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
Line 620: Line 620:
:*https://web.archive.org/web/20180817161209/https://manjaro.org/2017/09/02/maintenance-phasing-out-i686-support/ - Not reliable, as it is a forum.
:*https://web.archive.org/web/20180817161209/https://manjaro.org/2017/09/02/maintenance-phasing-out-i686-support/ - Not reliable, as it is a forum.
:If you can find more sources that are reliable, independent and in-depth, add them and it may be accepted if notability can be proved. Unfortunately, as DoubleGrazing said, it will not be accepted in it's current form. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Thanks, [[User:EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#b257f7">echidnaLives</span>]] - [[User talk:EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#fcaa3f">talk</span>]] - [[Special:Contributions/EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#3f78fc">edits</span>]] 07:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
:If you can find more sources that are reliable, independent and in-depth, add them and it may be accepted if notability can be proved. Unfortunately, as DoubleGrazing said, it will not be accepted in it's current form. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Thanks, [[User:EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#b257f7">echidnaLives</span>]] - [[User talk:EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#fcaa3f">talk</span>]] - [[Special:Contributions/EchidnaLives|<span style="color:#3f78fc">edits</span>]] 07:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
::Hi :)
::thanks guys for the quick responses!
::just one point to add: https://archlinux.org/pacman/ is just a tool (i.e. a package manager) which is used in that linux distribution and so referencing the creator of that tool should be not an issue (afaiu). it is more to provide details about what's inside.
::ok back to my q. I am asking about these sources for example:
::* in the print media "LinuxUser 04/2019" (https://www.linux-community.de/magazine/linuxuser/2019/04/) (german only)
::* online article of that print media: https://www.linux-community.de/ausgaben/linuxuser/2019/04/brueckenbauer/ (german only)
::* https://appuals.com/launch-forget-windows-use-linux-fwul/
::* https://www.linuxadictos.com/en/fwul-olvidate-de-windows-y-pasate-a-linux-para-trabajar-con-android.html
::* https://www.xda-developers.com/forget-windows-use-linux-is-a-usb-bootable-distro-for-your-android-recovery-needs-xda-spotlight/
::* https://www.xda-developers.com/usb-bootable-linux-android-recovery-fwul/
::* https://www.fossmint.com/forget-windows-use-linux-distro/
::* https://fossbytes.com/forget-windows-use-linux-fwul-linux-distro-for-android/
::Is that enough to become ''notable''?
::do I have to remove the forum links then or can (should) they stay? [[User:SteadfasterX|SteadfasterX]] ([[User talk:SteadfasterX|talk]]) 09:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:01, 16 November 2022

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


November 10

01:33:32, 10 November 2022 review of draft by Rickbenzel


Thanks for any help you can give. I have published a draft of an article about a noteworthy entrepreneur in southern California who has won many awards and deserves a Wikipedia page. I am a writer he hired to have me create his page. I have footnoted the appropriate content in his entry. I was trying to link some terms in the entry to existing Wikipedia pages, such as the mention in his entry to the EB-5 Program and the SBA 505 Program, both of which have existing Wiki entries. But I could not figure out how to do that. I have linked his companies to their external websites and that seems fine, but I wanted to show that he links to existing Wiki pages too. Can you show me how to do a link to an existing Wikipedia page?

Rickbenzel (talk) 01:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To link to another Wikipedia article(the preferred term for parts of the encyclopedia) or other page(like policy pages), place the title of the target page in double brackets. [[Joe Biden]] becomes Joe Biden. 331dot (talk) 01:49, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on Draft:Dennis_Schleicher

I cannot figure out how to add the hyperlinks with the references to the associated News and media articles.

73.238.217.156 (talk) 02:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can refer to this page Wikipedia:Citation templates that show different styles and type of citations. ww2censor (talk) 10:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:15:45, 10 November 2022 review of submission by Saloniisachdeva

I am requesting a re-review because the details I have entered in my draft are valid as per my knowledge and the references. Also, I am unable to find the mistake due to which the draft is being rejected. Saloniisachdeva (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saloniisachedega The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There is nothing that you can do about this, as no amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:56:08, 10 November 2022 review of draft by AEIR22


AEIR22 (talk) 13:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question, @AEIR22? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This draft as writ is advocacy rather than a neutrally-written encyclopaedia article. We don't accept manifestos. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 16:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:23:19, 10 November 2022 review of draft by Rnewenergy5


Hello support, thanks for reviewing this article. This should be the third change made to the article and it's still declined. I'd like you to be of assistance on how better I can write the article with the true events provided so it's worthy of approval.

I will be very grateful if my request is granted.

Thanks.Rnewenergy5 (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rnewenergy5 (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rnewenergy5: you need to write it in a neutral manner, avoiding spin and peacockery, such as the expressions 'pioneer', 'expansive', and 'spurring economic development'. While you're at it, you should also remove irrelevant content such as the list of board directors (I'm sure they would love to have their names included in a global encyclopaedia, but this is of no interest to us).
I also don't think, based on a quick glance, that the sources cited establish notability per WP:ORGCRIT, but I haven't analysed them in any detail. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DoubleGrazing, your prompt reply is well noted and goes a long way. I will update the article as advised and resubmit it for review. Thanks once again. Rnewenergy5 (talk) 16:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:51:47, 10 November 2022 review of submission by Bfcc3456


Review for one more time

Bfcc3456 (talk) 17:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bfcc3456: this draft has been rejected and is in the process of being deleted, hence it won't be reviewed again. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bfcc3456 please declare your conflict of interest. You're on the precipice of being blocked for repeated, inappropriate creation Star Mississippi 18:29, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

23:05:05, 10 November 2022 review of submission by 2402:3A80:1C52:454F:3D6B:A4CA:5388:49CE


2402:3A80:1C52:454F:3D6B:A4CA:5388:49CE (talk) 23:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anything (1) Chowdhury controls or otherwise has influence over or (2) is about his company and not him is useless as a source for notability and for biographical claims. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 11

02:14:30, 11 November 2022 review of submission by 174.27.66.83


174.27.66.83 (talk) 02:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC) Why did you reject this page? Why do you think that this is a clear case of WP:CRYSTAL? This is a page with refs and you are serious? Okay, please answer.[reply]

As it has been explained, this fails Wikipedia's crystal ball policy. Nothing about Windows 12 has been confirmed, and it is all based on rumours. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 03:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:26:49, 11 November 2022 review of submission by WikiHow0

I feel like this is still capable of being accepted WikiHow0 (talk) 02:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiHow0: No, this subject is not notable. Please do not attempt to resubmit again. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 03:00, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
you got it, sorry for resubmitting it. WikiHow0 (talk) 03:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:48:06, 11 November 2022 review of submission by Septemberam1988


Septemberam1988 (talk) 02:48, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Also help me to write an article about Digav Aaditya Singh Rajput.

@Septemberam1988: the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You resubmitted without making any significant changes, and none of the references in the draft establish notability. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 03:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:36:42, 11 November 2022 review of submission by LRExpertsen


Get my article published - How to improve references?

Hello. I wrote the following article (Sandbox), but Wikipedia declined its publication. It is about LatamReady, a solution provider company of Oracle NetSuite ERP.

Wikipedia declined it because the references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia Article. In the message, they say the sources don't have 1)in-depth, 2)reliable, 3)secondary, or 4)independent.

However, I edited the article by adding new well-known references such as New York Times and The Guardian, but Wikipedia rejected the article.

LRExpertsen (talk) 15:36, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LRExpertsen You have gotten a reply at the Teahouse, please only use one method of seeking assistance at a time, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 16:19, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LRExpertsen You are now on your third warning for potential WP:UPE. The question is a mandatory question. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:53:40, 11 November 2022 review of submission by Technologysam

Hello! I wrote a userspace draft about the new splatoon 3 idols, (similar to Pearl and Marina). It was declined when I sent it through the AfC process. From what I understand, it is a sourcing issue. I have a few questions:

  1. I assume that the article does not have enough sources to be published, is that the issue?
  2. I also wonder if the Newsweek article I used as a source is reliable. I saw on the "Perennial sources" list that after 2013 the articles that they had published had a little more clickbate, I am wondering if the one i linked to is good or not.

Btw, The article is at Draft:Shiver, Frye, and Big Man Thanks a lot for your help! -Technologysam (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC) Technologysam (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@technologysam: you need at least 2 or 3 sources, not just 1. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 04:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:05:56, 11 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Arosa


Two editors believe the draft might merit to be an article but that it's incomplete. I believe it merits to be an article. Can it be moved somewhere so others can add more to it? It would be wasteful to let it die so somebody else has to start all over. Arosa (talk) 23:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Arosa: there is nowhere better to move this to than the draftspace, which is the preferred location for drafts in development. It has been tagged with the WikiProject Computer science template; feel free to tag it with other relevant ones, if any, in case that draws some more attention to it. But ultimately the onus is on the draft creator to create a viable article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Arosa, this has circulated mostly through internal publications (Microsoft) and self-published papers. There aren't enough reliably published sources for an article. Consider incorporating it into the Compiler article. Make sure what you are saying is correct. The law is about compilers. What supports your leading statement that the law is a rule of thumb in computer science that says that programmer time spent on optimization might be misspent. I don't see that in the sources. StarryGrandma (talk) 17:26, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@StarryGrandma @DoubleGrazing

I'm certain I'm misformatting this reply and botching this procedure. Does this link count as not internal and not self published? https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/900525 If so, can one of you add it? Arosa (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Arosa, no. It is just a link to the abstract, with no information on how to even locate the paper, not a link to an article in a peer reviewed journal. It is just Technical Report CS-2001-12 from his department of Computer Science. Think about how to make this an article of several paragraphs, or a section of another article with a redirect to it, not just a definition. It would be better to start with a short section in Compiler or Optimizing compiler. You may have missed the important point about the law, which is not that optimizing might not be worth it - in the world of embedded programming it is terribly important - but that Proebsting is making the point: "Perhaps programmer productivity is a more fruitful arena." Try searching in Google Books for sources. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@StarryGrandma no, I did not miss the point, but I agree my summary misses it. This law says that the progress on compiler efficacy is very slow. That's actually the useful tidbit. I agree it would fit on the "optimizing compiler" article. I'll let it expire. Perhaps you can move this there. Cc0 jic. Arosa (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:51, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 12

17:06:02, 12 November 2022 review of submission by Nishantkasana77


Nishantkasana77 (talk) 17:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nishantkasana77: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't therefore be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 13

00:24:30, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Cbz123


We have now been notably reviewed a few times, can you publish the article now?

Cbz123 (talk) 00:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbz123 There are no reliable sources independent of the subject that have written about it given in the draft, there isn't even any indication of the significance of the podcast. It fails WP:GNG and is currently far to promotional to be approved. Until you can provide 3 sources that are independent, reliable and provide significant coverage of the podcast and rewrite in a much more neutral tone, I will recommend the rejection does not get over turned. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:13:17, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Johnsomark2

I received a notification that I may have a conflict of interest for this article. Can you tell me what that might be? Thanks. :) Johnsomark2 (talk) 03:13, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@johnsomark2: see wikipedia:conflict of interest. lettherebedarklight〔晚安 おやすみ〕ping me when replying 04:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the executive summary of that page, you are considered to have a conflict of interest with the topic if you have a professional, familial, personal, or financial link to the subject of the article or those working directly on the subject's behalf. We discourage editing in areas where you have a conflict of interest because it's next to impossible to write about those topics neutrally, as Wikipedia requires. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 07:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:06:50, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Pasmanda Waseem Raeen


Pasmanda Waseem Raeen (talk) 08:06, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pasmanda Waseem Raeen You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you have a question, please post it in this section. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pasmanda Waseem Raeen Your "references" aren't cited what-so-ever. We also do not allow significant tracts of Hindi (or other non-English) text in articles, as this is the English-language Wikipedia and our audience generally cannot read/comprehend Hindi. The Hindi text should instead be put on the Hindi Wikipedia, but they're also going to require you to provide sources and properly cite them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 08:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:10:03, 13 November 2022 review of draft by Hamzamkf


Hi there,

I'm a beginner and I've tried many time to fix Artist biography page but always the photos and reference appear randomly and not as I did! Please can anyone help me to fix that.

Many thanks,

Best regards,

Hamzamkf (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hamzamkf: you need to be more specific, what is the problem with the pictures? Although having said that, the pictures aren't important at this stage, as they don't affect the draft's chance of being approved.
What does affect it, is referencing: in articles on living people, we require inline citations, which need to support each material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details such as DOB. Currently your draft has no inline cites, as everything is piled together at the end. Please see WP:REFB and WP:ILC for advice.
Finally, you need to disclose any relationship you have with the subject of this draft; I will post a message on your talk page with instructions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:57:01, 13 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Ajo47


Hello, I would like to reply to your editor clarityfiend's last comments to me and to supply the names of Ockner's colleagues listed in Wikipedia. I understand I'm supposed to reply on my own Talk Page, but I can't figure out where to put my reply. Please advise me on how to get my reply to this editor. Thank you. Ajo47 (talk) 16:57, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Ajo47 (talk) 16:57, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:39:30, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Sportyinfo142

Hi, I am requesting a re-review because Emily played hockey nationally and also won a Queens Jubilee award for services to the country in the voluntary sector this year. She writes blogs for the global mental health charity Mind and also Shout that are seen by 100 000's of people. She also does talks to large audiences about mental health and most recently was invited to an event with Ed Sheeran to talk about mental health. Regardless of her Granddad being a professional footballer with his own Wiki page, Emily has also achieved national success of her own merit. Sportyinfo142 (talk) 18:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:47:55, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Sportyinfo142

I don't understand why this keeps getting rejected, Emily has competed nationally at sport for England Hockey, and is a major blogger in the mental health sector. She is also in the middle of setting up her own charity to help others struggling with their mental health. Please accept!!! Sportyinfo142 (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sportyinfo142 the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Notability is not inherited, and nothing else in the draft suggests that they are notable. None of the references meet WP:42, and I can't find any news articles about this person online. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 19:03, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:07:47, 13 November 2022 review of submission by IsaacGang


Why was my article declined because it is a biography, but there is an option for a biography during submission? IsaacGang (talk) 19:07, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IssacGang It was not specifically declined for being an autobiography, though you were advised it usually is not a good idea to attempt to write about yourself. Please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Trying to force the issue of an article isn't often successful; it's best to allow independent editors to organically take note of coverage of you and choose to write about you on their own. If you wish to proceed anyway, you will need to radically rewrite the draft to only summarize what others say about you- this is usually difficult for people to do about themselves. 331dot (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, 331dot. This makes sense and I agree. I am a newbie and I am still learning about Wikipedia policy on "notable person." I was totally ignorant to this. And in my defense - not that it is necessary, I didn't write the contents of the page. Someone else did, though I did agree with what they said about me when they approached me. They were just intimidated with the process of submitting so I thought I could do the submission myself (again, refer to my ignorance). I appreciate the feedback. I did include several independent sources in the last submission hoping this will improve the chance. No biggie if it does not. IsaacGang (talk) 18:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:48:32, 13 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Marthature


Hi there - after several edits, today I am informed that my article on pedal steel guitarist Bobby Black has been declined because it lacks reliable sources and much of it is unsourced. I dispute the statement that it lacks reliable sources and I dispute the statement that much of it is unsourced. I recommend pointing out to me what your people think is unsourced and unreliable sources.

I also wish to state that I have experienced repeated instances of rude, unprofessional communication from Wikipedia editors. I have made this clear to Jimmy Wales. Marthature (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Marthature Argumentum ad Jimbo doesn't work nowadays as he is little more than a figurehead. Bear in mind this list is primarily about the claims that would require a source per WP:Biographies of living persons.
  • Bobby Black (Robert Lee Black) was born in Prescott, Arizona in 1934. - Source? For biographies of living and recently-departed people you can't slap the source on the end of the paragraph and call it good; the citation must be at the claim itself.
  • During his childhood, Black listened to pop and big-band music on the radio. - Source?
  • Black also listened to Western swing as played by Bob Wills and his Texas Playboys Bob Wills and Spade Cooley, whose steel guitar player Earl “Joaquin” Murphey caught Bobby’s attention. - Source? This is also a bit of a run-on sentence.
  • In 1947, the Black family moved to San Mateo, California[.] - Source? (For links to other Wikipedia articles you don't include the full URL; you instead write [[(article name)]] or [[(article name)|(display text)]].)
  • In 1948, on his 14th birthday, Bobby received a six-string Rickenbacker[...]steel guitar and amplifier.[Malformed external link removed] - Source? (The external link provided, even if it weren't malformed, cannot be used to confirm this specific claim.)
  • He toured widely with Crawford, traveling in Texas and all over the mid-west. - Source?
  • Black and his wife settled in San Mateo, and he went to work for Pacific Bell; Larry married soon after and worked at Lockheed. - The first claim definitely needs a source, the second one needs one if Larry is still alive and should have one anyways if he has departed.
  • [...]a widely watched San Francisco Bay Area live television show. - Irrelevant. 86 this.
  • Both men were holding down day jobs, supporting their families, and working in two bands. - Source?
  • They shopped the tape around Los Angeles[...] - Source?
  • [...]in early 1961, Dore Records issued several vocal singles of the Blacks under the name The Tides[...] - Source?
  • The Dolton label issued three of the Blacks’ instrumentals under the name the Five Whispers from 1962 to ’64. - Source?
  • ...Black was not happy with the material the band was playing, and he returned to the Bay Area. - Source?
  • Black joined the band, transforming it from a bar band to a highly polished and professional troupe of musicians. - Editorialising. You're documenting his life, not writing as if he was a saint. Even rewritten this would require a source.
  • Black has played continuously since leaving Asleep At TheWheel. - Source? The sentence that follows this should be 86'd as irrelevant; at best it's a claim of notability-by-osmosis which we do not accept and which hurts an article.
  • Black married Marlene Bender in 1953. - Source?
  • They have two sons... - Everything represented by the ellipsis needs to be deleted as irrelevant.
  • They divorced in 1959. - Source?
  • In 1973 he married Sheila Ann Owen. - Source?
  • Nothing in the discography section should require a source (we consider looking at liner notes/credits to be enough to verify these barring an uncredited appearance or one under an unfamiliar pseudonym). However, it needs to be drastically cut down to his most important/notable credits, as proven by news reports and reviews of those performances/albums.
In short, you have a few unsourced biographical claims that need to be sourced, and you need to convert the Wikipedia URLs to internal links. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:50:45, 13 November 2022 review of submission by Rockoutto


At the time the band which I am writing about wasn't significant. Now PHELIXX Lake has over 6,500 monthly listeners on Spotify, 1000+ Tik Tok/Instagram/Facebook Followers. Rockoutto (talk) 21:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spotify/Pandora audiences and social media subscriptions/followers are irrelevant. Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
In essence, you have only three sources, two of which are cited three times and none of which are helpful for notability. The copypasta'd sources are churnalism at best and more likely payola. The only source that is unique is MusicHitBox, and even then it doesn't provide a byline. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 14

01:26:35, 14 November 2022 review of draft by Sandiners


Why my articles always been declined? Sandiners (talk) 01:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandiners Welcome to the AfC Help desk. One source to Youtube is not reliable, independent or prove notability. Submitting it multiple times with no improvement will not work. If you don't improve it, but submit it again, it will be rejected. This means you will not have the option to submit again. Learn more at Wikipedia:Verifiability. echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sandiners We don't cite music videos. Repeatedly submitting a draft without making a serious effort to address its issues is grounds for it to go to MfD. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 03:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:52:37, 14 November 2022 review of draft by Karmaker


Need suggestions improving the article. TIA

Karmaker (talk) 04:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Karmaker. Good job on significantly expanding the article since it was declined. However, there are a few things that still need improvement. Mainly, it doesn't completely read from the WP:Neutral point of view. Phrases like focused on managing development programmes, building operational and financial sustainability, and creating partnerships. aren't neutral, and parts like this may need rephrasing.
Otherwise, the article is in pretty good shape. Good job! echidnaLives - talk - edits 08:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:07:34, 14 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by KP070707


Hello,

I created a draft article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PaykanArtCar and has been declined as the following reason:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

  • in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
  • reliable
  • secondary
  • strictly independent of the subject

I just wanted to ask for help before editing it further. My questions are:

1. I have included multiple sources from big published including e.g. Washington Post, NBC News, The Guardian. I'm wondering if they are qualified to be included? 2. If you have time to review one or two sources, can you point me into the right direction of which example in the draft is qualified and which isn't? (I understood external links or the PR should be removed) 3. Is there any other room for improvement that I should considerate when editing it for resubmission?

KP070707 (talk) 11:07, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KP070707 (1) We do not judge a source solely by where it was published. As an example, an interview in The Grauniad is as useless for notability as an interview by Borat. (2) Get some coffee and refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
You have some usable sources but on the whole the weeds are choking the garden. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jeske Couriano,
Thank you very much for taking time to go through all sources and helping me understanding the rationale of why they are not qualified. Really appreciated it!
If I remove all those non-sequitur and unqualified sources and keep the good one, do you think the topic is notable enough to be published on wiki as your experience?
And for the washing-post where you mentioned it was reposted from Bloomberg. If I use the original piece https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-06-04/iranian-artists-in-exile-find-a-vehicle-for-protest?leadSource=uverify%20wall, do you think it works?
Thank you! KP070707 (talk) 11:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@KP070707 (1) You only have one good source. That's not enough. You need to replace them with much better sources. (2) No, and I invite you to reread the URL you posted and my criticism of the Washington Post source, as it answers this question. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:08, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:11:40, 14 November 2022 review of submission by Septemberam1988


Septemberam1988 (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


hey, why my submission is getting declined again and again. I see many Wikipedia articles with less notability and also a very few reliable sources. i need help regarding this article, this's my first article on Wikipedia and also i want to know why many articles are here in Wikipedia with less reliable sources and why mine is getting declined.

help me to write more about him, i shall be thankful to you.

@Septemberam1988, they may have a few, you have none. You may need to read what a relaible source is and what is required for any biography. With that being said your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. It is also currently nominated for deletion because of your tedious editing. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Septemberam1988 Please see WP:OSE. David10244 (talk) 07:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:55:20, 14 November 2022 review of submission by Melliza Slippers Oh


Melliza Slippers Oh (talk) 13:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Melliza Slippers Oh: Hello, I've just added a new submission template to your draft, as I can see some coverage of it online. At the moment it has hardly any sources, so please add WP:Reliable sources, and re-submit the draft for review. Thanks, and best of luck. Storchy (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:55, 14 November 2022 review of submission by 124.123.163.235


124.123.163.235 (talk) 15:30, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected, meaning it won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:18:12, 14 November 2022 review of draft by 94.86.60.198


Hello everyone, I read in WP:NPOL that "The following are presumed to be notable: [cut] This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them.", which is the case for this person: he was elected, but did not take office (opting for another office). However, an editor rejected the draft without mentioning WP:NPOL; he just said the person lacks notability. Could anyone please clarify why WP:NPOL has been ignored? 94.86.60.198 (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've come across this before, where someone is elected but chooses not to take up their seat. The NPOL guideline is silent on this eventuality — the "yet" clearly implies that they were elected and are expect to go on to serve, which isn't the case here — but my personal opinion is that such a person should not be considered notable, because it is presumably the service as an assembly etc. member which makes them notable, not the mere fact that they were elected. Happy to be proven wrong on this, though, by someone who actually knows. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:47:34, 14 November 2022 review of submission by Elverovenexian

hello, I would like to know how can my page be edited in order to be published. thanks!

Elverovenexian (talk) 18:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for a review, the reviewer will either accept it, reject it, or decline it and tell you what changes are needed. 331dot (talk) 20:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
yeah I actually followed a user advice, edited and now re-submitted Elverovenexian (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:46:01, 14 November 2022 review of submission by Mjansky2002

I changed the sources

Mjansky2002 (talk) 21:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjansky2002: the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I re submitted it Mjansky2002 (talk) 21:48, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mjansky2002 Why do five of your six sources all have the exact same title, content, attribution to a known PR agency, and (almost all) the exact same website layout and format? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:13, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:35:12, 14 November 2022 review of draft by JewelHL


Hi there. I recently created a Wikipedia page called 'Flicks (company)'. It was just declined because it says it was not adequately supported by reliable sources. All I can really reference in this company page are the news articles etc published about it, so I'm not sure what other sources I'm expected to reference. Can you help me clarify this please?

Here is the link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Flicks_(company)

JewelHL (talk) 22:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that The Daily Mail is not a reliable source and will need to be replaced, also we don't use external links in the body of an article. Theroadislong (talk) 22:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@JewelHL Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
On top of all of this, the article is blatantly promotional, and appears to be written as an investor-fishing exercise. We don't accept ad copy or investor bait. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 15

01:01:36, 15 November 2022 review of draft by SJSchiffer


I keep getting declined for this page. I have made sure that my sources are "from "magazines, journals, and news coverage (not opinions) from mainstream newspapers." per the Wikipedia guidelines, and he is a notable figure, an award-winning chef in Denver. I am modeling my submission after another page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lon_Symensma . He is of similar renown (award-winning chef in Denver) and the pages are not different. Why do I keep getting rejected? Please help. SJSchiffer (talk) 01:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SJSchiffer DISCLOSE. (I saw your thread on WP:IRC/wikipedia-en-help where you mentioned that Guard and Symensma were your clients.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, learning how to do that now. SJSchiffer (talk) 01:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02:10:37, 15 November 2022 review of draft by Jarpedro


my submission was declined due to "reliable sources" but I had included all sources correctly on the submission. I am not sure what i need to change. Jarpedro (talk) 02:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarpedro Your sources are not actually cited. See Help:Referencing for beginners for more details. Note that as this is a biography of a living person we cannot accept sources just blindly tacked onto the end of the article; they must be cited in-line. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 02:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:29:08, 15 November 2022 review of submission by Odurra


Odurra (talk) 04:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft has since been deleted as blatant and irreparable advertizing/promotion; matter now moot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 06:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:13:55, 15 November 2022 review of draft by Infinity6542


So I'll get straight to the point - my draft's been declined thrice now but my message isn't a complaint. I would like to know how I can improve my sources, as the feedback on all three denials were about in-depth, reliable, secondary and independent sources. So basically may I please have more specific feedback, as well as maybe a point in the direction? Thanks.

Infinity6542 (talk) 09:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Infinity6542 Welcome to the AfC Help Desk!
As the reviewer said, the article isn't shown to meet notability guidelines. If you can find more reliable, in-depth, independent sources, you may meet the guidelines.
For more info, check the links the reviewer left for you. Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 09:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Infinity6542: as it says in those decline notices, we need to see significant coverage of the company, in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources such as newspapers, TV, etc. Sources that merely verify their existence, such as the CoHo record, do not count; nor does routine business reporting (investment rounds, appointments, new markets or channel partners, etc.); nor do close primary sources such as the company's own website. The relevant notability guideline is WP:GNG, which has been further expanded in WP:ORGCRIT to cover companies and other organisations. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've also posted a COI query on your talk page, please respond to it. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

09:33:01, 15 November 2022 review of submission by Dhivyaadhanu

The above page is kept on rejected. I have done the required changes and submitted all the proofs I have at this time. I couldn't get the reason clearly. Kindly, help/guide me to get the page published. Thank you!

Dhivyaadhanu (talk) 09:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhivyaadhanu: it hasn't been rejected, only declined, with the advice to wait until the film has been released and has become properly notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:59:16, 15 November 2022 review of submission by 2405:201:6815:A14C:4456:A308:1A67:4967

This Wikipedia Page Draft is about the Bulandshahr's News Publisher. Please help us to expanding this page. 2405:201:6815:A14C:4456:A308:1A67:4967 (talk) 11:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:39:21, 15 November 2022 review of submission by Raylaur15


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

Dear Wiki Editors: You recently accepted ny Wiki article on Vincentian musician Frankie McIntosh. However, the editor ONE1596 put up a Warning Heading regarding the possibility of “undisclosed payments” and that the article on Frankie McIntosh may need “clean up.” I assure you that I received no payments from Frankie McIntosh, the subject of the article, or anyone else. The page was written completely gratis by me. Is there a form I must sign to confirm this? I do not believe I violated Wiki’s “neutral point of view” policies. The laudatory language regarding McIntosh’s work as a music arranger does not come from me. These are published, direct quotations from well-regarded Caribbean Music critics Dawad Philip (Amsterdam News), Nelson King (Caribbean Life and the Vincentian), and Les Slater (Class Magazine). The final paragraph on McIntosh’s accomplishments comes directly from the remarks at the ceremony where he was awarded an honorary Doctorate from the University of the West Indies (as reported by Nelson King in Caribbean Life). I included these quotations as a way of summarizing his accomplishments and establishing his notoriety through outside sources. Are these quotations not appropriate? If so, I will remove them. I would greatly appreciate your advice regarding anything else that needs to be done to “clean up” the article. This is my first attempt at a Wiki article and would like to get it right! I am not sure about the best way to communicate with you is. I just removed the Warning Heading and tried to explain the situation to ONE 1596 when I clicked “Publish Changes” after editing out the Warning. Is there another procedure I need to go through?

My user name is: Raylaur15 Looking forward to your advice and thanks for your time!

Raylaur15 (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Raylaur15: this is no longer an AfC matter, since the draft has been accepted and published, and your query doesn't relate to the AfC process; you may wish to take your query eg. to the TEAHOUSE instead.
You generally shouldn't remove maintenance tags just because you disagree with them, and you certainly shouldn't do so more than once. You should instead (and I would recommend doing this before going to the teahouse) take the matter up with the editor who tagged the article, on their talk page. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thaks for your response. I'm afraid I have already taken down the maintenance tag with an explanation.
So how do I contact the editor ONE1596 to discuss further?
Sorry if I am breaking protocol, I'm just very confused about how to contact the correct folks.
thanks, Raylaur 15 2603:7000:8106:B298:AC0A:75C8:FFF4:B952 (talk) 14:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Every user has their own user talk page, just like you have yours at User talk:Raylaur15.
And please log into your account when editing/messaging. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:52:04, 15 November 2022 review of submission by Bainzy1978

Hi there i received a messgae saying that my draft looked to much like an advertisement and was refused when its just a company history and profile much like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrustmaster. Can someone point out what changes i need to make? sorry completely new to Wikipedia Bainzy1978 (talk) 15:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bainzy1978: the short answer is, this needs to be rewritten pretty much entirely. You shouldn't write what you want to say about the subject; you summarise what reliable and independent published sources have said about it. This draft currently cites no sources of any kind, so the first thing you need to do is find sources that meet the WP:GNG notability standard, and precis what they have said. See WP:YFA and WP:REFB for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And to answer your talk page question In 2021, the MOIN camera gimbal and W10 Pro wireless microphone were both released by MOZA, as well as a first look into their research and development of active car suspension, which debuted at the Shanghai International Auto Show (citation needed). is clearly copied from somewhere otherwise the citation information wouldn't be present. If you have a Conflict of Interest, please diclose it @Bainzy1978 Star Mississippi 19:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:22:02, 15 November 2022 review of submission by 2A00:23C6:1E9F:3001:78BA:7AEF:4EA2:C031


2A00:23C6:1E9F:3001:78BA:7AEF:4EA2:C031 (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I had the below Talk with PaulW who rejected the Wiki submission in May, I then added offline media coverage, because he said it would be accepted in good faith, and it has still been rejected, this is unfair. Please honour what PaulW said and accept the offline media coverage in good faith and accept this Wiki submission so it can be published:

Request on 22:02:14, 20 May 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by PressgirlV

PressgirlV (talk · contribs) Draft:Bukky Leo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Draft:Bukky Leo You rejected this draft on 13th May 2022. I have mostly offline sources for citations, but I have checked and I have scans of offline coverage in The Guardian, Jazzwise and The Independent from 1989 onwards. Will you accept scans, or can I show them to you? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by PressgirlV (talk • contribs) 22:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

The Guardian may have online versions of the content you mention (worth checking). Even if they aren't, then we assume good faith in you adding them as sources, so long as the authors of the articles, titles and dates, etc, are clearly stated. Please note that, if possible, they need to be substantial coverage of the subject, not just passing mentions. Paul W (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much Paul, yes I have The Guardian, The Telegraph, and other , all substantial coverage of Bukky , all offline scans and not available online as they were published in late 80s-90s- early 00s, so the early stuff was before the internet! Good that you will assume good faith, excellent news will add those in now as inline citations. PressgirlV (talk) 16:37, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

17:40:07, 15 November 2022 review of submission by Lemonaka

Hello, reviewers. This article is a direct translation from a sub-stab of Japanese Wikipedia but declined here by AFC. I wondered that if the topic of this article is poor notability itself, or have not been cited enough?
~~~~ Lemonaka (talk) 17:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lemonaka: whether the topic is notable or not depends on whether it has been covered in sources that meet the WP:GNG standard. Currently the draft only cites two sources, both of which are close and primary, and therefore notability has not been established. (The fact that this exists on the Japanese Wikipedia has no bearing on the matter, as each language version is completely separate, with their own notability etc. policies.) Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:34:51, 15 November 2022 review of submission by 27 is the best number

If I remember correctly, notability alone is not enough to delete a draft. However, it has been declined many times... What should we do? 27 is my favorite number. You can ask me why here. 19:34, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will know no mercy from this Neopet, especially as I've already Bastard Helper From Hell'd this draft. I'm seeing a wealth of sources - I.E. pretty much every source I critiqued back in September - that were already discussed and dismissed the last time I looked at this, so I am not going to repeat advice that has evidently fallen on deaf ears. Read the previous BHFH for information on those sources.
None of the new sources are of much use, and all of the old sources are still present. Stop wasting our time with junk sources. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I missed one: I have questions about the provenance of https://singularityhub.com/2012/04/15/the-scale-of-the-universe-2%E2%80%B3-animation-made-by-14-year-olds-is-mind-blowing/ as I question whether or not the newsletter would publish individual stories in this way, especially back in 2008. This seems more like it's a fragment that was clipped out of the whole. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 20:41, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:43, 15 November 2022 review of submission by 86.1.199.26


86.1.199.26 (talk) 20:15, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This will not be approved unless an independent editor works on it Star Mississippi 20:19, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:37:18, 15 November 2022 review of draft by 2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1


I thought I had the criteria correct for references but need help I guess. Perhaps I can just delete some of the references as most of the material is also in the newspaper articles sited. I'd appreciate help since I am just learning Wikipedia and want to learn it correctly. I am not sure when a reference citation is needed and when it is not needed. 2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1 (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1 (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my answer to your next question. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:49:29, 15 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1


I thought I was doing this correctly but need assistance. I read that you needed newspaper articles and such and thought I cited them correctly. Appreciate any help. 2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1 (talk) 21:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2601:246:5900:CEA0:75DC:B22:F979:CEC1 (talk) 21:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have listed some sources, that is true. However, they are not cited very clearly, so it is difficult to see what the sources actually are, and which parts of the draft they support. Our preferred way of referencing is using inline citations and footnotes, please see WP:REFB and WP:ILC for advice.
Having said which, this draft wasn't declined for lack of references, but for its promotional nature. Wikipedia articles must be written in a neutral and factual manner, not like marketing blurb.
It is also obvious that this draft, and hence you as the creator, have some relationship with the organisation behind appreciationatwork.com, and therefore, before you do anything else, you must disclose your relationship with that organisation. I have posted a message on your user talk page with more information and instructions on how to do this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


November 16

00:09:38, 16 November 2022 review of submission by RowsdowerSavesUs

I'm reaching out to initiate the process for the article I created to be reviewed and approved to be migrated to Wikipedia's mainspace. This is my first time making an article before, so I feel really lost. This help page was the best thing I could find.

Unfortunately, the instructions on the Articles for creation page were not helpful, as I was unable to locate the "Submit for review" button, and the suggested code snippet did not make any changes that I could tell. Again, this is my first time, so please feel free to point me in the right direction, but I have tried to follow the instructions I could manage to track down. RowsdowerSavesUs (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @RowsdowerSavesUs, Welcome to the AfC help desk.
Your draft has been nominated for speedy deletion as it appears to exist only to promote a person, place or organization. You can contest this speedy deletion on the page if you wish to improve it. If it isn't deleted, you can add{{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. This will submit it, and you won't have to click a button.
Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 00:32, 16 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]
I have contested the nomination, and would love to hear specifics about how it can be improved. Also, I'm not sure why you advised me to add the code snippet when I already said that I tried that but nothing happened. I added the code to the top of the article when I'm in 'source editing' but it just puts it in the body of the entry. What should I expect to happen? RowsdowerSavesUs (talk) 00:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the CSD tag as I think the article can be improved and I have questions about the tagging as the draft does contain criticism of the article subject so it wasn't overly promotional. Like all biographies, it focuses upon the article subject and their work and ideas but it wasn't advertising. I'd appreciate it, EchidnaLives, if you and other AFC reviewers can advise this new editor on how to improve their draft. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RowsdowerSavesUs, it's important that articles on this encyclopedia present a neutral point-of-view so articles do not get labeled as promotional. I think you were able to do this but it's something to keep in mind if this is the subject area you want to work in. Liz Read! Talk! 02:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping @Liz, I'd be happy to help! (@RowsdowerSavesUs pinging in case you don't see).
  • First of all, I don't think notability or verifiability is an issue here. The sources present on the draft are sufficient. However, there is a bit of cleaning up that could be done to improve the article further.
  • In the Three Worlds Framework section, after the second paragraph, it becomes a list of time periods. This is proseline, and we want to try and avoid that. Could you turn it into body text?
  • A minor thing that should be fixed is the inline external links. It's small, but per WP:EXTERNALLINKS they should be removed.
  • Could you add some wikilinks? We don't want to overlink, but stuff like "The New York Times" and "Manhattan Institute" should be linked. Again, minor thing.
  • The only non-npov thing I'm really seeing at the moment is the proseline I mentioned above. It's unclear if it is a quote or not. If it is, then this isn't an issue, but quotation marks should be used. If not, it may need rephrasing to follow the guideline.
I believe when this is complete, the article will be ready for the mainspace. If you have any questions, issues or need clarification, feel free to reply here or ask on my talk page. Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 03:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

00:59:50, 16 November 2022 review of draft by Shunya1508


Hello @Hoary.

Thank you for your corrections and advice on {Draft:Bunta_Inoue}.

Following your advice, I have improved the opening sentence, etc., and modified the links, etc.

If you are able, it would be appreciated if you could review it and offer your advice.

Sincerely yours

Shunya1508 (talk) 00:59, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shunya1508, I tweaked it a little a few minutes ago. Please wait for some fresh reviewer to give it a review. -- Hoary (talk) 06:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:16:33, 16 November 2022 review of submission by ZeroApocalypse


I understood that the early drafts of this article may not appear to be notable for Wikipedia to accept. However, after the rejection of article creation, I have gathered more reliable and notable sources regarding the school. Especially in its high academic performance in the recent public examination of Hong Kong. (Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination). In addition to newly added notability, the school is also recognized as a top school in the region. However, as noted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(high_schools), the internet coverage of schools in Asia is not well. Regarding its school banding, I found multiple websites online ranking the school. E.g. https://dse.bigexam.hk/zh-hk/ssp/school/148 https://www.myschool.hk/secondary-school/Carmel-Secondary-School but I do not know if they are suitable sources to include. I hope to seek advice about how to prove its notability better. As the page already has its Chinese Wikipedia version, would it be better if I translate it directly? English and Chinese are both official languages of Hong Kong, and the school is an English-medium education school. Therefore, I think it is suitable for it to have an English article as well. I would appreciate any help, thank you.

ZeroApocalypse (talk) 04:16, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:43:25, 16 November 2022 review of submission by SteadfasterX

I understood that reliable sources are missing. Is it enough here to provide links from "reliable" websites in the "references" topic?

or is my draft rejected for other reasons? Still learning here ;)

SteadfasterX (talk) 07:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SteadfasterX: your draft wasn't rejected; it was only declined, meaning it can be resubmitted once you have addressed the decline reasons. These being:
  1. The draft is not supported by reliable sources — in fact, there are no sources whatsoever. Every material statement must be backed up by reference to a reliable published source; otherwise it's just your opinion (or worse, copied from somewhere).
  2. There is no evidence that the topic is notable. This is separate from the previous point, but related, because notability is established by citing sources (specifically, sources that meet the WP:GNG standard) — ergo, no sources, no notability.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @SteadfasterX, welcome to the AfC help desk!
I've looked at the sources, and here is a quick overview:
If you can find more sources that are reliable, independent and in-depth, add them and it may be accepted if notability can be proved. Unfortunately, as DoubleGrazing said, it will not be accepted in it's current form. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 07:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi  :)
thanks guys for the quick responses!
just one point to add: https://archlinux.org/pacman/ is just a tool (i.e. a package manager) which is used in that linux distribution and so referencing the creator of that tool should be not an issue (afaiu). it is more to provide details about what's inside.
ok back to my q. I am asking about these sources for example:
Is that enough to become notable?
do I have to remove the forum links then or can (should) they stay? SteadfasterX (talk) 09:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1122189946"