Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 April 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< April 6 << Mar | April | May >> April 8 >
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.


April 7[edit]

04:19, 7 April 2024 review of submission by ItsDaRetailGuy1025[edit]

Fixed References & External Links with FM Station data Template & <ref> ItsDaRetailGuy1025 (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsDaRetailGuy1025: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:40, 7 April 2024 review of submission by RDJ07[edit]

I am not even related to MVSR GROUPS LLC or Siva Raghavan M V. I am asking you why a page of Microsoft exists though it promotes or advertises the company. Similarly, Why can't a page for MVSR GROUPS LLC can't exist? I really wanted this page to be created since I like this company's products. What I should do to make this page exist? The lines that I have taken are from a page, where it is clearly mentioned, that the source of that page is from Wikipedia. So that page should also exist in Wikipedia, right? So, I wanted to create it. RDJ07 (talk) 04:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RDJ07: your draft was not only entirely promotional, it was a blatant copyright violation. It may be possible to write an acceptable draft on this subject, but this wasn't it.
Well done for reviving a long-dead account, though, I rather enjoyed that. :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thanks. Can you tell about the copyright violation. RDJ07 (talk) 06:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:20, 7 April 2024 review of submission by TaiXuan91[edit]

The reasons for rejection are ridiculous. GNU Moe is a software. I quoted GNU Moe's official website in reference. There are detailed software documents and source code download addresses on its official website. I don't know what is more reliable source than the official website for a software. TaiXuan91 (talk) 05:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TaiXuan91: this draft has not been rejected, only declined, and the reasons are not at all ridiculous. The software no doubt exists, but that is not enough for it to be included in a global encyclopaedia: we also need to see that it is notable. Notability requires significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. Your draft cites no such source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your reply. Now I know the problem is there. So what I need to add is about "notable", not just "reliable sources". But in the original review reply, "reliable" is mentioned multiple times without "notable".
This page should be declined does not imply that the original review opinion was correct. Moreover, the original review reply was unconstructive.
The original reviewer's main area of expertise was history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pbritti#A_personal_note). I don't think the reviewer would like his history paper to be sent to a physicist for review. Not to mention the opinion of physicists is to add more mathematical formulas. TaiXuan91 (talk) 05:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TaiXuan91: The original review mentions notability. You can see it in the second grey box at the top of the draft. Your history paper analogy is nonsensical and unproductive. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, wikipeida is turning into yet another bureaucracy anyway. Now that you have the power to define “nonsensical and unproductive” enjoy it. TaiXuan91 (talk) 06:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:47, 7 April 2024 review of submission by Editobd[edit]

reference source like? Google or website? Editobd (talk) 07:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Editobd: could you kindly write in complete sentences using standard English grammar; I can't understand what you're asking. In any case, I've rejected this draft, so that's the end of the road for it.
Also, you've already been warned against spamming us with this Al Amin stuff. I suggest you stop now, before you get yourself blocked. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:20, 7 April 2024 review of submission by Tbound1[edit]

First time creating Wikipedia article Tbound1 (talk) 08:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tbound1: okay... do you have a question you'd like to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I need help creating an article for an Australian Rules Football Player Tbound1 (talk) 08:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tbound1: you need to show that the subject is notable; per WP:GNG, this requires significant coverage of him, in multiple secondary sources (newspapers, magazines, books, TV or radio programmes, etc.) that are reliable and entirely independent of the subject. You also need to give us some reason as to why this person warrants inclusion in a global encyclopaedia. Merely existing isn't enough, nor is playing a bit of footy (and that's all we know, based on the single short sentence currently making up this draft). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are all the links to websites which have photos and information on Jim Thiel
https://www.redlegsmuseum.com.au/ON_FIELD/PLAYERS/THIELJames.aspx
https://australianfootball.com/players/player/jim%2Bthiel/17784 Tbound1 (talk) 08:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tbound1: primary sources don't establish notability. If that's all there is, then the subject probably isn't notable enough.
Note, though, that sources don't need to be online, so if there are old (pre-digital) newspapers etc., those can be accepted as long as they otherwise meet the reliability and other requirements. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:38:31, 7 April 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by IceStorm 54[edit]


I rewrote my draft for the lynching of george witherell but it got rejected again

IceStorm 54 (talk) 12:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Lynching of George Witherell
@IceStorm 54: your draft has been deleted as a copyright violation. You must write in your own words. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this good enough? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk?markasread=310813886&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-DoubleGrazing-20240407124400-IceStorm_54-20240407123800 IceStorm 54 (talk) 16:36, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry wrong link. This one: Draft:Lynching of George Witherell# IceStorm 54 (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:53, 7 April 2024 review of submission by Gents orge[edit]

I've cited plenty of secondary, independent sources as well as interviews conducted with the subject, not just his interviews. I'm not certain why the many publications cited don't warrant this being published. If the personal interviews were removed, would this be approved? Gents orge (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews are not independent sources so cannot be used to establish any notability likewise Facebook and assorted profile pages. You need to show how they pass the criteria at WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 16:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:07, 7 April 2024 review of submission by Jpaulsav1[edit]

hi What else needs sources? Jpaulsav1 (talk) 21:07, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpaulsav1: this draft has been resubmitted and is awaiting review, you will get feedback once a reviewer assesses it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_April_7&oldid=1218660056"