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
Reverted good faith edits by Party1967 (talk): Revert unexplained content removal (TW)
No edit summary
Line 655: Line 655:


::Good hunting! [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 10:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
::Good hunting! [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 10:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

== 12:16:28, 16 June 2019 review of submission by 2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF ==
{{Lafc|username=2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF|ts=12:16:28, 16 June 2019|declined=User:ClevelandDante/sandbox}}

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE CONTACT ME BACK WITH ASSISTANCE?? i HAVE RESUBMITTED THIS ARTICLE THREE TIMES AND IT STILL ISN'T BEING APPROVED. WHAT EXACTLY DO I HAVE TO DO TO CHANGE IT TO BE APPROVED?
DO I HAVE TO CHANGE THE TONE? DO I NEED TO FIX ANY CITATIONS? CAN I TALK TO A HUMAN BEING?? PLEASE?

THIS ARTICLE IS ONLY PER A CELEBRITY CHEF THAT WANTS TO HAVE AN ONLINE SOURCE FOR HIS ACHIEVEMENTS AND RECOGNITION.
I AM REQUESTING STEP BY STEP DIRECTION ON HOW TO DO THIS AND MAKE IT APPROPRIATE TO BE APPROVED.

SOMEONE PLEASE GET BACK TO ME ON THIS!!

[[Special:Contributions/2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF|2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF]] ([[User talk:2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF|talk]]) 12:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:16, 16 June 2019

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


June 10

05:04:42, 10 June 2019 review of submission by 220.247.219.10


220.247.219.10 (talk) 05:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


07:01:41, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Jaspreet007


Jaspreet007 (talk) 07:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Can you please help in pruning this profile so that it satisfies the Wikipedia submission rules? I assure you that gourish singla is a man of eminence.

Hi Jaspreet007. If everything that is unacceptable were pruned, there would be nothing left. The topic is not notable, so no amount of editing will make it acceptable. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:23:21, 10 June 2019 review of draft by Smartburmese


Smartburmese (talk) 08:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is currently awaiting review, please be patient. The backlog is currently about 4 months. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:59, 10 June 2019 review of submission by MoudgilAman


Need advise on why the article could not pass wikipedia's requirements when its not advocating/ promoting any company but merely talking about an elevator company which is very visible in Delhi and over 10 cities in India. Below are some of the hyperlinks of newspapers & journals who have published on the company for your reference please:

https://www.nbmcw.com/interviews/31933-gilco-global-pvt-ltd-and-orona-a-synergy-that-marks-the-beginning-of-a-new-era.html https://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index/National/2018-12-22/Spanish-elevator-giant-launches-latest-trends-in-India/462795 https://www.dailypioneer.com/2018/business/business---corner-business---corner-2018-12-01.html https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/thehansindia-epaper-hans/spanish+elevator+giant+launches+latest+trends+in+india-newsid-104501913 http://epaper.thestatesman.com/m5/1909094/Northern-Edition-The-Statesman/25-11-2018#page/14/1

Requesting tips on how i can publish basic information about this company? MoudgilAman (talk) 08:26, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MoudgilAman. The sources you've offered up are a trade publication and four variations on a press release. None of those do anything to establish notability (suitability for a stand alone encyclopedia article). --Worldbruce (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:45:40, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Anki 84


I need more information on this matter. The academy is based in Dubai and I would like to make the academy information available on wikipedia. Anki 84 (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anki 84. None of the cited sources contain significant coverage of the academy, other than perhaps Diario de Navarra, which I haven't evaluated because it is behind a paywall. If it contains in-depth coverage, the draft would need at least two additional independent, reliable, secondary sources that satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article is under review for a long time

09:07:51, 10 June 2019 review of draft by Sagarshah28


Hi team, My article is under review since 9th April. How can I bring this under the notice of reviewers community? Sagar Shah 09:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sagarshah28. The draft is not yet "under review". It has been in the pool to be reviewed since 19 March. More than 425 drafts have been waiting for review longer than this one. The current backlog is approaching 4 months. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:45:03, 10 June 2019 review of draft by Jeff Goodwin2


Jeff Goodwin2 (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an article for a popular Seattle author who reps our queer community well, but you guy's keep rejecting it because you said it's her... but it's me. So, Why?

Hi Jeff Goodwin2. If you think it was declined becuase it's an autobiography, you are mistaken. It keeps getting declined because it's awful. It makes many of the mistakes commonly made with autobiographies, so whether it literally is one or not, I strongly recommend studying that guideline.
It's identical to User:Tiffany Desiree/sandbox, which raises all sorts of troubling questions about whether you are in compliance with Wikipedia's account policies, conflict of interst policies, and terms of use regarding paid editing. I've left more information about these issues on your talk page. Once you've dealt with them, you can return to the question of whether anything can be done to salvage the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:46, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Personal attack removed) thanks for your bias feedback. It's not awful. Consider learning basic grammar with your run on sentences and 3rd grade diction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Goodwin2 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Also, you said, "conflict of interst." It's spelled interest. Am I seriously receiving advice from you about something being "awful?" What a joke.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Jeff Goodwin2 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:05:55, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Butterflygirl1996


Just wondering why the page is "contrary to the purpose of wikipedia". No explanation was given so I was wondering what can be done to improve the page. Butterflygirl1996 (talk) 14:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Butterflygirl1996. See the reviewer's comment below the big pink box on the draft. Wikipedia already has an article on the subject, Brooke Lynn Hytes, so any development should take place there, not in a draft space parallel. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:04:09, 10 June 2019 review of submission by ClevelandDante


Can someone please explain to me how we need to restructure the verbiage, or how we can successfully create a page for this Cleveland Chef?

ClevelandDante (talk) 17:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ClevelandDante. Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia), so no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable.
Please clarify what you mean by "we". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals.
Skimming the draft, I see that it cites The Washington Post and The New York Times. That would usually be a good sign, but neither article verifies the statements where cited, or mentions Boccuzzi. This suggests that you may not understand the point of citing sources. The WPO piece is an independent, reliable, secondary source containing significant coverage of Troy Dupuy. Try to find three similarly high quality sources about Boccuzzi. If you can't, then the reviewer was correct, and the topic is hopeless. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:08:34, 10 June 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Sayeyabandeh2019


Hello, I am trying to create a Wiki page for someone who has asked me to set it up for them. The name of the page/person is "Saye Yabandeh" she is a reputable award-winning actress, global humanitarian and the Global Ambassador to the Global Citizens Foundation. I am trying to figure out the best way to have her biographical information and lists of awards/film/tv projects presented in a Wikipedia page.

I started by creating an account and submitting an article for creation. It was quickly denied saying that it was advertising materials or something of that sort, but the only information that was initially submitted was Saye Yabandeh's biography with listed resources.

If there is a different way that I need to go about having the page set up, please advise. Her requests have continued to be rejected and we can't seem to figure out how to get a page set up properly.

Sayeyabandeh2019 (talk) 17:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sayeyabandeh2019. Draft:Saye Yabandeh was created by ZA Saye, submitted by an IP editor in February 2015, and declined for failing to show notability. It was resurrected by Rose2gonow1 in 2018, when it was declined for failing to show notability and later for reading like an advertisement. Most recently, your version was speedily deleted for being unambiguous promotion. Even the existence of a page about her, if she doesn't qualify for inclusion, could be seen as promotional.
The reviewers and deleting admins have been different each time. Consensus seems to be that she is not a suitable topic for an encyclopedia article at this time. Searching Google books returns nothing relevant, and Google news return no independent, reliable, secondary sources deeper than a passing mention, so I'm inclined to agree. The best thing to do is not to try to write an encyclopedia article about someone who has asked you to do so. If her achievements are genuinely notable, or become so in the future, a neutral volunteer will undoubtedly create an article about her. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:25, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:05:34, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Pumpkinhead11


Pumpkinhead11 (talk) 19:05, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article that I submitted for review was declined because it doesn't seem like the subject is worthy of an encyclopedia entry, but the reason I'm trying to publish it is because he's about to announce his candidacy for Governor of New Hampshire. As he hasn't technically announced officially yet, there is no coverage on this, but we wanted to have the start of the article up so that through the soft announcements people can still find info on him.

Thank you.

@Pumpkinshead11: - politicians have very strict notability requirements. High levels of coverage aren't/wouldn't be sufficient - to demonstrate political notability he'd have to actually win the election. He may warrant an article through his book, if it's received multiple reliable reviews. Take a look at WP:NAUTHOR for details. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An additional key note, is that as a biography of a living person, the references need to be inline, not general - that is, they need to support specific details (the little blue numbers) rather than just being a list of URLs at the end. referencing for beginners explains how. Please remember that you'll need multiple, reliable, in-depth & (critically) independent) review sources for the book. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:50:07, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Gingersnap1996


I am requesting a re-review because I do not understand why the page is not notable enough for inclusion. If there is a reason why the page is not notable enough, please explain why. Thanks! If it's an issue with sources please say so! Gingersnap1996 (talk) 19:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


20:49:25, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Lvbgar


Lvbgar (talk) 20:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC) I submitted this draft about 12 hours ago, but I cannot find it anywhere on the Articles for submission page. I'm wondering if I have done something wrong. Thanks.[reply]

@Lvbgar: Your draft has not yet been submitted please click the large blue button that says "Submit". Theroadislong (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:49:42, 10 June 2019 review of draft by Tuuzi


I noticed Dr. Jindal was listed on "Outstanding Americans by Choice" award page and should be on the history of Guyana page (maybe, debatable because he just setup the first kidney transplant program there), and Fulbright Scholar distinguished chair page. Can I edit the links on these pages, or do I have to wait for it to be published? Thank you in advance for any help. Tuuzi (talk) 20:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Tuuzi (talk) 20:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tuuzi. Articles may not link to drafts. If and when the draft is published, then you may edit the links, but do not do so before. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:31, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:39:50, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Gryffindor conservative


Gryffindor conservative (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


21:42:06, 10 June 2019 review of submission by Gryffindor conservative


Gryffindor conservative (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gryffindor conservative: - all of the content of this draft is included in other already-existing Wikipedia articles, such as United States Electoral College. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 11

00:11:50, 11 June 2019 review of draft by AWRcore


Why did my draft for Emma Boettcher get denied? Seems like Jeopardy contestants with similar references were approved on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jeopardy!_contestants

AWRcore (talk) 00:11, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AWRcore. The draft paints Boettcher as someone notable for only one event. If similar articles exist, and cannot be improved, they should be considered for deletion. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:43, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --AWRcore (talk) 01:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:50:16, 11 June 2019 review of submission by 5.227.6.183


Sorry, but I have 3 valid references 5.227.6.183 (talk) 09:50, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dadamanda. The cited references are all from those organizing/coordinating/supporting the event. They are not independent of it; they have a vested interest in promoting it. Independent sources are required in order to demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in an encyclopedia), and the bulk of any article should come from independent sources. If you can add three independent, reliable, second sources that contain significant coverage of the event, you may resubmit the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:31, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:52:16, 11 June 2019 review of draft by Klichnerska


Hello. This is the first time I've created an article by myself. Although I have edited many articles before, including Russian article on crowdshipping Краудшиппинг I have trouble finalizing the English version for crowdshipping. Please help me with edits and source edits. Thanks. you.

Klichnerska (talk) 09:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:49:28, 11 June 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Bunnies959


Hi, I have created a draft article for Serato DJ and was not accepted as it appears to "be a test edit", is there any way that I can change and improve this.

Bunnies959 (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bunnies959. User:Bunnies959/sandbox was declined as a test edit because it contains only a link. Draft:Serato DJ has not been declined, you have not submitted it for review. Add {{subst:submit}} to the top of it in order to ask for it to be considered for publication. When you save it, a large mustard yellow "Review waiting, please be patient" box will appear, probably at the bottom. The current backlog is approaching 16 weeks. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I have done that now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunnies959 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:01:30, 11 June 2019 review of draft by Gigi298


I am creating a biography page on someone who is in the DWAA hall of fame and is on live television. I have provided many sources about him and the work he has done, yet it is not published. I need help with what specific kinds of sources I need to get it published.

Gigi298 (talk) 15:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gigi298: I've commented on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:57, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gigi298: I was editing it to fix it as Worldbruce was commenting. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:39:47, 11 June 2019 review of submission by Swordswfriends


I have revised the rejected page (Draft:Distillerie_Neisson) to address the objections of the reviewer and on the advice of other editors. First, the article was originally categorized as a product entry — this was an error, as it was written as a company entry. In addition, I have included additional significant coverage (with justification in Talk) and removed links to retailers (except for one, included because it's the only available reference for a particular fact; this is also addressed in Talk). On these grounds, I believe the article now meets Wikipedia standards.


Swordswfriends (talk) 16:39, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:No pass - Swordswfriends - Advertisement for a non-notable product line. This won't go anywhere right now. Please review the red box at the top of your draft. Snowycats (talk) 20:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:24:34, 11 June 2019 review of submission by Andremartinsc


Been trying to create a page for a former football player and current coach named Ricardo Raúl Montoya from Costa Rica. He works in USL League Two for Daytona SC as an assistant coach (https://goaliesoccer.com/us-soccer/pro-soccer-has-moved-to-town-daytona-soccer-club/), have worked for Atlanta Silverbacks as assistant coach in USL Championship (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Atlanta_Silverbacks_season), as scout for Atlanta United in Major League Soccer and as performance analyst of El Salvador national team (https://www.dirtysouthsoccer.com/2017/1/10/14205500/local-atlanta-coach-joins-el-salvador-national-team-staff).

Here are links of matches he played: http://wvw.nacion.com/ln_ee/1997/abril/07/carmelita.html http://wvw.nacion.com/ln_ee/1997/marzo/06/carmelita.html http://wvw.nacion.com/ln_ee/1997/abril/10/liga.html http://wvw.nacion.com/ln_ee/1998/febrero/19/deportes3.html

He's referred as Raúl Montoya on these links above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andremartinsc (talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andremartinsc (talk) 17:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andremartinsc. Being assistant coach, scout, and performance analyst doesn't make him notable. If you can add a source that supports his having played in a competitive game between two teams from fully-professional leagues, that would demonstrate notability according to WP:NFOOTY. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:11, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:44:18, 11 June 2019 review of submission by 42.113.193.220


42.113.193.220 (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Subject does not appear to be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
no Declined - Please see the draft page. Snowycats (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:44:38, 11 June 2019 review of submission by 42.113.193.220


42.113.193.220 (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No draft in contribs. Please let us know how we can help! :) Snowycats (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:35:50, 11 June 2019 review of submission by Porygon-Z474


You say my Porygon article needs to have "Independent notability" to be spun off? What does that mean? Porygon-Z (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


June 12

01:55:13, 12 June 2019 review of submission by Mithun Pookat


Hi, Is it possible to know why the article for korure on Wikipedia has been rejected? I would like to make the recommended changes and republish the article. Thank you

Mithun Pookat (talk) 01:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mithun Pookat. The reviewer's comment, below the big pink box on the draft, links to the relevant guideline, WP:NCOMPANY. Most businesses are not suitable topics for an encyclopedia article. Rejection is intended to be final, to convey that the subject is not notable, so no amount of editing will make the draft publishable. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:10, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:58:26, 12 June 2019 review of submission by Jimbob2019


Jimbob2019 (talk) 02:58, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Requesting re-review because there was a reference missing from the article.

Hi Jimbob2019. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the topic. The draft still has zero. Rejection is intended to convey that not only is the draft in its current state unacceptable, but no amount of editing will make it acceptable - that the topic is hopeless. See Wikipedia:A primer for newcomers#Picking a topic, particularly the "Pick something notable" subsection. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:14:50, 12 June 2019 review of draft by M8ms2


M8ms2 (talk) 03:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Our page has been waiting for a review for quite a few months https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bread_Charity#Bread_Charity

@M8ms2: What do you mean by "our"? Only one person should use an account per WP:ROLE. JTP (talk • contribs) 05:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AROV KD: review of draft by Template:AROV KD:REVISIONUSER


Muthukumar21366 (talk) 03:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:02:59, 12 June 2019 review of draft by Mc olteanu


Hi, I own a Buti watch long time now. I have learned after extensive research that there is not a compiled set of information about what the watch company offered while in business. The company does not exist anymore, and they do not make any more watches. This is not an attempt to market the brand, I am trying to give a set of information as much as possible for the people that are trying to find out more about the former watch making company and what they were offering. If I need to write it some other way, let me know, this is the first time I am attempting to write an article :). I base all my info on articles from watch resellers, chrono24.com and other online found information from people that have worked in a watch store, like myself.

Help me out so I can put useful information out there.



Mc olteanu (talk) 08:02, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mc olteanu. Creating a new article is one of the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating tasks a novice editor can attempt. It requires a thorough understanding of what is and isn't a reliable source. Blogs, internet forums, and Facebook, for example, are generally not reliable sources. A better place to look for information would be books from reputable publishers. Original research is not allowed. Also, being true and useful does not mean something is a suitable topic for an encyclopedia (although those are good properties for an encyclopedia entry to have). Instead, Wikipedia uses notability to determine whether a topic should be included.
There are millions of easier ways to improve the encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help. If you are interested particularly in watches, you may wish to try to rejuvenate Wikipedia:WikiProject Watches. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:48, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:44:18, 12 June 2019 review of draft by SwanCom707


I am trying to find my Submission that went in for Review in Mid-April, 2019.

SwanCom707 (talk) 10:44, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SwanCom707. Draft:Makeda Antoine-Cambridge has been in the pool to be reviewed for 8 weeks. The current backlog is approaching 16 weeks. You may continue to improve the draft while you wait, or see Wikipedia:Community portal for other ways to improve the encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:50:49, 12 June 2019 review of submission by RajkaranRana


RajkaranRana (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:24:48, 12 June 2019 review of draft by Otinflewer


hi. I am trying to create an article about the youngest member of thirakwwa lineage in hindustani classical music. i do not have any conflict of interest since its my dedication to their music form that urges me to create its presence worldwide. however im uncertain as to why it has not been approved yet. i understand that the AFC may take more than 8 weeks. since i have just recently started contributing to wiki im considering this article as my learning project as well. to my knowledge i have been very particular about the guidelines. also have taken an email from the respective musician for using the images and other copyright content. if possible i need some first hand education on what happens to the draft now and how may i get it live on wiki.

Otinflewer (talk) 14:24, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Otinflewer. Draft:Shariq Mustafa has been in the pool to be reviewed for 8 weeks. The current backlog is approaching 16 weeks. You may continue to improve the draft while you wait. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:14, 12 June 2019 review of draft by AAltheaG


This is my first time creating a wikipedia article, this was done for a class project assignment, hence the reason why it read like an essay as that is exactly what it was. However, It would be great to be able to publish a wikipedia article and to have the knowledge and understand fully what is involved in publishing wikipedia articles so that I would be better equipped to publish or edit other articles.

AAltheaG (talk) 14:48, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:09:31, 12 June 2019 review of draft by Devokewater


Hi I'm not too sure what the problem is with a page I created "Norman Nicholson Society" can someone assist.

Regards Devokewater (talk) 15:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Devokewater You have not submitted the draft for review, but before you do, you need to find multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject in-depth. Their own website is of little help in establishing notability. Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Devokewater (talk) 20:28, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:23:45, 12 June 2019 review of submission by Skylark0007


Skylark0007 (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]



I received feedback saying my article read like an advertisement and did not have a variety of sources, and I cannot figure out why. I compared it to similar pages and couldn't spot any differences.

What do I need to change?Skylark0007 (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 13

05:51:52, 13 June 2019 review of draft by 117.240.248.50


117.240.248.50 (talk) 05:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

My wiki article got rejected with the reason 'do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject'.

But the 4 references I have listed are all independent sources and carry necessary information about the subject.

The first reference is from an article in Tugboat which is a journal published by TeX users group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TUGboat).

The second is another article that has been published in https://www.linuxtoday.com/.

The third reference is a detailed interview of the subject that has been featured in January 2008 issue of TUG India by the TeX users group. (TeX users group is a community that is mentioned in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeX).

The fourth is again an article from tug.org that has been retrieved from the internet archive.

Based on these references, the article that has been submitted is true to the facts.

So, I need some clarification on whether it is the way the references has been included that has resulted in the rejection.

Considering the case, I request you to kindly look into the matter and provide your recommendations so that I can get my article published at the earliest.

12:28:06, 13 June 2019 review of draft by Sophiaforgiz



Hello,

as the revision of this article takes much longer than expected, I would like to ask if it is possible to do changes to this article while it is being reviewed? I dont want to do changes and then need to wait longer. Or is it easier to do improvements after the article is approved?

Thank you for your help!

Kind Regards

Sophiaforgiz (talk) 12:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sophiaforgiz. Yes, you may continue to improve the draft while you wait for it to be reviewed. It doesn't cite any arms length sources, only the initiative and one of its partners. Wikipedia isn't much interested in what the initiative and its partners BMZ, GIZ, etc. say about the initiative. The bulk of any draft should be based on independent sources (think Süddeutsche Zeitung, academics writing in books and journals, and so on). It will not be accepted unless that is corrected. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:30:45, 13 June 2019 review of submission by Zhilianghu60


ZHu 15:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC) We have a number of peer-reviewed publications on this work (Animal QTLdb) on well-known scientific journals like Nucleic Acids Research by Oxford Academic publisher. Its developments has lasted over 17 years with federal funding (thus our works are in public domain). Would this be counted as "reliable" source? __Zhiliang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhilianghu60 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zhilianghu60. Reliable, yes. Independent, no. Secondary, probably not. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:03:19, 13 June 2019 review of draft by AustinRedd007


How many references do i need to prove that a species exists and what are the best references for this?

AustinRedd007 (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AustinRedd007. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of the topic. Scholarly sources (books from academic publishers, and peer reviewed journals) would be best, see WP:SOURCETYPES. Good examples of these types of sources can be found in the references for Cowpea and Tephrosia apollinea. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your swift response — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinRedd007 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:04:07, 13 June 2019 review of submission by Impast m


Hi, I'm asking you to please re-review the article I submitted for Nadia Masri. Can you please provide more insight into what needs to be changed or revised? Here are more additional press articles about the subject.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/perksy-app-forbes-30-under-ceo-1.4958254 https://www.forbes.com/video/5887541797001/#5fbe13c53115 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNiJnQ1hqqo Impast m (talk) 20:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:31:33, 13 June 2019 review of submission by Peace7777


Peace7777 (talk) 22:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:46:20, 13 June 2019 review of submission by Peace7777


Peace7777 (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


June 14

01:11:01, 14 June 2019 review of submission by The Real XL83


WHY YOU BULLY ME The Real XL83 (talk) 01:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place for you to advertise your youtube channel. Try facebook. GMGtalk 01:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:04:07, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Tigereye7

I spent a lot of time researching "independent, reliable, published sources" for this article and I am really struggling with the idea that someone says I wrote this like an advertisement. Every single sentence is verifiable from these sources. Is negativity required on Wikipedia? Someone please help me out here. Tigereye7 (talk) 02:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC) Tigereye7 (talk) 02:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tigereye7: DGG and I have both done some major editing to the draft recently. Please see the article's talk page for more guidance on what's still needed. Orville1974 (talk) 17:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:08:48, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Velenkosini


Velenkosini (talk) 08:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has no content. Theroadislong (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:33:43, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Fejacs


Initially i failed to include external links and references to back up my article. Fejacs (talk) 12:33, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence to suggest he is notable "supplier of eggs to University of Nigeria, Enugu campus." confers no notability whatsoever! Theroadislong (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:16:13, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Adeboa


Hello please my article was rejected becuase i didnt put any references, i have put in credible and reliable references now and i hope it is good enough. Thank you for your time.

Adeboa (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


13:35:07, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Adeboa


i added the references. it was declined the first time because i didnt add any references, i have then added credible and reliable references to the article.

Adeboa (talk) 13:35, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:41:10, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:51:02, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


14:52:39, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


why is my article getting rejected Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 14:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Muneeralsenaidi. User:Muneeralsenaidi/sandbox has been rejected because it is full of promotional marketing-speak, and the only source it cites is the company itself. Wikipedia may not be used to advertise or promote anything. Articles should be written from a neutral point of view and be based mainly on independent sources.
Creating a new article is one of the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating tasks a novice editor can attempt. I strongly suggest that you build some experience with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines by making small improvements to existing articles for a while, before again attempting to write an article from scratch. See Wikipedia:Community portal or Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture if you aren't sure where to start. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:24:32, 14 June 2019 review of draft by DondeEstaElBurro?


changing title of draft DondeEstaElBurro? (talk) 16:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd like to change the title of my draft from Boston Smallpox Epidemic of 1721 to 1721 Boston smallpox epidemic. How could that be done without having to create a second article?

@DondeEstaElBurro?: see WP:MOVE. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:49:40, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


Im trying to publish my firm info by it still keeps getting reqected Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 16:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


16:50:27, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 16:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

STLArchitects[edit source]


STLarchitects Logo STLarchitects is an architecture and urban design firm that was founded in 1996 in Chicago, Illinois. The projects in which are designed are being built all around the US, Europe and Asia. Its work is set on creating diverse work ranging from master plans to small cultural centers and large educational facilities to compact private schools.Stlarchitects design and work operated by 20 international architects and designers, thriving in an open and communicative atmosphere which favors vibrant exchange of ideas and emphasizes interdisciplinary teamwork over individual expression.

17:40:29, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Electricsity


I added new sources to provide more evidence for notability. I would like for someone to review and provide further feedback to improve it. Electricsity (talk) 17:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Electricsity. The company is not notable. Most businesses aren't, see WP:BFAQ#COMPANY. You're wasting your time trying to improve the draft, because no amount of editing will make it acceptable. How you spend your time is of course your own business, but don't expect volunteers to expend any more effort on it. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:50:57, 14 June 2019 review of draft by Sroth0616


How can I make it seem less like an and more like something interesting to read? (PS: I also couldn't title external ref correctly so, there is no title.)

Sroth0616 (talk) 18:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:58:13, 14 June 2019 review of submission by 2600:1702:C40:A2F0:2BB:60FF:FE61:1ED5


2600:1702:C40:A2F0:2BB:60FF:FE61:1ED5 (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:06:54, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Nadirah01


Harith bin al-Shākir or Harith bin Amr bin Shakir was among the companions of Imam al-Husain the Grandson of Prophet of Islam and the martyrs of Karbala. He was from Banu Shakir clan of the great Banu Hamdan tribe. He was among the famous people of Kufa. It is reported that he was a wealthy Person and powerful in speaking person and a great merchant in Kufa Nadirah01 (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 19:12:34, 14 June 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by RyanNewman20


Hi I wanted to know why my article was denied, thank you in advance. It was titled Fantasy Point Elasticity, by myself RyanNewman20

RyanNewman20 (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It lacks any independent reliable secondary sources and has no indication of why the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:36:41, 14 June 2019 review of draft by LLcentury


I don't know why references 14, 22, 48 and 87 appear that way when I've done the correct thing or at least I think so. Thank you. Kindest regards.

LLcentury (talk) 19:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LLcentury. Spaces strayed into the URLs of those four references, which made them display and behave oddly. I've fixed those four, but there may be others. Did you copy this from es:Política externa del gobierno de Shinzō Abe? You are welcome to do so, but must give attribution to the original authors. See WP:TFOLWP for how. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Worldbruce Thank you so much, but believe me please in good faith, I lack of technical English and dont understand how to attribute the authorship to User:Jeddah. I already put something on the draft talk page. --LLcentury (talk) 00:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce: LLcentury is not fluent in English, and interpreted your request as a request to attribute the article creator (User:Jeddah). There is an attribution on the talk page to the original article. Jeddah created the original article, but other people have edited/improved the article; it would be a bit tedious to attribute each and every person. Perhaps LLcentury didn't understand the request; I'm just conveying what they interpreted.
After this is cleared up, we should get back to the original question.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 00:54, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've repaired the insufficient attribution for LLcentury as described in WP:RIA. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:13, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Worldbruce: Thank you!, do you need me to do something more to attribution? Kindest regards --LLcentury (talk) 02:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@LLcentury: The attribution is OK now. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:24:39, 14 June 2019 review of submission by 196.126.37.62


Sumbit this draft. All sources was cited. it's an English translation of the French article :

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Foote

196.126.37.62 (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:37:32, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Muneeralsenaidi


this is my 6 time trying to publish why cant I?? Muneeralsenaidi (talk) 20:37, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been told repeatedly that the topic is not notable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:51:25, 14 June 2019 review of submission by Rhetoric84


Rhetoric84 (talk) 21:51, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 15

Request on 01:21:18, 15 June 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by BDubbs21


I don't understand why my submission was rejected.BDubbs21 (talk) 01:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BDubbs21 (talk) 01:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BDubbs21 Wikipedia may not be used to publicize or promote anything. Its articles cover only topics that have gained significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time. In other words, not a band formed in the last few years, that is releasing their first album this year. See WP:BAND for ways to demonstrate that a band is notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). Independent, reliable, secondary sources must be cited to demonstrate that the group meets the criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

01:49:45, 15 June 2019 review of draft by Nealuigi


Hi, I am wondering if someone can help me to determine which sources are considered unreliable for my new article. Thank you in advance! Draft link here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Patrick_Bet-David.

Nealuigi (talk) 01:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:51:54, 15 June 2019 review of draft by ElizabethPBallou

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Hey, checking in on a question I submitted a while ago. Here's the original text:

I wrote a first draft of this article, and it got rejected for not having enough notable sources/linking to the NYVGCC's website as a source. Since then, I've reworked the page to have higher-quality sources. I've also deleted any facts that couldn't be independently verified in a source other than the nonprofit's website.

My question now is: should I do anything else before I resubmit? Am I making other big mistakes that I don't know about?

Thanks so much for any help you can give!

ElizabethPBallou (talk) 02:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ElizabethPBallou. No one replied when you asked the same question on 7 June. This help desk is not a shortcut through the reviewing process. To have the draft evaluated and receive any relevant feedback, resubmit the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:09:23, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Farhad.klp

How can I improve the references for this submission to show proper notability of the company, if we assume the company has the notability? Farhad.klp (talk) 04:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Farhad.klp Who are "we" you refereed to above? CASSIOPEIA(talk)

08:43:07, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Seanjudelyons


I' jut like to learn how to publish a wiki article. And Russell is a notable figure, there is plenty off proof online but since he is from a small town, nobody is giving him adequate attention. The reference attached should be sufficient, he was the first anglo indian representative of the state which is a huge deal for our community. We are anglo-indian's and I think him having a wiki page would do our community well. Seanjudelyons (talk) 08:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:43:07, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Seanjudelyons



08:54:51, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Seanjudelyons


~Hi Russell is a valued member of the anglo Indian community. He was the first anglo Indian member to become a member of the legislative assembly of the state. It would make our community happy if he had a wiki pageSeanjudelyons (talk)

Accepted We're shooting ourselves in the foot, backlog-wise, when we twice decline, then reject, an appointed member of a legislative assembly that just needed a better source. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:27:42, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Oscar135789


I am requesting a re-review as it was rejected, I have now added a couple more references as requested. Oscar135789 (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oscar135789. A press release and a photo caption from before filming began do nothing to establish notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). Wait until the film is released, then revisit the subject. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:24:53, 15 June 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Jameschamoun


The reason why my article was denied was because it doesn't meet notability criteria. I kept the article short and brief so that other content can be added later on, i have mentioned at least 7 or 8 very reliable sources which include Top magazine names as well as tv channels. I do not understand why it would not meet the notability criteria.

Jameschamoun (talk) 14:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jameschamoun. "Mentioning" magazine names and TV channels does nothing to establish notability. The author, title, date, url, and page number (or whatever bibliographic information is applicable to the source) must be cited, see Help:Referencing for beginners for how to do so. Primary source interviews in which he talks about himself without independent analysis by the interviewer do nothing to demonstrate notability. Be aware that in Wikipedia's current business-skeptical climate, there is almost zero chance of a "young entrepreneur", "best known" for incorporating a company this year, being judged notable. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:05:50, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Blairshwach


Hi There - Requesting a re-review as I updated my coverage so I have all primary sources.

Please let me know if there are other updates needed.

Thank you, Blair

Blairshwach (talk) 15:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blairshwach. Reread the reviewer's comment. Primary sources are the wrong kind of sources. You want secondary sources, sources like the Chicago Tribune or The Washington Post. Furthermore, only independent sources can establish notability, so not his firm's website and not press releases from his firm. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:51:36, 15 June 2019 review of submission by Baecien


I feel the wiki page was wrongfully denied and I need a more descriptive reason for the rejection. The "so-called" blatant advertisement has also since been removed. Baecien (talk) 21:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 16

03:36:46, 16 June 2019 review of draft by Geoffmalc


At 86 years old, I have been urged to create this page before it is too late and family knowledge of references is lost I have spent many hours trying to comply with your +requirements, re-formatting to keep it simple. I need to know what the continued problem is. The components of my draft are all verifiable. I hope my latest version, with appropriate reference numbers, is the one being scrutinised , not the early versions.. Geoffmalc (talk) 03:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Autobiographies are strongly discouraged and your draft has no evidence that you are notable enough in Wikipedia terms, for an article I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 08:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a message at your user talk, Geoffmalc. --valereee (talk) 11:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:51:17, 16 June 2019 review of submission by 1brianrichardsmith


Hello, I would like a review. I think it's deserved to be on Wikipedia. Thank you. 1brianrichardsmith (talk) 05:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @1brianrichardsmith: Please take a look at our notability guidelines. Articles on Wikipedia need to be on subjects that have gained significant attention in reliable, independent sources. Examples of sources would be books, news articles, interviews by the media, etc. At this time that doesn't look to be the case for Brian Smith. If I can clarify anything about our notability guidelines, please let me know. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:07:49, 16 June 2019 review of draft by Kyle Riebe


Kyle Riebe (talk) 07:07, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Riebe: - this draft both lacked any sources, and also reads as an essay - not a neutral encyclopedic article Nosebagbear (talk) 10:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:02:11, 16 June 2019 review of draft by Falconite007


Help regarding citing same reference multiple times. How do I do it?

Falconite007 (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Falconite007: - excellent question.
If you're editing using the wiki-editor (you write in a box and there are some {{}}) then Ref Beginners "Using the same ref more than once" does a reasonable job at explaining
If you're using the Visual Editor (it looks more like word when you edit, with no {{}} anywhere), then Visual Editor - reusing refs is the place to go.
Good hunting! Nosebagbear (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:16:28, 16 June 2019 review of submission by 2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF


CAN SOMEONE PLEASE CONTACT ME BACK WITH ASSISTANCE?? i HAVE RESUBMITTED THIS ARTICLE THREE TIMES AND IT STILL ISN'T BEING APPROVED. WHAT EXACTLY DO I HAVE TO DO TO CHANGE IT TO BE APPROVED? DO I HAVE TO CHANGE THE TONE? DO I NEED TO FIX ANY CITATIONS? CAN I TALK TO A HUMAN BEING?? PLEASE?

THIS ARTICLE IS ONLY PER A CELEBRITY CHEF THAT WANTS TO HAVE AN ONLINE SOURCE FOR HIS ACHIEVEMENTS AND RECOGNITION. I AM REQUESTING STEP BY STEP DIRECTION ON HOW TO DO THIS AND MAKE IT APPROPRIATE TO BE APPROVED.

SOMEONE PLEASE GET BACK TO ME ON THIS!!

2600:1009:B060:14F8:8DCE:FD92:E9FD:8EEF (talk) 12:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=902081294"