Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< November 5 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 7 >
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 6

[edit]

00:08, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Dwanyewest

[edit]

I have added the dates Anna Buhigas played professional soccer in her inbox and I can't think of any additional improvements I could make since I have provided third person sources about her career. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dwanyewest: I'm not quite sure what you mean by "third person sources", but for notability per WP:GNG, we need to see significant coverage (not just passing mentions, match reports, player stats, etc.) directly of her, in multiple secondary sources (newspapers, magazines, TV or radio programmes, etc.) that are reliable and entirely independent of her (ie. not her club or university, and not interviews or press releases or her coach commenting on her, etc.). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:16, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Kristinak98

[edit]

Hello!

I have viewed, that my draft of the "Planforge" article was declined. Please review the draft again, as it is an exact translation of the german article "Planforge": https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planforge

Thus, I don't understand, how the draft could not be accepted, as the exact same german article I translated it from, already existed on wikipedia for a long time. Furthermore, as it is a translation, it would be wrong, if I now wrote it completely different than the german one, right?

Thank you and best regards Kristinak98 (talk) 07:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kristinak98: each language version of Wikipedia is completely separate, with their own policies and requirements (and the ones here on the English-language Wikipedia are probably the strictest); therefore, whether an article exists on one, says nothing about whether the same article will be accepted on another language version. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoubleGrazing! Tanks for your reply, I will try to rewrite my draft and write a complete new article of Planforge for the English-language Wikipedia to meet its policies. Thanks! Kristinak98 (talk) 12:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:21, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Pedropaulofb

[edit]

Thank you for your review. Could you please elaborate on the aspects in which the article needs enhancements for it to be approved? Pedropaulofb (talk) 08:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pedropaulofbit seems most of it is supported with publications by the same author, Giancarlo Guizzardi and associates, but what you need are secondary sources that have written in-depth about Unified Foundational Ontology and summarize what they independently say. Please also see the WP:Neutral point of view policy. Wikipedia cannot be the mouthpiece for a single person or group's research, theories, etc. S0091 (talk) 17:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:39, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Edizengoff

[edit]

Trying to understand why the article was declined I tried to make it very similar to other book articles for example this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heather_Blazing Edizengoff (talk) 08:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edizengoff: please don't model your writing on articles that themselves have problems. You need to instead show that the book in question satisfies the relevant notability guidelines, namely WP:NBOOK / WP:BOOKCRIT, and/or WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the replay!
The book I am writing about won a major literary award and has sevral academic works written about and a film coming out based on it.
The reason it was declined was "There's lots of sources in google from reputable websites. Read some and write a decent article using them as sources." for which parts should I have used Google for?
Which parts of what I wrote werent decent? Edizengoff (talk) 08:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not Google itself you should use as a source, but sources discovered with Google. The book is indeed notable- but you still need to have multiple independent reliable sources summarized in the article. You only have one source. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are sources I have picked arent reliable enough? To prove the books has won prized I have cited the prizes webisite. Regarding the plot sumarry I have cited an academic papper and a blog why isnt that enough?
So instead of the blog should I use the book itself as source? I have looked at many other book articles which for thep lot part dont seem to cite any sources at all. Edizengoff (talk) 11:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping @Vanderwaalforces Qcne (talk) 11:24, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Qcne thanks for the ping. @Edizengoff The book/novel is notable, I must say, but you see that book you made reference to, it is also a notable one, and I guess nobody wants to nominate it for deletion because of it's status, that article is one of Wikipedia's problem page and we don't want this new one you're creating to become one that is why we want it at a better, or at least a good state. Doing a cursory search return quite a handful of useful materials that you can use to develop the article, a lot that I don't want to start listing, when you do the search yourself you'll find useful things on Google.
I hope you understand this and it helps you. Kudos! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces
Thanks for the replay I did the Google search read the book itself and read academic papers about which I refrenced in my draft so I am trying to understand how many more sources should be added and in which parts of the article do I need to cite every part of the plot summary and find correct pages in the book? Edizengoff (talk) 11:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Edizengoff As a matter of fact, if you make a statement like The novel received considerable critical acclaim, by its recognition at the Irish Book Awards in 2003 and its nomination for the prestigious International Dublin Literary Award., it should be followed by a citation to a reliable source that says, without confusion, that Oh yes! the novel truely received a critical acclaim by its recognition at the Irish Book Awards in 2003... and so on. It should not be exactly what the source states though, you should write what the source says in your own words. Also, Notably, Alison Light from The Independent provided a commendable review, stating, "McGahern conjures the warmth and decency of working people without sentimentality. should be followed by a citation too, and so on.
These are just examples of what is expected of you. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:08, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Digital.niteshsharma

[edit]

I need a assistance to guide me to post a article. Digital.niteshsharma (talk) 09:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OP blocked. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:21, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Sirius Stella

[edit]

My submission was declined. The reviewer said "close, but not enough independent, significant coverage."

I would love some more detail on what coverage is needed. I thought the references provided were enough in number from multiple independent sources. Sirius Stella (talk) 09:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sirius Stella: I haven't done a source analysis, just going by what you and the reviewer said. Note that it's not enough for the sources to be numerous, or independent, they must be at once independent and reliable and secondary and provide significant coverage of the subject directly, and there must be "multiple" (which is usually interpreted as three or more) such sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:33, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:38, 6 November 2023 review of submission by 220.253.130.93

[edit]

Hello, for the charts is it enough to cite the website that documents music placements, or do I need a reference to a chart position from a news source? Lastly, it looks like peacocking language was used early on but has been edited out - does there need to be any more tidying before this draft is resubmitted? 220.253.130.93 (talk) 10:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure you just need a source showing the chart position to establish that they've charted.
As for the rest, we don't really do pre-review reviews; to get feedback, please submit it. 331dot (talk) 10:49, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:05, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Edizengoff

[edit]

Why are sources I have picked arent reliable enough? To prove the books has won prized I have cited the prizes webisite. Regarding the plot sumarry I have cite an academic papper and a blog why isnt that enough? Edizengoff (talk) 11:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edizengoff: please don't start a new thread about the same draft, reply to the earlier one so that the conversation is all in one place. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:12, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Talhashakeel374

[edit]

How many reference add to publish Quake Services page on Wikipedia. Talhashakeel374 (talk) 12:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Talhashakeel374 Hi there, please take a look at writing your first article. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:08, 6 November 2023 review of submission by ASKanetkar

[edit]

I made my first Article on Wikipedia and want to contribute more on sample cooler topic. This topic is separate from "Steam and Water Analysis System" How can I move my draft Article to Publish it for all viewers ? I can contribute more on this topic. Kindly advice ASKanetkar (talk) 13:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ASKanetkar: it seems you have created two things, Sample cooler, which was redirected to Steam_and_water_analysis_system#Sample_coolers, as it was not a viable article and completely unreferenced. And also Draft:Sample coolers, which you have not submitted for review yet, and therefore, at this time it is not in the pipeline for publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the template required to submit your draft. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:58, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Jbobbink

[edit]

I am confused about the reasoning behind references not being accepted. Yes, I added a couple of sources like https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/tagged/health/amsterdams-bynder-bringing-cloud-based-130000325.html and https://www.bynder.com/en/about-us/ that do not comply with being "secondary". However, I do not see what is wrong with sources like https://www.forrester.com/blogs/bynders-acquisition-of-webdam-for-49-million-will-force-big-players-to-innovate/ and https://martechseries.com/content/digi-asset-mgmt/bynder-announces-strategic-acquisition-webdam-49-1-million/ Could you clarify? Jbobbink (talk) 14:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jbobbink: routine business reporting such as M&A, financial results, appointments, opening of new locations or markets, etc. does not constitute significant coverage, and in any case is invariably based on press materials supplied by the organisation and therefore not considered independent or secondary. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:26, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Jbobbink (talk) 15:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:48, 6 November 2023 review of submission by 65.215.95.162

[edit]

Given the existence of plenty of other reporters with less accomplishments, it seems strange to have Suzanne Kianpour's career be denied and considered insignificant, especially given she's both listed in Wikipedia already under other BBC reporters with Wikipedia pages for themselves.

Here are examples offered below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_BBC_newsreaders_and_reporters

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Willis_(journalist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Bland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Ghattas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Plett_Usher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Long

These briefs for other reporters list less accomplishments than Kianpour, yet aren't denied. 65.215.95.162 (talk) 15:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists. Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We don't, and you shouldn't, assess drafts by comparing them to other articles that may exist, but by determining whether they meet the relevant guidelines and policies, in this case regarding notability. If you can cite sources which satisfy the WP:GNG notability guideline, it may be possible to have an article published on this subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi IP editor. I rejected this as every source was WP:PRIMARY, so useless at establishing notability under WP:GNG. If you can substantially re-work the article to prove notability under those criteria, ping me on my user talk page and I will have another look. Qcne (talk) 17:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:41, 6 November 2023 review of submission by 2600:1700:B880:5970:9E2:FAEA:8102:807

[edit]

Draft has been rejected multiple times and need help with next steps. The page was first rejected for not enough reliable sources. I added in references to make sure the information was well-supported, but the submission was then rejected for having too many sources tied to the subject (this made sense, I did not realize that press releases by related companies were not allowed). I then reworked the page to include information only from independent news outlets and it was just rejected again. I'm a bit unsure what to do next, as I feel like I've shown that Rosen is a notable Cleveland businessman. Can you help me with exactly what next steps to take? Thank you! 2600:1700:B880:5970:9E2:FAEA:8102:807 (talk) 16:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with the latest reviewer. Interviews, passing mentions, press releases / company announcements, routine business reporting and primary sources do not establish notability per WP:GNG. I didn't find even one source among the 18 cited that contributes to that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:06, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Dkoltorcan

[edit]

Hello, I try to work on the new version of my article about Bernhard Ruchti (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bernhard_Ruchti). I understand sone of the concerns about the neutral point of view, I can easily fix this. However, I have two questions: - About the comment that is still appearing at the top that says: "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use." This is not the case and I don't understand why this comment is appearing here, I have no personal relation with the person and I am not paid by him. I don't receive any incentive or anything else. What should I do (apart from the conversation I already had with your colleague) to have this sentence removed? - About the DOB: I was told that I should prove the DOB. Usually this musicians doesn't display his full DOB online (for example on his website there is only is year of birth) but I found it in a printed program when attending one of his concerts. Can I use a printed program as source of DOB? Also, how to quote it properly so that it is considered valid for Wikipedia? For example, when I look at other musicians' Wikipedia page such as András Schiff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A1s_Schiff) there is no reference after the DOB. Thank you for your help, Dkoltorcan Dkoltorcan (talk) 17:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dkoltorcan: regarding the DOB, I don't think you can use a concert programme as a source, because it may not be available for verification, and in any case almost certainly does not qualify as reliable.
And yes, there are inevitably some articles out there where the DOB isn't referenced, in violation of WP:BLP, but this doesn't mean we should be creating more such problems. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dkoltorcan: forgot to address the paid-editing tag, but this has in the meantime been removed. I was just going to say that it isn't an unreasonable thing to suspect, given that you have uploaded the photo used in this draft as your 'own work', which suggests that you must have been at least once at close quarters with the subject, which in turn may imply some sort of connection. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is because I asked him for the authorization of using his picture. I would not use it without authorization. The Wikimedia contacted him to confirm that I had the right to use his photo and he provided the necessary paperwork. Dkoltorcan (talk) 20:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dkoltorcan he cannot authorize only you to use it or only Wikipedia to use it. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for additional information on how the photographer can donate the photo (Bernhard Ruchti is likely not the copyright holder as generally the photographer owns the copyright). Nothing at Commons suggests this has been followed as there is no indication permission has been given. S0091 (talk) 21:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is already done. It was the first step. All the paperwork has been signed and there is no issue with the media. @DoubleGrazingwas asking why I downloaded the picture, I replied. This was to reply on the paid-editing tag, which is not the case. Dkoltorcan (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean uploaded, not downloaded :) Sorry for the typos. Dkoltorcan (talk) 21:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dkoltorcan I have started a discussion on the draft's talk page and pinged you there (Draft talk:Bernhard Ruchti). The photo is not the reason for decline but a reason to suspect a conflict of interest. If you are in anyway affiliated with Ruchti then you do need to WP:DECLARE. I will post a query on your talk page to which you can respond, thus ending the discussion here. S0091 (talk) 22:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, noted, thanks. I have been told several times and I have replied. There is no conflict of interest. Dkoltorcan (talk) 22:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you have communicated with the subject, that is a conflict of interest. Articles are typically written without any involvement from, or even the knowledge of, the subject. 331dot (talk) 23:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had to ask him permission to use his picture, but apart from that there is no conflict of interest. Dkoltorcan (talk) 23:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is sufficient for a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I see. Can you redirect me to the proper action to take then? Because it was not clear to me what to do next and where to display the fact that I asked M. Ruchti's permission to use his picture? Thank you Dkoltorcan (talk) 23:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:COI, but it will be sufficient for you to just write a statement on your user page disclosing your communication with him. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. Do I need to give a link to my Draft? Or to the media itself? Dkoltorcan (talk) 23:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I found the Connected contributor section. I added it to my page. Thank you again for your help. Dkoltorcan (talk) 00:42, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:27, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Saffiulla Muhammad

[edit]

I have a physical hard copy of a newspaper article in English and Odia language. I want to show it as a reference to prove the authenticity of the person in the Wikipedia. How can I use this physical newspaper cutouts. Please help. Saffiulla Muhammad (talk) 18:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Saffiulla Muhammad authenticity is not the issue but showing the subject meets the notability guidelines. Nevertheless, you can use the "Manual" citation method and fill out all the pertinent information (author if known, publication, title, date of publication, etc.). See also WP:CITE. If you need additional help, you can ask at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:35, 6 November 2023 review of submission by 108.21.67.83

[edit]

Can you please help me create an articles about the biography of Georgios Dritsakos as a Lieutenant General of the Hellenic Air Force, a Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel of the Hellenic Air Force, and Adjutant to the President of the Hellenic Republic Constantinos Stephanopoulos? 108.21.67.83 (talk) 18:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the comment? You need to provide the source for ALL the content you have added, where did it come from? Theroadislong (talk) 21:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:09, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Ddllggpro

[edit]

I have tried to upload a well known term twice but you keep rejecting my artical. I am starting to think that you do not accept the fact that FeminISISm is real Ddllggpro (talk) 21:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ddllggpro, firstly a single post on social media does not make something 'real'. Secondly Wikipedia has articles about notable subjects, not ones that just exist. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). KylieTastic (talk) 21:13, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:05, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Luc1239

[edit]

This page was declined for submission. How can I improve the article so that it will be accepted the next time? Luc1239 (talk) 22:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have not established that this musician meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 22:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:19, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Melursus Mare

[edit]

Helllo! My draft about the magnet school called the Academies of Loudoun. It was rejected for lacking reliable sources. I'm confused about this for two reasons, the first is that many other articles in the same category and locale use the same sources I did. For example, in an article about a high school in the same district (Independence High School in Ashburn) uses sources that came from 6 different publishers, 4 of which I also cited.

Secondly, Wikipedia's reliable sources wiki states that "Similarly, the publisher's web site is likely to be reliable for the fact that the work exists". In my article, for example, I cite the school district's website that certain courses in fact are taught at the school. I frequently cited the school district's website, but only for things that were completely factual, like the population of the school.

Because of this, I'm having trouble finding a way to fix the reputability of my article, how can I do this? Melursus Mare (talk) 23:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Melursus Mare it appears this is resolved as the draft was accepted. S0091 (talk) 18:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:31, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Dubaiali

[edit]

I added real news source, could you please help me, how can make it live? Dubaiali (talk) 23:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to resubmit it for review, but you haven't addressed the issues adequately yet. Please read the messages from reviewers carefully. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:35, 6 November 2023 review of submission by GonetotheDawgs

[edit]

This is my first attempt at creating an article, and I can't tell you how much I appreciate the fast feedback, but it looks like I'm going to need some hand holding because of my inexperience. Can you tell me if the primary weakness in the article is the references contained in the following sentences, or is it something else? Thank you!

Myrlie Evers-Williams who called the book “a treasure.”

Lee Smith has called The Queen of Palmyra "the most powerful and also the most lyrical novel about race, racism and denial in the American South since To Kill a Mockingbird," and Kirkus Reviews has described "Gwin's prose [as] profound and Faulknerian in tone." GonetotheDawgs (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GonetotheDawgs it seems most of it is sources directly to her work which are not independent so not helpful. I suggest adding more reviews from reputable critics/publications, see also WP:NAUTHOR. S0091 (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:46, 6 November 2023 review of submission by Dubaiali

[edit]

Dear Sir, The article is for a film director and given authenticate news source. Could you help me please how would be the article live as it is declined. Should i change the article formate? Looking for your kind support Dubaiali (talk) 23:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_November_6&oldid=1184694531"