Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< November 20 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 22 >
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.


November 21

[edit]

00:14, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Ch4mpezz

[edit]

I do not think there is anything wrong with the references because personally i got it all from that website. I put the reference that shows the exact part of the site where i wrote the paragraphs about! Ch4mpezz (talk) 00:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ch4mpezz: Your article has to be in English. And those sources do not show why the subject is notable. Please read the advice in the decline notice. You need in-depth secondary sources. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got it all from that website is precisely the problem. 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.
You need to find independent sources, and base the article almost entirely on them. The school's own website cannot contribute anything at all to establishing that the school meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 11:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

01:19, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Mohammad Husen

[edit]

I am a contributor of Wikipedia, I have working in many Articles. It's one of the draft article by me. Please work here to improve it. Mohammad Husen (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mohammad Husen: this draft has been each time declined for lack of evidence of notability; that is basically an issue with the sources, which aren't sufficient to demonstrate that the subject is notable. It is up to you to find and cite adequate sources, we can't do that for you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

02:43, 21 November 2023 review of submission by JamesTheOrganGeek

[edit]

Why is it not>? JamesTheOrganGeek (talk) 02:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JamesTheOrganGeek: "why is it not" what? This draft was rejected and has subsequently been deleted, apparently at your own request. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:07, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Drgoel007

[edit]

why my article was declined as per best of my knowledge i added reliable refereces which can be cross verified from your side and there is nothig against wiki policies. Drgoel007 (talk) 07:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Drgoel007: it was declined because the sources are not sufficient to establish notability per WP:GNG; with the exception of the Express article, they are all either primary or passing mentions.
If this is yourself that you're writing about, then please be aware that you shouldn't; see WP:AUTOBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:22, 21 November 2023 review of submission by BVECJordan

[edit]

please help me to create this new articles BVECJordan (talk) 08:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BVECJordan: you're swearing on your talk page at everyone and everything, and you're removing the AfC templates from this draft although I asked you not to... yet now you want help?
Okay, one more time: "Tourist attraction place" is not something that is inherently notable, so you need to either reframe this as a natural feature, or establish notability by citing sources which satisfy the WP:GNG guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
☺️🙏🙏😆😆😆😆
I don't care what u say respected senior writer.
I respect u but this time i want not to .
It's just I want to publish this article very badly
U can do whatever ever u want
I am just notorious writer.
You can block or report my account
U can block my ip address.
I don't care.
It's just I follows Wikipedia guidelines hardly.
Anyone follow hardly this days BVECJordan (talk) 08:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:55, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Josammy777

[edit]

I edited my draft with many reliable sources from Congo my native country. We have 12 publications on my work, Bibliography, Books, foundation, Patents, and the impact of my work in 3 reliable source such as: HorizonAfricain, la depeche de Brazzaville, La semaine Africaine. They displayed all informations with about 10 publication. However, the draft was declined why ? and we should improve the work Josammy777 (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Josammy777: as it says in the decline notice and adjoining comment, this draft is completely unreferenced, with no evidence of notability. You need to find multiple sources that meet the WP:GNG guideline and summarise what they say about the subject, citing them as you go. See WP:YFA for advice on article creation. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:29, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Johnmark2384

[edit]

Hello , I made an initial submission of the above article related to Ravindu Nawanjana ( Draft:Ravindu Nawanjana ) on Nov 15th , and since then I made a few additions to his portfolio and resubmitted it today and was declined. Was the article declined because the data about the candidate is not enough or is it because of the less references made by external sources?

I have also seen many stubs with relatively less information approved by wiki.

Also , any guidance on getting the article accepted would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You Johnmark2384 (talk) 09:29, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Johnmark2384 That another article exists does not necessarily mean that it was "approved" by anyone, please see other stuff exists. These articles you have seen could also be inappropriate and simply not addressed yet by a volunteer. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible in many ways to get inappropriate content past us, this cannot justify the addition of more inapprpropriate content. If you would like to help us, you can work to identify other inappropriate articles for possible action. We need the help.
Wikipedia is not a a place to just tell about someone and what they do- you must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about this person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. What do sources say is important/significant/influential about this man? (not what he or his associates thinks is important about himself) That's what Wikipedia wants to know. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to use other articles as an example or model, use those classified as good articles, which have been checked by the community. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:20, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Rayhanulhaque1

[edit]

Why my article has been rejuct Rayhanulhaque1 (talk) 10:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rayhanulhaque1: because this is an encyclopaedia, not a social media or blogging platform. Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about yourself, unless you're notable, and even then you should leave it to others to write about you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:23, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:35, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Pratik.S2005

[edit]

Pls make the page more reliable for that It can be published as soon as possible. ... Pratik.S2005 (talk) 10:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pratik.S2005: the two sources are not sufficient to establish notability; we usually need 3+, and they should provide significant coverage of the subject, whereas at least one of these is just routine business reporting.
There is no rush to publish this, as Wikipedia is not edited to a deadline. Take your time to find solid sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:38, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:00, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Alucard F Tepes

[edit]

Hello, I am trying to publish my first article regarding World Fisheries Day. I noticed there wasn't a Wikipedia page some months ago but didn't think much of it; today, however, I decided to search extensively and confirmed there isn't a Wikipedia article yet.

So I wrote this today. I added a lot of references at first, but that seemed to trigger a refusal; therefore, I removed references that seemed unnecessary and only kept what I considered noteworthy. Can someone check if there's anything wrong with the article, please? I lack experience as this is the first time I've done it. Thanks in advance. Alucard F Tepes (talk) 11:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alucard F Tepes: the draft is promotional in tone; Wikipedia articles must be written in a neutral, factual manner.
It only cites two sources, one of which is YouTube. (It also lists, without citing, several sources, but that's not very useful as it isn't clear why they're there since they're not being cited. And not all of them are reliable.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your comment. I changed the entirety of the draft and tried to change the tone to be neutral. I removed YouTube sources and added better references, such as official reports and event announcements, while also citing them. Is there anything else I should change, add, or do? I would like any recommendations so I can improve, please. Alucard F Tepes (talk) 12:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Alucard F Tepes: you need to show that the subject is notable per WP:GNG, which the currently cited sources don't achieve.
Also, there are still those six external links listed in the 'References' section without them being actually cited anywhere. Why are they there? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From those 6 external links, 5 are cited in the draft as reference for something that I wrote, or to show where it came from. I am unsure if there is a mistake in the format I used since the links appear twice in references, but 5 of the 6 are cited.
I am also going to research more in order to show what you are mentioning "notable per WP:GNG" I'll give an update when I do Alucard F Tepes (talk) 13:12, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:55, 21 November 2023 review of submission by 178.165.181.175

[edit]

Hi, I experienced a third negative review of my draft. The last reviewer didn’t leave any comment and did not reply to my questions. I am wondering, since my subject does meet four criteria of notability, why my draft still needs additional sources. It is very difficult to know how many references are enough. Also some references I used were flagged as unreliable but they do appear on another serious Wikipedia page ( on th Museum of Applied Arts of Vienna) so I don’t understand why they are not accepted on my draft. Could you please help me with this issue? I have a ph.D. and I am used to very strict, clear and transparent rules for sources reliability. Here, I feel left in the dark. Especially, I feel that the books quoted (not available online) are not considered as reliable. Although they are actually more serious sources. Thank you very much for your help, Catherine Lemieux 178.165.181.175 (talk) 11:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Catherine Lemieux another editor has responded on the draft's talk page (Draft talk:Patrick Rampelotto) so please respond there. S0091 (talk) 16:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Catherine Lemieux (talk) 17:28, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:37, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Tomtomwaran

[edit]

Hi, I received a message that the proposed topic does not qualify for the notability standards of Wikipedia. I went through the criteria in the article here: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) . Which of the notability criteria is most problematic? Would it make sense if I provided other sources? Or should I edit the text and in what direction? Thank you. Your help would be much appreciated because I would like to edit and re-submit my proposal. Tomtomwaran (talk) 12:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are writing about a broad field, not a specific company, so the general notability criteria are what applies. You need to summarize independent reliable sources that discuss this field in depth. 331dot (talk) 13:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:19, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Russell Bassett

[edit]

Hey why'd you decline it, may i have a reason please? Russell Bassett (talk) 13:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was not only declined, it was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. The reviewer left a reason at the top of the draft. 331dot (talk) 13:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:30, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Balalaka21

[edit]

Hello. Which kind of problems should I fix, before resubmitting draft? Balalaka21 (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you should find references according to the decline message. Ca talk to me! 13:31, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This has now been accepted. (Happened while I was trying to decline it.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:32, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would have declined this too as not notable and advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:47, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Bigbossdol

[edit]

I need some help making my submission suitable, as I feel I have already included reliable references and sources. I have used government websites, industry information websites as well as long standing and respected hobbyist websites on the subject matter. A similar page already exists which uses exactly the same sources Craigkelly transmitting station and I believe my submission is comparable with this, please can I get some support with what I should do ? Bigbossdol (talk) 13:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bigbossdol: there is unreferenced content (several small paragraphs without any citations), and the lead section is supported by search engine results which are not valid sources. To avoid original research or synthesis, please only summarise what reliable published sources have said about the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:08, 21 November 2023 review of submission by 2603:300C:196D:300:59B8:D54A:2237:CBA3

[edit]

how do i get my real micronation that i established and gave ownership to burger king on wikipedia 

2603:300C:196D:300:59B8:D54A:2237:CBA3 (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You don't. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:17, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:02, 21 November 2023 review of submission by EdwinThornton75

[edit]

What is wrong with this article? It is all properly sourced about a small artist online. EdwinThornton75 (talk) 17:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinThornton75: what's wrong is that there is no evidence that the subject is notable, either by the WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO standards. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero independent reliable sources and Zero indication of passing WP:NMUSICIAN. Theroadislong (talk) 17:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:20, 21 November 2023 review of submission by GAALIIAV

[edit]

Hi, i know there is a problem with the references i'm using in this page, but i can't find others references. There are some tools i can use to find new references? GAALIIAV (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot find other references, this team likely does not merit an article. You have gone about this backwards, you should first gather sources before writing the draft. 331dot (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:41, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Malexof

[edit]

I need help with this article. The problem is in reliable sources. But I have used Boxrec as a reliable source and saw the Boxrec as a source on the pages of other sportsmen. I filled this page by analogy with other pages already published in Wikipedia. For example, here: Iago Kiladze Why is this article approved (they used the same link on Boxrec), but mine is not? Malexof (talk) 17:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Malexof That another article exists does not mean that it was "approved" by anyone. You should avoid using random articles as a model that themselves could be inappropriate, and you would be unaware of it. See other stuff exists. Use good articles as a model.331dot (talk) 17:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Malexof: the Kiladze article was published eight years ago and never went through the AfC review process, so it wasn't "approved" in the same way. In any case, you shouldn't model your articles on existing articles, which may well have their own problems, but should instead follow the relevant guidelines applicable today.
We need to see multiple sources that meet the WP:GNG criteria. A single source isn't enough, either to establish notability or to reliably support the contents.
Alternatively, if you can prove (using reliable sources) that the subject meets WP:NBOXING, then that would be an alternative approach. It doesn't look like it, though? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:21, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Kimbamy

[edit]

Hi, I would like to find a talk page to discuss about this draft : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Carmelo_Pipitone thank you in advance 

Kimbamy (talk) 19:21, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Kimbamy, feel free to ask any questions you may have here? Qcne (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you! I have made this draft. I think the coverage is enough. can you help me understanding what is missing exactly. I am not an expert. I have read the rules but I cannot fix it. thank you in advance. Kimbamy (talk) 10:01, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing @Kimbamy. Let me go through your references one by one. Note that musical artists need to pass the WP:NMUSICIAN criteria, this means finding multiple secondary sources that are independent of Carmelo (not interviews), and provide significant coverage with discussion/debate/analysis:
  1. An interview, so cannot be used to establish notability.
  2. An interview, so cannot be used to establish notability.
  3. This works as a source.
  4. This works as a source.
  5. This is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Carmelo.
  6. This is a WP:TRIVIALMENTION of Carmelo.
  7. This works as a source.
  8. This is about the album, not Carmelo- it can be used to source the album but not establish notability.
  9. Not significant coverage.
I think you are close to proving notability under WP:NMUSICIAN, but not quite there. If you could find a couple more independent secondary sources that discuss Carmelo I think it would get over teh line.
My other advice is to format your sources proper, so they include the full URL, access date, author, etc. See the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE. Also your External Links section is too big, only include a max of two external links. See the policy at WP:EXTERNAL. The Discography is also unsourced, but you can use a primary source for this. The Insound Award award is also unsourced?
Let me know if you can fix all that, by pinging me here or my User talk page, and I will have another look.
Hope that helps. Qcne (talk) 10:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are very kind @Qcne. and your answer is very detailed.
I'll try to get through. Thank you! Kimbamy (talk) 13:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne if you can check when you have time. no hurry:)
that's what i did:
- I added 2 sources (ref 6 and 7). I think (hope) can be considered as independent. Can you check also if the format is correct? If ok I will do also the other references like that.
- I removed the external links as requested.
- The Insound Award is cited on ref 2 ( I have more references about this, in italian, if needed )
Thank you in advance Kimbamy (talk) 17:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've accepted that, I think it puts it over the line. Please add some WP:CATEGORIES :) Qcne (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much again @Qcne! Kimbamy (talk) 18:16, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:29, 21 November 2023 review of submission by Architect encyclopedia

[edit]

I published before I had written the article and it has been rejected Architect encyclopedia (talk) 21:29, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can let the reviewer know that it was not complete when you submitted it, they may reconsider.
Note that you cannot use Wikipedia articles as a references for other Wikipedia articles, see WP:CIRCULAR. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiOriginal-9: Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I removed the rejection. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Pinging Architect encyclopedia in case they aren't following this discussion. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_November_21&oldid=1187025646"