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 KhndzorUtogh (talk | contribs) at 13:54, 6 April 2021 (→12:10:22, 6 April 2021 review of draft by KhndzorUtogh). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, 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 31

00:22:47, 31 March 2021 review of submission by WilsonJamesSmith


I am requesting a review of the references cited to prove notability. There are over 20 published news and magazine articles solely talking about the artist and her work. I have just added a reference to her NBC6 news interview that has recently been released. More can be provided if necessary.

WilsonJamesSmith (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. The fact that you added lots of references actually is a red flag that the sources in general are likely inappropriate for establishing notability. Several of them are interviews, which are a primary source. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 00:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

00:40:57, 31 March 2021 review of submission by Coagmano

Hi there, I recently came across the Bank of Sydney draft and saw it was rejected for lack of independent sources. I went through and added a few sources to cover the summary and history and resubmitted it, at which point it has been declined for not having enough content, and a suggestion that it be merged with the Bank of Beirut.

I don't think it should be merged with the Bank of Beirut, since even though they have the same parent company, they operate in totally different countries with different regulatory frameworks and government guarantees. I also doubt an Australian looking up Australian banks would think to search for Bank of Beirut when they want Bank of Sydney.

The draft has a similar content structure to several other Australan bank's pages for example Bendigo and Adelaide Bank, Beyond Bank Australia, St.George Bank and other foreign owned banks like HSBC Bank Australia, ING Australia, Citibank Australia, but with less actual content. How much content is needed to make the page ready for publication?

Would appreciate suggestions to improve the draft.

Coagmano (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:57:59, 31 March 2021 review of submission by Vidhula A

I have created a new draft " Myc associated Synthetic Lethality" and I want it to be reviewed. However, I just have an option to Publish it. How do it get it reviewed? As per the earlier suggestion, i have added a link in the current draft to which the reviewers had asked to work on. Vidhula A (talk) 06:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well @Vidhula A, it is quite simple - you need to click the blue button "Submit the draft for review". Please be patient, we have several thousands drafts waiting for review, it can take up months for the review. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:23:04, 31 March 2021 review of draft by N-USO


How can I create a Wikipedia page? N-USO (talk) 09:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

N-USO You have already created a draft article, submitting it, and it was declined. Pleass review the advice given by the reviewer. Your draft has no independent reliable sources to support its content. For more information on creating articles, please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:33, 31 March 2021 review of submission by JuwelNotts12

{{Lafc|username=JuwelNotts12|ts=11:09:33, 31 March 2021|page=

I am unsure as to how long a page takes to be published. I have created this page for a BBC documentary in regards to DNA profiling. JuwelNotts12 (talk) 11:09, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was declined, please see it for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:57, 31 March 2021 review of submission by Happycontentme


I am new. I don't know html/coding. I am in grad school, and I reached out to Suman Fernando after reading some of his work. I told him that he should be on Wikipedia and said I could help him post his Bio.

I have spent a few hours trying to figure out what I am supposed to do, but I am still confused...

How do I cite him as my living source??

Thank you, Erica WangHappycontentme (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happycontentme (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happycontentme You don't, as interviews are a primary source. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves.
Wikipedia articles are typically written without any involvement from the subject, or even awareness. Since you are in communication with the subject, you have a conflict of interest, please review that policy. 331dot (talk) 14:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would also be wary about telling people they should have Wikipedia articles. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:31:56, 31 March 2021 review of draft by Mikip1015


Hello,

Can you be more specific on what I need to fix? It looks like all the articles listed have a correct citation and they are pubmed articles. What is that is not working? In the decline in February it was requested to do in-line citation. I did correct and resubmit and the 2nd decline in March are they now asking for to do footnotes. I am a little confused. Any help is much appreciated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paul_Khavari

Thanks Mikip1015 (talk) 18:31, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mikip1015 Your draft is basically a list of accomplishments, and not an encyclopedia article. A Wikipedia article needs to 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(in this case, a notable academic). It shouldn't just be a list(even if you have cited it all). Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikip1015: You might want to look at some example articles from our Good Article or Featured Article selections. I'm picking Benedict Cumberbatch at random. If you look at how the article is structured, we typically go:
  • Statement of fact, then a reference that supports that statement.
So looking at Cumberbatch:
  • Benedict Timothy Carlton Cumberbatch was born on 19 July 1976<ref name=tvg>{{cite web| url = https://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/benedict-cumberbatch/354194| title=Benedict Cumberbatch| work=[[TV Guide]] | access-date=11 November 2015 | archive-date=30 October 2015 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151030151758/http://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/benedict-cumberbatch/354194/ | url-status=dead}}</ref>
  • at Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital in the London district of Hammersmith,<ref>{{cite news |last=Culbertson |first=Alix |date=5 November 2014 |url=http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/kensington-heartthrob-benedict-cumberbatch-gets-8056486 |title=Kensington heartthrob Benedict Cumberbatch gets engaged to Hammersmith girlfriend |newspaper=Ealing Gazette |publisher=[[Trinity Mirror]] |access-date=27 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170328105739/http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/kensington-heartthrob-benedict-cumberbatch-gets-8056486 |archive-date=28 March 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref>
  • to actors Timothy Carlton (born Timothy Carlton Congdon Cumberbatch) and Wanda Ventham.<ref>{{cite news|last=Stanford|first=Peter|title=It's no good, Benedict Cumberbatch can't stop us liking him|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9485074/Its-no-good-Benedict-Cumberbatch-cant-stop-us-liking-him.html|work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|date=18 August 2012|access-date=3 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180528134903/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9485074/Its-no-good-Benedict-Cumberbatch-cant-stop-us-liking-him.html|archive-date=28 May 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>
So that is essentially what you'd need to do at the Khavari article. Also, all of the inline-links to external websites (for instance, the bulk of the award section) should be removed. Each notable award the subject won should be followed by a properly-formatted reference that proves the subject won each award, similar to what is shown above. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:54:28, 31 March 2021 review of draft by Trubbleinthebubble


Trubbleinthebubble (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious what to do with this page since it is a translation of the German page.

Hi Trubbleinthebubble, the draft has no references at all. Thus there is no evidence of the subject's existence let alone his notability. See the Referencing for beginners guide. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question about reason of reject

22:56:53, 31 March 2021 review of submission by Edmondmkw

I have tried to publish two times, but it still gets reject. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Coast_Guard_Law_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China_(2)) The latest reason is about "Needs template cleanup". However, can anyone say more clearly what wrong with my template? thank you so much

Edmondmkw (talk) 22:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Edmondmkw I do not understand that rationale either. Please ask -noah- to explain their rationale. We must all be able to explain what we mean Fiddle Faddle 19:58, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Edmondmkw: The AfC template was in the middle of the article, the article duplicated itself and the article didn't have a section for references. Noah 💬 20:08, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

13:21:02, 1 April 2021 review of draft by Bahastt


Hello, i‘ve added more than 1,500 BYTES on this Mario_Saeed Artikel, fixed all the footnotes added more recognizable and approved footnotes and many more information that shows that he‘s a professional athletic and well known, but still didn’t get any approval to be published and shows it‘s still in the Drafts. I‘m wondering if it‘s completely ignored or i have just to wait more?

Best regards Bahast Ahmed

Bahastt (talk) 13:21, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahastt Instead of adding quantity, please look at quality of editing. Read WP:YFA. It is unwise to submit drafts that look wrong. Please attend to that, too. There is a huge [ool of drafts. It will be assessed in due course, but the probability is that it will be declined in the state it is in. Fiddle Faddle 19:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:06:28, 1 April 2021 review of submission by Ghaynes19

The Columbia mill was the first mill to be built on Cedar Creek, and many mills followed. The early industrialization of Cedar Creek provided the economy that built Cedarburg and the surrounding communities. While the mill was demolished its dam millrace and pond remain. The millpond was contaminated with PCBs in the mid 1900s by mercury marine, and the contamination and subsequent cleanup has been a significant part of local history. Additional sources and text have been added to explain this significance. Ghaynes19 (talk) 14:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghaynes19 you make a persuasive case. Since this was rejected by @力 may I suggest you start by asking them about their rationale? Fiddle Faddle 19:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why I tagged this as "do not resubmit"; I can change that or you can just re-submit. The article I reviewed didn't say anything about mercury cleanup. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

request by P18agency

Hello, I ask for advice on the article about Ellen Alexander — Preceding unsigned comment added by P18agency (talk • contribs) 18:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@P18agency: Certainly. Here is your advice. Please make a correct declaration as a Paid Editor. This draft has been rejected. Fiddle Faddle 19:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:25:30, 1 April 2021 review of draft by RobertLaughlinD360


Hello, I'm just wondering why my page is being submitted for review.

RobertLaughlinD360 (talk) 20:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not yet submitted, you need to click the submit button. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an advice before submitting - you should overthink the sources of your draft - 100% of them are so called non reliable ones, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources, in its current form it will be declined. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:12:47, 1 April 2021 review of submission by 2600:1700:5A64:C310:8862:5C9D:43E5:D1C


2600:1700:5A64:C310:8862:5C9D:43E5:D1C (talk) 23:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I note that the creating editor has been blocked for failure to adhere to WP:PAID. Fiddle Faddle 08:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


April 2

05:08:07, 2 April 2021 review of draft by Aqstudies


Aqstudies (talk) 05:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:30:23, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Kieran375


Kieran375 (talk) 08:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kieran375 Rather too early, but plenty of time to writ e it when there is sufficient coverage in reliable sources Fiddle Faddle 18:46, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


08:46:04, 2 April 2021 review of submission by SriAmaraneni

Please Review my draft article

Thank You!

Sreedhar Rao (talk) 08:46, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:48:07, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Sekickimartin


Sekickimartin (talk) 08:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:48:07, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Sekickimartin

Hi @Sekickimartin:. A notable person is someone who has been covered by national news agencies or just reliable sources multiple times. You have not, so your draft was rejected. Noah 💬 14:23, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:54:58, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Imdavid21


Hello,

Hope this message finds you well.

Please tell me where I'm going wrong in the article for Bhartiya Group [1]. I have tried changing each and every sentence. Please let me know where EXACTLY does the problem lie. I will do my best to fix it


Imdavid21 (talk) 08:54, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Imdavid21 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to tell about the existence of a company and what it does; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Press releases, announcements of routine business activities, interviews, the company website, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:48:45, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Ahnaf Tahmid Islam


Ahnaf Tahmid Islam (talk) 10:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahnaf Tahmid Islam You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. I would also strongly advise against you posting personal information about yourself in this public website, for your protection. Please read guidance for younger editors, perhaps with a parent or guardian. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:43:50, 2 April 2021 review of draft by RJHuang


How can I change my draft name?? I accidentally named it "draft for ..." RJHuang (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RJHuang Don't worry about it, if and when your draft is accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. 331dot (talk) 15:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:49:23, 2 April 2021 review of submission by 64.121.103.144

My draft: Draft:Space Exploration was rejected. What should I do to make it accepted.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What you have made is a pleasant social media post, but Wikipedia is not social media. I suggest you choose a personal blog for this Fiddle Faddle 18:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


18:25:23, 2 April 2021 review of submission by ADTN1210

Hi, can you re-review my submission? I do not see any reason why my article is rejected? As I'm writing an article about list of artists influenced by American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift, just like how I see in other artists-influenced articles such as List of artists influenced by Beyoncé, List of artists influenced by Christina Aguilera, List of artists influenced by Janet Jackson and List of artists influenced by Madonna. Also, I know that my draft was rejected but I need specific reasons about why my draft was rejected. ADTN1210 (talk) 18:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ADTN1210 - Your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Let me say that this list is absolutely arbitrary, I do know other reviewers who would say nonsense. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford - Let me ask how the list is arbitrary when I did the same just as other "artists influenced by artists" articles? Can you please explain to me the reason why my article got rejected in detail? So that I can find out what I need to fix in my future articles. ADTN1210 (talk) 3:23, April 2, 2021 (CST)
@-noah-: Please would you take a further look at your rejection of this draft in order that ADTN1210 may understand better what was in your mind? Fiddle Faddle 20:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@-noah-: Please explain to me in detail why you rejected my article. I need to understand what to fix. ADTN1210 talk 7:32 PM, April 2, 2021 (CST)
Hi. I rejected it because the list seemed to be completely arbitrary, with no merit. It could probably be split into an article like "Cultural impact of Taylor Swift". Noah 💬 13:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The List is total arbitrary, there is absolute no scientific base stated, I would have rejected it, too. I for example would disagree with 80% of what is stated there and I know a couple of editors who would even disagree with this. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford: ok so if you think that "list of artists influenced by X" is arbitrary, then should all "list of artists influenced by Y" such as List of artists influenced by Eminem, List of celebrities influenced by Selena, and List of artists influenced by Beyoncé be deleted because all of these lists are "arbitrary"? ADTN1210 (talk) 15:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would say yes, although other stuff exists and those articles may have unique circumstances. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: now what do you mean they have unique circumstances? The article that I created is dedicated to American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift, and the reason that I created it is because I discovered that there are more than 100 artists who were influenced by her, just like Eminem, Christina Aguilera, Madonna, Beyonce,... so I just wanna ask that what do they have that I don't have? ADTN1210 (talk) 22:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, because I haven't examined them to compare them to your draft(and I don't intend to), so there could be reasons for those to exist but not your draft. Each article is judged on its own merits, see other stuff exists. That said, I would again say yes, those articles probably could be nominated for deletion too. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:02:51, 2 April 2021 review of submission by VanwaniAmit


VanwaniAmit (talk) 19:02, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Requesting you to let me know why my article been declined

@VanwaniAmit: If you're talking about the content at User:VanwaniAmit/sandbox, that's not an article, that's just random babbling. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VanwaniAmit: See here (ckicl the blue text) for what you should know when writing your first article for Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:26:31, 2 April 2021 review of submission by Kieran375

Kieran375 (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kieran375 Rather too early, but plenty of time to writ e it when there is sufficient coverage in reliable sources. This is the same answer as I gave above, plus this sentence Fiddle Faddle 07:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 3

09:31:57, 3 April 2021 review of draft by Abhinath Maurya


I need your help in finding out all the mistakes in the Draft: Vikash Kalra. IT is said there that it is not from reliable sources but I only used independent and reputed and definitely reliable sources. I will appreciate your help. Thank you so much.--Abhinath Maurya (talk) 09:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC) Abhinath Maurya (talk) 09:31, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhinath Maurya  Done I have offered you the advice you seek as a comment on the draft itself. Others may wish to add to it there or here. Fiddle Faddle 10:01, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Faddle, Thank you so much dear, you made it very clear. I am reaaly thankful for your precious time and suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhinath Maurya (talk • contribs) 10:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Abhinath Maurya as a general rule, solving referencing problems will show you the route for the article itself. It may be that the person is not yet notable, or they may be. The references you find (and then use) will determine this for you. Even if the work you do proves that they fail to cross the notability threshold you have still gained tools for your next piece of work. Fiddle Faddle 11:28, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:27, 3 April 2021 review of submission by Getmeonwiki


Hello,

I seek your kind advice to bring the Edcast page on wikipedia live.

Kindly help.

Thanks.

Getmeonwiki (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been deleted as blatant advertising. 331dot (talk) 15:39, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Getmeonwiki:. I would recommend recreating the draft as just a few sentences without anything that could even possibly seem promotional. If it seems ready for being in the main article space, someone will likely come along at some point and expand it. Noah 💬 21:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:16:11, 3 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mrbuldops


I am documenting a digital historic event from a neutral point of view but commanderwaterford doesn't agree with this and won't let me publish an article.

Mrbuldops (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mrbuldops The draft was correctly rejected, then deleted, as a blatant advertisement. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a subject. You should use social media or an alternative forum to tell the world about your event. 331dot (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 4

09:34:35, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Imzasf

The draft was not accepted under the reason that it is not supported by reliable sources. However, I have used newspapers, web articles and original website to support the wiki article. What do I change? Imzasf (talk) 09:34, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Imzasf The sources themselves might be reliable, but the specific pieces offered do not establish that this organization meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Most of them seem to be promotional pieces for the organization, announcements of routine activities, the website of the organization, or interviews with the founder of the organization. These do not establish notability. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about the good work an organizaton does. Please see Your First Article.
If you are associated with this organization, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:10:29, 4 April 2021 review of draft by Smectaone


I want the draft to be proffessional as it is in analytical chemsitry and I am not a native english writer. I believe the GC-UV has a high value and that it should be adressed on wikipedia! Not only in publications..

Smectaone (talk) 10:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Smectaone, Welcome to the Helpdesk - what is your question? So far your draft has not been submitted for review. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Smectaone you could ask for assistance at the WikiProject Chemistry talk page where someone familiar with the subject might be able to help. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:50:45, 4 April 2021 review of draft by KaironAI


Hi,

I've submitted a page for review called Kai.ai

It hasn't been approved for review but I'm not sure why.

I have disclosed that I work for Kai.ai, included multiple references, and have mostly provided a description of what the company does, when it was founded, technological overiew, and some branding info.

Also, I'd like to remove 'Company Page' from the title but couldn't find where I could actually edit the title section.

Thanks for your help!! KaironAI (talk) 11:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC) KaironAI (talk) 11:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KaironAI: Draft:Kai.ai Company Page hasn't been reviewed because you didn't submit it for review. There is a big blue button ("Submit the draft for review!") allowing you to submit it for review. The "Company Page" suffix can only be removed by moving the draft, however, this is nothing to wory about, because the reviewer will take care for you. While the draft is awaiting review, you should work on fixing the citation template errors indicated in red. The blue text labaled "(help)" should help you with that. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:30:06, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Eun Jin Wang


Dear Reviewer, my draft, "Kwon Jung Ho" has been rejected due to references but I am quite not sure why my sources are not qualified. All the sources are published, reliable, secondary sources which are independent of the subject. So I would like to ask more details of the errors on my draft. Is it problems all of my sources are published in Korea (which can be meant that they are reliable only in Korea, although even they are written in both Korean and English?) Do I need to find or make sources in media which are based in English or international? Any other errors that I need to improve?

Thank you for your time, I hope to hear from you soon.


Eun Jin Wang (talk) 14:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eun Jin Wang I give the reviewer a courtesy ping that he can explain his decline - @LJF2019. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Eun Jin Wang This is largely immaterial since you have copied and pasted the draft to become Kwon Jung Ho. Regrettably this just creates work for someone who has to merge the histories together. Fiddle Faddle 15:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:06:21, 4 April 2021 review of submission by 99.95.234.228


New coverage (book) 99.95.234.228 (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected and will not be considered further Fiddle Faddle 21:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


17:16:08, 4 April 2021 review of submission by 99.95.234.228


New coverage (Book). 99.95.234.228 (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


18:44:53, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Nikhil Singh Kotwal

Sorry sir but i believe that this topic is very Noticable . It is a scholarship by governemnt of INDIA to the JK students which provides scholarship upto 3 Lakhs(4,088.42 United States Dollar) per annum for pursuing medical courses . It also supports studying in Indian Institute of Technology and other AICTE verifies institutes. It is a very great opprotunity for the students and it is our responsibitlty to make the information to reach them. There are already a government website on this but as you know they dont do much awareness. I thought wikipedia is the best platform to make this information reach out to those needy students but you made me wrong sir. What is the use when there is a article on government of India but not on its greatest inititatives for students. I am the beneficiary of this scholarhsip and i wanted to reach out to students through your medium but i dont understand this topic is not yet noticable to you. Please guide me and help to reach out to the students through your medium sir. Hope you will Understand Nikhil Nikhil Singh Kotwal (talk) 18:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikhil Singh Kotwal regrettably, despite your good intentions, you created an advert. I would imagine that the Government of India has sufficient resources to place its own adverts. A needy student is unlikely o look for scholarships in Wikipedia Fiddle Faddle 18:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:20:16, 4 April 2021 review of submission by MarinaNebro

I first created this article in December, but it was declined because of lack of citation. I've updated the page with more citations, and would like to know next steps so that it can be published and seen online. Currently it doesn't appear in basic google searches, and I'm assuming this is because it isn't reviewed yet. MarinaNebro (talk) 19:20, 4 April 2021 (UTC) MarinaNebro (talk) 19:20, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are currently more than 5,000 drafts waiting for a review, it can take up to several months, please be patient. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:58:45, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Bapela


Bapela (talk) 19:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:58:45, 4 April 2021 review of submission by {{SUBST:REVISIONUSER



i am a South African rapper, and i am popular and well known in South Africa. Reason why i want to be live is that i want my fans to understand and know me better.

Thank you for letting us know but I do not see any question from you. Your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further.CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:00, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:59:59, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Lilstiff69

What will help this be approved and what can i add and change? Lilstiff69 (talk) 19:59, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing since your draft has been rejected and will not be considered any further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:25:28, 4 April 2021 review of submission by Rossophonic

I've added links to radio stories and programs I have done. Rossophonic (talk) 22:25, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


22:58:03, 4 April 2021 review of draft by PhilCrusie2


Need help publishing draft. I added 60+ more links to the citations sections because the editor did not see a reason that the subject was notable. Now there are over 80 citations in notable music and celebrity publications worldwide.

PhilCrusie2 (talk) 22:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:33:43, 4 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by PhilCrusie2


I believe that this article is necessary to discuss an up-and-coming musician, but the editor does not believe they are noteworthy. Hi, I just need someone else to help me publish this article. I understand that maybe there was some ambiguity, as I originally submitted the article with ~25 references but since then I have added 60 more links to the citations section. Would be glad to elucidate further, but I feel like that would be excessive with the additional links. Can you help publish this article please?

PhilCrusie2 (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about an up and coming musician. Musicians must already be established to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about the musician. You have added a lot of brief mentions, announcements of routine activities and press release type sources- exactly the wrong things to establish notability. Three or four sources with significant coverage are better than 60 with minimal or non independent coverage. 331dot (talk) 00:05, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 5

06:23:25, 5 April 2021 review of submission by Pauliine Mitt

My article got declined, because it doesn't have enough reliable sources, but are regular articles reliable sources as well or what else could be used as that?PauliineMitt (talk) 06:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PauliineMitt No, you cannot use other Wikipedia articles to source a Wikipedia article, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, in this case, a business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. This means that you need things like news reports or other independent coverage of this record label from outside sources that have taken note of your label and chosen on their own to write about it (no press releases, announcements of routine activities, interviews, brief mentions)
If you are associated with this label, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 06:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:33:49, 5 April 2021 review of submission by Mobashir hussain


Mobashir hussain (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mobashir hussain apart from lack of notability it doesn;t even look like an article. It has been rejected Fiddle Faddle 13:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


13:34:08, 5 April 2021 review of submission by 64.121.103.144

Can I ask someone to re-review this rejected draft? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 13:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC) 64.121.103.144 (talk) 13:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to the draft you want us to look at is advisable. I looked at Draft:Starship SN11 and declined it Fiddle Faddle 13:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Link to Draft:Space Exploration.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:11:26, 5 April 2021 review of draft by CreativeContentWriter


Hello, Te figure of whom I would like to make a wikipedia page of is a prominent artist however, there is little coverage of him online but plenty of primary sources. YOuc an find more about him on other art gallery webpages such as on https://rungg.co/artists/khalid-mahmud/ or on http://www.ejazartgallery.com/artist-detail.php/119. Is this enough for the page to be published? His list of publications, as an academic, should suffice to prove he is a prominent figure in academia. Thanks CreativeContentWriter (talk) 15:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have uploaded a number of photographs of his work, are you the artist Draft:Khalid_Mahmud? If not then they are copyright violations and will need to be removed. Theroadislong (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CreativeContentWriter Your uploads to Commons for this draft need to be sorted out. Your talk page there will give you details of what is required. Fiddle Faddle 17:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:23:20, 5 April 2021 review of submission by PhilCrusie2


There is extensive evidence in this article, that is cited properly. It makes me very sad that Wikipedia is fighting so hard against the music in my city. I do not know any other musicians in Hip Hop or EDM that are this well-known in the city of Austin. Sage Suede is a founding creator in these genres that has managed to be well known globally, despite the lack of support for these genres in the city of Austin.

So far, the editors haven't done anything supportive. They say I should remove references to the art museum exhibition and the artist being a polyglot. None of it makes any sense and I feel very hurt that my contributions to Wikipedia are ignored and my city's music is being stifled. I find the motives of these editors to be very suspicious and suspect strong prejudice.

PhilCrusie2 (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PhilCrusie2 It looks like the draft was a victim of WP:REFBOMB when multiple unreliable sources are added, the good ones get lost, for instance YouTube is rarely considered suitable, thegalleryatx.org is a blog which are also not usually considered reliable. Using ten references to support an "independently produced album" is cite overkill, just one would be preferable etc etc. Theroadislong (talk) 16:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please WP:Assume good faith from other editors, especially if you're unfamiliar with Wikipedia's sourcing requirements. There's a high bar for establishing notability and the current sources are very messy. Assume that the issue is more likely to be with sourcing than any sort of editor conspiracy or prejudice. The onus is on you to demonstrate notability with suitable sources. BlackholeWA (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I added more information on notoriety for this prominent artist in Austin's community and cleaned some more of the sources. I've addressed most of the concerns of reviewers, There's just a lot of info so the extra links could be moved to an appendix. It could use some cleaning but I'm exhausted after working on this for days. Several members of the community have been helpful and they were amazing.

Can you please approve this article, now that it has detail on the artists prominence, including abundant international music coverage? PhilCrusie2 (talk) 23:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would still consider a lot of the sources to be suspect, as I can't find any indication they have any sort of professional editorial oversight, which is a requirement for us to be able to use a source (alongside independence from the subject and in-depth discussion of same). The obscene number of citations to random blogs hurts the draft significantly. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 00:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:48, 5 April 2021 review of submission by 64.121.103.144

I am requesting a re-review because I added a lot to the draft. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your first port of call is to ask Mcmatter to reconsider their rejection. This is a courtesy, because I doubt any reviewer will overturn a rejection without consulting them. Fiddle Faddle 16:53, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tell zem we already have one-- Space exploration. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the rejection as the draft is in a much better place, I would still decline as it is basically a rework of the history section of NASA. I have left such a comment on the article and left it so they can submit the draft for review by someone else. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:55:11, 5 April 2021 review of draft by 38.73.141.229


38.73.141.229 (talk) 19:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has not been submitted for review, but will fail if submitted n its current form Fiddle Faddle 20:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:50:16, 5 April 2021 review of submission by PhilCrusie2


I added more evidence. He was endorsed by the 5th most influential radio personality in the world and recently appeared in issue #251 of DNA Magazine to an audience over 1.9 million. I think it's the largest gay publication in Asia.

PhilCrusie2 (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE QUIT MAKING NEW SECTIONS. Reply to one of the threads that has already been replied to. We don't need a new thread every time you make an edit; it's unhelpful and clutters up the page with redundant threads. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to this and it is very confusing. I posted one more time but I think it might finally be ready. There is much more detail. Sorry about the extra threads.

22:23:41, 5 April 2021 review of submission by Thaentity11


Thaentity11 (talk) 22:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Courtesy link: Draft:Amega Family) Two of your three sources are interviews with the family members, which are primary sources. Furthermore, we are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim that could potentially be challenged for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to a strong third-party source that corroborates it, and if no such sources can be found they must be removed. This is not negotiable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 23:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

23:40:34, 5 April 2021 review of draft by Ekkie101


I have included many references to my subject, yet only the first 24 appear in the reference section. Is there a limit to how many refs I can cite or am I doing something wrong?

Ekkie101 (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ekkie101: the issue is you have not put in more then 24 references you have instead put in mostly external links. Please read through WP:REFB to see how references should be formatted. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


April 6

01:01:44, 6 April 2021 review of draft by 1.136.110.76


1.136.110.76 (talk) 01:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you failed to respond professionally, rationally, and appropriately to a very simple question! So no wonder why majority of significant and notable scholars out there argue and are of the opinion that Wikipedia, unfortunately, is such an infamous, notorious, insignificant, not notable, unreliable, and invalid platform which provides people with misinformation and which is a menace to the society as a whole. Majority of significant and notable people argue and are of the opinion that Wikipedia is nothing but just an unworthy and fake website run by a pack of arrogant kids acting as technical tyrants, and, unfortunately, childish, shenanigan, egocentric, arrogant, and inappropriate behaviour of yours proves them right. Majority of significant and notable people believe that Wikipedia has no right to intrude people’s privacy and very personal information. Majority of significant and notable people are of the opinion that Wikipedia is a sham and shame because it threatens individuals by committing illegal action of exposing their IPs and unlike other esteemed platforms, does not let people get rid of this notorious Wiki account by completely, totally, and permanently deleting their accounts. As a result, significant and notable people recognize and mark Wikipedia as a spam, unfortunately! Therefore, majority of significant and notable scholars out there argue and are of the opinion that it is high time Wikipedia put itself together or else shut itself down permanently and let significant and notable people take a breath.

Properly cite your sources and stop citing Google queries. If you're properly citing sources, as you should be doing for every single claim, then the question about invasion of privacy is irrelevant on the grounds of Wikipedia going solely off of what the sources say. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 01:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your childish rant is unlikely to get your article considered further. The reason the article draft has not be accepted is because it does not reference reliable secondary sources that establish the subject's notability. More than half of your references are Google searches. It is your responsibility to provide such sources, and you won't help your case by insulting Wikipedia and its volunteer editors. The link to the subject's LinkedIn page and exhaustive list of personal achievements also gives the draft a somewhat promotional tone. If you have a personal connection to the subject this must be declared, and promotional content is not allowed on Wikipedia. It should be noted that attempting to add promotional content and then posting insulting rants when it is procedurally rejected will not reflect well on either you or the article subject. BlackholeWA (talk) 08:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, if this user is User:Ala.academics, the draft author, then this is a ban evade. BlackholeWA (talk) 08:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02:57:24, 6 April 2021 review of submission by PhilCrusie2


Hi, so latest edits are a big jump that makes it read clearer. Added some more on notoriety.

Fixed issues with links, by moving most of the extra links to an appendix for anyone that wants to dig deeper. This artist has so much global presence that I feel like there should be no confusion on their notoriety. I don't understand why no one was willing to look into the links because there are more than 7 UK publications and a feature in DNA Magazine, which is the largest gay magazine in Asia. This artist is from Austin, TX and has been covered extensively worldwide.

Hoping that this article will finally be published, because this has been so much work for me. It makes me sad that my writing is being criticized so much, when I was hoping it would be a more cooperative process. I haven't been on wikipedia's editing side in years and it used to be easy to post on here. Now it is very stressful and not much fun for me...

Can you please publish this article? There are too many sources for me to explicate on alone.

PhilCrusie2 (talk) 02:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no interest in "notoriety" it is notability we are looking for. Theroadislong (talk) 07:52, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:42:03, 6 April 2021 review of draft by Fitedits0007788


Fitedits0007788 (talk) 04:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:42:03, 6 April 2021 review of submission by Fitedits0007788



hey, just wondering what are the changes I need to do on this?? thanks for helping out

== 04:42:03, 6 April 2021 review of draft by Fitedits0007788 ==,

@Fitedits0007788: add some reliable sources. Neither IMDB nor YouTube are reliable in this context, the same thing goe for instagram. All the YouTube links don't work for me, the format is either https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id or https://youtu.be/id. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:19, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:09:30, 6 April 2021 review of draft by HoustonAstrosFan97


Hello, I need help on trying to get this page published. I don't know how to improve it to make it submit. Please help me. HoustonAstrosFan97 (talk) 05:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HoustonAstrosFan97 note the review comment by @KylieTastic and submit when you are confident that it passes Wikipedia:NGRIDIRON If it opasses then it will be accepted. If it fails then it will not. The draft is not currently submitted for review Fiddle Faddle 09:03, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:36:13, 6 April 2021 review of submission by 2A02:CB80:4085:D4A0:7D8C:3F3:779E:80F5


2A02:CB80:4085:D4A0:7D8C:3F3:779E:80F5 (talk) 05:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is your question? CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05:36:13, 6 April 2021 review of draft by 2A02:CB80:4085:D4A0:7D8C:3F3:779E:80F5 ==,

AlMaarefa University, Dirrea, Riyadh

Almaarefa University is located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It started in 2009 as a private higher educational institution.

Undergraduate programs being run are: Medicine, Pharmacy, Nursing, Respiratory Care, Emergency Medical Services, Anesthesia, Information Systems, Computer Science & Industrial Engineering [1]

Almaarefa University logo.png

Contents 1 History 2 Program Offerings 3 See Also 4 References History In 2009, the university started as "Almaarefa College of Science and Technology" and by 2018, it was renamed "Almaarefa University"[2]

Almaarefa University Theater

Program Offerings Medicine & Surgery (MBBS). Clinical Pharmacy (Pharm.D.). Nursing (BScN). Respiratory Therapy (BScRC). Emergency Medicine (BSc). Health Information Systems. Anesthetic Technology (Anae). Information Systems (BSc). Computer Science (BSc). Industrial Engineering.

AlMaarefa University Campus

See also: List of universities in Saudi Arabia www.um.edu.sa/en

References [1] 

Adamu A Ahmed, "The new generation of indigenous private universities, University World News, 29 June 2019 . Retrieved 2019-07-01



2A02:CB80:4085:D4A0:7D8C:3F3:779E:80F5 (talk) 06:07, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Posting a huge number of messages is counter-productive. The draft has been rejected. It will not be considered further unless oyu can persuade the rejecting reviewer to change their mind. From their comment this looks unlikely. Fiddle Faddle 09:32, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:46:36, 6 April 2021 review of submission by Gracetandeamara


Gracetandeamara (talk) 06:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC) i still don't understand why my article was rejected. i am new to this.. so please help[reply]

It would be helpful if you let us know which draft (the name of your article/draft) has been rejected. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft Draft:Félicité Niyitegeka was deleted because it had been abandoned (not edited for 6 months). Theroadislong (talk) 11:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:33:27, 6 April 2021 review of draft by Helen Wallimann


I submitted my revised draft with additional references on 4 November 2020. Since the last refusal (by Kvng) was published on 21 October 2020, I imagine the revised draft was not received. What should I do? Helen Wallimann (talk) 07:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Helen Wallimann Welcome to the Helpdesk. There are currently over 5,000 drafts waiting for review so it can take up several months for a review. Your draft needs especially sources (Wikipedia:Inline citation) for the Awards being listed because right now the draft presents mainly coverage about his works (not himself) which is not sufficient to establish notability per Wikipedia:NAUTHOR. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:54:07, 6 April 2021 review of submission by Kalpanavgowda


Kalpanavgowda (talk) 09:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft does not reference any reliable secondary sources to establish subject notability, is written from a promotional perspective, and, as you are a member of the company, you have a clear conflict of interest, which means that even without the lack of sourcing and unencyclopaedic tone the article would be the subject of increased scrutiny. Please be aware that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia which covers notable topics supported by reliable secondary source coverage, and is not a venue for promoting business interests of any sort. See WP:COI, WP:PROMO and WP:SOURCE. BlackholeWA (talk) 10:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:10:22, 6 April 2021 review of draft by KhndzorUtogh

Draft:Congressional Armenian Caucus

I was told to use more secondary sources/ I used too many primary sources. I'm honestly not too sure what a "primary source" is in this context, and how many secondary sources I need to use for this article to be approved. Could this be explained? Thanks.

KhndzorUtogh, some of the changes you made are much better. Primary sources in this context would be pulling directly from the caucus website. I would even be uneasy about referencing press releases from members of congress who are caucus members. Obviously sources from the caucus or its members think that the subject is notable, they are part of it! That being said, the AsBarez and ArmRadio sources are good secondary sources. Bkissin (talk) 13:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestion @Bkissin: I added several more secondary sources. Now half of my sources are secondary sources. Is there anything else I need to do for my article to be approved? Thanks. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 13:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:20:01, 6 April 2021 review of draft by Nedrum


Hello, I submitted an article for review, Draft: X-teens, and it was declined by AngusWOOF. AngusWOOF questioned the band's notability. Some discussion followed between me and AngusWOOF on AngusWOOF's Talk page. I provided additional information in support of the band's notability. AngusWOOF then replied, "please indicate that in the comments section of the article or the talk page so that other AFC reviewers can see it. Also you might want to ask Bkissin to review the article as it was considered close to being ready."

I have done as AngusWOOF suggested: I added information regarding the band's notability to the article's Talk page and left a message with Bkissin requesting a review. I have not heard anything more and just want to make sure there's nothing more I should do at this point, particularly since the article is still in the "Declined" state. Thank you

Nedrum (talk) 12:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1016309254"