liverpool-Manchester United rivalry, the most notable game of the 2022-23 Premier League season, and Manchester United's biggest ever defeat. I know it wasn't a cup final, but for reference, United's 2011 victory over Arsenal - also "just" a league game with a big scoreline - has its own page. I'm unsure of why this match has a lesser notability. Kalr93 (talk) 09:50, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beware in citing other articles as an example, see other stuff exists.
There are large unsourced sections, especially the background section. It's not enough to link to relevant articles. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kalr93 Because you have used a mixture of simply a list of references at the end without making us aware of which facts they refer to, and also a few inline links, it is impossible to see what is referenced. Please read WP:CITE.
You also need to edit the prose, which is written in the style of a magazine, not an encyclopaedia. We require "dull-but-worthy" as prose. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Kalr93: firstly, your draft wasn't rejected, only declined, meaning you can resubmit after you've addressed the issues.
Secondly, as you haven't used inline citations, it's virtually impossible for anyone to tell how well supported the content is, and how much of it is unreferenced or possibly original research.
It seems that only two of the sources, the BBC and Sky ones, meet the WP:GNG standard for notability, the rest being mainly stats etc. Both of those were written immediately following the match. For individual matches to be notable, they should have a lasting legacy, as explained in WP:SPORTSEVENT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your explanation - I'll address the citations/refs and the prose in an edit.
As for the notability, referring to the guide (WP:SPORTSEVENT), I believe this match meets the following criteria:
"...games should be extraordinary and have a lasting impact on the sport; news coverage should be extensive..."
but I'm aware that outside of news coverage existing after the week of the event, the rest is subjective - could you let me know if this event is likely to be considered in that regard? As mentioned, it was the biggest club in England's heaviest ever defeat, and the biggest margin of victory in the biggest rivalry in English football - I presume the Manchester United 8-2 Arsenal league match has been allowed because of its relevance to the Manchester United-Arsenal rivalry, as an example. Kalr93 (talk) 10:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kalr93 All articles stand or fall on their own merits, so no precedent is ever set by any article for any other. This makes your task interesting. If you can demonstrate by dint of referencing that it has notability, then it is notable. Notability does not expire.
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 🇺🇦 10:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:05, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Yaross 228

[edit]

i'm trying to make a wikipedia page about a game that i found out about and using all the knowledge i have to describe the game but the wikipedia page got rejected, the text that was in the wikipedia page is "The Game Is a Roblox Fast-Paced First Person Shooter That Has Gravity Controlling And The Elements Are Inspired By Doom And Quake. The Game Is Actively Being Worked On And Is Made By Only One Person Which Is A Russian Developer. The Only Developer Username is "andrey4ik23". That Was The Only Things I Know About The Game Because The Game Is Unlocked Only To The Only Developer." was there something wrong with it? Yaross 228 (talk) 10:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yaross 228 Does it even look like an article? Only submit drafts when they at least look right.
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 🇺🇦 10:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The immediate "thing that is wrong with it" is that you used "all the knowledge i have to describe the game". I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not interested - at all - in the knowledge you have, or the knowledge I have, or the knowledge that any random person on the internet has. To write a Wikipedia article, you need to use your knowledge to find independent, reliably published sources about the subject, and then summarize what those sources say, not what you know. Please see BACKWARDS. ColinFine (talk) 10:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:15, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Suresh330

[edit]

can you help me why my draft is rejected Suresh330 (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Suresh330 It has been declined notrejected. Please consider asking the declining reviewer before coming here 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 13:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:56, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Spbvj

[edit]

She is acted in notable roles on films and television series,but not having reliable sources for all,So how to move it to mainspace with (citation needed tag) and (stub)tags.Any advise!!? 

Spbvj (talk) 14:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Spbvj: most of the draft content is unreferenced, and the sources cited do not establish notability per WP:GNG. There is no point in publishing this as it currently stands, as it will only get sent back to drafts, and could be deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Spbvj - if you cannot find reliable sources then I am afraid Hallea cannot have an article at this time.
You have some odd choices of Wikipedia:Manual of Style, such as missing spaces after full stops and commas. Most of the statements in the draft are not sourced (Early life and Music) so should be removed if you cannot find sources that are independent and reliable - IMDB does not count.
The article in it's present form is not suitable for mainspace, sorry. Qcne (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:51, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Rywiki23

[edit]

Can I have some further assistance with my draft please? Rywiki23 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the link. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rywiki23 Please read Referencing for beginners. In terms of the draft, Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company and what it does. 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 the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely describing the activities of the company and goes into detail about what is important/significant/influential about the company as the sources see it, not as the company sees it. Brief mentions, staff interviews, press releases, and announcements of routine activities do not establish notability.
If you work for this company in any capacity, the Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 19:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:36, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Alexxxxx125

[edit]

i need write an article for a well known person but i dont know guys are keep on deleting my draft , i dont what is a biased article , please be generous and at least consider our content please 

Alexxxxx125 (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alexxxxx125, the draft has been marked for speedy deletion. Have you read Your First Article? If your account is controlled by multiple people, it will be blocked. Have each person create their own account. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:00, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Palpatine of the Seven Seas

[edit]

It says that my draft is "not adequately supported by reliable sources". I don't know how much more reliable a source can be than the series itself. What can I do to make my draft more reliable? Palpatine of the Seven Seas (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Palpatine of the Seven Seas Please actually read the full text of the decline message. The series is a primary source at best 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:15, 25 July 2023 review of submission by 1960 Jaguar MK9 Estate

[edit]

Why is it denied? It's from reliable sources from those including AROnline (who have archives of British Leyland era things from 1962. RoverAddiction (talk) 20:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anything from British Leyland will be a primary source, and so will not contribute to establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:51, 25 July 2023 review of submission by Monomontermonter

[edit]

how can i get this publishedd Monomontermonter (talk) 21:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Monomontermonter Only by proving beyond doubt that Minter is notable in a Wikipedia sense. This draft will not do it, and it has been rejected. Please read HELP:YFA 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_July_25&oldid=1167970717"