Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MuddySloth (talk | contribs) at 22:39, 12 March 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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


March 6

00:21:10, 6 March 2021 review of submission by Joshua Gooden

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua Gooden (talk • contribs)

@Joshua Gooden: none of the sources used in the current draft are particulary reliable. It would help the respondees over here if you were to ask a question, rather than having us trying to guess what your question is when you came here. If you want to do so now, there is an "edit" link next to the section header Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:25:14, 6 March 2021 review of submission by Sayem Shirin Vlog


Sayem Shirin Vlog (talk) 06:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sayem Shirin Vlog, you don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:52:34, 6 March 2021 review of submission by Xzanthier


Xzanthier (talk) 06:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Xzanthier, there is no draft associated with your account. Please be more specific! CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
why my page submisison declined ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzanthier (talk • contribs)
@CommanderWaterford: This is probbably about Draft:Xzanthier, crated by this account according to Special:Log/create. @Xzanthier: please be aware that autobiographys are strongely discouraged, that Wikipedia is not social media, and that A Wikipedia article might not nessesarely be desireable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:46:52, 6 March 2021 review of draft by 27.57.240.61

I recently created a Draft: Jalgaon District Court ,but it got declined for copy-editing.I want help to improve this article.so reviewer will accept it.Before I was done minor edits in some articles.But first time I tried to write a article.Beacuse important articles around my place was not present on WP.Help me to improve It.I wrote five articles.I want help to make them correct,so reviewer will accept them.These are Draft: Ghodasgaon (District - Jalgaon) , Draft: Jalgaon housing scam ,Draft: Kothadi ,Draft : Jalgaon District Court,Draft: North Maharashtra ,Draft: Maroti Temple of Shirsada.You can improve them , suggest me changes.27.57.240.61 (talk) 07:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

27.57.240.61 (talk) 07:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question by Gbiswal

please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbiswal (talk • contribs) 09:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gbiswal You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:30:27, 6 March 2021 review of submission by Swakshar Mukherjee


Swakshar Mukherjee (talk) 11:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swakshar Mukherjee You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:43:07, 6 March 2021 review of draft by 142.105.209.171


ok im lazy, it’s a stub, DONT REMOVE IT, so can you finish it, guys but let me submit it. help me and I will also help you 142.105.209.171 (talk)

142.105.209.171 (talk) 15:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From what I have read, it's currently way to early for an article for that film. As far as I can tell, it is still in the planning phase, so there is no evidence how this meets WP:NFILM or complys with WP:NOTNEWS. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:13, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:50:23, 6 March 2021 review of submission by Pouryaferedi


Pouryaferedi (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pouryaferedi, You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to promote or tell the world about themselves. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 7

Draft article by Jejsiguoa

Hello! I created a draft article at Draft:List of Indian under 20 Records in Athletics on 20 February 2021, with reliable government sources and good standards. But the article has been declined. May I know the reason for declination??? --- Jejsiguoa(talk), 2:49, 7 March 2021

Your draft was declined by User @Devonian Wombat: - easiest way would be ton ask the editor on their talk page but I also pinged them here. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:56:58, 7 March 2021 review of submission by Pyeargin


Pyeargin (talk) 02:56, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I was confused as to why the article got declined after I made the requested changes, removed all marketing speak, and then connected the verbiage I did use to other already approved Wikipedia articles for "Marketplace" and "knowledge market".

Please let me know what the issue is?

Thanks! Peter

Hi Pyeargin. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. The draft was rejected because the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). You may be underestimating how difficult it is to justify a stand alone encyclopedia article about a company. It's unrealistic to expect a small, privately held startup less than a year old to have attracted sufficient notice from the world at large to warrant inclusion. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, so volunteers do not plan to review the draft again. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:14, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:26:41, 7 March 2021 review of submission by Guptadebol


Guptadebol (talk) 03:26, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guptadebol, You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:41, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:48:56, 7 March 2021 review of draft by 103.155.118.230


103.155.118.230 (talk) 07:48, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

you do not ask a question, you submission was declined, it barely consists of five words. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:14:43, 7 March 2021 review of draft by Chillabit


Hi. You can delete my draft. I made a regular page for it. I didn't realize this was only for unconfirmed users. Apologies. Chillabit (talk) 08:14, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chillabit This is not only for unconfirmed users; it's for anyone who would like someone else to look at a draft before it is placed in the encyclopedia, which is the best thing to do unless one has a great deal of experience in article creation. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thanks for letting me know, I suppose I was mislead. I'll put my next through draft review whenever I get around to it. --Chillabit (talk) 21:16, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:15:43, 7 March 2021 review of submission by Official TusharSahu


Official TusharSahu (talk) 09:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Official TusharSahu, you do not ask a question. What is your matter? CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:40, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:56:01, 7 March 2021 review of submission by King Februarius

I made a draft for an article about a university but it got rejected but i thought universities made good articles and were significant King Februarius (talk) 12:56, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

King Februarius Universities are subject to the same notability definition as every organization. You must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the university, showing how it meets that notability definition. At one point, the mere existence of a university merited it an article, but that was depreciated years ago. As such, an article about a university must do more than tell of its existence and offerings. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:02:31, 7 March 2021 review of submission by Femtasticx

Hello. I need some help. I understand the reasons this draft was rejected. I was proud I added a lot of references, but I understand more doens't always mean better and that references need to be reliable. Do you think there might be some way this page will work? I understand it's a tricky subject, but they exsist and I wanted the page to be some kind of overview of all the info there is about them. I can delete references to social media etc, but is it enough? Do you have suggestions of what I can add? Were the articles okay? Please help me out. Thanks in advance. Femtasticx (talk) 14:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Femtasticx, These days, Wikipedia does not have many articles about porn performers. It is fairly difficult to be notable as a porn performer. You need coverage in the mainstream press. My guess is they do not currently meet our guideline. Unless you can find coverage of them in several national newspapers, your best bet is making them a profile on a pornstar wiki of some kind, not Wikipedia. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 8

02:38:00, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 45Boomer

I've gotten all credible sources and shortened bio and still my wiki page isn't getting added.

45Boomer (talk) 02:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 45Boomer. Not everyone is a suitable subject for an encyclopedia article. In the Heavy.com piece, Boomer describes how he has never gotten "the call". Once he gets the call, and appears in at least one NFL regular season or post-season game, then a Wikipedia article will be justified, not before. See WP:NGRIDIRON for the nitty gritty details. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:59:05, 8 March 2021 review of submission by AmberLovesEverything

Hello There, I'm making an article for Internet animation, I want some editors to improve my article, Is there an way with editors improving and add details on my article, is it okay with that? AmberLovesEverything (talk) 03:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AmberLovesEverything, to create an article on Wikipedia it should be notable meaning it should pass WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Further more, it should have references (called reliable sources) present to verify the information provided in the article. If no reliable sources exist about the article, then it should not have an article on Wikipedia. I saw your draft was declined. It needs inline citations to verify the information. Please read WP:YFA and WP:REFB, if you haven't yet. –Kammill ⟨talk⟩ 04:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:29:21, 8 March 2021 review of draft by JudeJnr


After getting everything right, draft still got declined. Reasons;-

  1. Firstly because it falls under WP:TOOSOON. So I checked the article and I was able to defend it wasn’t a case of WP:TOOSOON. Then I resubmitted after making edits.
  2. Secondly because of COI, all this because I was able to prove the editor wrong and I still made a declaration under Goodfaith.

Is this how Wikipedia operates 🤦🏽‍♂️, before I started editing. I read about wp:BITE, now I feel like I’m been bitten for writing a beautiful article and it unjust. JudeJnr (talk) 08:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JudeJnr, Sorry for your feelings but as the reviewers now told you three times your subject of the article is not notable (yet). CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CommanderWaterford, looking at articles like Tems (Nigerian singer) and Nonso Amadi, it sourced in the same manner and it was approved.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, in the live chat I had. I was told, interviews in reliable sources are seen as primary sources and can’t establish notability. How did subject like Tems (Nigerian singer), gain notability with interviews and Draft:Oxlade (singer) fails?.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JudeJnr Please see other stuff exists. That other articles that exist that may be inappropriate does not mean yours can exist too. This is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, as such it is possible for inappropriate content to go unaddressed. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, it unjust even my draft have more reliable source than Tems (Nigerian singer), this is reliable enough [1] to all source used in her article.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
JudeJnr If you would like to pitch in and help weed out other inappropriate articles, you may do so, we could use the help. As I said, you can't use the existence of other potentially inappropriate articles to justify the existence of yours. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits. Your draft has not yet been completely rejected, only declined, so there is at least a chance that this person will meet the notability guideline and have appropriate sources. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, yes it does. Following this guidelines, WP:Band, and WP:Anybio. He has been nominated, charted, and also performed in ART X Lagos.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If that's true, then the reviewers will see it. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:03:54, 8 March 2021 review of submission by MuttFriday


She is one the foremost in the world of dog training and a President-awardee. Why is this post not qualified for publishing?

MuttFriday (talk) 09:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC) MuttFriday[reply]


MuttFriday (talk) 09:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is entirely promotional in tone and content, with zero reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:05:41, 8 March 2021 review of draft by Bartram83


Bartram83 (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know which articles/references to remove for this page for it to be verified.

Many thanks.

Hi Bartram83. As far as sources to remove, the ones that jump out are: the-royals.fandom.com, There Ought To Be Clowns, and monstagigz.com. They contain user-generated or self-published content, so are not reliable sources. You may also need to add sources. Most of the entries in the lists of theater, film, and TV performances cite no sources. Sources for them may already appear in the lead, in which case you should be able to make reviewers happy by adding inline citations within the lists. See Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repeated citations for a clean way to cite the same source multiple times. If, after you've done that, there are still performances that cite no sources, you'll need to add sources or remove the unsourced content. Everything included in Wikipedia must be verifiable in a published reliable source. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:15:20, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Joshua Gooden

I am taking a re-review request for the article that I'm working on, "Tanner Rozankovic" because I believe this biography about Tanner is worth an article due to public interest, for this person and that according to wiki guides this person is suitable for an article. In summary here is why I believe Tanner Rozankovic fits the requirements for an article/biography. From years 2016-2021 the name Tanner Rozankovic has been searched on google over 15 thousand times per 3 months, according to Google ranking sites. Tanner Rozankovic has had a wide range of media coverage calculating to videos all together over 6 million views, with Tanner's games and Tanner being the sole interest and focus of these videos. With big YouTubers making playlists with multiple videos just about Tanner, and the biggest twitch steamer to exist "Shroud" even mentioning and playing Tanner's games on videos and live streams, with hundreds of thousands of viewers watching live.

Tanner can be found with sufficient coverage from many notable and respectable sources, from the Valve cooperation all the way to EA Sports and DICE Studios some of the biggest publishing and developing companies to ever exist.

Joshua Gooden (talk) 04:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC) Request moved from the draft itself. --Jack Frost (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Gooden The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It doesn't matter if he has five viewers or 5 billion, it seems that he does not have significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This was also copied to my talkpage as the last AFC reviewer. I have articulated my review of the sources on the talkpage. I remain of the view that this draft fails to meet the general notability guideline, and I have been entirely unable to find sources to indicate otherwise. Please feel free to ping me with any queries. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 09:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:18:02, 8 March 2021 review of submission by MrWanderer321


I have updated the page with better sources.

MrWanderer321 (talk) 09:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrWanderer321 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:11:09, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Akash kumbhar 31


Akash kumbhar 31 (talk) 10:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akash kumbhar 31 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or post their resume, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Akash kumbhar 31 If you wish to ask a question, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:11:34, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 45Boomer

I was just in the Super Bowl yet my bio has not been approved 45Boomer (talk) 17:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Boomer Mays has not been re-submitted? Theroadislong (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:17:43, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Jupiter50


Jupiter50 (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Plz sir accept the article

@Jupiter50:, the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:49, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:DA6:AC99:6577:F5EA


Hello, again. I have added more references to check out.

2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:DA6:AC99:6577:F5EA (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you even tried to read my draft before before reading this? You should've checked the new references. I will not accept like this. Unless if you want to make me to do a new article, with the same details and then submit. It clearly says to ask for advice, and none. Ha, Ha.2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:A81C:5E18:81C8:FC1D (talk) 16:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:32:15, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 190.195.107.55


190.195.107.55 (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


March 9

00:48:47, 9 March 2021 review of submission by Kruguitarz


I would like to switch the article I posted from its current state to a biography page. I have more information about his personal life and career to be included in a formal biography. How do I make this change? I have tried but failed.

Kruguitarz (talk) 00:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:10:16, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Haggisnl


I have updated the article a bit to remove the parts that sound like they're advertising the company's service, but I wonder if there's more I can do to make the article more informative and less commercial in nature. Jan Jacob Mekes (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:20:00, 9 March 2021 review of draft by WPooya


Hi, I submitted draft:Seyed_Ali_Jaberi 2 months ago but it has not been reviewed yet.

WPooya (talk) 09:20, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WPooya As noted on your draft, "This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 5,012 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to continue to be patient, as there are thousands of drafts to review but only a limited number of volunteers to review them; those volunteers do what they can, when they can, in their free time. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:40:26, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Dalia Soliman CoE


Hello, I want to ask if theres any way to get a review on my article within the next few days. That would be very helpful! The Article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:European_Centre_of_Excellence_for_Civilian_Crisis_Management

Dalia Soliman CoE (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dalia Soliman CoE, As noted on your draft, "This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 5,012 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to continue to be patient, as there are thousands of drafts to review but only a limited number of volunteers to review them; those volunteers do what they can, when they can, in their free time. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:45:14, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Mapri


Hi, I would like to move the draft "Müge Turan", but can´t find the button/drop down menu "more>move". thanks for your help.

Mapri (talk) 10:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mapri You do not yet have the 10 edits needed to be autoconfirmed. Even once you do, you should continue to use the AFC process until you gain significant experience in article creation, as it is the hardest task to perform here. Please resubmit your draft for review. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:28:33, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Atbilst


Hello! I need to make a non-indexing wiki article on 3 languages. Could you pleasse advice hot to do it?

Atbilst (talk) 12:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:42, 9 March 2021 review of draft by 2600:8806:A602:1800:521:D5E9:6339:21FC


I am the author of this article and also its subject. How would you like me to verify the details of my biography?


2600:8806:A602:1800:521:D5E9:6339:21FC (talk) 14:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia is not interested in what you want to say about yourself, but in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable creative professional. Please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, would you please have a check on this draft - I have no idea why Eyebeller blanked the draft after declining but perhaps I am missing something. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually not sure either, as there are sources provided. 331dot (talk) 18:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, I asked him on his talk page on bookmarked the draft. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, I reverted the blanking. The Reviewer seem to be inactive for several weeks after getting into some "administrative issues". CommanderWaterford (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please resubmit the draft (simply press the resubmit button in the draft). CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:25:09, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Paullyleela


I would like my article to be submitted, but it was declined. I saw the reason according to this article: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

What should I do? I would like my article to be submitted.

Paullyleela (talk) 15:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paullyleela As noted, "This draft does not establish that the Faculty of Education is independently notable so as to warrant a separate article from the university." You need independent reliable sources with significant coverage that discuss the faculty as a group in order for them to merit an article by themselves.
Do you have an association with the faculty? 331dot (talk) 15:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:25:36, 9 March 2021 review of submission by Loloirving


Hello I am Lolo Irving wife of Robert Irving III & Co-founder of "Our Space In Time" you can check this detail from Robert Irving III Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Irving_III

I am trying to upload my content and every time this was declined. You can check this link https://www.mixcloud.com/totallywiredradio/280221-illicit-grooves-bob-hill/?fbclid=IwAR38Q_WmOZzTe0Pdx28oMCj_5VRm3N5ibJySUuHKhNWMo-TPx79lgryMOFA 

where London Podcast play my song on-air (after 29 minutes my song play and after the song he gave my intro)

Please let me know if you need anything else

Regards, Lolo Irving

Loloirving (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Loloirving, your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:51:06, 9 March 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:A81C:5E18:81C8:FC1D

Please check my new references. It seems that 331dot didn't even bother to check them, since it is already rejected. The ask for advice button is to tell why you should make the draft go to mainspace. I may have edited after the rejection, but I don't think this means nothing can be solved now. I will not give up. If it never works, I will speedy delete the article. However, I will make a new article of the same name with the same content and also those new references. It might work, and then I know your flaws.2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:A81C:5E18:81C8:FC1D (talk) 16:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, that won't work, at least right now, as you have now made any attempt to create this suspect. Gaming the system is rarely successful. You are only wasting your time and that of others by pursuing this. It was rejected and will not be considered further regardless of if you delete it and recreate it. What is the nature of your strong interest in this subject? 331dot (talk) 18:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted my article! Now I have to make it from scratch and find those references again! Goodbye, (Personal attack removed)!2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:18E7:9554:4C4B:8FBE (talk) 20:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:07:02, 9 March 2021 review of submission by WolfgangSchmidtHH


Well, excuse me, the articles if've written and ask for submission were declined, and to my opinion this is wrong. 1. These are translations from the articles of the Wikipedia version in German language. For example the article about Mr. André Vard is there for years.Obviously the user who declined the article is not from Germany and decides that this artist is not relevant to be mentioned in the wikipedia in English. Sorry, but that's a little bit kind of arrogant. And btw he's a well known drummer all over the world, but he lives in seclusion and only very rarely allows interviews. As a journalist I was lucky enough to speak to him personally. 2. Same about the band Korona. Just five minutes ago I added a link to a press review available on the Koronamusic website. So declining was much too fast, but also wrong without that new link. You could do you're own research if you are a real journalist and find out that this band is historically significant. It is the only band in the history of the Rock am Ring and Rock im Park festivals, which are the biggest rock festivals of Europe, booked there officially in the beginning of their career without having a record contract. That's why they were even part of a documentary about "30 years of Rock am Ring". etc. And because of their name and the coincidence of the currently absurd pandemic you should be understand that this is an important article. This is the only band on this planet that is officially allowed to have the name "Korona" as a band, and their label "Koronamusic" is the only label that is officially allowed to use this name. 3. I am a musicologist, living in Hamburg, Germany, and I also work as a freelance editor and journalist for many media. So I thought this articles should be available in English. People should not make changes to the articles who seem to have little or no idea about the subject. It is also questionable why no changes of this kind are made to other articles that have existed for years and are from the same subject. In my capacity as a scientist and journalist, I come into contact with many people and artists from the music industry. I have a lot of conversations and often receive information that, at the request of these people, is not made public. That is why I do not write some information or receipts in the articles, even though I have them firsthand, so to speak. If you have doubts about some things, you are welcome to write to me privately. Then I would also be happy to send you my press card from the German Association of Journalists or answer you any question. Additional: In the German version nearly all changes that were made first on my articles in the past had later to be taken back after "changers" really get into the information. So please, don't decline these articles. I know your subject qualifies. And I think you're very wrong in declining, because you don't know the subject, and you don't know or can't read the published sources and references because it's in German.(?) But that doesn't mean that there are no English speaking people interested into these subjects, right? Cheers! Wolfgang

WolfgangSchmidtHH (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moin WolfgangSchmidtHH, thank you for your detailed opinion but I can assure you that there are many, many reviewers here who do also speak almost fluently German, many of us speak several languages - like I do for example. And I can assist you that I would have declined your draft, too - your article persists of only self-published, not reliable sources and there is no significant coverage of this band proved. I suggest looking for those kind of sources, adding them and resubmitting the article for review. Auf bald! CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford: Aloha CommanderWaterford, so in your opinion, articles from music magazines, skateboard magazines or the press review with websites like t-online etc. are not reliable sources? Hm, there was a time when articles appeared on printed paper, you know. You can go to the Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt am Main and research the sources there. There are also articles on Korona and André Vard in the "Munzinger Archive", if that tells you something. How is that supposed to work with sources from the past, if you practically exclude the printed press? As a journalist, that is incomprehensible to me. And what do you mean by "self-published"? You call something "self-published" if it is press material that was once written about them and published in a press review? But that is a wrong argument. Because the content of the press review was not published by themselves. Seriously, you really exclude any source that is not on the internet right now and right here? I definitely disagree with that. And as I said, then you have to go to the German Library and order the magazines if you don't think that's reliable, or hire Munzinger. Actually, I just wanted to round it off, and also have it appear in English, because I had just conducted an interview with André Vard about Rolf Gehlhaar. I think Wikipedia is great, but the cliché regarding "opinions" and dealing with various assessments, especially when it comes to music and musicians, was promptly confirmed again. It still goes on and on. Futile hope. The reason for this was discussed in a nice symposium at the Frankfurt Music Fair three years ago. I think that's it for me again. All the best and stay healthy! WolfgangSchmidtHH WolfgangSchmidtHH (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:55, 9 March 2021 review of submission by Ccptv


Hello, I'm new to writing drafts. Seeking help to why the draft was denied. I was given permission to write the content and use their history located at https://thestellarawards.com/stellar-winners35.html. Any help you can give would be much appreciated.

Ccptv (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ccptv: Please see donating copyrighted materials, though I have a slight feeling you are wasting everyone's time with that, as stuff like Please follow our accounts on social media @thestellars and check our website www.stellarawards.com for updates from Central City Productions. or "We must adhere to the social distancing measures put into place and continue to remain vigilant about following all possible recommendations carefully, while remaining steadfast in our faith."(source) or For more info, please go to the CDC Website. or "not even a global pandemic could diminish the powerful spirit of praise, worship and celebration during the historic virtual broadcast of the Stellar Gospel Music Awards Sunday night on BET and BET Her."(source) don't belong in an encyclopedic article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)added links Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ccptv Please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:02:49, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Eastcoasthawaiian


Not sure how to add an American Photojournalist Stephen S. Myers, National Magazine Award finalist, profiled personally in LIFE Magazine twice, in the collections of the several major museums

Eastcoasthawaiian (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eastcoasthawaiian Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a place to just list people. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent [{WP:RS|reliable sources]] with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. I'd recommend looking at some articles about people in general(Joe Biden, Boris Johnson, Pope Francis, Tom Brokaw) and/or photojournalists in particular. You may also find it helpful to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia and its content. 331dot (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. His work is featured over 200 times in NY Magazine, LIFE Magazine, and is in several museums. He has had shows at the American Museum of Natural History, etc. I've looked at other artists and photojournalism pages and they have pages for similar content? Please clarify. We have copies of all the magazine, books and museum collection links. Please advise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastcoasthawaiian (talk • contribs) 21:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eastcoasthawaiian What is needed is not collections of his work, but independent reliable sources that discuss that work in depth. That might include things like independent reviews of his work or independent news stories about him(but not press releases or anything prompted by him or those exhibiting his work). 331dot (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Very respectfully, Thank you. So a LIFE Magazine profile by Time Warner is not considered independent? https://www.amazon.com/Original-Life-Magazine-March-1998/dp/B008JG35YK This is their independent publication, not a press release. Please clarify? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastcoasthawaiian (talk • contribs) 21:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

His profile is on pages 96 to 99 of the magazine.

His profile is on pages 96 to 99 of the magazine.

That might be one independent reliable source. Most reviewers look for at least three- and the draft should summarize what they say. Note that it should not be based on an interview with him(I haven't looked at it). 331dot (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Very respectfully, Thank you. The interview of Stephen S Myers inside the magazine was conducted by Harriet Barovick of LIFE Magazine and appears on page 96 and ending on page 102 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastcoasthawaiian (talk • contribs) 21:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, an interview with him would not be an independent reliable source as it is his own words, a primary source. 331dot (talk) 21:37, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Eastcoasthawaiian, first of all it would be good not to ask on x several places for advice in order to get a draft accepted. As 331dot already said that neither collections of its work nor an interview makes this person notable, see WP:GNG - I also encourage you to read and follow the guidelines I already gave you before resubmitting again. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:22:37, 9 March 2021 review of draft by Jscarboro


Hello, I have been working to improve the draft for Juanita Jaramillo-Lavadie that was started at an edit-a-thon I recently attended...but based on the most common occurrence of name forms I think the article should actually be titled "Juanita Jaramillo Lavadie" (with no hyphen). Can I just change it in the draft, or is it more complicated than that? Thanks in advance for your help!Jscarboro (talk) 21:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC) Jscarboro (talk) 21:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jscarboro It is easier if you note on the draft talk page the error in the title; if the reviewer accepts the draft, they will place it at the proper title. 331dot (talk) 21:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks 331dot! Will do Jscarboro (talk) 21:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 10

05:36:29, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Sauravgupta7297


Sauravgupta7297 (talk) 05:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I wanted to Know why my article on The Opinion Express Group is not moved to the MainSpaceas it is about the News Magazine which is currently running in India. All the other News Magazine pages are already in the mainspace I have posted my article 4 to 5 times with all the official documents as the references and still, it says that the content is for Promotion I have just written About the organization and the History and just the Notable contributors; Please tell me how it is Promotional content. you can review the Page of India Today Magazine then that page is also a Promotional page!!! I have been working on it for months now and it becomes really frustrating for me because everytime my page has been deleted and the reason is the same Promotional purpose I request you to please review my draft and tell me what should I change in my article to make it verifiable please!!! Sauravgupta7297 (talk) 05:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sauravgupta7297 The reason for the decline was given by the reviewer at the top of your draft. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about the existence of something; Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability.
That other articles exist is not relevant; see other stuff exists. It could be that those other articles are also inappropriate, but simply have not been addressed yet. We can only address what we know about, and as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected. This is why each draft or article is judged on its own merits.
If you are associated with this magazine, please review conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:23:47, 10 March 2021 review of submission by LAngeli07


LAngeli07 (talk) 07:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LAngeli07 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LAngeli07, You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:36:03, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Threedotsmedia


Threedotsmedia (talk) 09:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, user blocked. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:12:28, 10 March 2021 review of submission by 182.190.222.152


182.190.222.152 (talk) 10:12, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why still rejected?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.190.222.152 (talk)

Your draft was rejected because it is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves; we are only interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. If you work for this business, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier to do in the full desktop version of Wikipedia, even in a browser on a phone. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:15:08, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Ciuffoly


Ciuffoly (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ciuffoly You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you are attempting to write about yourself, please review the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:51:42, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Ciuffoly

what is wrong ? Ciuffoly (talk) 14:51, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ciuffoly, Put plain, you fail WP:BIO. If you want to advertise yourself please use social media Fiddle Faddle 14:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:56:31, 10 March 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Beeloser


Looking for some feedback on the attempts that I have made to comply with the rules since the page was declined. I've removed many of the references to the bbka website - clearly, in hindsight, no help in proving notability - and used alternatives from third parties I've declared that I am a beekeeper and not receiving any benefit for creating the page. TIA --Beeloser (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beeloser (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beeloser, I suggest you resubmit for review. Fiddle Faddle 08:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:49:53, 10 March 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Leoreleu


The draft for the creation of a webpage for the mathematician Assyr_Abdulle from the (EPFL, Switzerland) was denied https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Assyr_Abdulle. I have difficulty to understand why: there are reliable independent source, on the academic side the research is a major player in his field that got important recognition from scientific society (like SIAM). My goal is to do an entry for each person that got the SIAM Wilkinson Prize

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_H._Wilkinson_Prize_in_Numerical_Analysis_and_Scientific_Computing

The reviewer shall explain me why this research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexing_Ying meet the standard of Wikipedia while this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Assyr_Abdulle not.

Leoreleu (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leoreleu, You have a good objective. I will quarrel with your last paragraph. No one article on Wikipedia sets any sort of precedent for any other article. Please do not make that argument,ment. It is unlikely that this question will be answered.
Draft:Wilkinson abd eng has been rejected in favour of your working upon Draft:Assyr Abdulle, therefore please work on that draft. The former will not proceed further, The latter will. Fiddle Faddle 17:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

what is the relationship between sociology and public administration — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.205.113.55 (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a raven like a writing desk? Fiddle Faddle 22:57, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:46:14, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Sultanqureshi87


Sultanqureshi87 (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:50:44, 10 March 2021 review of submission by JonoLynch-Staunton

Hello,

I worked very hard to create a neutral article for 'Rocket Science' looking at many other companies within the same field which have already been verified and have pages on Wikipedia.

I used respected outside sources within the industry as references. Despite being diligent and trying to following the guidelines and my tone I've had the article rejected.

Please could I get some help to what is wrong and how the article may be fixed in terms of change tone or sources.

I looked at similar companies in the field who have had their profiles ok'd - eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embankment_Films https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HanWay_Films

before starting to create the article in the hope that meant the tone I used was safe and within the permitted guidlines.

Having done that it would be great if any advice could be given on how to amend the tone to an acceptable place

I value Wikipedia and am really very disheartened at the moment.

Thank you in advance for your help.

With best wishes, Jonathan JonoLynch-Staunton (talk) 18:50, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:23:14, 10 March 2021 review of submission by Heribert Julià


I've created a page about Spanish photographer Yosigo and the draft has been declined because "submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

All the references I have used are media and press articles about him, so they aren't just passing mentions. Moreover, they are articles published in newspapers and magazines unrelated to this photographer so, in other words, they are independent of the subject.

In conclusion, I don't really understand why the article submission has been declined neither what can I improve to solve the reason it was declined for... :S

Could you help me with that?

Thanks!!!

Heribert Julià (talk) 20:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heribert Julià, you should have read the Reviewers Comment which says that it does fit into WP:NARTIST, your sources are by the way primary blogs and self-published or promotional ones which do not fit into our criterias of being a WP:RS, the only exception would be El Diario but this is not sufficient. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CommanderWaterford, thanks for your answer! I will try to update the aricle so it better fits into WP:NARTIST. About the references I have used, there is one blog owned by Gabriela Cendoya, one of the main specialist on Spanish photography books. The other references are well-known online magazines about photography, arts, and culture. Anyway, I will also try to look for more references.

Thanks again!!! Heribert Julià (talk) 09:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:21:02, 10 March 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Kwabenabaop


The article is the lyrics of a song (the FIRST Ghana National Anthem which we sang every morning at assembly as school pupils of the then elementary school nationwide. Our poor record keeping and the opposition against the first Ghana government, particularly after the first coup d'etat in 1966, are reasons that this problem/confusion has occurred. There are other supporting posts on YouTube but that platform unfortunately does not qualify for credibility. So the possible verification now can only be from the aged Ghanaians who also sang the first National anthem in the late fifties and early sixties before the overthrow of Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. Any suggestions on how this can be done? Kwabenabaop (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kwabenabaop, I would suggest to ask for some help at the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ghana, Facebook and/or Youtube as sources will not help. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


March 11

01:45:43, 11 March 2021 review of draft by Tekellypstcc

Im trying to make enough edits so that my page can be excepted

Tekellypstcc (talk) 01:45, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tekellypstcc, Instead of trying please succeed. Do not, please, submit test edits for review Fiddle Faddle 08:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:05:24, 11 March 2021 review of submission by I-Spin-for-health


Hi, so I have a question. Is it possible for us to put a claim to a name for the wikipedia page that I am about to post?

I-Spin-for-health (talk) 03:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I-Spin-for-health, no Fiddle Faddle 08:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:25:32, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Supthenext


Supthenext (talk) 03:25, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Supthenext, they are insufficiently notable, the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further Fiddle Faddle 08:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:50:41, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Cakeybuns

I feel wehoopin is big enough for his own wiki, also if its just you need me to write more i will do so

Cakeybuns (talk) 04:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cakeybuns, I'm afraid you are mistaken. Please read WP:BIO Fiddle Faddle 08:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:39:20, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Xander flex

I am failing to understand how Souder is not notable enough. There are a multitude of articles covering his life and work, he is a well-published artist whose artwork is still sold and collected today (by people such as jay leno), he was the recipient of multiple community awards, there is a memorial in his name, his death was formally honored by a government body. How do these things not pass the "notability" guideline..? I have 20+ citations in the article that confirm all of these things.

Xander flex (talk) 05:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Xander flex: Your first port of call for discussion is Clarityfiend who rejected it. Fiddle Faddle 08:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Xander flex: "Community awards" rarely confer notability(as Wikipedia defines it for artists) as anyone can give out an "award". Unless those awards merit articles themselves(like an Oscar or Tony or Grammy) they usually aren't notable. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Ok...and what about all of the other things? The awards are simply one example of the many times he was the subject of articles and praise. How many people have their death honored with a resolution passed by public officials? non-notable people? How many articles does he need to be the subject of to be considered "notable"? I am surprised that all of the provided publications do not make obvious that he carried a fair degree of fame and notability.

15:17:54, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Cancersign


I have nothing to do with the subject of the article.This is my first article, so every time I ask you for guidance.But you rejected my article using rude and difficult language, I had no such hope from the members of Wikipedia.I only asked you for guidance in the question, how can we improve this article?


Cancersign (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cancersign, your draft has been deleted (apparently the author blanked it itself) so the only way to improve the article is by creating a new one. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:24:09, 11 March 2021 review of submission by MrWanderer321


I have adhered to and made changes as pointed out by reviewers but still can't get this up. Help, please. MrWanderer321 (talk) 16:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrWanderer321 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, and no amount of editing can change that. To be frank, you will only be wasting your time and that of others if you pursue this further at this time. 331dot (talk) 16:32, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:27:26, 11 March 2021 review of draft by Bigbirdboy


Hello and thank you for your attention.

My submission was declined for the following reason:

"This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

My question would be, is one source referenced from an independent secondary enough? Is that one reference source enough? or do I need more than one publication from secondary sources?

Thank you

Bigbirdboy (talk) 19:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bigbirdboy: see WP:THREE. Three indenpendent, reliable sources is often regarded as the bare minimum, more is always better, also with regards to WP:BLP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:43:53, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Miaminsurance


Miaminsurance (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I created a page for iMerit but the main title has it IMerit. Not sure how to make that change.

21:49:37, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Or-Kitt


Hi, I'm trying to fix up an article on Canadian artist Zinnia Naqvi, but I'm having difficulty with the "notability" of this artist. She's an award-winning artist and pretty notable in Canada — she has an award from the National Gallery of Canada (biggest arts institution in the country), she's exhibited nationally and internationally, I've included citations on her work in Canadian Art magazine (best-selling arts periodical here) and an interview on her work on Global News (one of our national news networks). I'm not using any sources that I think are questionable (eg. her artist's website), and I really just don't know what to add at this point! Any suggestions are appreciated.

--Or-Kitt (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or-Kitt (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmaceutical Association of Mauritius - P.A.M

Hello, I just wanted to know if I shall have to resubmit the article which I wrote on 'Pharmaceutical Association of Mauritius -P.A.M' on the 27th March, 2014, and subsequently edited to include verifiable sources. This is a page which I want to link to the [list of pharmacy associations] for the Republic of Mauritius.

Thank you for your attention!

Alain Sheratan Alshera (talk) 22:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alshera, We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to return. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 08:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:14:34, 11 March 2021 review of submission by Puhoaosb


Hi there :)

Slightly confused as to the comment I received and if I could please receive any insight:

Reviewer: "This is an entry on the List of massacres committed during the Eritrean War of Independence, and as can be seen on that list, none of the others have a standalone article. However, an article about the village itself, if official sources can be found, would be acceptable."

I was wondering why a separate article of the village is required in order to also discuss the massacre? The articles on the list do not have a standalone articles but frankly should, therefore I am not sure how this is a reason. There are standalone articles of massacres which took place in the US, for example.

Agreed that an article on the village itself would be ideal and will work to build one soon - but the comment regarding the need for 'significant coverage' does ignore the context/time of which this massacre took place. This article is an attempt to contribute to knowledge, which so far exists mostly through oral history. If the goal of Wikipedia is to disseminate knowledge effectively, the obstruction of said knowledge due to a lack of what is deemed as 'coverage' seems almost counterproductive.

Even then, building an article on the village itself would consist of few sources anyway. Any specific advice would be helpful please going forward.

Puhoaosb (talk) 22:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Puhoaosb, I am afraid that thsi draft also looks like a memorial. While that is laudable it is not a thing for Wikipedia. Please see WP:NOTMEMORIAL. For me this suggests your list of victims is out of scope for us here.
In real terms you have only two references. One is duplicated. I think it likely that three solid references (WP:42 is a good guide), potentially more, that the draft sans list of victims wil stand a far better chance of acceptance Fiddle Faddle 22:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:02:11, 11 March 2021 review of draft by Duduzh


Are the sources that I added to Draft:Hsiao-ting Lin not reliable sources? When should I resubmit the draft?

Duduzh (talk) 23:02, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Duduzh, Please consider your sourcing. It is not useful. WP:42 summarises what is useful.
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 23:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your links say that "primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia" and "A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts". The sources that I used from the Hoover Institution and Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars are being used for straightforward statements of facts and are not being used for interpretation. Every sentence in the draft has a reference. What am I missing here? Duduzh (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If university sources are not allowed for scholars, then that is a pity. Newspapers do not write many articles about researchers unless they are quite exceptional. Duduzh (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Duduzh, You are missing WP:NACADEMIC Fiddle Faddle 23:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 12

00:19:55, 12 March 2021 review of submission by Pogerina

This was rejected but I don't know why. Please help! It said something about putting references in footnotes but I did not know I had any 'references'. Pogerina (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pogerina. You have to tell the reader where every piece of information in the draft came from. Do so by citing sources (also known as references). Help:Referencing for beginners is a simplified introduction to the mechanics.
Sources should be published, reliable sources. Reliable has a distinctive meaning on Wikipedia. Many sources you might think are trustworthy, such as Discogs, IMDb, and YouTube, generally are not reliable as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources contains a list of sources Wikipedians have found useful when writing about music.
Furthermore, the bulk of the draft should come from independent, secondary sources, so not Rietveld (including primary source interviews of him without independent analysis), nor his label, nor others who have an interest in promoting him. The best sources will also contain significant coverage (at least a few paragraphs) about him. Try to find at least three reliable, independent, secondary sources, that contain significant coverage of him.
As an example, for the statement, "Rietveld joined Miles Davis's band for his 1988 World Tour", I've added a citation to an independent, reliable source (a book written by a notable music writer). Add citations for everything in the biography and awards sections. It is not important to have citations in the discography and filmography sections if the credits of the albums and films themselves support the listing. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:59:55, 12 March 2021 review of submission by Athinarayanan1


Athinarayanan1 (talk) 07:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Athinarayanan1, Wikipedia may not be used to advertise your own business. Fiddle Faddle 08:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:27:27, 12 March 2021 review of submission by 2400:4050:A1A3:BD00:9539:3103:96AA:C9DE


2400:4050:A1A3:BD00:9539:3103:96AA:C9DE (talk) 09:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:49, 12 March 2021 review of submission by Cakeybuns


Cakeybuns (talk) 14:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC) Why was this declined[reply]

Cakeybuns As noted by the reviewer on the draft, this person does not seem to meet notability guidelines. As such, it has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:29:18, 12 March 2021 review of submission by 204.10.221.47

I need  a paragraph about WWII ending

204.10.221.47 (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:36:17, 12 March 2021 review of draft by MuddySloth


Just had an article rejected, I wanted to see what was wrong. it says "references" but I'm not sure what other references would be needed. I've included the subject website along with dates. Any assistance on what else is needed would be appreciated, thanks.

MuddySloth (talk) 19:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MuddySloth Your draft is almost entirely sourced to the subject's website- and the two that aren't are just ads for the comics. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia isn't interested in what a subject(or those associated with it) says about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the subject have chosen on their own to say about it. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:31:06, 12 March 2021 review of draft by 195.35.231.211


Can someone make it better? translate someone of dutch article into the English one? My English is bad. This was intended as a novice.


195.35.231.211 (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:39:06, 12 March 2021 review of draft by MuddySloth


How many outside references are needed for a subject to be "notable?" Thank you MuddySloth (talk) 22:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1011803315"