Wikipedia talk:Requested articles

Removing entries

What is the protocol for responding to page requests that are clearly not going to make it, notability-wise? Can they be removed with an edit summary to that effect, or do they remain here forever? Possibly (talk) 06:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• I just realized I had the exact same question. A loose necktie (talk) 16:06, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

  A loose necktie, Possibly, I've been unilaterally deleting entries that facially seem to fail WP:GNG or other criteria like WP:NOT and I think that's the appropriate course. I've been taking a conservative approach to this (e.g., only deleting the entries that are CLEARLY going to fail just based on the name and a quick Google search), so I wouldn't go wild. But if something on here seems frivolous, I think we should cull it unless someone objects. DocFreeman24 (talk) 05:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Why is there no category "Journalism" or "News"?

Why is there no category "Journalism" or "News"? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

(1 month later) Why is there no category "Journalism" or "News"? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:23, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Journalism has existed for over ten years. Are you requesting that an article be put into that category? Jim.henderson (talk) 00:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles added here by me

Hi there. I just added here some Wikipedia articles to be created. Since I already tried myself and they never got created, I ask someone around here to do so. These articles are: Almorzando con Mirtha Legrand, Scatter Records, BRIC: El Nuevo Mundo and 26 personas para salvar al mundo. Please create them asap, it's been a very long while since I started wanting to create them... Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.195.107.55 (talk) 14:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Given what I've seen, the likelihood of any given Requested Article actually being generated by any Wikipedia editor is quite slim. This is part of why we encourage users to be bold about creating new articles on notable topics. It doesn't even matter (theoretically) if the article is poorly formatted, or lacks references, so long as the topic itself is bona fide notable. If you create an article but it isn't formatted right or you add references incorrectly, other editors have the option to correct your mistakes or to place tags on the article noting its problems (which you may then fix, if you think you know how, or which you can ask other editors for advice on fixing). If you create an article on a topic that is not actually notable, then you should expect it to be deleted in due course. There are lots of guidelines on what constitutes notability (like WP:GNG) which you might want to consult before creating an article, and lots of other available guidelines on how to go about doing it. But asking or re-asking someone else to do it for you isn't likely to produce much in the way of results, because most Wikipedia editors are already plenty busy with their own interests and aren't looking for suggestions for new topics. Occasionally someone might decide to take on a topic from the Requested Articles list and actually make an article, but the vast, vast majority simply sit here indefinitely. If you would like more direction on how to get started, consider visiting this link for more guidance. Good luck! A loose necktie (talk) 12:40, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

To provide a slightly alternative perspective, requested articles do get made. I've made two in the past week, and I'm working on a requested list. But mind you, that's 2-3 out of hundreds -- potentially thousands. It does happen, and it's pessimistic to say it never will, but don't have overly high expectations. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 02:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Let me revise that: I've noticed that you have already attempted to create draft articles on these topics, and that other editors have reviewed those drafts and decided that the subjects were not notable enough for inclusion. I also noticed that you included no references whatsoever in these drafts. If you feel the drafts were rejected unfairly because the subjects are, in fact, notable, then your best bet is to identify some legitimate sources that discuss the subject in depth and regenerate the drafts with those sources included. It doesn't matter if you don't format those sources correctly, so long as they are there and so long as others can check them out. The editors who rejected your drafts supposedly conducted their own searches and came up empty handed, but there is no guarantee of this. Also, since the topics appear to be related to Argentina, you will want to provide links to references so that other editors can follow them in Spanish-- Spanish sources are perfectly acceptable! But English Wikipedia editors can't necessarily understand Spanish and may not know where to look to identify a legitimate Spanish source. Expecting them to do so isn't all that fair. Are there articles on the Spanish Wikipedia for these topics? Do they have sources there? If so, you can copy those sources and include them in your draft of these article here on the English Wikipedia. But if the subjects are not notable and are not covered in published reliable sources in English or in Spanish, then asking for someone to generate them is going to be pointless. A loose necktie (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles added here by me (Part 2)

Hi there. I still insist that my proposals of Wikipedia articles to be fully created on this encyclopedia. These are now: Almorzando con Mirtha Legrand, Scatter Records, BRIC: El Nuevo Mundo and 26 personas para salvar al mundo. I know that these are argentine stuff and pretty unimportant. But the creation of these will undobtedly enrich the encyclopedia even further. Thanks.