Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Line 472: Line 472:


[[User:Lochan123|Lochan123]] ([[User talk:Lochan123|talk]]) 04:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
[[User:Lochan123|Lochan123]] ([[User talk:Lochan123|talk]]) 04:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

== 11:39:21, 26 January 2021 review of submission by Graceinbusiness ==
{{Lafc|username=Graceinbusiness|ts=11:39:21, 26 January 2021|declined=Draft:Michelle_Stonhill}}
I have included Michelle's experience in dealing with trolls and negative accusations in regards to fraudulent activity.
[[User:Graceinbusiness|Graceinbusiness]] ([[User talk:Graceinbusiness|talk]]) 11:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:39, 26 January 2021

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


January 19

02:26:37, 19 January 2021 review of draft by TipsyElephant


I was hoping to publish the drafts for some podcast awards so I created Draft:2019 iHeartRadio Podcast Awards, Draft:2020 iHeartRadio Podcast Awards, and Draft:2021 iHeartRadio Podcast Awards. I based these pages on 2019 iHeartRadio Music Awards and 2020 iHeartRadio Music Awards. All three of my drafts were rejected for having WP:ROUTINE coverage, but both the 2019 and 2020 podcast pages have more sources than the corresponding year for the music awards. Would it be possible to reverse the decision to decline my drafts or is there a way that I could improve the article so that they meet notability guidelines? If not then why are the music awards notable and if they aren't should I tag those for deletion as well? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:14:41, 19 January 2021 review of submission by ThatOddEditor

Hi I would like to request for a re-review and also some pointers as to why subject matter does not qualify for notability in this sense as mentioned person has significant works in his field of expertise. Please kindly advice how I could proceed to appeal this decision. Thank you so much! ThatOddEditor (talk) 06:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, profiles and spotify are not reliable independent sources and would need to be replaced. Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:17:07, 19 January 2021 review of submission by Sadaf kashmiri

Please let me know the reason why my article has been rejected and what should I do for improvement Sadaf kashmiri (talk) 06:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As noted, your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, because it is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. That purpose is to summarize what independent reliable sources state about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. You essentially wrote a resume. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:50, 19 January 2021 review of submission by Pumpkinbanter123


Hello! I've taken the advice on the article published https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pickupp and changed the content such that its much more factual than promotional. Can I check if this works better?

Pumpkinbanter123 (talk) 09:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pumpkinbanter123 Wikipedia is not for merely telling about a company and what it does. A Wikipedia article 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. Your sources seem to be press release-type stories, announcements of routine business transactions, or announcements of what the company does. Things like that, along with staff interviews and other primary sources do not establish notability.
If you are associated with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:06:10, 19 January 2021 review of draft by Jin at Samsung Galaxy official


11:06:10, 19 January 2021 review of submission by Jin at Samsung Galaxy official

I've submitted my drafts several times, and I'll like to understand in a more specific indication to the article where I'll need to work on, to avoid multiple rounds of revision.Jin at Samsung Galaxy official (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jin at Samsung Galaxy official If you represent or work for Samsung, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you are required to make; paid editing is required to be disclosed per the Wikipedia Terms of Use.
Your draft just tells about the event you are writing about. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the event, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable event. Wikipedia is not interested in what the representatives of an event want to say about it, only in what others completely unconnected with the event have chosen to say about it. YouTube is rarely considered to be a reliable source, especially if the videos are from the subject themselves. Press releases and routine announcements are also not acceptable for establishing notability. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:47:06, 19 January 2021 review of draft by Callmejones


Hello, I would like to get my Draft reviewed again. I don't understand why the OFFICIAL Social Media couldn't be used as reliable sources, I mean they were from the OFFICIAL VERIFIED CHANNELS, so they should work. As the person is a Social Media personality, it's obvious for him to have such sources. It's not just words either, there's literally videos of him.

Anyway. I removed major parts of the social media references except two. Please review and let me know if this works.

Thanks!

Callmejones (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Callmejones, see WP:SPS. Self-published sources cannot be used to establish notability because they are not reliable sources, whether the account is verified or not. Statements on verified accounts can be used only in a few cases: see WP:ABOUTSELF. JavaHurricane 14:59, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JavaHurricane: Callmejones (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, what could be done? The person ain't getting the page now???

Callmejones, Notability on Wikipedia is determined by if the person has received significant coverage in multiple, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Additionally there are other parameters for notability mentioned at WP:BIO. If you can demonstrate that the subject passes the basic criteria of notability for people or passes the other criteria at WP:BIO, the draft may be accepted. JavaHurricane 04:11, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JavaHurricane: Callmejones (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have on him. I guess it's not enough. What do you think?

15:44:00, 19 January 2021 review of submission by Imtiyazrasoool

Thanku for reviewing tis article . I have made some changes please review it back Imtiyazrasoool (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was rejected and tagged for speedy deletion so it will not be reviewed again. Theroadislong (talk) 15:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cash Chat App Article deletion.

16:21:00, 19 January 2021 review of submission by David Waynans

I am writing an article about Cash Chat and this has been declined and deleted many times yet this is not promotional its actual and true content about Cash Chat and the history about how it started and how it has progressed with citations and references, How can i be helped.

here is the article:

Cash Chat, now mainly Known as CashChatApp, is a Ugandan Social Media, Digital advertising and Financial Technology App built for messaging, digital advertising and financial services merged in one platform. It allows users to Chat one on one,Live streaming, Make chat groups, advertise, send voice messages, make voice and video calls, and share media files. Cash Chat application runs on mobile devices accessible via only Android devices. The App service requires user to use their preferred mobile number for registering with the service.

The Cash Chat application was created by Cash Chat Limited located on Semawata Road Plot 146 Ntinda, Kampala, Uganda. The Application has options of accessing it world wide and with different user locations. However, this app services like financial services are strictly accessible by users from East African countries while other countries can only access live streaming, instant chats, advertising, Voice and Video Calls.

2017-2018 Cash Chat App was founded by Asher Namanya Asanasio a former Expert in Telecommunications, finance and technology and Roger Magezi commonly known as Tywan as a Software Engineer, these two first started as Bold Cashers which is the main wallet for financial services in early 2017 and as numbers grew Asher Namanya proposed an idea that would include financial services merged with social media and in 2017 December Cash Chat was introduced first as a web application to help bold cashers and ease communication between members and this product failed and did not work according to Asher Namanya, and thats when they started a mobile app version for ease accessibility and mobility.

In November 2018, Cash chat was launched in Nairobi where it was piloted before it could reach other countries, Uganda, Rwanda and other European countries. Cash Chat team has worked closely well with Vrinsoft Team to ensure quality product and development of the stable app versions since 2018-to-date.

Asher Namanya got the name Cash Chat, Cash to represent finance and chat to represent social media knowing that this would be easy for users to get attracted to finance and social media at the same time. Cash Chat first worked under bold cashers limited as a product and in 2020 December it has been incorporated as Cash Chat Limited to manage her own products and services and now bold cashers remains as wallet for merchants, and bulky payments and this has not ceased from operating within cash chat mobile app.

In February 2019, Cash Chat launched user earnings and digital advertising where users would benefit from the services by earning from user status, allowing users to benefit from the app by earning or sharing revenue from Ads sponsored by companies that advertise on their user status. Cash Chat has recently been upgraded upgraded to 1.19 version which has increased the number of users to more-than 500,000 within active users 250,000 monthly. Cash Chat levies some fees on using its financial digital wallet to access payments and only this is available in Uganda, rwanda and Kenya countries where by users can send money from the wallets to different Banks in Kenya, can make mobile payments to different merchants and also send money between themselves from wallet to wallet respectively. in December 2020, Cash Chat made 2 years with Expected Revenue 3.8 Billion Shillings per year and most this money comes from user wallet activations, advertising and merchant payments.

In February, Cash Chat appointed Anna Talia Oze the NBS TV presenter to be her Product Ambassador

References.

[1]


David Waynans (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ 1. KTN News, Money transfers and Payment service, Standard Media, https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/ktnnews/video/2000180498/cash-chat-a-social-media-app-that-offers-money-transfer-and-payment-services-your-money 26, November, 2019 2. Solomon Obwoto Social Media and Money, Tech Jaja, https://techjaja.com/is-the-ugandan-cash-chat-app-an-alternative-to-whatsapp-pay/, 26th/ May/2020 3. Kenneth Kazibwe, Business News-Nile Post https://nilepost.co.ug/2020/05/06/cash-chat-app-upgraded-for-effective-user-experience/, 06/May/2020 4. NewVision Media, https://www.newvision.co.ug/news/1533957/cash-chat-launches-learning-live-streaming, December,2020.

17:15:49, 19 January 2021 review of submission by 94.36.183.116

Really frustrating! I provided tens of links to independent articles and pages which talk about Space Renaissance as an organization, its publications, events, initiatives. Yes, i also inserted links to the SRI websites, papers and articles. So, please i'd like to know what is the main issue: a) there are too many references to the association's publications b) the independent sources are not considered good enough

btw, i had a look to some friend organizations wiki page, that were accepted, such as Lifeboat Foundation, the Mars Society, the Moon Society. More, i took such pages as a sample, to help my search for useful links on the web... However, their pages were accepted, the Space Renaissance International not. SRI exists since 2008, it is rather known at least within the space community, we have hundreds of published papers, and many of us use to participate to the International Astronautical Congress each year. Our papers hold a good reputation on Research Gate and Academia.edu. So, what's wrong with SRI?

Thanks for your help, dedicating your precious time to analyze our case. Kind Regards, Ad Astra! Adriano V. Autino, SRI, President

94.36.183.116 (talk) 17:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You must read the conflict of interest and paid editing policies for information on formal disclosures you must make. Other articles should not be cited as a reason for yours to exist; see other stuff exists. It is possible those articles could be problematic as well; as this is a volunteer project, it is possible to get inappropriate content by us. We can only address what we know about. I would say that the primary issue here is "b". A Wikipedia article should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization says about itself, only in what others choose to say about it. Most of your sources seem to cite the existence of papers or work you do; that's not what is being looked for. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions. I wonder if i can profit of your kindness for some more questions, to better understand the matter.

1) BEING PAID OR NOT BEING PAID I have already stated to the WP authority that i am not paid for what i do on the Space Renaissance International page. I am the president of this not for profit association incorporated under the Italian law, and the Italian law clearly forbids a president to be paid by his own association. Furthermore, i am throwing thhousands of volunteer hours into my association since its birth: I don't understand why i should want to be paid for this particular activity! Question: should i "disclose" any more proofs that i am not paid? Then i wouldn't know how to comply, since of course proofs could exist only if i were paid, the opposite is not possible.

2) SHOULD A PRESIDENT BE ALLOWED TO DEVELOP THE WP PAGE FOR HIS OWN ASSOCIATION? Now, once we (hopefully) cleared that i am not paid, the next question is: am i having a Conflict Of Interest, just because i am the president and i am doing everything as a volunteer? This seems to be a stupid question, however, believe me, i didn't understand.

3) IS IT WORTH TO KEEP ON INVESTING OUR TIME ON A WP PAGE? - I provided many references to external sources that are writing about SRI on their own, without being requested to do that. Let's call them RT-01 (Ref Type 01) - I provided many references to external sources that are publishing, or re-linking our articles, pages and papers on their own, without being requested to do that. Let's call them RT-02 - I also added links to sources that are internal to SRI, but i believe they are needed, if we want to give a portrait of the association. RT-03 - Finally, we might have some links to sources that are external, but somehow "near" the association. RT-04 The main question: should we let live only the RT-01 items? Or, maybe, the WP autority is saying that none of our supposed RT-01 are really RT-01? If so, i should give up, waiting for some real RT-01 (or, better, items accepted by the WP authority) to exist. It is paramount important for us to understand whether we should keep on investing time on a wp page, since we have a congress this year, and things to do are overhelming. https://2021.spacerenaissance.space/

Thanks a lot for your patience. Kind Regards Adriano V. Autino — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdrianoAutino (talk • contribs) 18:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:28:42, 19 January 2021 review of submission by WriticBee


WriticBee (talk) 17:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay understood. Could have replied in a polite manner. Will take into account of the feedback given. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powell Roy (talk • contribs) 16:45, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


January 20

00:13:51, 20 January 2021 review of draft by JCWrites


JCWrites (talk) 00:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hey there my name is Jeff and I'm kinda confused why the article I am trying to public is being declined, it says because it appears to be a promotion or something like that but I'm not getting paid or being told to write this. I have recently started writing articles on different sites about up and coming artists, rappers, singers, influencers, and just people who id think are good to write about. I added all the sources I got my information from and I just want to know what I need to change so that my future articles don't get declined either

JCWrites Part of the issue is that you are writing in the style of a biographical piece and not an encyclopedia article. I would suggest reviewing Your First Article and using the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia before attempting to write an article; writing an article is the absolute hardest thing to succeed at on Wikipedia, it takes much time, effort, and practice, and diving in without experience and/or knowledge usually is not successful. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

00:21:23, 20 January 2021 review of draft by JCWrites


JCWrites (talk) 00:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Question by 103.134.115.143

my article has been declined and I'm not completely sure why, I added sources and I'm not even writing about my self or promoting someone. idk what To do know

Sandeep kr.Narayan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.134.115.143 (talk) 05:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:00:25, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Charikagomeda

this is a school histiry of Vijitha Central College.why my page is not accepted ? how can i resolve and publish? Charikagomeda (talk) 07:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charikagomeda The reviewer left you a message on your draft telling you why it was not accepted. It appears that the college does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization, at least based on the sources you provided. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:01:44, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Rajinder Singh Meena

07:01:44, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Rajinder Singh Meena


Rajinder Singh Meena (talk) 07:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


07:35:45, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Rajesh84Kumar


Rajesh84Kumar (talk) 07:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I created a Wikipedia page for “North East Centre for Technology Application and Reach (NECTAR)” yesterday, and it’s been rejected continuosly. I’m new to Wikipedia and I’m having trouble understanding what I’ve done wrong. Please guide on how to get the page published.

Rajesh84Kumar Wikipedia does not have mere "pages", it has articles. Your draft has been rejected because it does not summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the center, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. In fact, you offer no sources at all. A Wikipedia article does not just tell about something. Please see Your First Article for more information.
If you are associated with this center, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

North East Centre For Technology Application and Reach (NECTAR) is already defined in the below two pages - 1. List of agencies of the government of India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_agencies_of_the_government_of_India#Department_of_Science_%26_Technology

2. Department of Science and Technology (India) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Science_and_Technology_(India)#Autonomous_S%26T_Institutions Rajesh84Kumar (talk) 09:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please place follow up comments in this existing section, instead of creating new sections. What you say is not the issue; please see my comment above. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not able to follow your instructions. Please guide. Also, let me know if the article can be published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajesh84Kumar (talk • contribs) 10:17, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rajesh84Kumar It will not be moved into the main encyclopedia until the draft does what I have stated- summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about the center. I can't do this for you. There is no deadline for drafts; if you need to take some time to learn more about Wikipedia and how it operates, I would recommend that you do so. New users who dive right in to creating articles without editing experience or learning more about Wikipedia first often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings when their work is rejected, I don't want to see that happen to you. As I stated, you must declare any conflict of interest that you have. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You might try reading Your First Article and using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 10:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:37:15, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Ttwilliams01


Ttwilliams01 (talk) 07:37, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


07:38:56, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Ttwilliams01


I would like to change the name of my draft Bishop Robert S. Williams. Can you please tell me how to do that? This is a biography.

Ttwilliams01 (talk) 07:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ttwilliams01 If you submit it for review and it is accepted, the reviewer will move the article into the encyclopedia and put it at the correct title. You could leave a note on the draft talk page about it, though. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:42:52, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Swansonnery


The last time the article was rejected was due to the topic not being relevant enough, if I am not mistaken. I believe it is not the case anymore, as the topic in question (TasteAtlas) is growing in popularity and significance year after year. The results on Google concerning TasteAtlas are great in numbers—at the moment of writing this, the number is 438,000. I have not checked the same metrics the last time, but I am certain the number has increased numerous times since the last date of submission.

If the article is rejected again due to not being relevant enough, I would greatly appreciate some more detailed explanation as to why the reviewer(s) believe that to be the case.

Thank you for your time.

Swansonnery (talk) 07:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swansonnery The draft just tells about TasteAtlas and what they do. A Wikipedia article must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Brief mentions, announcements of routine business activity, staff interviews, the company website, and other primary sources do not establish notability. As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further at this time. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 331dot, thank you for your reply and I apologize for my belated one. I must admit that I am very confused as to what constitutes a proper and notable, as you say, Wikipedia article. By pure coincidence, I have stumbled upon this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albayan_University. An article concerning a private university, containing only one sentence and a few mentions of its colleges. It is highly likely that I am not yet familiar with some of Wikipedia's standards, but I find it appalling that an article such as that one is live and accepted while the one I am trying to publish is not meeting some certain standards. Furthermore, there are many more such articles on Wikipedia that I have stumbled upon either accidentally or not over the years. While I do not believe that such extremely short (or, in my opinion, irrelevant or not notable enough) articles should be abolished or removed from Wikipedia, I can't help but formally complain like this and inquire further explanation as to why my draft does not meet certain standards when other articles clearly do not either. Thank you for your time. Swansonnery (talk) 18:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Swansonnery Please see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. The article you mention is marked as problematic. With over 6 million articles and only thousands of editors, some poor content will get by us. That doesn't mean more problematic content should be permitted, or that existing problematic content is accepted; we just haven't gotten to it yet. 331dot (talk) 20:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:25:06, 20 January 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by MellymelDot2Dot


HI. I keep submitting my article and it gets rejected only for me to be contacted by the rejector saying that they can edit it and get it accespted for a fee. One of these ( ‪KartikeyaS343) has clearly already been blocked as I can no longer access his page, but "R. Gaurav" has sent a message too to the person I am writing about. I have included this below. I would like to know more specifically what areas of my piece aer incorrect and why. Thank you for your time. Best wishes Melissa Roskell



Dear Eden, I hope you are doing well.

This email is intended for the person who is overseeing the Wikipedia article creation of "Eden Phillips". If this email has not been sent to the correct department then please forward it to the concerned person.

I have 10+ years of experience at Wikipedia. I have created more than 290 articles over the time that includes over 150 biographies of people belonging to different professions around the globe. I have complete knowledge of Wikipedia's guidelines including their deletion and inclusion policies. I have worked on Fiverr, Upwork, Guru and Freelancer.

While going through pending drafts at Wikipedia, I came across the draft of your biography that has not been reviewed for some time now. I can help you with the article publication on mainspace. I have expertise in creating encyclopedic content. I can fix the article, add more sources and followup with admins and reviewers so that the article can be reviewed and published as soon as possible. I can also expand the article with original research-based content.

Charges for my services are nominal which we can discuss once I receive a response from your end. You can hire me through any freelancing platform mentioned above. I can be hired through PayPal too. I will give details of my profiles at the freelancing platform later.

If you are interested then please send me a message for further clarification. I will explain my strategy in my next email. I will be happy to work with you. Looking forward to your response.

Regards Gaurav, R. MellymelDot2Dot (talk) 10:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:03:18, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Thecriclover99

Tried to provide many different sources, how can I get this article approved? Thecriclover99 (talk) 13:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


13:09:30, 20 January 2021 review of submission by FredBensen

Im not sure what else to add but i stongly feel this has place as a wiki article as Cromwells father in laws being a Lord of the manor shows the political sway cromwell would have had access to further more i feel it is necassary for a full article as it outlines other prominent family that were lords of the manor. FredBensen (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:16:28, 20 January 2021 review of draft by Bhorais


I have been working on creating a Wiki page on Therming'. I have gone through a few iterations on creating verifiable references in the proper format, but have still received a rejection with the following message:

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.

Can you give me some advice on how to correct any errors in the references? Also, I received the comment: Comment: Please directly cite the information within the text. SL93 (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2020 (UTC). I thought my text did a good job of directly citing the references. What am I missing?

thanks for your help

Brian Horais Bhorais (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bhorais I've removed the text of your submission as it is linked to above. 331dot (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:CITE for information on properly citing references. 331dot (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bhorais: I have done some work on the article to get it moving forward to acceptance. It still needs some work. Have a look at WP:REFB, which will help you create the references. I have did one already to get your started. I also changed the links to external links for example of the working, and added a gallery tags, so when you upload your images, you can bundle them in there and will come nice looking. If you need any further help, give me a shout. The article is mostly, it just needs in-place citations. REFB will show you howto do it. I couldn't find the images. I think they need uploaded. scope_creepTalk 17:19, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:05:30, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Imtiyazrasoool


Hello team , This is my first article, so i need some help. May you please check this draft and edit if i had done any wrong thing in it. And make sure to tell me how can i improve this article it will be pleasure for me. Thanku Imtiyazrasoool (talk) 17:05, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Imtiyazrasoool: As currently written, the draft does not indicate how WP:NPERSON is met. Press releases, routine announcements, interviews and other primary sources are of limited use. This draft would benefit from more reliable, independent sources with some coverage of the subject. See also WP:CSMN. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:49:11, 20 January 2021 review of submission by WikiEditorNumber9


Greetings

I would like to know what to do in order to have this article published, as I firmly believe in sustainability, and I am wanting to spread awareness about companies that offer sustainability in their investment packages.

Kind Regards WikiEditorNumber9 (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiEditorNumber9: I am afraid "spreading awareness" fails Wikipedia's scope. The current draft shows no evidence of WP:NCORP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:29:08, 20 January 2021 review of submission by Angusismydog

Why does this post not fit in the guidelines of Wikipedia and how does it go against the purpose of Wikipedia? Angusismydog (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for websites that launch one day. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:20, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 21

07:36:17, 21 January 2021 review of submission by Rena Mae Lee Tian

i added some references, this group is still new but they we're having big impact to the community right now here in iloilo city, philippines. i really wanna put them to wikipedia for more people to know their advocacy and be good towards animals. Rena Mae Lee Tian (talk) 07:36, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have 5 references to Facebook and one to a blog post, these are not independent reliable sources, you also have links to Instagram and Twitter, again these are not suitable, the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Theroadislong (talk) 10:25, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:46:31, 21 January 2021 review of submission by Wettujggvbb


Please help me to get the article published Wettujggvbb (talk) 10:46, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wettujggvbb The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone; a Wikipedia article must summarize what published independent reliable sources like the news have chosen on their own to say about someone, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:17:12, 21 January 2021 review of submission by אור פ


Please help me to get the article published. as per User:Scope creep think is pretty decent article now and think he is probably notable, but he think it is probably better if somebody else review's it אור פ (talk) 13:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the physician is notable for his procedure, which seems to pop up, all over the shop. scope_creepTalk 13:23, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:39:17, 21 January 2021 review of submission by Barouy13

Hello, I am reaching out again as I have updated the JumpCloud Wiki page with more key information from independent sources including product history and funding history. I would appreciate if somebody would re-review the page and let me know if it is accepted this time. Thank you. Barouy13 (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Barouy13: There's too much marketing text - it makes you look connected. Please read WP:COI just in case, and make proper disclosures if you have to. There should be no spaces between the punctuation and the references. Section titles should be sentence case, not title case. Don't include funding or detailed product info in the lead section. Put a history section first with items in chronological order. Simple milestones go in the history, but leave the more detailed technical product descriptions for a products section. Make sure everything is properly sourced. Get rid of anything that says PR or Newswire. Remove the entire recognition section. That promotional info isn't that notable in the eyes of Wikipedia, and makes you look connected, hurting your chances of getting this approved. Good luck! TechnoTalk (talk) 01:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:27:01, 21 January 2021 review of submission by Guitarfan21

Hello, I have submitted a new article (Positive Grid) for review. The yellow "article submitted/ please be patient" box appeared very briefly at the top of the page but then disappeared, so I'm not sure if there was an error or if my article is really in the review queue. Any way to tell? Many thanks! Guitarfan21 (talk) 20:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Guitarfan21: aparently you didn't follow the instructions to the end. I am going to submit it for you now. Please make sure to follow the instructions to the end next time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:17:39, 21 January 2021 review of submission by CaliKatie

Hi - This is my first article creation and I believe the references are solid and meet the Wiki guidelines. Roy is a very accomplished artist and has several news and magazine articles that have been written about him. I selected the stronger ones as citations that also confirmed statements made in his bio (ie. award winner). The page was declined due to references not meeting requirements and I don't understand why? Perhaps I missed something and one or two references don't meet the requirements but I have seven references listed, including the Los Angeles Times. Can someone please help me to understand the error so we can get Roy listed on the Wiki as he should be. Thank you! CaliKatie (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CaliKatie: I made some modest improvements to the article, but couldn't find anything more significant in the sourcing department. What's there now isn't quite enough to demonstrate notability. For example, the first LA Times piece is good, but the other article is listed as an opinion piece in a local satellite publication, but it's not the main LA Times. I think the challenge is that there's not a lot of media covering surfer art. I thought for sure there's be more about the Etta James album cover, and put in the only source I could find, but even that is a bit promotional. You can keep hunting to see if you find anything more to add. TechnoTalk (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 22

07:45:09, 22 January 2021 review of submission by Dailogian

My article reference to the journal that has been published on international Journal Could you give me some advice regarding which part of my article that should be deleted so that it does not look like an advertisement?

Dailogian (talk) 07:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dailogian The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There is nothing that you can do to change that. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:23:02, 22 January 2021 review of submission by Intern Communication

Good morning, I am writing because my draft was rejected because the text I entered did not contain citations of sources. I would therefore like to ask you whether it is necessary for a text to cite sources in order to be approved or whether it is possible to insert a text, in my case the biography of a journalist, freely, without the need to use external sources.

Intern Communication (talk) 11:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Intern Communication Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources state about a subject, in this case, a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. All information in an article must be sourced, especially in an article about a living person, which has its own special rules. Wikipedia is not a place like social media to just tell about a person.
If you are associated with this person, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing. I would also suggest that you change your username to be more individualistic(your real name is not required) and not that of a position. I've posted how you can do that on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:04:58, 22 January 2021 review of draft by Nilabh Shivam Thakur 2


Nilabh Shivam Thakur 2 (talk) 13:04, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nilabh Shivam Thakur 2 You don't ask a question. You have submitted your draft and it is pending review. This may take some time. 331dot (talk) 13:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:19:09, 22 January 2021 review of submission by Rk2515

why my articla is not appoved. ? i have already follow all your WP:NFILM notability. and my film is in pre production film and is also listed in the international film database(imdb) you can check this link(riturn ticket) too. and star cast is already in wikipidia. plz accept this. Rk2515 (talk) 16:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rk2515: I don't think you read all of WP:NFILM, because one portion of it, found at WP:NFF says: "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles, as budget issues, scripting issues and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. The assumption should also not be made that because a film is likely to be a high-profile release it will be immune to setbacks—there is no "sure thing" production."
Thus, you shouldn't be submitting an article about a film if you can't prove that filming began. "Pre-production" doesn't matter to us. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:20:28, 22 January 2021 review of draft by Dsalerno


Dsalerno (talk) 16:20, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I'm trying to get feedback on a recently submitted page. My impression is that I would do well to use the sandbox before re-submitting the page for re-review. You can find a link to the page below: 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rose_Matsui_Ochi

Is the sandbox the appropriate venue to request help with the page, or would this 'help desk' be able to review the page prior before I resubmit it?

Well wishes.

Due to how recently they passed, this article would fall under biographical protections, and as such the presence of unsourced claims is going to result in a decline. A reviewer has also noted it's not neutrally written. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 18:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:38, 22 January 2021 review of draft by Rk2515


why you remove my image its my own work if not belive you can find in intire internat.

Rk2515 (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rk2515: You didn't specify what image you're talking about, so it's hard to help you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Rk2515: I assume you refer to c:File:Return Ticket (2021).jpg. FYI, the argument that an Image is yours because it appears on the entire internet is a particular bad one, as this makes OTRS permission nearly required. Hence, I have a question: Are you realy the creator of that movie poster? Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even if they were, I find it unlikely that the studio wouldn't have made them give up their rights as a work-for-hire. Also, Rk2515 should be aware that if that was their own work, they are effectively releasing that high resolution image into the Creative Commons. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:52:29, 22 January 2021 review of submission by Martymcflys

Hello, Can I edit more notable information on her article? Martymcflys (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's written in a highly promotional tone and contains strange statements, like that she has "five combined" children. Are they strapped together, or did she use glue to combine them? I'm guessing she used glue, since her education is in "collage". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:50:21, 22 January 2021 review of submission by JoshKaine

I'm requesting a re-review because I've added more reference's for the subject. JoshKaine (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All you've added are paid for spam sources. Those are not acceptable CUPIDICAE💕 23:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added more references to the subject
JoshKaine (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JoshKaine: You didn't add any new references since you opened this help request. Thus, your question has already been answered. Note also my comments on your talk page, since your multiple help requests are beginning to be disruptive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 23

Mikhail Lebedev

We urgently need a Wikipedia article on the famous neuorscientist, Mikhail Lebedev. Can you please finish the article on Mikhail Lebedev this weekend? It needs to be nominated as a good or featured article within 30 days. I Already started. Please see Draft:Mikhail Lebedev (neuroscientist). — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 01:04, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you posting this or similar notices on dozens of user talk pages and other locations? --Kinu t/c 01:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am new. I need to see how I can get this article approved and featured. This guy studies human robots and living forever. It is like a sci-fi movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 02:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first step would be to create a properly-sourced draft that indicates how the subject meets notability criteria, such as WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:ACADEMIC, etc. A single paragraph that is ostensibly WP:REFBOMBed is not a proper encyclopedia article. --Kinu t/c 02:05, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can you write this first article for me and I will learn from it? I am new and have never done this before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 02:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, because I do not believe the subject is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. If you think otherwise, then be bold and feel free to ask for assistance. However, posting the same message on multiple editors' talk pages, asking them to do your work for you with an apparent demand that such an article "needs to be nominated as a good or featured article" by a certain deadline, is considered poor form. --Kinu t/c 02:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Weirsky

I wrote an article about a highly notable man, in fact one of the most notable men in New Jersey and approval is being delayed. Please expedite approval. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Weirsky

Given the thread you started above and this one, I suggest you read WP:NOTABILITY before creating more drafts. --Kinu t/c 02:18, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop the Steal

I decided to start writing about topics that do not involve people. Can someone send me some guidelines to make https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stop_the_steal better? I apologize if my drafts are not very good. This is my first day being an article writer. In a month or two, I will have some good articles and in six months, I should have a featured article if I work hard to improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LotteryGeek (talk • contribs) 02:56, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:49:01, 23 January 2021 review of draft by Funmazing

I am requesting help on my page because want someone else to look over it improve as it is not very good, and I am new at wikipedia.

Funmazing (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:19:25, 23 January 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Coffee4you


Hi team, my request to create page has declined even after having required criteria. I am submitting articles on the name photojournalist Arun Sharma, who is senior photojournalist with Press trust of India. I have attached his published work. In the references I have attached articles which carries Arun Sharma’s work pictures. Please see how I am not able to publish this article. Thanks Coffee4you (talk) 05:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Coffee4you (talk) 05:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:32:26, 23 January 2021 review of submission by Sj1233

Because my article is a notable one and have provided correct information other than facebook and youtube.

Sj1233 (talk) 07:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sj1233: hm... Apart from YOuTube and Facebook I see one other source in an arabian language that I can't read. I am afraid that this draft currently fails WP:NPERSON let alone WP:BLP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:11:25, 23 January 2021 review of submission by Jaya Soorya 24


I have made a draft for a popular person and needs help with reliable soreces. I would be thankful to you , if u could help.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aranthangi_Nisha Jaya Soorya 24 (talk) 11:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:30:03, 23 January 2021 review of submission by 72.50.16.105

72.50.16.105 (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP User 72.50.16.105. You haven't asked a question so i don't know specifically what you would like help with but I did notice that your draft doesn't have any citations so it will be rejected at least until that is resolved. --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:40, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:30:26, 23 January 2021 review of submission by 72.50.16.105

72.50.16.105 (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP User 72.50.16.105 - since you've worked on a few drafts but haven't specified which one you're asking about, or asked a question then we wont be able to help you. Please give us a bit more info on what you'd like help with. --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:37, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:59:14, 23 January 2021 review of submission by Akpalok2006

Why my article was rejected? - Akpalok2006 (talk) 13:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akpalok2006. Wikipedia only accepts biographies of people shown to be notable, you can read the notability criteria for here. Also even if the subject was notable, your draft did not cite any sources at all - so it would also have been rejected for that reason. --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:02:57, 23 January 2021 review of submission by Betahatdelta

My draft was rejected by a wikipedia editor and the reason given to me was that the subject is not notable and there aren't enough citations. I am working to research and find more citations but I was wondering how this article on a similar and contemporary poet here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirendranath_Chakravarty got accepted but my article on Krishna Dhar did not. Thanks. Betahatdelta (talk) 15:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bethahatdelta To avoid duplication of effort, please only use one method of seeking assistance. I have not yet looked at your draft, but please see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about; as such other similar content existing does not mean your content can exist too. It could be that this other article is inappropriate as well. 331dot (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 24

04:42:58, 24 January 2021 review of submission by Kkmal.Hamouda

My article was waiting and is expected to be accepted. No contrary to the wikipedia purposes. It does satisfy all 4 purposes and is open for editing by public by using (Edit semi-protected) . Someone tried to hide my article by redirecting, his name #TakuyaMurata and not acceptable not to find it. I request finalizing the acceptance of my article. My article is accepted for waiting of 3+ months. Please for any editing use (Edit semi-protected). This is open to public and all. Thanks Kkmal.Hamouda (talk) 04:46, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kkmal.Hamouda (talk) 04:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kkmal.Hamouda: You've added duplicate, messy requests here, which have created need for cleanup. See these three edits, which resulted in a blank heading at top, and then, basically, a repeated comment at the bottom of what you were trying to articulate in the middle. Note the FOUR signatures you added? Also, it's unclear to me what exactly you're complaining about. If you're talking about this edit from 12 January 2021, that was reverted, so it's not clear what your problem is. Also, is there a reason why you've used two different user accounts to edit this article? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kkmal.Hamouda: your draft reads like a how-to guide, as if you've tried to draft a page from a high-school calc textbook. Wikipedia is not a how to guide, and that's what makes your draft contrary to Wikipedia's purpose (which is to be an encyclopedia). Since it has been rejected, it is not going to be accepted. You might find such content at WikiHow or even on Wikibooks but obviously both of those projects have their own quality standards that you'd need to adhere to (and obviously wouldn't accept something like a by-line on a Wiki page). --Paul ❬talk❭ 09:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:07:43, 24 January 2021 review of submission by 60.229.148.166

Because it is notable enough. Trust me. 60.229.148.166 (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't ask a question, but we don't rely on editors' assertions. We only care what reliable secondary sources would say. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:24, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:55:06, 24 January 2021 review of submission by Aban0001

(UTC)

This is my first wikipedia article and I wrote about someone whose writing I have been following for some time. However, it has been declined twice, inspite of providing very credible links etc. The reason ascribed is that it does not meet notability guidelines. However, I see that there are wiki pages for far less notable people ( see Mathures Paul or Tarapada Basu), and I am not really sure of what is needed to meet wiki's notability guidelines - the subject of this article is a published author and a senior journalist. Can you advise how this article can be improved to the same standards as applied for Mathures Paul or Tarapada Basu, please? I am unable to consider further articles until I clearly understand what is needed, so your help will be appreciated.

Aban0001 (talk) 05:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Aban0001: Welcome to Wikipedia! The draft you submitted does not show WP:SIGCOV in the references, which is required to meet WP:NBIO. None of the sources linked talk about the subject in depth. The draft also fails WP:MINREF. Looking at other articles as examples of why your article should be included is a bad argument (explained at WP:WAX), but I will do my best to answer. Tarapada Basu has received the Padma Shiri, which is a major accomplishment and therefore meets WP:ANYBIO point 1. While this does not guarantee notability, it provides a strong argument for why the article should exist. In the case of Mathures Paul, the article was started over a decade ago when notability guidelines were not enforced as well as they are today. The article has a banner at the top noting that the subject may not be notable. If you feel the subject is not notable, you could start a deletion discussion at WP:AFD. I also wanted to note and get your response on the fact that other editors have identified you as a possible undisclosed paid editor, which is a conflict of interest. See WP:COI and WP:PAID for more information. Please WP:PING me if you reply here. AviationFreak💬 07:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:AviationFreak Thanks for the comprehensive response. I am assuming that being the first Indian Female Konrad Adeneur Fellow, or being recognised as Emerging Leader in Asian Journalism by KAS, or being the Editor / Head of digital media of an international news portal does not qualify for notability parameters. Noted, thanks Aban0001 (talk) 14:35, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:08, 24 January 2021 review of submission by Ajjj11

I have been trying to get this page online but every time I am not able to do it. Please review the article and help me taking it public. The person mentioned in the article has been contributing his bit to the film industry, having worked for more than a decade and 20 plus films. Having mentioned all the sufficient references still the article keeps declining. Please review it and help me know what stuff is missing in the article. Ajjj11 (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please wait for it to be reviewed. You've been declined only once, and you just submitted it for a second time eight minutes ago. Posting here will not speed up the process. Pahunkat (talk) 15:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined for a third time, with a warning that continued submission without radical improvement will be treated as tendentious editing. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:15:52, 24 January 2021 review of submission by Jackignore

Hello guys, I am new to wikipedia. I don't know why this article rejected. Can you please help me? Thanks. Is there a way to make it eligible? Jackignore (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jackignore The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. As noted on your draft, it appears that the person does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know but Hackernoon is a news website and it's also in wikipedia and google news. How can I make that article notable?Jackignore (talk) 08:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackignore:. The nature of Hackernoon, and whether it is in Wikipedia or is indexed by Google News is irrelevant. The cited Hackernoon pages were written by Nima Owji. Nothing written by him can demonstrate that he is notable. The draft has been rejected because no amount of editing can make the topic acceptable. Therefore volunteers do not intend to review it again. Move on to a different topic, or consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for your writing. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:08, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Jackignore, Hackermoon may be notable but notability is not inherited. JavaHurricane 15:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:39:54, 24 January 2021 review of submission by Ishan3011


Ishan3011 (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:43:23, 24 January 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Harriett Type


I want my deleted wiki page to be reinstated so that I can fix it according to the feedback that I received from the reviewer. I understand the comments and will fix the content.

Harriett Type (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An unambiguous copyright infringement is unlikely to be reinstated. Theroadislong (talk) 21:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can safely say it is more than unlikely, the chances are close to zero. You can't "fix" a copyright violation. 331dot (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:05:10, 24 January 2021 review of submission by 79.97.141.188

The content of this submission is verifiably factual, and undisputed 79.97.141.188 (talk) 22:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But rejected many times as not notable evidently. Theroadislong (talk) 22:08, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:04:46, 24 January 2021 review of submission by LeGoldenBoots


LeGoldenBoots (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. The subject's own website and LinkedIn do not count a whit for notability as Wikipedia defines the term. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 23:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know and I didn't write his LinkedIn and Website as a refrence. I only refrenced Hackernooon. It's on Wikipedia too!Jackignore (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 25

01:23:52, 25 January 2021 review of draft by John T Ghillie


Subject is the foremost authority as author and instructor on tactical Firefighting and the books published assist Firefighters globally. His co-worker/author Shan Raffel has Wikipedia page, so can't understand as Author of three textbooks in field and previous expertise, lecturing at international conferences etc that subject is not notable? Can you advise? Would shorter article focusing on as textbook author satisfy criteria more easily?


John T Ghillie (talk) 01:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your citations are not properly done. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to cite sources in Wikipedia, and WP:Biographies of living persons for why we are insistent on sourcing this article properly. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 01:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:54:53, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Kemmiiii


Kemmiiii (talk) 02:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC) I am requesting another review because the subject meets the notability criiteria both generally and for an actor. Also the fact that her fellow housemates on [brother naija]; [[1]] and [[2]] also have Wiki pages despite being more popular and more accomplished than they are. --Kemmiiii (talk) 02:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kemmiiii: You make this assertion rather confidently, but if I were to start going through the article and deleting content supported by weak references, such as blogs and user-generated sites like IMDB, I think most sources and content would be deleted. Her birthplace is attributed to IMDb, so that fails WP:UGC and is a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY. Her schooling is attributed to the school she attended, which fails WP:BLPPRIMARY. The random YouTube links I've clicked on in the article are not from verified channels, so they could be copyright violations. So I'm struggling to see where any of the remainders are from major mainstream sources, or how any of them are all reliable, independent and talk about the subject in significant detail. Anyway, I'm not asking you any questions, I'm just trying to explain the likely reasons why it was rejected. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. These points are noted and will be rectified. Kemmiiii (talk) 07:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 03:31:28, 25 January 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Harish139


Hi, hope you are doing good. I have been working on an article titled 'Chandramouli Gaddamanugu', who is the project director for Akash Missle. But, the article is getting rejected the reviewers multiple times stating that the references are not sufficient. My point here is that he is a project director for Akash missile for which Wikipedia page is already there. In that case, I think he is also eligible to get a Wikipedia page. WHen it comes to the references, I have already provided sufficient references to support my copy. Please hep me out with this issue. Thanks.

Harish139 (talk) 03:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Harish139: Hello! The reason that your submission has been repeatedly declined is that its references do not show significant coverage of the subject. Notability is generally not inherited, meaning that a subject is not notable purely because of their affiliation with something notable (in this case, the Akash missile). If you have questions, please WP:PING me here or reply on my talk page. AviationFreak💬 05:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:39:25, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Sheichey


Sheichey (talk) 03:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please reconsider the edited content. I deleted the advertisement part of the content. Please let me know if I have more items to delete or revise.

@Sheichey: This article would need to be essentially rewritten to properly contain a neutral point of view. Even if it were rewritten, the sources currently in the article do not show notability. Most are advertisements, and the last one is a self-published source. AviationFreak💬 04:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:57:52, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Sheichey


Sheichey (talk) 06:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the content with notable Parent Company reference and an article from Property Report PH that we are a housing brand.

Sheichey Wikipedia is not a place to just tell the world about something. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Press releases, announcement of routine business, brief mentions, staff interviews, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Please see Your First Article.
You will need to read the conflict of interest and paid editing policies and make the required declarations. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:11:19, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Imonboss


Imonboss (talk) 09:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:45:09, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Risa Kuribayashi

Please let me know the reason why my article has been rejected and what should I do for improvement. Thank you.

Risa Kuribayashi (talk) 11:45, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Risa Kuribayashi. The reasons the draft has been declined are contained within the large pink boxes at the top of the draft, and the policies and guidelines to which they link. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. The draft cites no sources. Help:Referencing for beginners may assist you if the problem is simply that you don't understand how to cite sources, but nothing written in the draft suggests Yanagi has accomplished anything that would make him suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:15:47, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Ritikr019

Please let me know the reason why my article has been rejected and what should I do for improvement? 

Thank you.

Ritikr019 (talk) 12:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ritikr019. The reasons the draft has been declined are contained within the large pink boxes at the top of the draft, and the policies and guidelines to which they link. YouTube and Facebook are generally unreliable sources. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. The draft cites none. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also Ritikr019, it seems you have written an autobiography. Please note that Wikipedia discourages autobiographies primarily as Wikipedia articles must be neutral in tone. Additionally, do note that Wikipedia is none of the following: a platform for promotion or advertising, a social network like LinkedIn, a web host. I hope you can understand why the draft was declined. JavaHurricane 15:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:15:36, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Conifigueroa


My article was declined by Sulfurboy saying "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you."

But i don't fully understand what should i fix, i have 11 footnotes with references. What is wrong specifically? I'm new on wikipedia, actually this is my first article

i hope you can help me!

Thank You!!

Conifigueroa (talk) 13:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Conifigueroa: The minimum standard for inline citations is laid out at WP:MINREF. Basically, most claims need a citation so that readers can easily identify the source of a piece of info. Information on this draft requiring inline citations would include the first paragraph and last sentence of "Early life," citations for each point in "Education," his lead roles, etc. However, as other reviewers have noted, you have provided no indication that this subject meets WP:NMUSICIAN. To respond, please WP:PING me here or reply on my talk page. AviationFreak💬 15:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:02:27, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Vagabond-PRVienna

Not sure if the draft will finally be reviewed. I made the draft: Lüftner Cruises several days ago but I am not sure if it was "correct". I found out, that i have to add some sort of code, but I am still not sure if it is listed now or again not. I also don't know where I can look it up or where I can find the status or even in which position the draft is. Is there any possibility to check all the information regulary and to find out when or even if the article can be published? Vagabond-PRVienna (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vagabond-PRVienna Before you worry about that, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing, and make the required declaration.
You may resubmit it by clicking the "resubmit" button in the notice at the top of the draft, but it will be rejected again unless you address the concerns. 331dot (talk) 16:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:01, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Powell Roy


Powell Roy (talk) 16:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I have written genuinely on my progress as an amateur travel blogger in Malaysia with appropriate resources. My work has been noted by many local travel bloggerd/ companies. Please consider to post information on my travel blog.

Powell Roy Wikipedia is not for you to tell the world about your blog. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources say about you blog on their own, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notable web content. If it is notable, ideally you shouldn't be the one to write about it due to your conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:27:32, 25 January 2021 review of draft by Emremer


Emremer (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Emremer: Do you have a question? An editor independent of me already determined that the draft is the original source, and I added {{backwards copy}} to the draft talkpage so others can see it. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:31:23, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Harshit603


Harshit603 (talk) 19:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Harshit Agrawal (Born 29 October 2002) is a student and Indian politician. A member of NSUI.

Biography Born in Bhayandar, Maharashtra. He spent his early childhood between Mumbai, Maharashtra and Guna, Madhya Pradesh and stayed away from the public sphere for much of his childhood and early youth. He attained primary education in Jaipur, Rajasthan and Silvassa, Dadra Nagar Haveli. He began his undergraduate career at University of Mumbai.

References www.instagram.com/_real.photographer_

www.twitter.com/nsuiHarshit

and therein lies the problem zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:56:31, 25 January 2021 review of submission by Barouy13

Hello, I recently received advice on here as to how to make the draft of JumpCloud better & more likely to be published. I implemented all of the edits recommended which includes the following: Removed marketing text, removed spaces between the punctuation and the references, changed section titles to sentence case, removed funding info in the lead section, put a history section first with items in chronological order, made sure everything is properly sourced, got rid of anything that says PR or Newswire and removed the entire recognition section. I'd love to get this draft approved, let me know if there is anything I can do to increase my chances. Thank you!


Barouy13 (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


January 26

01:09:06, 26 January 2021 review of submission by Ringsidemd1961


Ringsidemd1961 (talk) 01:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have made all the corrections, additions and edits requested. In addition, the draft was also just edited again by a reviewer and additional changes were made. Can you please tell me what other changes need to be made prior to the draft being eligible for a permanent article? This is my first attempt at creating, so any advice is appreciated. Thank you https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:Harold_Lloyd_Schwartz&oldid=1002084799

02:34:13, 26 January 2021 review of submission by 2601:586:C401:660:5566:E251:8B9A:9F1F


2601:586:C401:660:5566:E251:8B9A:9F1F (talk) 02:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Can I please fix the issues and submit it again. The old articles that were didn't have the sources, that's why they were deleted. This new article has good sources.[reply]

04:34:48, 26 January 2021 review of draft by Jayjay2020



I was hoping to publish the drafts for Draft:Rosanna Roces and Draft:List of 2021 PBA season transactions because I putted available and verified informations and sources for these two drafts. Jayjay2020 (talk) 04:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:57:33, 26 January 2021 review of draft by Lochan123


Lochan123 (talk) 04:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:39:21, 26 January 2021 review of submission by Graceinbusiness

I have included Michelle's experience in dealing with trolls and negative accusations in regards to fraudulent activity. Graceinbusiness (talk) 11:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1002868749"