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 Cmurphey80 (talk | contribs) at 22:23, 21 September 2015 (→22:17:53, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Cmurphey80). 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


September 15

01:38:36, 15 September 2015 review of submission by EAS1978

Hello. I'm wondering if I can receive some tutoring on how to create more verifiable references for Don Louis Perceval. I was assuming, since he is featured in books alongside Maynard Dixon (a Southwest painter who has a Wikipedia entry), that he met the "notable person" requirements for Wikipedia. Would more or differently formatted references help to get a page on Perceval accepted? I look forward to your guidance. Thanks so much! EAS1978 (talk) 01:38, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@EAS1978: Two things would be helpful, although they are not required. 1) Inline citations to what are now general sources would give readers a clearer understanding of where each part of the article comes from and, without obtaining the sources, an idea of how much depth each goes into on the subject. 2) The first book in general sources is 242 pages long, the third is 533 pages long. Specifying the relevant page number or range would also help. Worldbruce (talk) 18:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

06:15:05, 15 September 2015 review of submission by 93.118.151.141


93.118.151.141 (talk) 06:15, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hi I had a question, what's the difference between making an article by myself and submitting a draft for publication? how can I distinguish these articles for each other in wikipedia?

One obvious difference is how much time it takes the author up front. Once the text is written, a registered user can create a new article on their own in a matter of seconds. By contrast, the delay between submitting a draft and having it reviewed averages days or weeks, and many drafts must be improved and resubmitted, often multiple times. The advantage to the author of submitting a draft is that if and when it becomes an article, it will have been improved by one or more experienced editors and will be a better, stronger article, far less likely to be deleted from Wikipedia.
Somewhere in their history, articles that have been approved through the Articles for creation process normally will have an edit with a summary along the lines of "(so-and-so moved page Draft:Article name to Article name: Publishing accepted Articles for creation submission (AFCH 0.9))". Usually they also have this template on their talk page:

{{WikiProject Articles for creation|class = |ts = |reviewer = }}

Worldbruce (talk) 05:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

07:22:16, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Jamcyu


Hi all,

Just wondering why my page for Cassidy McFadzean was denied. A full-length book with Random House of Canada is not good enough for notability as far as poets and Canadian ones, for that matter? I'm also especially surprised since her book was reviewed by Publishers Weekly, and she was also interviewed on one of Canada's biggest national newspapers, National Post. I've linked to both of that review and interview under the external links section.

Jamcyu (talk) 07:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jamcyu: Notability for a person depends on what other people have written about that person. So no, having authored a book (or a hundred books) does not demonstrate notability.
Reviews are often the key to proving notability for an author, and you included one from Publishers Weekly among the external links. External links are by definition for material that cannot be worked into the article. Reviews of an author's work can and should be integrated into the article and cited as references. There are many good ways to do this, see for example: Maya Angelou, Anna Laetitia Barbauld, Emily Dickinson, and Stella Gibbons.
Multiple independent reviews in reliable sources are needed to establish notability. The difficulty with the National Post piece is its interview format. It is McFadzean talking about McFadzean, with little or no analysis by the interviewer. As such it isn't independent of the subject, and it's a primary rather than a secondary source. What is needed is at least one more source (and preferably several more) as good or better than Publishers Weekly. Worldbruce (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce: okay, great. i'll add some more reviews of her work to try to establish her notability. thanks for the thorough response. Jamcyu (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:48:25, 15 September 2015 for assistance by Pjbjas

I do not know if this is the appropriate forum, but I would welcome some advice on getting articles reassessed. I have recently completely rewritten Gaius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus and would like its current status as Start-Class (which relates to its former format) to be reconsidered. (I realise that this might mean that it is placed in a lower class). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjbjas (talk • contribs)

Section created and misplaced question moved here from before TOC. Worldbruce (talk) 01:44, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pjbjas: This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. For future reference, the Wikipedia:Help desk is where editors will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. It helps if you sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~.
Assessments from stub through B-Class can be made by anyone, but are usually made by members of WikiProjects that have the article in their scope. For Gaius Furius Sabinius Aquila Timesitheus, for example, that would most likely be Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, although it could also be WikiProject Military history or WikiProject Biography. If you want someone other than yourself to make the assessment (good form when you are a major contributor to the article), see the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome/Assessment#Requests for assessment.
Quality assessments of GA and FA are made through a more formal process. Candidates are nominated by listing them at Good article nominations or Featured article candidates. Judgments are made according to the criteria at What is a good article? and Featured article criteria, respectively. Before embarking on the GA or FA path you may want to request a peer review. Hope this helps! Worldbruce (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:21:25, 15 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Larissagaudet


Hi there, I am trying to publish a page about Riki Turofsky and have put together the content however it keeps getting removed and flagged. I work with Mrs. Turofsky and all of the info for her bio has been created by her and is completely factual. I would also like to include an image on her bio page and am having trouble uploading this into the editing area. I would really like some help on getting the page up and running with all the information included. Can someone please help me? thanks and all best, Larissa

Larissagaudet (talk) 15:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Larissagaudet: This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. The correct place to discuss the content you are edit warring over is Talk:Riki Turofsky. For help uploading an image, please consider asking at the Wikipedia:Help desk. That is where editors will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for any help related to the topic you want to know more about. Worldbruce (talk) 17:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:29:59, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Vivalasdivas



Vivalasdivas (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC) George Klein (Disc Jockey) Good morning. I am trying to edit this page. My submission has been declined. Can you tell me what I need to do to make it suitable for inclusion?Vivalasdivas (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vivalasdivas: This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. George Klein (disc jockey) is an existing article, so is outside our scope. Judging by User talk:Vivalasdivas#Supported browsers, the difficulty you are having editing is a technical one, which is also outside our scope. Please consider continuing the discussion on your talk page or asking this question at the Wikipedia:Help desk. - This is where editors will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for any help related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps! Worldbruce (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:46:52, 15 September 2015 review of submission by VitaStCyr

Hello, I recently submitted an article about NeighborhoodScout and it was rejected for lack of notability. I know that NeighborhoodScout is a notable brand and worthy of an article on Wikipedia, but I understand why my draft may not convey its notability and I could use your help!

NeighborhoodScout is a recognized website brand that has served more than 40 million users since 2002, and has been published in several reputable media outlets such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, Forbes.com, and many others. It has also been featured in several published books, most notably a series of "Dummies" brand books from 2010-2012 like Home Buying for Dummies, Personal Finance for Dummies, and Investing for Dummies. As well as a 2005 edition of the Wall Street Journal's Guide to the Business of Life. It is also mentioned in various TV news and media outlets across the U.S. on a weekly basis because the site is a trusted resource for crime ratings (and other data) at the neighborhood level. News channels often refer to NeighborhoodScout's crime data to either spur contention in local politics or to fuel collaboration about how city officials and residents can help to reduce their crime. It is also the website brand that invented the location search technology that you see used on many websites today. i.e. Select criteria like 'walkable' and 'family-friendly' and have a list of geographic places that match those criteria delivered to the user. They invented and patented that technology back in the early days of the worldwideweb. Very cool!

When I was writing the article, I was focused on citing the sources that supported each sentence or paragraph. A lot of the time, however, those sources weren't the glamorous and notable sources I mentioned above like WSJ or NYTimes because those articles weren't written as fact-finding missions about the website's inception date, or about the website's revenue model, or history.

For instance, in this New York Times article called "Using Data-Driven Home Search" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/realestate/using-data-to-find-a-new-york-suburb-that-fits.html), the author is focused on telling a story about how homebuyers are using websites like NeighborhoodScout to get factual data about neighborhoods and to try to predict the future about an area's gentrification potential; and most of the data cannot be provided by realtors because of Fair Housing laws. This is a very interesting story and includes a photo and quote from NeighborhoodScout's CEO, but it is unrelated to the background story I was trying to provide in my Draft.

Another example is this article on Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com/2007/12/06/housing-investment-property-forbeslife-cx_mw_1207realestate.html) that explores the best "Blue Chip" real estate investments using NeighborhoodScout's home appreciation data. Or this other Forbes article (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jmaureenhenderson/2014/07/31/from-a-roommate-matching-app-to-the-rise-of-the-tea-party-does-big-data-drive-social-segregation/) about how Big Data sites like NeighborhoodScout could be driving social segregation because of it's search technology that allows users to "self-select" to find places with top schools, low crime, and educated neighbors with the ethnicities of their choice. Again, both very interesting examples of NeighborhoodScout talked about in reputable and published sources, but weren't included in my Draft because these articles don't support the factual, background story about the site that I had intended.

What is the best way to convey the notability of the site with the help of these published media sources, if the books or articles do not directly correspond to the sentence or paragraph?

Do I include an additional section about 'NeighborhoodScout in the news'? Or a section about how NeighborhoodScout has spurred debates on the availability of Big Data to the public; or if racial data on websites like NeighborhoodScout violates Fair Housing Laws? Or how the site has been used as a resource for Neighborhood-level data for a wide range of media stories (like Top 25 Best Places to Retire, etc.)? Then these more recognized/reputable sources would be included. I appreciate any help you can give me about the direction with regards to conveying the brand's notability. Thank you, V.

VitaStCyr (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@VitaStCyr: Deciding on a narrative and then seeking sources to support it is the wrong way around, and usually doomed to failure. Start with what a range of reliable, independent, secondary sources - like The New York Times and Forbes (not www.forbes.com/sites, which are unreliable blogs) - say about the website. Ignore sources that merely mention the website or where a company spokeperson merely provides a quote; you're looking for direct, in-depth coverage. The bulk of the article should be based on such sources. Only turn to non-independent or primary sources when you need them to fill in a non-controversial detail. Delete the patent information.
Contrast the draft with a couple of Wikipedia's best articles about websites: The Million Dollar Homepage and 4chan. The draft need not be as long or polished as those to be approved, but observe the range of sources they cite. Worldbruce (talk) 06:57, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:09:11, 15 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 2A02:C7D:B913:5D00:129A:DDFF:FEB4:F4CE


I am new to wikipedia and have tried twice to submit an article for record producer John Burgess, but have been rejected due to not showing notability. Is there someone who could please help me. John was an intrinsic part of the British music invasion of the 60s and is notable and known throughout the industry. I am not sure how else I can show this.Is there an editor I can employ to add more references to show this etc? Thanks


2A02:C7D:B913:5D00:129A:DDFF:FEB4:F4CE (talk) 17:09, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend re-reviewing the three comments already posted on your page. The large problem is we need to see substantial coverage in the media or other sources. The listed sources are either barely reliable or only mention the person in passing. Sulfurboy (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 16

07:36:23, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Samuel Blaison


Samuel Blaison (talk) 07:36, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

07:51:04, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Kabirnahak

In wikipedia or on internet there are no substantial information on a word gooma. I am the owner of the company which is name as gooma. How to I write an article to include my company name and services into wikipedia? gooma (talk) 07:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kabirnahak: You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY helpful. Worldbruce (talk) 07:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

09:02:05, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Samuel Blaison

Hello Sulfurboy, I have resubmitted content yesterday and got message " this submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability " What would be the actual reason. Is the reference link i gave is not much reliable or some other issues..Please let me know the actual reason. It will be appreciable if you give a guidance for the reason of rejection. Regards.Samuel Blaison (talk) 09:02, 16 September 2015 (UTC)Samuel Blaison (talk) 09:02, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Samuel Blaison (talk) 09:02, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Samuel Blaison: No source is identified for the first nine paragraphs of Draft:Kauthuka Park. Do the TV programs cited in the recognition section support that content? Any statement a program supports should cite the program, giving at a minimum the title of the episode, the name of the series, the network, air date, language (if not English), and time at which the event occurs in the source (e.g. "5:12 minutes in"). It's good practice to include a direct quote in the citation as well, especially when the source is not in English, so long as the quote is not excessively long. The programs may be used as sources, and may be sufficient to demonstrate notability, but they appear to have been uploaded to YouTube in violation of copyright, so Wikipedia may not link to them - the urls must be removed. Worldbruce (talk) 07:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:50:00, 16 September 2015 review of submission by LMauney


Thank you for the feedback on my article submissions. All comments have been extremely helpful.

I completely understand the issue raised about article length and citation "bombardment" and will work on that.

However, one issue that keeps coming up in the rejection comments is a lack of verifiable citations. For my subject's past history, which is noteworthy to a degree, I am wondering how to verify anecdotal information when the subject was not a celebrity or figurehead for an operation, meaning that his work was behind-the-scenes and out of the media spotlight. The story itself is easily verifiable per the citations I found, but he is not mentioned by name. Do you have recommendations for how to handle that issue?

Beyond that, I plan to keep this article in draft mode until the citations can be addressed.

Thank you again.LMauney (talk) 12:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LMauney (talk) 12:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:32:56, 16 September 2015 review of submission by Doctor Mellifluus


I am requesting a re-review because I have since edited the article with regard to length, peacock terminology, sources, and tone. Are there other aspects of the article I need to address before resubmitting?

Thank you for your time.


Doctor Mellifluus (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 17

03:27:07, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Econohammer

This is my first article submission. I believe I am close. My reviewer, Sulfurboy, has declined the submission with the comment External links should also be removed from the article. I removed the external links. However, in the heading box, I get the following message: The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you. I am happy to edit, but I don't any way to enhance the article text with more citations. Any guidance would be much appreciated. Thanks! Econohammer (talk) 03:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Econohammer. I'm afraid you misunderstood which external links the reviewer was referring to, his comment was not clear. External links embedded within the prose of an article are not permitted. I have removed the offending links with this edit and restored the listed external links which you mistakenly removed. Perhaps some of the listed links could actually be used as references? I have also tagged two sections that have no references. The rules are particularly strict about referencing in articles about living people, "extraordinary" claims such as achievements, awards and honors must be specifically referenced, you need a reference for each such claim. Two of the references you have used do not support the claims they are appended to, so I have also tagged them. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:30:27, 17 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by CiaraOsborne064


Would you have any Templates I could see that would ensure a more acceptable article?


CiaraOsborne064 (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CiaraOsborne064: I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you seeking to pattern the draft on good examples of articles about venture capital firms? Evidently no one has written a good one yet. The closest I can suggest are: Apollo Global Management, The Blackstone Group, and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. They aren't ideal articles, they don't follow all of Wikipedia's guidelines, but the community has judged them good. A draft need not be that long or good to be approved, but it's something to aspire to. Worldbruce (talk) 08:10, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

13:10:03, 17 September 2015 review of draft by Furdepazzi


I can't work out how to put the references already created into the list of references below

Furdepazzi (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Furdepazzi: There are several ways. The key is to embed the citation in the body of the article within ref tags: <ref> description of the source </ref>. I've done the first citation for you, in two of the most common ways, without and with cite templates. Pick whichever method you prefer, delete the redundant one, and do the rest of the citations in the same manner. Worldbruce (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:45:25, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Vemurione


Vemurione (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is an English-Telugu dictionary in the Telugu Wikipedia. How does the search engine in English Wikipedia know about the existence of this dictionary in the Wikipedia of another language (here, te)? Would a key phrase "English-Telugu dictionary" typed in the English Wikipedia search box point to the availability of this in ? If not, how can I facilitate the process to English Wikipedia users? ThanksVemurione (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

14:49:06, 17 September 2015 review of submission by SatishBabusenan


I would like to add the poster of my film The Painted House to the page. But not sure how to do that. The 'add an image' does not show a browse option for me to select the image. Thanks. BTW,I would also like to mention here that I am the co-director of the film. I have, however, tried to be as objective as possible in creating this page, adding a good deal of media citations available in English. Please feel free to advise me on any rectifications I might need to make.


SatishBabusenan (talk) 14:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the poster cannot be added until the Draft is accepted. So it's best to wait until then. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:01, 17 September 2015 review of submission by JayRossBJ


How do I add the citations? Where do I put the webpage links? How do I add photos?

JayRossBJ (talk) 15:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JayRossBJ. Have you read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 12:35, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:33:55, 17 September 2015 review of submission by ShakyIsles


I just created Draft:New_Zealand_flag_referendums,_2015/2016. This is quite timely as it is a current event and it would be great if it could be reviewed ASAP. I'd usually just make an article but decided to use the draft function so others could contribute. It was broken out from New_Zealand_flag_debate which now needs to be reduced and appropriate links put to this page. I just can't do that until it is approved and worried people will add new info to the the other article. I'm tempted just to make the article and copy across. ShakyIsles (talk) 21:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:24:06, 17 September 2015 review of submission by Garvo13

Hi there - I just wanted to jump on here to see what more I can be doing in terms of editing company profile information. I have had a couple come back to say that they read too much like an advert and I have edited one in particular down to very bear minimum information, copying other examples of companies within the same sector. In terms of this VInci Facilities entry, I felt that it just stuck to the facts and cited a lot of different reference sources in order to establish notability. I am more than happy to edit this back but I would be keen to understand which part of it sounds more like an advert and which part is more suitable as an encyclopedia entry. I feel like the contracts managed by Vinci are relevant to those people who may discover them through Wikipedia - it is not unreasonable that people may want to find out who manages the facilities in specific parks and hospitals and the entry cites relevant newspaper and journals to evidence and further support the entry.

I enjoy creating the content for Wikipedia but would like to get a better understanding of how to move away from 'advertising' language to copy that is more appropriate to an encyclopedia entry.

Any advice would be gratefully received. Garvo13 (talk) 22:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Garvo13: Hi, I see the Draft:Vinci Facilities (UK) decline by Onel5969. Can you clarify what you mean by "had a couple come back"? Have you submitted drafts about other companies that have been declined? Or deleted? Most companies do not have, and should not have, Wikipedia articles written about them. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business directory. With fuller information I'll be able to give you a more helpful answer. Worldbruce (talk) 08:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


September 18

05:57:50, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Killeranalyst

The article draft was rejected on the grounds of notability. The concerns raised by the reviewer are reasonable. Purely based on external citations, it does not appear as if the person in question should have an article about him on Wikipedia.

But there is no doubt about the person's notability in the circles of professional astronomy. Both in India and on the international scene, the person in question has contributed immensely and is respected world-wide. One does not get to chair international bodies governing directions of astronomical research without credibility. For example, the person in question heads the International Alliance on Virtual Observatory methods, a very important of research in Astronomy. The person is also an elected Vice President of the International Astronomical Union, the single largest body on this planet for all things - astronomy and space science.

However, for various reasons, media coverage highlighting these accomplishments has been thin. How do you then handle the issue of notability?


Killeranalyst (talk) 05:57, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Killeranalyst: It would help to narrow the question. Thin media coverage is a common issue with academics, and is one of the reasons Wikipedia has specific notability guidelines for them. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (academics) and decide which one of the nine criteria Kembhavi most unambiguously meets. Perhaps the draft already contains proof of notability but didn't state it plainly enough. Or perhaps the notes on the specific criteria will give you an idea of what proof to supply. If you're still stumped, someone here may be able to suggest how to approach a specific criterion. Worldbruce (talk) 08:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:32:04, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Vkjainautor


Can you me any reviewer in Delhi who can help rewriting the article.

Vkjainautor (talk) 17:32, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22:35:27, 18 September 2015 review of submission by 108.26.79.126


108.26.79.126 (talk) 22:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've submitted an article on an interesting but overlooked Victorian painter whose works hang in a number of major museums and collections, but the article has been rejected because of a lack of notability. I don't know how to respond--the article cites three books that deal with him, which seems some measure of notability. what can I do? I'm an amateur at this and don't have the time to learn arcane coding.

Thanks.

The draft article in on Lefevre James Cranstone.

@VictPoets: Accepted Thank you for submitting Lefevre James Cranstone. It may not have been apparent to the reviewer that you were citing the three books. They were labeled "Further reading", and that section is not meant for general references that were used to create the article content. Based on the above I relabeled them as references. Since they are not widely available (six library copies of one worldwide, seven of another), it would be extremely helpful if you identified which statements are supported by which pages in which books. Parenthetical referencing is not so arcane or very hard to learn, it's just (Author Year:Page). Many editors can help you with the formatting, but you're probably the only one who has read all three books. Worldbruce (talk) 07:54, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:40:56, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Elissajf


The original submission (not done by myself) was full of objective statements which have all been deleted. This version of the article was rejected due to the artist not being "notable." I would like to know why this page isn't acceptable due to the Wikipedia notability requirements. As for this particular artist, she is notable, as she is signed to a reputable record label, KIDinaKORNER Records, and has features on major, commercial releases. In addition, she has also written for major artists such as Rihanna. Finally, during the submission of this page until now she has released her debut album via KIDinaKORNER Records and thus has her own, commercially released record. Each of the facts I pulled have direct sources from independent and reliable sites apart from any of her own social media pages. Please explain further as to what needs to be corrected so I can make the changes and re-submit the page. Thank you!

Elissajf (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Elissajf: Accepted I've added some references and accepted the article. There's a lot that's been published very recently. Thanks for your contribution. Julie JSFarman (talk) 17:38, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 19

12:24:40, 19 September 2015 review of submission by Badspice


Badspice (talk) 12:24, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am puzzled by the reviewer's comment about checking the inline references I used. They are according to normal conventions, and the references are as listed in PubMed. Reviewer was Oo7565. I have been a science publisher for 30+ years, and I thought my draft was very polished! Maybe I'm just blind to my own mistakes, but the reference is Draft: Tamas Bartfai. How do I communicate with Oo7565 to find out what she/he thought was incorrectly executed. Thanks, Badspice

@Badspice I suspect that Oo7565 might have been confused by the fact that only the last section of your draft actually has references. You need to reference the rest of it before it can be accepted. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12:36:22, 19 September 2015 review of submission by 124.125.230.34


124.125.230.34 (talk) 12:36, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a question about why Draft:Umer Jubapu was declined, it's because the draft cites no references. You need references, like, for example, in Palak Muchhal. To prove the subject is notable, there must be multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources, and they must provide a significant depth of coverage about the subject. Worldbruce (talk) 07:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 20

Request on 06:06:13, 20 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Thenewsmakers


Good morning, I am writing because my draft was rejected stating that the subject was not notable enough. I need to work on my referencing better. Would you please assist me on how to reference better. Thank you.

Thenewsmakers 06:06, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

23:35:18, 20 September 2015 review of submission by OneMind604


Greetings to whomever this may concern, 

I have recently re-submitted my page for the 3rd time and have been declined once again, this is expected.  I was only given valuable and in depth information on some things I needed to change on the article at hand, via  the 'talk page'.  I feel my article passes all the required criteria and prerequisites but I am still getting declined with very vague and general reasons that are not helping me towards getting the article published.

 If somebody could give me a more detailed response as to why the article continues to get declined, this would be greatly appreciative.  The more information I have, the more I will be able to submit to Wiki to build the community.  Thank you in advance.

Blessings, OneMind

Opinions of other reviewers are especially welcome, as I've commented about the draft before at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 September 8. I've left a detailed response to this latest question on Draft:Los Poetas. Worldbruce (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 21

09:27:59, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Mystywave18


Request on 10:16:53, 21 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Mulan Pearce


Hello. I need help editing a wikipedia page. I have submitted an article for creation about 5/6 times and it has been rejected everytime. Reason being I require more sources. Some pages have just 1 or 2! How much more do I need to get the article approved? Kindly response ASAP as it has dragged on too long

Mulan Pearce (talk) 10:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

15:03:27, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Eric Inglert


I would like to remove my request to make (i.e., publish) this as an article at this time, because the reasons for publishing have changed. In addition, the article is not ready to be published. Is there a way for the original applicant to remove the request to publish?

Thanks.

Eric Inglert (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric Inglert: It has been removed from the pending queue. Worldbruce (talk) 18:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:01:21, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Amitkumarsultania


Amitkumarsultania (talk) 16:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:22:01, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Vkjainautor


Vkjainautor (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC) I am not advertising, these are the lifetime achievement. Please guide how much of my submission is worth including in the encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vkjainautor (talk • contribs) 16:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:25:38, 21 September 2015 review of submission by PLDPR

1) Is it just the resources that need to be adjusted? Or does the content need to be edited too? 2) Would the likelihood of approval be higher if I included this topic under an umbrella topic like the Gold Rush?

Please offer any other advice you can think of that would help get this content approved. PLDPR (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

20:46:14, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Nupur2000


Kiran Kamath has huge contribution in bollywood music. So can you please consider the article once again or help me with suggestion what else I can include to make it eligible

22:17:53, 21 September 2015 review of submission by Cmurphey80


I submitted DiCentral for the third time to be reviewed. I waited almost three weeks just to have it turned down for the same reasons. To update the article I completely rewrote as I went through competitors that do have wiki pages to make sure it fit the notability guidelines. I followed several companies to get my third party resources. Sps Commerence, Opentext, and Trilogy Company. If they are accepted and we are not, I can't figure out what the difference is. Please advise.

Cmurphey80 (talk) 22:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=682158279"