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
Brazbiog (talk | contribs)
17 edits
Requesting assistance regarding Draft:Carlos_Ernesto_Guestrin
Line 665: Line 665:
:::::@[[User:GwnftLight|GwnftLight]]: you can create a subpage in your personal space, you just have to give it a unique name, like [[User:GwnftLight/sandbox2]] or [[User:GwnftLight/newdraft]], etc.
:::::@[[User:GwnftLight|GwnftLight]]: you can create a subpage in your personal space, you just have to give it a unique name, like [[User:GwnftLight/sandbox2]] or [[User:GwnftLight/newdraft]], etc.
:::::Or you can go to [[WP:YFA]] and use the article creation wizard there. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::Or you can go to [[WP:YFA]] and use the article creation wizard there. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

== 15:29, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Brazbiog ==
{{Lafc|username=Brazbiog|ts=15:29, 30 November 2024|draft=Draft:Carlos_Ernesto_Guestrin}}
This is my first article. I'd appreciate any feedback to improve the current draft. [[User:Brazbiog|Brazbiog]] ([[User talk:Brazbiog|talk]]) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:29, 30 November 2024

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
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


November 24

00:48, 24 November 2024 review of submission by PostRhythmRecords

I don't know what I'm missing. PostRhythmRecords (talk) 00:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. It seems like your article doesn't meet at the requirements to be an actual published article. You are missing: Referencable sources. You need references and citable sources in your article. To make an reference use the ref keys. To learn more about references and, click this link to this article Wikipedia:Citing sources Jag612red (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OP blocked. 331dot (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:09, 24 November 2024 review of submission by MyNameIsGeorgeHale

I am not sure if the article for “Kieran Howe” has been properly submitted for review or not. I can’t see it on the list of articles submitted for review. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kieran_Howe MyNameIsGeorgeHale (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answered your other post, please only use one forum to seek assistance. 331dot (talk) 01:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:31, 24 November 2024 review of submission by 2603:8000:A4F0:9A00:8F1C:1D8A:2ECB:4557

I am not able to use the Move action to change the title of the article to "Southern Lights (sculpture)" How to rename the title? 2603:8000:A4F0:9A00:8F1C:1D8A:2ECB:4557 (talk) 05:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a note of that in the draft. There's no need to move this yet, since it will have to be moved in any case, if/when the draft is accepted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:44, 24 November 2024 review of submission by 2409:40E2:1021:3933:6359:AC25:5F3E:524D

Please help in creating this page. I do not have much knowledge about Wikipedia, so please help in creating this page. Thank you 2409:40E2:1021:3933:6359:AC25:5F3E:524D (talk) 07:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:48, 24 November 2024 review of submission by 2409:40E2:1021:3933:6359:AC25:5F3E:524D

Please help me in making this page, I am not able to understand what mistake I am doing so please correct my mistake 2409:40E2:1021:3933:6359:AC25:5F3E:524D (talk) 07:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think it's time to give this a rest? This is at least the fourth title where it has been attempted, and always failed, to create the article. The subject is clearly not notable.
Also, note that when you're blocked, you are not allowed to edit even logged-out. The block applies to you as a person, not just to your user account. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:09, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Prince Folorunsho Adegoke

Thank you for your response. Please check, I think it meets one of the eight academic-specific criteria because the subject is the immediate past Deputy Vice Chancellor of Redeemer's University and her successor, Ahmed Yerima has an article on Wikipedia which I used as a sample to make her article better. Kindly refer to Editors who can also assist in addressing the issues in the article. PFA (talk) 08:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prince Folorunsho Adegoke: being deputy V-C does not satisfy WP:NACADEMIC #6, if that's what you mean; they would need to be the actual V-C for that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:50, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Idk17272727

Ariticle draft rejected my draft for an article was rejected for copyright i believe but i wanna know 100% why i dont think i did anything wrong. Idk17272727 (talk) 10:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idk17272727 I fixed your post to provide a link to your draft as intended. You were given a clear reason for the rejection at the top of your draft. We also already have an article about Christmas which details its history. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:18, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Sebdocs

What is the reason behind this? Sebdocs (talk) 13:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a social media platform. This isn't the place for you to be posting a profile of yourself. I placed a warning on your user talk page regarding the creation of autobiographies. Even if it is not an autobiography, you failed to provide any references of any kind to support the notability of "Seb Doherty". Wikipedia does not accept unreferenced drafts. If you can find reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, then include them and there might be a chance of the draft being accepted. Otherwise, no. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:29, 24 November 2024 review of submission by HKFighter

Hi, I wish to resubmit this draft but cannot find the submission button. HKFighter (talk) 14:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HKFighter, that's odd. I've submitted it for review for you. @DoubleGrazing any idea what happened to the re-submission button? qcne (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like HKFighter accidentally replaced the Articles for Creation decline templates with the notices from their user talk page. I restored the previous declines – goodness knows the template code is not easy to read if you don't know what it is supposed to look like, and my guess is that HKFighter thought it was the same notice without realising that the talk page version actully looks rather different. --bonadea contributions talk 16:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:35, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Arota1612

Hello

My article has been refused for not reliable sources but there are books and official media. Can you help me by telling which sources are a problem for you and those who are not so I can finish a good article? I checked other music producer pages and there are very similar Thank you for your kind help Regards Arota1612 (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arota1612. The quality of your references is vastly more important than their quantity. Three or four excellent references are far better than dozens of mediocre sources. Most of your references seem to be passing mentions, interviews or event listings. Your draft also has problems with language violating the Neutral point of view policy. One example is An eclectic music-lover from an early age, Lyon found his vocation to music production by flipping over the album covers he loved, followed by unnecessary name dropping. As for articles about other music producers, please name them. Perhaps some of those articles need to be deleted. Cullen328 (talk) 00:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Made the modifications accordingly. Hope it is good now. Best Arota1612 (talk) 10:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Arota1612 It's mandatory that biographic articles have in-line citations for every fact, starting with the date of birth. I notice the top half of the draft has no citations whatsoever: readers therefore cannot verify the information is true. I've declined it for now on that basis: please do re-submit once you've either got citations or removed the uncited paragraphs. qcne (talk) 10:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:49, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Jag612red

I want to know which sources are primary sources so I can change them. I know not all of them are primary. I can easily fix it so my article can get published. Some of them are secondary so I am confused about which is which. Thank you. Draft:Qubein Center Jag612red (talk) 15:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only one which even might be secondary is no 9, which won't display in my region. Almost all of them are published by the university or the architects, and so are not independent. 13 might be independent, but from what I saw before it threw up the paywall, it looked as if it was regurgitating a Press release, and so is also not independent. And Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and should almost never be cited.
Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Am I allowed to use at least one primary source or do they all secondary sources and will this mean I will have to redo my wiki page. Jag612red (talk) 03:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. The purpose of a citation is to allow a user to verify some information about the subject in the article: nothing else. As long as most of the information comes from secondary sources, a small amount of uncontroversial factual information may be cited to primary sources ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also can I shorten the article because I've seen other articles related to my topic with little to no references and still get it published and I'd also like to know if the city newspaper is primary or secondary because 9 and 13 are news articles with sources in them but one is somehow secondary and the other isn't. Im new to Wikipedia and I just want to clear it up because the Millis Athletic Convocation Center uses primary sources as well and I just want my article to be published Jag612red (talk) 03:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jag612red, please list here the other articles related to my topic with little to no references and still get it published. Maybe some or all of those articles need to be improved or deleted. Cullen328 (talk) 05:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The city newspaper" is not primary or secondary: it depends on what it publishes. If it publishes an article which is clearly a regurgitation of a press release, that is primary. If it publishes an interview with the subject, with little commentary, that is primary. If it publishes an article by a named journalist, who is clearly not simply repeating what the subject says, but has done their own investigation and written a commentary, it is secondary. And there can be many intermediate possibilities. ColinFine (talk) 11:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:08, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Unknownkidman

I think that theses YouTubers need more clout on there name give them a chance Unknownkidman (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have no interest in giving people clout; we summarize what independent reliable sources say about people that meet our criteria. "YouTubers" are not inherently notable. 331dot (talk) 16:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unknownkidman, your style of writing is completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Our Manual of Style says Editors should write articles using straightforward, succinct, easily understood language. I can barely understand what you have written. Cullen328 (talk) 00:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:02, 24 November 2024 review of submission by Mahreen1212

Hi - Why was the updated submission rejected on the following basis " not adequately supported by reliable sources". Every source was independent and government/informative. Does it need to be longer? Mahreen1212 (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahreen1212: Government sources are considered primary sources; we're looking for secondary sources (newspapers, scholarly books, etc.). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:16, 24 November 2024 review of submission by GenesisGSE

Help clean up and write this draft GenesisGSE (talk) 21:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We're not here to be co-editors. The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It's the end of the line. 331dot (talk) 21:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 25

02:35, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Warmtoned

Hello! I'm working on a draft for Sophia Laforteza of Katseye, in other words, a member of a band/musical group. As per WP:BANDMEMBER, the individual needs certain independant notability. I'm requesting general information and clarity as to what independant notability exactly means, and how this guideline could be met. This would greatly help the submission of the draft and getting into mainspace, as well as knowing how exactly notable the subject is in regards to getting it accepted on Wikipedia. Cheers! Warmtoned (talk) 02:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had just realized this may not be the right help desk to ask this question, please let me know if that is the case and where I could be redirected! Warmtoned (talk) 02:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warmtoned, please be patient and wait until your draft has been reviewed before asking for assistance at this help desk. The review is the next step. Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I had figured this help desk wasn’t the right placement to ask a question about notability as per WP:BANDMEMBER, so I appreciate the clarity. Warmtoned 🕯 talk! 13:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:48, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Ms 2024 baiiiii

Beatbot is a top brand in robotic pool cleaner industry, how can a brand be list in wikipedia, thanks Ms 2024 baiiiii (talk) 03:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ms 2024 baiiiii Wikipedia isn't a brand listing, neither is it a place for promotion. You need to demonstrate that the company is notable by providing multiple independent reliable sources. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 04:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ms 2024 baiiiii, your one sentence draft utterly fails to make the case that this product is notable. Compare it to an article about a somewhat similar household robot Roomba, which is vastly more detailed and has 168 references. Your references, except for one, are terrible. Cullen328 (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes, thanks Ms 2024 baiiiii (talk) 08:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:11, 25 November 2024 review of submission by 2400:AC40:61C:3C89:A194:3975:78D3:3FA4

Why? 2400:AC40:61C:3C89:A194:3975:78D3:3FA4 (talk) 05:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, right now you don't have references, which is a problem. But I don't know why it was rejected. @SafariScribe? -- asilvering (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, that was a wrong click of reject instead of decline. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:49, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Isaajibola

Dear Team,

I am currently working on an article titled Zubaida Umar. Unfortunately, I made an error by redrafting another article with the same content, which was subsequently published. This has resulted in a conflict between the two articles, preventing the first article from being considered for submission, and the submission was ultimately declined.

I have been trying to delete the second draft but have been unsuccessful. As a temporary measure, I recently edited the second draft and deleted all its content before publishing it.

I would like to confirm if this approach is the correct way to resolve the issue so that I do not have conflicting articles requiring merging. My goal is to resubmit the first article on Zubaida Umar for consideration.

Thank you for your assistance. Isaajibola (talk) 10:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

checkY resolved, after user came to the IRC live chat for help. qcne (talk) 11:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:59, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Nabil Madi

Publishing the article on Wikipedia Nabil Madi (talk) 11:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nabil Madi Not as presented, no. no Declined 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have resubmitted it for review. It is unlikely to be accepted, as it is poorly sourced and many parts are unsourced. Wikipedia articles cannot be used as a source for other Wikipedia articles. You seem to be writing about yourself, this is highly discouraged, see the autobiography policy. Also, the image of yourself seems to be professionally taken, but you claim it as your own personal work and claim you own the copyright. Please clarify. Typically the photographer owns the copyright. 331dot (talk) 12:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:09, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Sillygoose92

how do I make this an article titled Draft: Daniel J. Ballard ? Sillygoose92 (talk) 12:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The specific title of a draft is not particularly relevant. If the draft is accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. You can create drafts via the Article Wizard which will start them at a better title than the name of your sandbox, for future reference. 331dot (talk) 12:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:44, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Hobodubo

I’m new here I need assistance Hobodubo (talk) 13:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no indication that the person you have wrote about meets our WP:NOTABILITY criteria, @Hobodubo qcne (talk) 13:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:56, 25 November 2024 review of submission by OgTheig69

why si this rejected? i dont understand. i have references. it has all the ingo on how this word started within the Twitch gaming community. OgTheig69 (talk) 13:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't accept AI-generated drafts about dictionary definitions. Maybe go to Urban Dictionary. qcne (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:00, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Weasleyrian

I am seeking guidance regarding my draft of SmarterMail, which was rejected on November 22 by @Bonadea. I believe the rejection may have been premature. I have been addressing the concerns raised and believe that the topic meets Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion. Could you advise on how I can appeal the rejection and continue improving the draft? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated. Weasleyrian (talk) 14:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first step to appeal a rejection is to appeal to the rejecting reviewer directly, please use their user talk page. You can continue editing the draft regardless. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before appealing to the reviewer make sure you have at least three high quality sources that discuss SmarterMail in-depth with significant coverage, otherwise you will be will wasting everyone's time. Theroadislong (talk) 14:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI to reviewers, there's lots of discussion on the user talk page. This is a difficult one where the user has been assigned this task by their professor. qcne (talk) 14:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Weasleyrian: It looks very clear from the draft history, the discussion on your user talk page, and the sources (including several that had been removed from the draft) that the software is not independently notable – and since the company creating the software isn't notable either, I don't see how there could be an article about it. I am very sorry that you were set an impossible assignment, but that doesn't change anything in terms of whether the software is notable or not.
What do you mean when you said the rejection was premature? The draft had been declined six times by three different reviewers before I saw it, so I don't really understand the "premature" comment. --bonadea contributions talk 16:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I referred to the rejection as premature, I meant that I was still in the process of revising and rewriting the content at the time. The company and its software are notable, as their products have been widely recognized. Additionally, a search on Google reveals books and articles discussing the product and the company. I was in the process of reviewing these materials to ensure they met the criteria for reliable and independent sources. Weasleyrian (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Weasleyrian. You resubmitted at at 2024-11-21 21:02:36, and @Bonadearejected it eleven and a half hours later, at 2024-11-22 08:38:10. You're perfectly entitled to continue editing after submitting, as you did; but you had asked for a review, which Bonadea gave. Why did you resubmit if it was not ready for review?
I am sorry that your professor appears to have set you an impossible task. Has your professor read WP:Education program/Educators?
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 17:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:01, 25 November 2024 review of submission by KellyWendorf

Cannot publish page KellyWendorf (talk) 16:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@KellyWendorf: that's because this draft has been rejected. Rejection means the end of the road.
And in case you haven't been made aware of this yet, we very strongly discourage autobiographies; see WP:AUTOBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, @KellyWendorf. I have rejected it as you are not notable and do not merit an article on Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 16:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
It seems you may need more notable sources to publish us. Here are links to articles that feature Kelly Wendorf:
MSN Travel
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/tripideas/santa-fe-new-mexico-travel-guide-a-soulful-journey-of-self-love-wellness-in-the-land-of-enchantment/ar-AA1ttYzE?cvid=8ab2f3dbf62b4caef3a509f729eb9358&ei=8#
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/19/style/equus-horses.html
Vogue
https://www.vogue.com/article/how-equine-therapy-can-help-us-face-our-fears
Kindred Magazine
https://kindredmedia.org/2021/03/finding-a-bridge-to-indigenous-wisdom-and-worldview-an-interview-with-kelly-wendorf/
The Wall Street Journal
https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-horse-therapy-make-you-a-better-at-your-job-1543962433
Forbes
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinaliao/2018/10/31/a-look-at-equus-an-equine-program-thatll-change-your-life/?sh=7f3fec244734
Is this enough to prove that we should have a Wikipedia Page?
Link to website as well press/podcast page
https://www.equusinspired.com/press KellyWendorf (talk) 16:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, nope @KellyWendorf. None of those sources provide significant coverage or are independent. qcne (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The thing that you're missing, @KellyWendorf, is that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Unless you can find several sources each meeting the triple criteria in WP:42, there is literally nothing that can go into an article about you. ColinFine (talk) 17:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:22, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Chethu0728

The article written for a person is a doctor by profession. He has done excellant contribution to the society. He is a receipient of B.C. Roy Presidential award in 2018. Please let me know what changes to be done for the approval of the article in Wikipedia. Chethu0728 (talk) 16:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chethu0728 Please see the criteria for inclusion at WP:NPERSON. You will need to totally re-write this draft as currently it is just a resume. Wikipedia does not host resumes. qcne (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:30, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Sunflowerlilies

Hi there! Could you tell me what I need to work on? I'm not quite sure what you mean. Sunflowerlilies (talk) 16:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sunflowerlilies, your draft has a lot of content and a single source. Is all the content from that one source? We would usually require at least three independent sources to prove that a person meets our definition of "notable". qcne (talk) 16:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Everything is from a single source. Sunflowerlilies (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And it's not even clear what that 'source' is, or whether it indeed is a valid source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://kurdcollect.com/index.php/%D9%85%D8%AD%DB%95%D9%85%DB%95%D8%AF_%D8%A6%DB%95%D9%85%DB%8C%D9%86_%D8%A6%D8%A7%D8%BA%D8%A7%DB%8C_%D9%87%DB%95%D9%85%DB%95%D9%88%DB%95%D9%86%D8%AF_%DB%8C%DB%95%D9%83%DB%95%D9%85_%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%85%DB%8C_%D9%82%DB%95%D8%B2%D8%A7%DB%8C_%DA%86%DB%95%D9%85%DA%86%DB%95%D9%85%D8%A7%DA%B5
Here is the single source. Sunflowerlilies (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sunflowerlilies: okay, thank you. For future reference, if you have an online source, cite it; this makes it much easier for reviewers (and readers) to verify the source. And if you're citing an offline source, you need to provide sufficient bibliographical detail so that the source can be reliably identified; see WP:OFFLINE for more on this. Finally, sources must be published, which "Interviews and questions from the descendants of Muhammad Amin Agha Hamwand" does not sound like. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:06, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Wikigeekgod99

which items are problematic vs. unacceptable? Wikigeekgod99 (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first problem is that basically all of the useful sourcing is about the documentary; there's almost no content here that's about Juson, outside of a basic description of who she is. You may have the framework for an article about the documentary here, not Juson specifically.
The other problem is that even if you're just writing about the documentary, there needs to be a massive paring down of the sources. Independent reviews of the documentary that are in large publications and aren't part of interviews are good. However, there's a lot of sources here that do nothing to help the article; Wikipedia can not be used as a source, nor are things like schedules that list a viewing time for the film. Flooding an article with anything that is a passing mention of the subject is completely counterproductive; it's a bit like washing the dishes by flooding your kitchen with a fire hose. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:20, 25 November 2024 review of submission by 216.11.33.210

What can I do to get it approved? I am trying to publish this for a reason, not just for fun. 216.11.33.210 (talk) 18:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing you can do, it has been rejected. 331dot (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And if your reason is anything other than "to help Wikipedia reach its aim of summarising what independent reliable sources say about notable subjects", then you have not understood what Wikipedia is. ColinFine (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:57, 25 November 2024 review of submission by Thisisnot1621

Not sure how I would make this not sound like advertisement. Thisisnot1621 (talk) 20:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's academic, since it was rejected, but Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about an organization and its offerings or views. A Wikipedia article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:11, 25 November 2024 review of submission by JanaFerrume

Hi I have edited article and appreciate feedback, thank you JanaFerrume (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JanaFerrume: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):
Nothing you have helps a whit to show she is notable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 00:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 26

00:39, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Monetbaer

I am trying to publish this page on Adam Lynn and I think the submission was declined because it appeared that I had a financial stake. I would love help updating/editing this so that it complies with Wikipedia's terms and does not come across as biased. Thanks! Monetbaer (talk) 00:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Monetbaer: No, it was declined because you have uncited claims in the article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 01:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:36, 26 November 2024 review of submission by ShrimpInAHotTub

There’s a box around the “Size” section and I don’t know how to remove it ShrimpInAHotTub (talk) 02:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ShrimpInAHotTub I've fixed it for you - there was an extra space before the text, causing it to display as code. I've also cleaned up the references. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! ShrimpInAHotTub (talk) 02:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:32, 26 November 2024 review of submission by 118.221.204.69

ㅁ 118.221.204.69 (talk) 03:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No sources were provided in the draft, nor does Google provide any clarification, at least as a discrete, named entity in itself. It just looks like a long sequence of amino acids. Assuming the name itself isn't a joke because of it's length (I would imagine if this were real, the fairly standard abbreviations would be used), sources have to be provided for an article to exist, and nobody that has edited this draft over the last three years have provided any such sourcing. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:53, 26 November 2024 review of submission by WWWedit

My submission was rejected, and I completely understand and agree with the decision. It read more like an essay rather than an encyclopedic article. One of the challenges is that solid, documented sources about communal ovens in Morocco are not readily available, as these traditional facilities are deeply woven into local communities and often lack systematic documentation. However, we have to start somewhere, and in many cases, we must rely on oral histories—accounts from older generations who lived through and witnessed these traditions firsthand. For instance, Farrane Mama is not just a communal oven but a cultural monument, and its story deserves to be documented for future generations. What do you suggest is the best way to go with this one. Thanks. WWWedit (talk) 03:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles here require sources, and there's no way around that, so it'll be nearly impossible to find an article if sources can't be found. If that is the case, I would suggest that if you would like to spread awareness of this sort of thing, writing about it on your own website is a great way to get people to read about it. And if the topic further interests researchers who happen to read your page, perhaps some will produce more written research that will someday be the basis for an article here. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:58, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Ngiphondims

I'm a bigginner Ngiphondims (talk) 04:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a specific question? If it's about your WP:AUTOBIO, you've provided no sources that come close to establishing that you're notable, in Wikipedia's sense. In fact, it looks like you took a basic template and then ignored half of the template, leaving things like "citation to reliable source, print or e, goes here" and "Important book to know about" in the draft. This draft was rejeccted, meaning that it will not be reconsidered at this time. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:43, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Ghaloit1983

as i am new to all these and want to contribute to wikipedia, but as i know about my topics and i am well sure for the information i shared about "Asian Education Group". but still the rejections happening again and again. Still i am eagerly exited to know the sugestions and need help to publish my first article successfully. Ghaloit1983 (talk) 08:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghaloit1983, your draft has no complete sentences. It tells us almost nothing about the topic. It fails to establish that the topic is notable. It bears no resemblance to an actual encyclopedia article. It is more like a business database entry, and that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 08:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) If you work for the Asian Education Group, that must be disclosed, see WP:PAID as well as WP:COI.
The draft was declined twice and now rejected, this means it will not be considered further. Literally the entire content of the article was "Asian Education Group, Noida, UP, India. Established in November 1986, Owned by Dr. Sandeep Marwah, Founder Film City, Noida, UP, India". Wikipedia is not a directory of things that exist. This is an encyclopedia which has articles that summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, like a notable organization or business.
Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and it isn't the only or even best way someone can contribute. We have millions of articles, most of which need work. It is highly recommended that new users first spend much time to get experience and knowledge of how Wikipedia operates by first editing existing articles in areas that interest them, as well as using the new user tutorial. It's possible to be a succssful editor and never write a single new article. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the valuable inputs, surely i will try to write new articles with keeping these points in mind. Ghaloit1983 (talk) 11:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:54, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Talosofficial2

Hello sir! i need help because i am keep getting rejected what can i do to fix it ? i fixed the part of advert and added Reference Talosofficial2 (talk) 12:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Talosofficial2: you have not been rejected, but your draft has.
I'm afraid your experience is rather typical for people who come to Wikipedia and immediately try to do the most challenging task there is for newcomers: to create a new article. It's like somebody picking up a tennis racket for the first time, and immediately entering a major competition, or having your first violin lesson and trying to give a public recital: not only don't you know how to do it, you probably won't even understand the feedback you get.
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.
My quick summary of how to create an article:
  1. Look for sources which are reliable, independent, and have significant coverage of the subject. Ignore anything written, published, or commissioned by the subject or their associates. Ignore anything based on a press release or interview with the subject or their associates. Ignore anything which is on social media, forums, wikis (including Wikipedia). Ignore anything self-published, or published by an unknown or vanity press. Ignore anything that does not mention the subject. Ignore anything which does not have at least a few paragraphs about the subject. Ignore anything where those few paragraphs about the subject are obviously copied from the subject's biography or website. See WP:42 for more details.
  2. If you do not have at least three sources that meet all those requirements, then give up: you are wasting your time trying to create this article.
  3. If you do have three or more sources, then forget everything that you know about the subject, and write a summary of what those sources say. Some of what they say might be trivial and not appropriate to an encyclopaedia, and you can leave those out. But make sure that you don't leave anything out just because you disagree with it.
ColinFine (talk) 13:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I understand everything. I fixed all the issues that caused my submission to be rejected. However, I was blocked from resubmitting because:
Submission rejected on 26 November 2024 by KylieTastic (talk):
This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Talosofficial2 (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Talosofficial2: that's not a question; was there something you wanted to ask?
But yes, you're right, this draft has been rejected, which means resubmission is no longer possible. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yeah its a question what does it mean with:
This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia Talosofficial2 (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Talosofficial2: it means that even after multiple reviews, the draft provides no evidence that the subject is notable, and it will therefore not be considered further. For most subjects notability is evidenced by citing multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject, and have provided significant coverage of it. This draft cites no such source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is clearly a very new venture and it is way too soon for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is for subjects that are already notable, this looks more like an attempt to use Wikipedia to promote. The site does not even have it's own domain just what appears to be a free hosting sub domain. It has six basic blog posts and claims only "23 Developers Already Onboard". As the site links to what appears to be your YouTube channel I am also assuming this is an undeclared Conflict of interest. KylieTastic (talk) 15:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:52, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Deathfrog10

I really want this to be posted Deathfrog10 (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you have provided 0 sources despite writing a lot and after three declines. Therefore, it's been rejected and won't be considered any further. Additionally (see also the comments on that draft), its not written in the format that readers would expect. JuniperChill (talk) 17:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:23, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Emmasaltbox

Hi, my article was turned down because the listed citations were linked with the topic (Lexercise). However, I don't believe this to be true. I found external, third-party writeups of the topic. Why was this denied? Thanks, Emma Emmasaltbox (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Emmasaltbox: the sources are blogs and the like, quite possibly sponsored or some form of churnalism. I don't think any of them are fully independent, and they certainly don't come across as particularly reliable. I'd say this was declined correctly.
What is your relationship with this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually came across Lexercise through one of these blogs and have since used their free testing. I do think these third party reviews should not cause a denial of the page based on a guess that they might be connected, especially since there are no affiliate links on the pages or anything that would point to this being the case. Emmasaltbox (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Emmasaltbox: it doesn't matter whether they are independent or not: Blogs almost always fail to be WP:reliable sources, so may not be cited at all, and cannot contribute to establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:31, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Deathfrog10

Can’t submit anymore please help Deathfrog10 (talk) 18:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deathfrog10: that's correct; this draft has been rejected, which means the end of the road. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Deathfrog10: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further, no matter how often you remove the decline/reject notices. No sources, no article, no debate. (You need to actually cite your sources here.) This article also reads like a press release. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:51, 26 November 2024 review of submission by Tepojama

Sorry if this is a silly question but can someone tell me if I need to do anything to clean up the formatting of my references or if they're good as-is? Thank you! Tepojama (talk) 19:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say they should be formatted in accordance with WP:REFB, instead of just a Bare URL. JuniperChill (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:11, 26 November 2024 review of submission by JohnHapi

Why can’t my page get accepted to the Wikipedia Article? I have sources of pictures, ancient-medieval paintings, ancient-medieval art works, statues, 16th-19th century art works, many cultural relics, historical objects stored in museums, historical clothes stored in museums, modern art works portrayal of the historical past, and many more. I study China-NorthEast Asia History for many years. I will send it in the MiaoFuk Wikipedia. MiaoFuk is a clothing very similar to HanFuk (HanFu on Wikipedia) and it’s also has GiJzoang/QiZhuang clothings (there is a QiZhuang Wikipedia) MiaoFuk is a Chinese clothing style worn by another ethnicity. I have a lot of sources, I will just send it in later. Chinese-NorthEast Asia History is not really taught in the United States and that’s okay because I can send in more works. Wikipedia has a lot of American History compared to any other Worldwide Histories because it’s an American invention. JohnHapi (talk) 22:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnHapi you had six oppotunities to include sources yet you didn't, and the draft was rejected as a result. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for butting here uninvited, but I think I may be able to help out here.
First of all "MiaoFuk" or "Miao Fuk" doesn't appear to a word in English. It appears to be an idiosyncratic transliteration of 苗服 - the coda "k" here would it appear to indicate that it's a transliteration from one of the Yue Chinese family of languages.
What I would suggest is that you start a draft Draft:Miao clothing, starting with text like "Miao clothing is the tradition dress of the Miao people..." and references from reliable sources, not your own personal assertion that "I have sources of pictures, ancient-medieval paintings, ancient-medieval art works, statues, 16th-19th century art works, many cultural relics, historical objects stored in museums, historical clothes stored in museums, modern art works portrayal of the historical past, and many more."
I hope this may assist you. Peter in Australia aka Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 11:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 27

04:58, 27 November 2024 review of submission by Otaneka

My page was declined due to missing footnotes. I'm unsure of how to add the footnotes. Can an experienced editor complete this task? Otaneka (talk) 04:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Otaneka: nobody else can really do that for you, at least not without considerable difficulty, because we don't know from which source each piece of information came from. The process is explained at WP:REFB, please see that for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:19, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:47, 27 November 2024 review of submission by Venugo

Please merge this page with Devendra Rajesh Kothe new page or already existing subject Venugo (talk) 05:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Venugo: there is no miraculous Merge-a-matic® article merger, it's just a case of manually editing the content to selectively insert information (and references) from one article to another; or, if you like, improving and supplementing one article with information appearing in the other. In any case, this isn't something we do here at the help desk, that's your job (or the job of whoever wishes such merging to be done). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:32, 27 November 2024 review of submission by HewRamen

I have a project that makes a new topic and I chose to make a new card game that was released 1 year ago UnionArena most of the resources are on the official site I don't know how to find other sites that can Improve my topic which got declined HewRamen (talk) 06:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HewRamen: Wikipedia doesn't publish articles on things that merely exist (with some exceptions, like major geographical features or most species), but rather on things that have been previously covered in the media. Wikipedia articles then (mostly) summarise what media outlets, and more specifically reliable and independent secondary sources, have said. If such sources don't exist, then they cannot be summarised, and a Wikipedia article on the subject cannot be created; this is described as the subject not being "notable" enough for publication. I expect this is what we're dealing with here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:01, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:30, 27 November 2024 review of submission by Commercialindustrial

Hello, I’m seeking guidance on how to improve this draft. It has been rejected multiple times for reading like an advertisement.

I have made several attempts to rewrite it with a more neutral tone, but I’m struggling to get it approved. To me, it seems neutral, but I may be missing something. Could anyone point out specific sentences or sections that come across as promotional? I would appreciate your feedback so I can make the necessary edits. Commercialindustrial (talk) 07:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Commercialindustrial: this draft has now been rejected (after multiple earlier declines), and will therefore not be considered further. Hence, there seems little point in analysing it further.
You have stated that you are not being paid to edit on this subject. In that case, could you please describe, in your own words, your relationship with Quintessential? Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback. I understand that the draft has been rejected multiple times, and I appreciate the concerns raised. My intention with this draft is to provide a factual and encyclopaedic entry for the company, relying on reliable, independent sources that establish its notability.
To clarify, I do not have any connection to the company, nor am I being paid for this submission. My sole aim is to contribute verifiable information about a subject that, in my view, meets Wikipedia’s notability standards due to significant independent coverage in reputable publications and its contributions to the industry. Commercialindustrial (talk) 07:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Commercialindustrial: just to clarify, this draft has not been rejected multiple times; it has been declined multiple times, and rejected once. The difference may seem pedantic, but is actually substantive: decline means that the draft can be resubmitted once the decline reasons have been addressed; rejection means it cannot.
You registered your user account, and as your very first edit created a draft on Quintessential in your sandbox User:Commercialindustrial/sandbox, followed shortly after that by creating the same at Draft:Quintessential (company). To date, your entire edit history has to do with Quintessential. Yet you have no relationship with them. Well okay then, if you say so. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification regarding the difference between “declined” and “rejected.” I appreciate your explanation, as it helps me better understand the process and policies.
Regarding my account activity, you are correct that my edits have focused on this draft. This is because I registered my account specifically to contribute information about this topic I believe is deserving of an encyclopaedic entry. While my editing experience is limited, I am eager to learn and improve to ensure my contributions align with Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you again for your time and assistance. Commercialindustrial (talk) 08:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're just wondering how you came to edit about this topic- you didn't pick it at random to edit about. Do you intend to edit about other topics? 331dot (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to edit other topics as well. Since I live in the neighbourhood of this topic, I chose to contribute to it because I believe it is deserving of an encyclopaedic entry. Commercialindustrial (talk) 01:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:49, 27 November 2024 review of submission by Maumau1978

Dear help desk team,

I would like to provide better source for my draft on Automad. Therefore I have the two following questions:

1. Is it ok to use references in other languages. In example having an article written in English that references a webpage written in German? 2. I can see that articles about related subjects in the same space provide a similar set of sources such as the pages of Drupal, Bolt, CMSimple, Grav, Made-Simple, just to name a few. More can be found here in the PHP section. What is the main difference here and how can I improve my article to be notable?

Thank you in advance and all the best! Maumau1978 (talk) 08:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References do not need to be in English, as long as they meet all other requirements for being reliable sources. It's not a good idea to use any random article as a model or example, as those too could be inappropriate and just not addressed yet by a volunteer. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits and not based on the presence of others that themselves may be inappropriate. See other stuff exists. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have been examined by the community. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:46, 27 November 2024 review of submission by 118.69.188.172

Can you advise what I should do improve this article and meet Wikipedia standards? 118.69.188.172 (talk) 09:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted it for review, the reviewer will leave you feedback. Please see the messages left by the previous reviewers. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:03, 27 November 2024 review of submission by Kwame lemuel

my project was deniad Kwame lemuel (talk) 11:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwame lemuel your poorly-formatted draft was declined, meaning you can still improve it and resubmit. The formatting seems to be Markdown - did you copy this from somewhere? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:31, 27 November 2024 review of submission by YamunaIRE

Why does this page have to be speedy deleted? YamunaIRE (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's AI-generated spam, @YamunaIRE. qcne (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:42, 27 November 2024 review of submission by WIKI.THEMASTER

I'm creating a page to explain the benefits of taking online traffic school, trying to understand the approval process WIKI.THEMASTER (talk) 18:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WIKI.THEMASTER, Wikipedia doesn't host AI-generated essays or how-to guides. Wikipedia articles are summaries of independent reliable secondary sources. qcne (talk) 18:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WIKI.THEMASTER: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. We don't accept AI-generated text anywhere on Wikipedia due to its inability to stay on-topic and its tendency to make things up out of whole cloth to support whatever arguments the prompt demands. We also do not accept essays or other forms of original research no matter if it is written by a human or an AI chatbot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:00, 27 November 2024 review of submission by 70.23.62.81

Hello, I am a manager for musician Gloria Sabra. Please either approve the page for musician Gloria Sabra, or re-edit to have it approved. You can check that Gloria is a musician and her music is available on major music streaming platforms. Thank you. 70.23.62.81 (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First, the draft was rejected (not just declined) on 8 November, as not sufficiently notable for Wikipedia.
Secondly, if you are her manager, then you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor. This is a requirement of its terms of service.
Thirdly, Wikipedia is not social media or a listing service. It is not enough that Sabra is a musician or that her music is available. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and any article about her should be based almost 100% on what people wholly unconnected with her have chosen to publish about her in reliably published sources, nothing else. Your draft, even after three declines, cites not one reliable source, and therefore makes no claim that she meets Wikipedia's criteria on notability. ColinFine (talk) 22:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 28

05:11, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Mackmahak

can you help me to understand what Wikipedia can carry...as per the guidelines we have added the content Mackmahak (talk) 05:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mackmahak: I'm not sure what you're asking, but this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:19, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Sujitbus

Hi Admin, The edit text for my biography has been declined. So I want to know how I can Fixed the issue. Sujitbus (talk) 06:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sujitbus: there is insufficient evidence of notability; you need to show how you are notable by either the WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR or WP:NACTOR standard.
Also, articles on living people require inline citations. Please see WP:REFB for advice.
Finally, if this is about you, please read and understand our autobiography policy WP:AUTOBIO. In short, autobiographies are very strongly discouraged. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DoubleGrazing,
Yes It's my autobiography. inline citations is missing on my bio page. So I'll update on same. and I'm fulfill of notability I have articles and I'm award winner Author including actor who's worked on Indian TV shows and some notable movies. Sujitbus (talk) 09:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also suggest that you read WP:PROUD. There are good reasons to not want an article about yourself. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:47, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Tizzythewhale

any suggestions for this article to get accepted in wiki Tizzythewhale (talk) 07:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tizzythewhale: this draft was rejected (months ago) for lack of evidence of notability. If you wish to appeal the rejection, you need to take your case to the rejecting reviewer, with evidence of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:53, 28 November 2024 review of submission by AviKluger

My Draft was rejected: "This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner." I am interested in improving the Draft so it might be accepted in the future. Yet, I did not understand the comments. For example, it says, "Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources," while my Draft contains 27 peer-reviewed journal articles as secondary resources. What am I missing here? Could you please direct me to existing entries considered exemplary in this domain so they can serve as a model for improving my Draft? AviKluger (talk) 07:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AviKluger: This reads more like a research paper about the method, mixed with an instruction manual on how to do it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano thank you very much for this helpful clarification. Could you please suggest a few model entries in related fields so I can attempt to revise my entry successfully? Avi AviKluger (talk) 10:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:24, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Wertk

I do agree with the "not sufficient content" as this article requires more info & citations but "Submission should be merged into an existing article" with Arrest_of_Imran_Khan is not ideal because that event happened in 9 May 2023. The indiscriminate killing of civilians by security forces in Islamabad happened on 26 Nov 2024 with at "least" confirmed deaths of 17 individuals as per the Guardian newspaper. Event of this magnitude deserve its own page and we have many such examples on wikipedia. Perhaps the name could be changed to less charged language like '26 November Incident'. Wertk (talk) 08:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wertk: okay... so what is your question? This draft has been resubmitted (without any improvement, which is never a good idea, although I can see some edits were made after that), so you will get a new review sooner or later.
If you haven't already done so, you may want to review our guideline on notability of events, at WP:EVENT. Given that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a news outlet, just because an event has occurred doesn't necessarily mean that we should have an article on it. (Note, I'm not saying that we should not have an article on this particular event, just making a general point.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel that the reviewers have gotten it wrong, you are free to move the draft into the encyclopedia yourself(though it's not a good idea unless you have experience in having articles accepted, which you don't). This process is (usually) voluntary. You would be taking the risk, though, that it would get nominated for deletion. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This would be declined since we already have an article on this, and this falls into a contentious topic anyway. New users should stay as far away from contentious topics as possible. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:37, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Anonpriest

The draft was declined because of it's resources. I would assistance on finding other resources if any and if possible to mention why the resources I provided were not adequate. Anonpriest (talk) 08:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anonpriest: to be more precise, this draft was declined because it does not demonstrate notability, which, indeed, is usually a problem with the sources. You should be writing this by summarising what reliable and independent sources have said about the subject, and then citing those sources as its references. Assuming that's what you have done, then it could be that the subject really isn't notable enough. In any case, we don't do the research for you, that's very much your job as the draft author. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious message

Hi,

I received message from Laiba Fareed stating that against 1000$ she will approve my article and will maintain it for the next 8 months. I see this as a potential scam but as long as this is my first article in Wikipedia I am not sure if this is just a scam or this is some agent working for Wikipedia and trying to win some extra cash for work which is usually free. Strange aspect of the conversation was that the conversation happened in WhatsApp not in the Wikipedia website (as normally happened till now). Could you please provide me with some information and also check what is the status of my draft because I think that I am pretty close to approval and she knows it (if she really is a moderator for Wikipedia) and just before publishing the article she tries to earn extra money. I am open to hear your opinion and I hope that soon my article will be approved :)

Best Regards, Lstr1 (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lstr1, that is a scam and unfortunately a common one. Wikipedia will never ask for money in exchange for editing services.
Please immediately follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning and report the user to the Wikimedia Foundation. qcne (talk) 09:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Lstr1: I've no idea who Laida Fareed is, but you're right, this is almost certainly a scam; see WP:SCAM for advice on dealing with it. And do not pay any money, there's a high chance you won't get anything for it, nor get it back. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for the fast response. I will definitely report this lady. Lstr1 (talk) 09:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:29, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Epiphytehsu

I need an advice for how did the article "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". Epiphytehsu (talk) 09:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:33, 28 November 2024 review of submission by IlikeCubepidia

Dear Reader,

I trust this message finds you well. As part of my ongoing efforts to craft a comprehensive and highly informative tutorial, I am focusing on the nuanced task of opening a Chromebook while simultaneously holding a full glass of coconut juice. It would be nice if you gave me any tips or improvments for next time because my article got rejected which i could not understand why. IlikeCubepidia (talk) 10:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't vandalise Wikipedia, @IlikeCubepidia, which is what your draft was. You may be blocked from editing if you vandalise further. qcne (talk) 10:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IlikeCubepidia: I've deleted your draft (such as it was), as it clearly had nothing to do with our objective of building an encyclopaedia. Please find a different platform for your tutorials. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am very sorry and did not have any intent to vandilize wikipedia but its just very hard to find things to write about that someone else hasnt written about these days. IlikeCubepidia (talk) 10:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IlikeCubepidia: there are countless ways to contribute here, besides creating new articles. In fact, new users would be well advised to contribute in just about any other way, before attempting to write their first article. I will post some suggestions on your talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IlikeCubepidia Check out Special:Homepage which includes suggested edits to existing articles which would be a really good place to start. qcne (talk) 10:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:37, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Purnarthapms

I wish to know in detail why the request was declined. Moreover, this is the page of a renowned Indian Entrepreneur. In the reference section, all the key references have been provided pertaining to the person. Request you to kindly review the same. Purnarthapms (talk) 10:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Purnarthapms: because it was purely promotional, with no evidence of notability.
And you clearly have a conflict of interest, which must be disclosed without delay. I've already posted instructions on your talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no undisclosed payment. I am an employee of this company and I have posted the information of my owner. Kindly explain how this can be an undisclosed payment. I have also included all the credible references for you to ensure the correctness of the content. Do let me know what else do you need. Purnarthapms (talk) 10:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you are an employee, it is mandatory that you make a declaration on your User Page. Follow the instructions at WP:PAID immediately. qcne (talk) 10:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Purnarthapms: your very next edit should be to disclose your paid-editing status, before you find yourself blocked.
And please don't open a new thread with each comment, just add to this thread. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have upaded the user page as per the guidelines. Request you to kindly help me publish the draft again. Purnarthapms (talk) 11:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Purnarthapms. Unfortunately your username is against policy and you will need to change it.
As for Draft:Rahul Rathi, I see no indication that this person meets our strict notability criteria. The draft is also written in an inappropriate way for an encyclopaedia. Therefore the draft will not be published.
Have a read of Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Let me know if you have any further questions. qcne (talk) 11:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:53, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Mayommugezi

I want to know what is missing on my article? Mayommugezi (talk) 13:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication that Mayom meets our special notability criteria, @Mayommugezi. You can find the criteria at WP:NPEOPLE. qcne (talk) 13:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:44, 28 November 2024 review of submission by 102.85.58.140

Alimansi Wanzu Ainomugisha well known as Spyda Mc is a Ugandan hip hop rapper, Mc, and Events Host.

Spyda Mc was born in 1986 Alimansi Wanzu Ainomugisha. He started his music career in early 90s as a Underground Rapper until 2000s and he put his music career on hold to teacher Rap in the Slums of Kampala and outside the country. In 2024 he changed to Afro Beats and released songs like Abantu Mukisa. He released his breakthrough through song "Abantu Mukisa" in 2024 and he was nominated in several awards across the country. Spyda Mc was the first African to do the song cover of Dear Mama by Tupac Shakur. 102.85.58.140 (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and after it has been rejected, you do not resubmit it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:28, 28 November 2024 review of submission by P.S Parvez islam

My life line P.S Parvez islam (talk) 16:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia, your draft needs to be in English. If you would prefer to contribute in Hindi, please go to the Hindi Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@P.S Parvez islam: that's not a question, did you have one in mind you wanted to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@P.S Parvez islam: do not do that again, you are already getting quite close to a block even without spamming this help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MD parvez islam

My life line P.S Parvez islam (talk) 16:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? qcne (talk) 16:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:14, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Ashok76yadav

hello sir way you are rejected my artical Ashok76yadav (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashok76yadav: This draft has been rejected as the product of an AI chatbot and will not be considered further unless rewritten by yourself without using the AI. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ashok76yadav AI generated promotional spam, which is prohibited. qcne (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:23, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Edward200211

What is wrong with the page Edward200211 (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, @Edward200211, but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and doesn't host biographic articles about non-notable Youtubers. qcne (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You state this but there are plenty of much less notable people on Wikipedia. Understood that it's an encyclopedia - TheReactionKing (Edward Speller) is known, gathered over 4 Million views across YouTube alone. 12,000,000 if we include all channels. Over, 50,000 subscribers if we add all channels. Theres people on Wiki with just a date of birth and place of birth. This is certainly more notable than a lot of Wiki pages. I request it's accepted. Edward200211 (talk) 18:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do go ahead and provide three strong reliable independent sources that provide significant coverage of Edward. qcne (talk) 18:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Edward200211 Wikipedia contains many sub-par articles. They usually date from the Wild West days of Wikipedia. Times have changed. There is only so much time we have to clear them out. If you would like to tell us about a few then we will look at them individually. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like my draft accepted. I believe 50,000 collective subs as well as 12,000,000 consolidated views is worthy enough of a Wikipedia page. Even more recent pages have less information and popularity than this. Not just "wild west days" of Wikipedia. Edward200211 (talk) 18:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Edward200211 With respect, your desire to have what appears to be your autobiography accepted has no value here. The only thing which has value is references which pass WP:42. There is much work to do. Please do that work, then the rejecting reviewer may consider reversing their rejection. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Viewcounts do not contribute to notability, @Edward200211. As I've stated, give me some strong reliable independent sources that provide significant coverage and I will assess. qcne (talk) 18:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:49, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Adityaksingh409

it's my request to approve my page for an punjabi singer 'Alfaaz" Adityaksingh409 (talk) 18:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adityaksingh409: No sources, no article, no debate. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adityaksingh409 totally unreferenced and will not go forward 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:25, 28 November 2024 review of submission by Orange sticker

Hi there, I submitted this draft for review as I was aware there was already a redirect. Now I have discovered that in the redirect's history there was already a full article, so I have restored this. How can I withdraw this draft from the review queue? Orange sticker (talk) 23:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orange sticker  Done. I removed the request for review. if you wish for the draft to be deleted please just blank the page, or reply here and sometime will handle that for you 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 23:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'll blank it when I've checked if any of the references can be used on the other article. Orange sticker (talk) 23:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 29

03:43, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Killianordono

i had to submit multiples times because of people making changes but it is the right requirement for a page. Killianordono (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Killianordono: None of your sources are usable (the only one that isn't an online storefront or social media is Genius), and even if they were they aren't properly cited. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 03:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
properly cited? as in what how do you do that and i didnt know any sources because i myself is making it about me so there really isnt any sources its the actual person who knows themselves the most writing the article. Killianordono (talk) 03:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Killianordono: I linked Help:Referencing for beginners above. As to the actual person who knows themselves the most we absolutely cannot rely on "just trust me bro", especially if the person asserting that is the subject themselves. We are looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that discuss the subject at length, are written by identifiable authors, and are subject to fact-checking and other editorial processes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ive fixed the article can it be submitted now? Killianordono (talk) 04:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, because all of your sources are still unusable (as they're the same ones dismissed before) and you still haven't actually properly cited them. (Those angry red notes are malformed cites.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:12, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Thehistorianisaac

How long does a draft need to be for the submission to be accepted? I translated an article from chinese wikipedia but the draft is pretty short compared to some other AfC submissions because tonnes of info related to it are classified Thehistorianisaac (talk) 04:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thehistorianisaac: Length isn't relevant, compliance with English Wikipedia's sourcing/notability requirements is. Straight translations generally don't work for this reason. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:32, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Divya Ramadoss

I dont understand why my article is getting rejected. it is not promotion angle, i strongly feel the article is not an advertisement of the person.kindly help. Divya Ramadoss (talk) 04:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Divya Ramadoss: The article does a lot of editorialising, and is filled with as much buzzwords as your average badly-written article on a company. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:36, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Aesthemii

how do i fix my draft article to it could pass the review? what more reference do i need ? what more do i include? Aesthemii (talk) 04:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aesthemii first of all, you need to properly format the references using inline citations, instead of dumping them at the bottom of the draft. You also need more reliable sources. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:17, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Intenselatte

not sure what i need to add to make it sufficient Intenselatte (talk) 09:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately nothing, @Intenselatte, as I see nothing that makes this person meet our Wikipedia:Notability criteria. qcne (talk) 09:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Intenselatte What is your connection with this person, as you took a picture of them? 331dot (talk) 09:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:01, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Aaron Bradley10

Approval For Aaron Bradley Page. Aaron Bradley10 (talk) 10:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Bradley10 You will need to resubmit the draft for review for it to be considered, which you should only do if you have addressed the concerns of the last reviewer. Note that writing about yourself, while not absolutely forbidden, is highly discouraged, please see the autobiography policy. We don't want to know what you say about yourself, only what independent reliable sources choose to say about you. 331dot (talk) 10:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On your user page, you say you have been paid by Aaron Bradley- if you are not him, you must change your username immediately, please do so via Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:55, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Veer27Gupta

I was creating a new page about ISKCON UJJAIN but something is missing there which makes it declining again and again I'm unable to understand what changes should be done to make it accepted Veer27Gupta (talk) 11:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Veer27Gupta: the draft is unreferenced, and only lists the subject's own website as sources. No subject can establish its own notability; we need to see significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent of the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can I provide reference of wikipedia and resources other than only using their website will make the article publishable, or I have to do some more changes Veer27Gupta (talk) 12:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Veer27Gupta: since you ask, yes, you will probably need to rewrite much of this. Wikipedia articles mostly summarise what independent and reliable sources have previously published about a subject. So you need to start by finding such sources, summarising them (in your own words – no copypasting!), and citing each source against the information it has provided. That will give you the appropriate content, required referencing, and the necessary evidence of notability. You may then supplement this with small amount of factual and non-contentious information from primary sources such as the subject's website, but the draft should be predominantly based on third party sources, not on what you know about this subject or what the subject wants to tell the world about itself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:07, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Thehistorianisaac

I received a comment in my talk page which claimed that my draft had been "created" but when i tried to search it turns out it was not an article yet. May i ask what is going on? Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thehistorianisaac: I think it's someone playing games. I'll go have a word with them... -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:12, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:30, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Zoe Sharma

Because even after providing for reliable references my article is rejected and now I can't resubmit it since the option has been disabled. Zoe Sharma (talk) 18:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zoe Sharma: that is correct, this draft has been rejected, because after multiple reviews there is no meaningful referencing, and even less any evidence of notability. That's is the end of the road for this draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please go through the references that I have provided, they are meaningful as well as reliable. Zoe Sharma (talk) 18:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zoe Sharma: they are not meanintful, they are completely meaningless; they aren't even proper references, just websites. References are meant to support information in the draft. These just point to the home pages of random websites. And they are not cited anywhere in the text, merely piled on at the bottom. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned 2 such references which are mentioned in the text. However they were also rejected. Zoe Sharma (talk) 19:03, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zoe Sharma: there are no references "mentioned in the text". -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zoe Sharma: You have a one-sentence "draft" which makes no mention of any outlets, and your sources are all website homepages, rather than articles on those domains as we require. We're not going to spend hours hunting down the articles you're trying to cite because you're not inclined to do the work. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since I was the one rejecting the draft, I should perhaps be clear about this: I searched both Hindustan Times and Washington Post for mentions of Era Joshi, but there was nothing. Also, the draft text is copied straight from Joshi's own website (which has no other info). It's rather obvious that Era Joshi is simply not notable. Maybe she will become notable in the future, but not yet. --bonadea contributions talk 21:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:53, 29 November 2024 review of submission by Bibi Raheela

Dear I hope this message finds you well. I recently submitted an article about my company, Digitonz, but it was unfortunately rejected. I understand there may be areas for improvement, and I would appreciate your guidance on how I can enhance the article to meet Wikipedia's standards.

I have been working in this field since 2014 and registered my company in 2024. I want to ensure the content adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines, and I am open to any suggestions or support you can provide in making the necessary improvements.

Could you please advise on what changes I need to make to improve the article? Any help in pointing out specific areas for revision would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

Best regards, Bibi Roheel Sarhandi Founder, Digitonz Bibi Raheela (talk) 21:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing you can do, Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves. See WP:COI as well. 331dot (talk) 21:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 30

02:35, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Jhrtvunbyhhf

im A FAMOUS roblox playwe Jhrtvunbyhhf (talk) 02:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. That doesn't make you notable though. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:36, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Jhrtvunbyhhf

I'm a roblox plauer, @Dinogold4 i need help, now green avater Jhrtvunbyhhf (talk) 02:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jhrtvunbyhhf You were already told no. Being a "famous" Roblox player does not make you notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. Not to mention the undeclared WP:COI. Sandcat555 (talk) 04:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:02, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Rosebabysu

Can anyone help me check whether the draft I submitted can be passed? I have revised it many times. Thank you very much. Rosebabysu (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosebabysu That is what the next review will tell you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 04:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's time to pull the plug on this draft, the sources simply aren't there, and to somehow magic notability out of thin air is a big ask. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:25, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Sujithsubash

The information provided is genuine and it is of importance. The references given are also from reliable sources including research journals published by the government departments. Declaration of conflict of Interest: The Arya Vaidya Pharmacy (Coimbatore) Limited was the parent company of my previous employer. But this has nothing to do with the entry nor I am receving any payments from them for doing this entry. Sujithsubash (talk) 06:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sujithsubash: whether a journal of research in a pseudoscience can be truly reliable is debatable, I guess, but regardless of that, most of the draft content is unreferenced. We need to see where the information comes from, so that it can be verified and assessed.
The draft is also overly promotional, with peacocky terms like "prestigious" and "most esteemed", and expressions like "epitomises the pinnacle of intellectual achievement" and "remarkable contributions to the field, particularly in uplifting Ayurveda". Your job is merely to describe the subject, not to praise or 'sell' it in any way. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:41, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Ridgeman12

This isn’t a fake Wikipedia for no reason, there actually is a streamer named Trod who has a dog named Remi. This is not a fake character. Ridgeman12 (talk) 06:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ridgeman12: sure. I have a dog, too. She's not a fake character, either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:47, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Thenfactor

I need assistance please as I have written a wholly unbiased, not promoting the artist and the 50 sources included within the Rick Beerhorst page are tested as independent of the artist, having done over a week's work of research on testing those sources. John Yau Art critic who has independently written of Rick Beerhorst the painter for 35 years, has been included with the article to give the article Wikipedia tested impartiality. Can someone please review the prejudice that is being given to this article, in order to have the painter substantiated and placed within Wikipedia which is his rightful place. Thenfactor (talk) 12:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

55 sources is a lot, @Thenfactor. You have some major Wikipedia:Citation overkill - does the first line really need nine sources!?
I don't think many volunteer reviewers are going to want to go into 55 sources to assess each, so give us three and only three of the strongest sources you have, to make the job for the reviewer easier. Each of the three sources should meet this criteria of being independent, significant coverage, and from reliable places. qcne (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:48, 30 November 2024 review of submission by GwnftLight

I need help in editing my article GwnftLight (talk) 13:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GwnftLight, the draft has now been rejected and so will not be considered further. qcne (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:46, 30 November 2024 review of submission by GwnftLight

I'm finding it difficult to create a new article GwnftLight (talk) 14:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GwnftLight: are you trying to create another draft on the same subject? Because that wouldn't be a good idea. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I tried editing based on the comments received but the submission was not responsive GwnftLight (talk) 15:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GwnftLight: this subject is clearly not notable, there is no point in creating another draft on it. Please find another subject to write about. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also finding it difficult to create a new draft on another subject entirely GwnftLight (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It kept redirecting me to the rejected draft GwnftLight (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GwnftLight: you can create a subpage in your personal space, you just have to give it a unique name, like User:GwnftLight/sandbox2 or User:GwnftLight/newdraft, etc.
Or you can go to WP:YFA and use the article creation wizard there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:29, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Brazbiog

This is my first article. I'd appreciate any feedback to improve the current draft. Brazbiog (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1260400625"