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
Scsbot (talk | contribs)
Bots
239,332 edits
edited by robot: archiving October 7
No edit summary
Line 504: Line 504:


= October 13 =
= October 13 =

== 04:46:31, 13 October 2019 review of submission by Valiyaparambil ==
{{Lafc|username=Valiyaparambil|ts=04:46:31, 13 October 2019|page=
Draft:Debashis_Chatterjee
}}

Even after making all the necessary changes, the article keeps getting declined. Feel like really frustrating. Am new to wikipedia, and not sure if am missing something.

[[User:Valiyaparambil|Valiyaparambil]] ([[User talk:Valiyaparambil|talk]]) 04:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:46, 13 October 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


October 7

Please have a look i think now it is fine, If need more changes please let me know.

07:13:21, 7 October 2019 review of draft by Patroong


Patroong (talk) 07:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:01:33, 7 October 2019 review of draft by 46.240.142.86


Dear editor, I noticed that my Wikipedia submission was not accepted due to the lack of relevant references. Before publishing the page about Jessica Sepel, I read Wikipedia guidelines and in addition to that checked pages similar to this one to compare my content and references to some existing pages (to be more specific, I discovered these pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ella_Woodward, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayla_Itsines). I was wondering how the references listed on these two pages differ from the ones on Jessica Sepel page and if you could tell me in more detail or give me an example of what I should be looking for. Thanks!

46.240.142.86 (talk) 08:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Wikipedia is constantly a work in progress with many substandard articles. If you feel that they do not live up to the notability guidelines, then feel free to nominate them for deletion. shoy (reactions) 17:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:44:19, 7 October 2019 review of submission by Yogi raj2

This is an inspirational personality in the world of mobile smartphones in India. Details about him are being sought by people throughout India. The correct details can only be shown via Wikipedia and that is what might have led to the COI issues. Requesting a reconsideration for review based on new sources added. Yogi raj2 (talk) 09:44, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yogi raj2. The cited sources, heavy on trivial mentions and press releases, fail to demonstrate that he is notable. Rejection is meant to convey that not only is the current draft unacceptable, but that no better sources exist, so the topic is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. No amount of editing can fix that problem, so volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:58:30, 7 October 2019 review of draft by Sltechy


Hi,

My article was reviewed and rejected by Dan arndt stating that the article "It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous rather than factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time."

The article is purely factual and has been created due to the controversy that surrounded the ownership of the product PickMe, which is the market leader in Digital Mobility in Sri Lanka.

This article is not a hoax as stated in the reason for rejection and has a backing of citations.

Please be kind enough to let me know what the next steps should be

Sltechy (talk) 09:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:17, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:45, 7 October 2019 review of draft by Ray Oaks


Unable to detect why this draft does not meet the Following Criteria "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." Sources are the bais for a factual statement of what has been published. Help! Ray Oaks (talk) 10:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC) Ray Oaks (talk) 10:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ray Oaks. The popular culture section is original research. Shakespeare, D.H. Lawrence, and Dylan Thomas may have used the words womb and tomb, but did not write about Neolithic burial sites, and nothing you've cited demonstrates otherwise. Remove the section.
The archaeological evidence section has more promise. Add page numbers (and volumes, where applicable) to the citations. It isn't sufficient to say that somewhere in these 600+ pages is a statement that supports the claim.
Best practice would be to continue editing Draft:Womb tombs. It would be inadvisable to delete the first draft or create a second draft on the same topic under a different name or in a sandbox. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice - Will reconsider the initial paragraph and focus the article on the archaeology. NB - Henshall is the primary archaeology authority - this is part of the References etc. ??? Will see if I can comply. The sequence of using the Literature sources first was to help the reader "into" the topic. Ray Oaks (talk) 11:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Am confused about which version of the entry you have commented on? Was it the version that was moved from my Sandbox a couple of weeks ago? Or the present version? If you could clarify, it would help. The Literature/ popular culture is the intro to a lengthy section with images etc that locate the concept "Womb Tombs" clearly in archaeology. Does that make sense? Thanks again Ray Oaks (talk) 13:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ray Oaks: My comments are regarding the page you linked in your question, Draft:Womb tombs. Keeping multiple versions on different pages is a bad idea. It causes confusion, breaks the thread of development, and can become a copyright violation if anyone contributes something that you later fork without the contribution history. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion regarding multiple drafts. I wish I knew how to delete the original draft I submitted for review. If you know how, please say so. I only wish to keep a draft in my current Sandbox. Can you help? I wish to proceed with editing the current version in the Sandbox. Ray Oaks (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ray Oaks: As the only substantial contributor of content to the page, you may request deletion by adding {{Db-author}} to the top of the draft that you want deleted. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:08:43, 7 October 2019 review of draft by ScottFromNY


I submitted an article to be reconsidered in august and it's october. Haven't heard back. It took like a day for it to be denied and now it's two months into the resubmission process. Any idea to find out what's going on?

ScottFromNY (talk) 18:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ScottFromNY. Some reviewers concentrate on recent submissions that can be disposed of quickly, which may explain the initial quick decline. The draft was resubmitted 7 weeks ago. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so you can anticipate another review by the first half of January. The company is fairly obviously not notable, so the draft is likely to be declined again. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:50, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:35:27, 7 October 2019 review of draft by Baozon90


Baozon90 (talk) 22:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


droeloe should be made into an article. its in draft right now. Thnx Baozon90 (talk) 22:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion. Speedily deleted for that reason after Baozon90's posting. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 8

04:15:25, 8 October 2019 review of submission by 216.8.168.186

Information on Milan Vidojevic can only be obtained by reading and citing the material in Serbian Cyrillic. Milan Vidojevic is spelled Милан Видојевић who indeed was a member of the "Black Hand" and a military leader on the front. (This biography has nothing to do with Milan Vidojevic born in 1950). English references are difficult to obtain since little was written in English about the armed groups that carried out actions inside the Ottoman Empire in the territories of Old Serbia and Macedonia. Serbian (Bulgarian and Greek) armed groups, entering these areas, were aimed at destabilizing the Ottoman Empire to give way to the state policies of Serbia (Bulgaria and Greece) to intervene in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire in order to protect the Eastern Orthodox faithful from age-old Muslim oppression. Those who understand the combined struggle for the independence of Old Serbia and Macedonia (1903-1911) will better understand the Balkan Wars and the unfortunate Great War that came so unexpectedly and at the worst time, after so many years of warfare!


216.8.168.186 (talk) 04:15, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


04:56:29, 8 October 2019 review of submission by 2600:6C64:727F:C330:CC6C:709B:2BCA:3DB

what kinds of citations does this article need to be accepted? 2600:6C64:727F:C330:CC6C:709B:2BCA:3DB (talk) 04:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The decline notices on the draft link to various guidelines that describe what properties sources should have. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources lists sources that Wikipedians have found useful when writing about albums and musical groups. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:28:41, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Littleboybluesmoke


This musician is of note and should be listed on wikipedia. Cross has been a vital artist and musician within the Australian independent music scene releasing 15 albums since 1996 on major labels, independent labels and his own No Drums Records label. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darren_Cross_(musician)

Littleboybluesmoke (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:02:56, 8 October 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Ray Oaks


Confused!! I really to not understand what I have to do. to make things easy 1. Delete my original DRAFT entry on Womb Tombs 2. Free up my Sandbox so that I can prepare a revised version 3. If you can - please explain what the original draft article was not acceptable. It seemed to me to meet the usual criteria - it makes sense as it is; it requires more content (to follow) and would be better with images (to follow) Ray Oaks (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC) Ray Oaks (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answered above, but others are welcome to comment. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:30:35, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Kbshah6p


Arya Shah 10:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


Arya Shah


Born 21 April, 1937 (82 years old)


Yamaguchi, Japan


Height 152 cm


Weight 38 kg


Occupation: Student

You have now created the same content at least 24 times in different locations, please stop it is very disruptive. Theroadislong (talk) 10:43, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:34:05, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Kbshah6p


Arya Shah 10:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


Request on 10:41:56, 8 October 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Diya786



Diya786 (talk) 10:41, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:19, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Kbshah6p


Arya Shah 10:47, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


10:51:10, 8 October 2019 review of draft by Trypp


Hi, I'm Trypp, and recently, i just saw that this article is still under draft, how can i publish this since the creator, oppaidaisukikun is blocked permanently? Thanks and have a great day!

Trypp (talk) 10:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trypp. Reviewers have declined it for not meeting Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Add an inline citation at the end of every sentence (or paragraph, if all sentences in the paragraph are supported by the same source). If you can't find support for a sentence in either source, remove the sentence or find an additional source. The resulting citation density should be sufficient to show where everything came from. Anyone may resubmit the draft by clicking the blue "Resubmit" button on it, one doesn't have to be the editor who created it. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:42:25, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Aitch & Aitch Aitch


The draft is well-written and has sufficient sourcing. Aitch & Aitch Aitch (talk) 12:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aitch & Aitch Aitch (talk) 12:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


12:56:26, 8 October 2019 review of submission by 2405:204:3027:3794:FCC0:C858:452B:FF7E


2405:204:3027:3794:FCC0:C858:452B:FF7E (talk) 12:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:56:53, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Harish139


Hi Sir, can you tell me why my article is rejected? You have rejected this topic by saying " it as not sufficiently notable topic."

But, this topic has the sufficient reference links. I wrpte article on the famous politician of Andhra Pradesh. Even there are many pages in Wikipedia that relates this person.

Please review once again. Thanks in advance.

Harish139 (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answered below. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:01:42, 8 October 2019 review of submission by Cb912


Cb912 (talk) 14:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi! This draft has been recently updated to reflect some changes since it was last submitted. I had requested advice earlier this year from the help desk. I see that a reviewer scope_creepTalk' left comments confirming notability in April. Can this be re-reviewed? Thank you!

Even though, I submitted an article on notable topic, my article is rejected by saying 'not sufficiently notable topic'

Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Hi Sir, can you tell me why my article is rejected? You have rejected this topic by saying " it as not sufficiently notable topic."

But, this topic has the sufficient reference links. I wrpte article on the famous politician of Andhra Pradesh. Even there are many pages in Wikipedia that relates this person.

Please review once again. Thanks in advance. Harish139 (talk) 14:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft is at Draft:Devineni avinash I believe Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Harish139. Being an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability (see WP:POLITICIAN). The extent of coverage of Avinash does not exceed what one would expect for any Lok Sabha candidate. So I concur with the reviewer that Avinash is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia) at present. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 9

01:39:23, 9 October 2019 review of draft by Brenjezz


Brenjezz (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

please help what the missing point? is it about the reference?

Hi Brenjezz. Most businesses are not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. Wikipedia is not for advertising, promotion, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:32, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:00, 9 October 2019 review of submission by Ravivarma Hattaraki


The_name_is_ravivarma (talk) 09:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 09:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:05:06, 9 October 2019 review of draft by Vinod.scotch


Hi, Requesting for help as the references i have cited for the Draft:Mini_studio is legit and proves the production is done by Mini Studios. Want to know what can be done for the page to be approved and published? Please to help. Vinod.scotch (talk) 11:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vinod.scotch. Examining a few of the drafts references at random:
  • "S Vinodh Kumar is producing Vellai Yaanai under his Mini Studios banner" is a trivial mention[1]
  • Filmibeat, NDTV, and The News Minute don't mention Mini Studio [2][3][4]
  • Indiaglitz reports "Data not available!"[5]
  • "Superstar Rajinikanth and director Shankar's highly anticipated magnum opus 2.0 will be distributed via Mini Studios in Kerala ... Mini Studios are associated with actor Dhanush owned Wunderbar films. Mini Studios also holds the distribution rights of Rajinikanth's upcoming movie Kaala" is marginally more than a trivial mention, but still well short of significant coverage.[6]
Most businesses are not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Your obvious conflict of interest, which you haven't disclosed despite being warned to do so, may blind you to this. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. Wikipedia is not for marketing, promotion, or public relations. Explain why you should not be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:39:12, 9 October 2019 review of submission by 103.48.68.44


103.48.68.44 (talk) 11:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:25:12, 9 October 2019 review of submission by PK2112


I have 3 images I would like to include. 2 photos I took myself and a PC screen shot of a CAD drawing I drew myself. When I try to include these I get copyright errors and warnings. How does one include images that one produces themselves (i.e. no possibility of copyright issues) into an article?

PK2112 (talk) 12:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PK2112. Adding an image is a two-step process: upload it, then use it in on a page.
Go to Commons:First steps and carefully step through the tutorial. When you get to "First steps/Uploading files", don't dive in too hastily. First follow the link on that page to learn about the different licensing options. Other useful advance reading includes Wikipedia:File names and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images, which will prepare you to answer important questions the upload wizard will ask you. If after that you have any questions or doubts, Commons has its own help desk.
Once you've uploaded an image, the picture tutorial explains how to use it on a page. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:46, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:24:37, 9 October 2019 review of submission by Mdmisri


Mdmisri (talk) 13:24, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:58:23, 9 October 2019 review of submission by Ravivarma Hattaraki

I am an Artist I wanted to publish my arts

The_name_is_ravivarma (talk) 15:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


16:59:01, 9 October 2019 review of submission by 194.243.213.83


194.243.213.83 (talk) 16:59, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Please check this bio and help me. Thanks you

17:38:28, 9 October 2019 review of submission by Ravivarma Hattaraki


Ravivarma Hattaraki (talk) 17:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)Ravivarma Hattaraki[reply]


October 10

07:18:43, 10 October 2019 review of draft by Sumaiya.mobility


I have submitted an article in the month of August 2019. It got declined saying that the language was not proper. I edited and resubmitted for review in the few days span. Till now I haven't received any update on my article. Is there a way to know how to improve my content so that it gets accepted faster? Apart from that, is there a way to know the current status of my article (if someone is actually reviewing it or if I need to work on it again so that it matches the level and gets approved)? Thanks in advance.

Sumaiya.mobility (talk) 07:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sumaiya.mobility. Some reviewers concentrate on recent submissions that can be disposed of quickly, which may explain the initial quick decline. The draft was resubmitted 5 weeks ago. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so you can anticipate another review by the middle of January. Most businesses are not notable (not suitable for inclusion - the second reason it was initially declined), so the draft may never be accepted. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:22, 10 October 2019 review of submission by Gerard-Odonovan


I requesting a re-review because I made some changes to the page context. I wanted this biography to be live in wikipedia.

Gerard-Odonovan (talk) 08:26, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No reliable sources, and the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 11:20, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:21, 10 October 2019 review of submission by CheatCodes4ever


I think you should accept this. I just wanna be part of Wikipedia and be a good editor. You should be helping pages get fixed, not deleting them because they are not perfect. I want you to, instead of doing this, help me with this page. I hope you understand this. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 10:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your drafts have no sources, let alone in-depth reliable ones, the subjects are not notable enough for articles so they have been rejected or declined as appropriate. Theroadislong (talk) 11:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:50:54, 10 October 2019 review of submission by Alexander Andronkin


Alexander Andronkin (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


15:55:42, 10 October 2019 review of submission by Alexander Andronkin

I supplemented the article about SSLS company and now the article looks much better. Alexander Andronkin (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is just an advert with one source, their own website. Theroadislong (talk) 16:02, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:12, 10 October 2019 review of submission by 2402:8100:3986:4C77:F84F:F3C9:F905:EAD7


2402:8100:3986:4C77:F84F:F3C9:F905:EAD7 (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


October 11

02:28:20, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Ryancreekviw


Ryancreekviw (talk) 02:28, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:10:00, 11 October 2019 review of draft by 103.80.22.227


103.80.22.227 (talk) 09:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me what i do more.

It is written in a very promotional tone and sadly lacking in sources, every statement of fact requires a source, IMDb is not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 09:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:48:59, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Nomembrane

Why has this been rejected? What do i need for this to be approved? These are major achievements in an important persons life? Nomembrane (talk) 09:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this page not being accepted? Perhaps you need new mods that are not power tripping. Nomembrane (talk) 10:18, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why has this been declined? Nomembrane (talk) 10:18, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nomembrane. Draft:Danielle Pepper was rejected for not being notable (not being suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). It was then speedily deleted for being vandalism, blatant and obvious misinformation, or a blatant hoax. Because it has been deleted, I can't examine it to see why the two reviewers and an administrator reached these conclusions.
A number of essays have been written for people in your position:
These may help you understand why the page was rejected and deleted, and what your options are going forward. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:22:51, 11 October 2019 review of submission by 193.111.60.7

We are requesting a re-review because we took care to make this purely informational. There is no sales angle, just facts. Please let us know of any areas you think are sales content and we will remove them 193.111.60.7 (talk) 10:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The presence of the topic in Wikipedia would be promotional. It would give the impression that the company is significant, important, or worthy of note, which it is not. Most business are not a suitable subject for an encyclopedia article. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:23:34, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Alexander Andronkin

We are requesting a re-review because we took care to make this purely informational. There is no sales angle, just facts. Please let us know of any areas you think are sales content and we will remove them Alexander Andronkin (talk) 10:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Andronkin Articles require multiple in-depth sources, you have one source Alexa which is not suitable, also who is "we" Wikipedia accounts are strictly for single person use. Please be sure to declare any conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 10:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:25:17, 11 October 2019 review of draft by Dxfydd


Hey, AngusWoof denied this back in July saying that Multiplay already has plenty of coverage for Insomnia. However, Multiplay's events branch was sold to GAME (see Player1Events: https://esports-news.co.uk/2018/11/28/game-esports-player1-events/) and it doesn't belong there any more. What would you suggest now? I'll try to add more content soon:tm: but I can't guarantee pages and pages :p

Dxfydd (talk) 12:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:25:09, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Til1004

Hi there, I'm searching for someone who can help me improving/publishing the draft. Im looking forward to hear from you.

Thanks! til1004--Til1004 (talk) 13:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC) Til1004 (talk) 13:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:30, 11 October 2019 review of draft by Banquo92


Please review this article again. It still has not been accepted although the last review did not find any issue with it. Please see the comments left by DGG ( talk ) 22:16, 1 July 2019 (UTC).

Banquo92 (talk) 13:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Banquo92. The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed since July 4. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so you can anticipate another review by late November or early December. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Banquo92 The last reviewer said "Most of this article is still uncited. See WP:Verifiability for an explanation of why it is necessary." large sections of the article are still uncited, it's not clear exactly what your conflict of interest is but it would be advisable to add as many independent sources as possible to help future reviewers. Theroadislong (talk) 17:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:02:19, 11 October 2019 review of draft by Elijahandskip


I submitted a draft of an earthquake and it was declined, because it wasn't a major event. "Wikipedia doesn't keep separate articles for each earthquake". -BearCat (Person who declined). Should I add the Earthquake information to the town's Wiki page, since a separate article isn't warranted? Elijahandskip (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elijahandskip! Welcome to Wikipedia. I would agree with Bearcat's reasoning here. However, I think what you are suggesting is a Great idea! That way, it's included as part of the history of Lilbourn, Missouri. Happy editing, and if you need any help, reach out to an experienced editor! Bkissin (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:05:56, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Davideventi

Hello. I submitted this draft – Draft:Maths Time Joy – but it was rejected because not 'notable enough', because apparently it fails WP:MUSICBIO. However, WP:MUSICBIO shows the criteria for musicians and ensembles, meaning artists more generally I suppose. Maths Time Joy has made a name for himself mainly as a producer and songwriter, having worked with artists such as Mahalia Burkmar, Bebe Rexha and Romans (musician), as well as having been nominated for a Grammy for his work on Gallant's album Ology. So, really, the criteria for his page are shown in WP:COMPOSER. And I personally believe he meets those criteria. Also, Maths Time Joy was awarded the PRS Foundation Writer-Producer Fund a few months ago, with PRS for Music being the leading music royalty collection society in the UK. Which I believe makes him more than notable enough. Especially considering there's plenty of other people - including artists, producers, musicians, songwriters, etc. - with fewer achievements, who have pages on Wikipedia. Would it be possible to have the draft re-reviewed? Thanks!

Davideventi (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davideventi. It isn't enough to assert, "I personally believe he meets those criteria [of WP:COMPOSER]". Spell out which of the six criteria of WP:COMPOSER you believe he meets, and identify the sources that prove it. Throwing out random statements, like "worked with artists such as Mahalia Burkmar", doesn't advance your cause. I don't see how he meets any criteria of WP:COMPOSER, but if you're specific about which and how, someone will reconsider, and explain.
Don't get hung up comparing the draft with existing articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. Just because an article exists doesn't mean it should exist, that it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It might just mean that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Worldbruce. As I mentioned above, MTJ "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition" and he "has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria" – such as Mahalia's 'Sober', 'I Wish I Missed My Ex', 'No Reply', 'No Pressure', 'Grateful' and 'Hide Out', all of which have been released on Atlantic Records, a major record label, as well as charting in the UK's Top 40.[1]
MTJ also produced Bebe Rexha's 'Gateway Drug', featured in her EP 'All Your Fault Pt 1' (2017), which peaked at #51 in Billboard's Top 200[2], and it's arguably a major stepping stone in Bebe Rexha's career, which now counts three Top 10 hits in Billboard's Hot 100. [3]
MTJ also has a Grammy nomination for his work on Gallant's album Ology - more specifically for the track 'Jupiter Grayscale'. [4] Which means he "Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers". I can even send over his Grammy certificate if that helps.
MTJ meets more than one criteria of WP:COMPOSER. Hope this helps clarify. Thanks, Davideventi (talk) 09:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.officialcharts.com/artist/56258/mahalia/
  2. ^ https://www.billboard.com/music/bebe-rexha/chart-history/TLP
  3. ^ https://www.billboard.com/music/bebe-rexha/chart-history/HSI
  4. ^ https://www.grammy.com/grammys/artists/gallant
@Davideventi: That concrete description is much more helpful.
  • With respect to criterion #1 of WP:COMPOSER: "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition", none of those six songs charted in the UK's Top 40, according to the chart you linked as evidence. It shows zero singles by Mahalia in all of its Top-n categories. Absent other evidence, those singles are not notable. What label they have been released on is irrelevant. Since none of the individual compositions are notable, he doesn't pass this criterion of WP:COMPOSER.
  • Producing doesn't pass any music notability criteria. Someone notable for being a producer must demonstrate that through the general notability guideline.
  • Criterion #4 of WP:COMPOSER is: "Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition ..." According to the link you provided, the album has one nomination and zero wins. Being nominated is not winning (and there is no second place), so he doesn't pass this criterion of WP:COMPOSER.
So I still don't see how he meets any criteria of WP:COMPOSER. I hope this clarifies where the disconnects are between your thinking about notability and how the Wikipedia community evaluates it. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce: Criterion #1 is met because two of the mentioned songs are included in Mahalia's album 'Love and Compromise', which, as the link shows, peaked at #28 in the UK's Top 40.
Also, why does producing not pass any music notability criteria? Producing is really just another word for composing. Producing the track means also composing the melodies. And MTJ also has writing credits on the above-mentioned tracks.
Stating that being nominated isn't winning is one thing. But saying that it doesn't count as coming second or third is really just nonsense. The criterion clearly states "or in some cases been given a second OR OTHER place", which means any place after first counts. So it doesn't really make a difference whether out of the 5 albums nominated, it came second or third or fourth or fifth. It is still a notable and highly-regarded achievement.
Hope this clarifies how he meets those criteria. Davideventi (talk) 13:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Davideventi: No, WP:COMPOSER criterion #1 is not met by the songs being part of a notable album, because being part of a notable album doesn't make the songs notable. Notability is not inherited.
"Why" there aren't special guidelines for producing is beyond our scope at Articles for Creation. You can read the years of discussion of this in the archives of Wikipedia talk:Notability (music) and form your own conclusions.
The Grammy Awards are awards, they are not a competition. Competitions are events such as the Eurovision Song Contest in which there is a second place finisher, a third place finisher, etc. If being nominated for an award satisfied WP:COMPOSER criterion #4, the criterion would say so. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:14, 11 October 2019 review of draft by JuntasCambiamos


Hi, I submitted an article for submission yesterday and it says it has copyright from a page I used for reference. I don't want to have problems with Wikipedia so I want to fix this as soon as possible, but I'm not sure how or what is the best way to proceed. I don't mind deleting the whole article and starting again if that's what it takes. I just want to do things right.

Thanks in advance,

JuntasCambiamos.

JuntasCambiamos (talk) 15:40, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:54:25, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Horse Eye Jack

Hi, I spent a number of hours improving the page Draft:Ammar Campa-Najjar (added something on the order of 10,000 bytes) which now clearly passes WP:GNG, it was declined for failing WP:NPOL which I would note doesn't apply if WP:GNG has been met. The argument made by the declining party is that nothing has changed since 2018 which is simply untrue, more than a dozen sources (from all around the globe) have published in depth or significant content concerning the subject since then. Their rationale doesnt make any sense... Nor does the political rant they placed at the top of the page as a comment appear to be an accurate description of wikipedia’s policy vis-a-vis failed candidates who are otherwise notable. Particularly this piece "he will have to win the congressional election in November 2020 to qualify for an article” which has never been true, there are plenty of other ways to qualify. Could someone tell me how improving and nominating a superbly sourced 20,000 byte plus page is editing contrary to the purpose of wikipedia? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:09:15, 11 October 2019 review of draft by Professorjacobs


I've made the proper changes to my draft and I still haven't heard anything from the editors. I feel like the editing team (I understand how much work they do) should leave all their notes at once, not make us continue to change one thing, then wait two weeks to hear about another minor change. The title of my page is Nick Uhas, I've been a long time reader and I finally found a topic to make a cool page about and now it feels nearly impossible to wade through this red tape. Someone help me out!

Professorjacobs (talk) 17:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has now been accepted by Theroadislong who has also made some direct cleanup edits - congrats on your article. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:24, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting for review

22:33:11, 11 October 2019 review of submission by Rumbidzainokutenda


Rumbidzainokutenda (talk) 22:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC) I have corrected highlighted mistakes[reply]

Rumbidzainokutenda (talk) 22:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 12

02:14:31, 12 October 2019 review of draft by Ramongonsalis123


I have resubmitted this article a number of times and the references are correct and from reliable sources, but it keeps getting declined I need help in resubmitting it in the correct way Ramongonsalis123 (talk) 02:14, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:11:28, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Harish139


Hi Sir, what can I do with the article? Do I have to delete it? or can I make any modifications to the topic so that it will get approved? If there is a possibility for the approval, please tell me what modifications I have to do.

Harish139 (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:05:12, 12 October 2019 review of submission by 5.36.254.4


5.36.254.4 (talk) 06:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

06:53:59, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Janice (God is gracious)


Janice 06:53, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

10:10:44, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Jackson646


Jackson646 (talk) 10:10, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


11:34:13, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Lucasankunding45


Lucasankunding45 (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:26:06, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Beyhiveboys

The article I created was needed since the page of Angel Locsin will be congested. Each awards I put on the article have their own sources/links and are valid so I don't see anything wrong with information. Also, there are too many awards page by local pinoy celebrity that exists even though they don't have proper links and citations. I hope this draft will finally be approved.

Beyhiveboys (talk) 13:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:15:14, 12 October 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Def-Mornahan


I am writing this to lay out the situation around the draft Society of Catholic Scientists articles. I am a member of the Society and in contact with its leadership. I am also in contact with their volunteer social media person, who wrote the first rejected draft article. He discussed the situation with me (obviously, through email off of wikipedia's internal channels), and I decided to write an alternative article. My article was rejected, with no reason being given other than the existence of the prior rejected article. I told him about this, and he has marked his draft for deletion.

Having read the COI policy the other day, I recognize ways in which I may fit that definition as stated: 1) I am an active member of the organization in question. 2) I discussed writing the article with another person who is an active member of the organization and responsible, if on a volunteer basis, for some communications for the organization. 3) I have been paid by the organization for consulting work: specifically, to interview leadership members and conference speakers and release these interviews on my own independent podcast. (I was not paid to draft this article; however, this work was starting at the time I did so.)

So there is the situation. While I would certainly prefer that my article be posted, and think that it is adequately neutral and about an organization of reasonable interest for inclusion in wikipedia, I am not attached to that outcome. What is appropriate in this situation? Def-Mornahan (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC) Def-Mornahan (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:50:10, 12 October 2019 review of submission by FossilDS

Hi, I'm new here to Wikipedia editing, and I was just wondering how to make my article better, so it can pass peer review. Sorry if I am wasting your time, and I will delete the article if it is not notable enough.

Thank you very much!

FossilDS (talk) 21:50, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 13

04:46:31, 13 October 2019 review of submission by Valiyaparambil


Even after making all the necessary changes, the article keeps getting declined. Feel like really frustrating. Am new to wikipedia, and not sure if am missing something.

Valiyaparambil (talk) 04:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=920990180"