Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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


June 6

04:23:53, 6 June 2018 review of draft by Javiero Fernandez


Hello. I'm new to Wikipedia and it's my first time creating an article and I would like some help. I was expecting my article to be created from the article creation Wizard right away, instead when I presses "publish" I was given a draft. Can someone please explain this? What do I do now to create the article? Thanks. Javiero Fernandez (talk) 04:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Javiero Fernandez, good day. There is no content in the draft article. Please visit WP:Your First Article to familiar yourself on how to create an article. Once you have written the article, all you have to do is click sumbit and one of the reviewers will check on your work. If the subject is notable and the content is supported by independent, reliable sources, then the article will be accepted and published. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:53:36, 6 June 2018 review of submission by Mbsmt


I have created an article draft for my own Issue tracking system "Helpical". It is rejected because of references. But as its producer, I do not know how can I verify it. There might be other issues with it and as I am a new writer, I don't know them exactly. Please help me to solve this issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Helpical_Ticketing_System

Mbsmt (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mbsmt, There is a few issues here- see below
  1. Since you are the producer, that means you have conflict of interest. COI means any any person, who is affiliated to the subject of a Wikipedia page (family members, friends, client, employers, yourself and etc), involves in contribution of the page. If a person is paid to write about a subject, that is a financial conflict of interest. COI is strongly discourage on Wikipedia as COI editors would/might not able/aware to write the article in a neutral point of view. For COI, editor need to disclose your COI when involved with the effected article. COI discloses need to be made on user page (your user page), article talk page and /or on edit summary of an edit you made. You could find how to disclose COI here. You could also place {{request edit}} on the article talk page and state your suggestion.
  2. To merit for a stand alone article in Wikipedia, the subject (Helpical_Ticketing_System) needs to meet the notability guidelines of Wikipedia - see here for organisation notability requirements.
  3. Content added in the page needs to support by independent, reliable sources (major newspaper /books and they could be print/digital source in any languages)for verification. If you cant find any source to support your subject, then no notability could be achieved and the article would be accepted.
  4. Please visit WP:Your First Article to familiar yourself on how to write an article in Wikipedia.
Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:11, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:05:11, 6 June 2018 review of submission by Lukisav

I do not understand what do i need to improve.

Lukisav (talk) 19:05, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lukisav Good day. At the top of the draft page, there is a pink box which indicated the reasons of the of rejection. In short, subject INFEKT/Christian Fial has not demonstrated he meets the musicians notability requirements - pls see WP:MUSICBIO. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 00:41, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:57:43, 6 June 2018 review of submission by Anuradhawrites


Hi,

I am creating this Wiki page on behalf of Dance USA Dance Season 2 (as a member of their digital content management team). The draft was not accepted (post review) as it stated that "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources." This is my first page and I would request to know which information is not supported by reliable sources so that I can rectify it. I have also reached out to your team about inability to add pictures. Kindly advise so I can get this resolved asap.

Thanks in advance.

Regards, Anuradhawrites

Anuradhawrites (talk) 20:57, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anuradhawrites Welcome to AfC help desk. There are a few issues here, and pls see the following.
COI
conflict of interest (COI) - Since you are affiliated to Dance USA Dance Season 2, you have a COI here. COI means any person, who is affiliated to the subject of a Wikipedia page (family members, friends, clients, employers, yourself and etc), involves in contribution of a page. If a person is paid to write about a subject, that is a financial conflict of interest. COI is strongly discourage on Wikpedia as COI editors would/might not able/aware to write the article in a neutral point of view. For COI, editor needs to disclose his/her COI when involved with the effected article. COI discloses need to be made on user page (your user page), article talk page and on edit summary of an edit you made. You would find how to disclose here.
Notability and reliable source
Content added/edited in Wikipedia needs "inline citation" from independent "third party" reliable source (in any language) for verification to gauge the nobility criteria is met. Please note official website, records of sport events or individual player records are consider primary source and not independent source, and social network source such as facebook, twitter, instagram, imbd and etc are considered NOT reliable source and can not be used for citing.
Independent reliable sources are secondary sources give information about primary source or original information or other secondary resources , which analyse, describe, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. Secondary sources are those obtain from major newspaper, such as The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald, CNN news, review/works of criticism from reputable sources and etc. or source obtain from major publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press). Please note Wikipedia can NOT be the source - see WP:CIRCULAR.


I do suggest you to read WP:YFA and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners to familiar yourself on Wikipedia policies/guidelines/info on writing an article in Wikipedia. Let me know if anything else I would help CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:05, 6 June 2018 for assistance by Prof.Davis(Socscience)

Diplomatic Society of St Gabriel Could some help create a Wikipedia page for this longtime organization? Be thankful for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof.Davis(Socscience) (talk • contribs) 03:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prof.Davis(Socscience), You could request the article to be written at Wikipedia:Requested articles provided the subject is notable; however, since there are a lot of requests, it will take a long time for any editor to pick up the request. If you would like to write it yourself, then please visit WP:Your first article for there are a lot of info to help you get started. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:24, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Diplomatic Society of St Gabriel Could some help create a Wikipedia page for this longtime organization? Be thankful for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof.Davis(Socscience) (talk • contribs) 03:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Prof.Davis(Socscience), You could request the article to be written at Wikipedia:Requested articles provided the subject is notable; however, since there are a lot of requests, it will take a long time for any editor to pick up the request. If you would like to write it yourself, then please visit WP:Your first article for there are a lot of info to help you get started. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:24, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


June 7

Request on 03:08:08, 7 June 2018 for assistance on CMG Worldwide submission by 67.69.131.130


I am wondering why the New York Times, CNN, Telegraph, CBS, ABC, and others used in the draft are not considered to be reliable sources or show notability for this company. Considering that this draft was reviewed only a few hours after I posted it, I am not certain a proper review could have taken place by User:Bradv if this was the result. Is it possible to have this reviewed by someone who actually looks at the references used? 67.69.131.130 (talk) 03:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

67.69.131.130 (talk) 03:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We don't take hours to review a given draft. If you want another review address the concerns on the decline and submit again. Legacypac (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:Legacypac - what concerns? That the New York Times isn't a valid publisher? Also, you didn't even read the question properly, I said the review took place haphazardly only a few hours after I posted the draft, not that you should take hours. Is there someone else who can read properly that I can hear from? 67.69.131.130 (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First, Legacypac did so read your question correctly. Your complaint is that the review took place a few hours after the draft was posted. Why is that a problem? Second, you did get another review, and it declined the draft. Besides, the draft is promotional. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06:10:49, 7 June 2018 review of submission by Nenzi3316


Can somebody help me to know how i can send a request to wikipedia to create an automatic article about me. Since I have already submitted the draft for review on 15 may but unfortunately it was declined by wikipedia. I have written all the information based on published reliable reference but bad luck. Therefore I request wikipedia to write an article itself. Nenzi3316 (talk) 06:10, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nenzi3316. You may ask at Requested articles that an article be written. Recently there has been some internal debate about the effectiveness of requesting an article. The problem is that many people ask for articles on non-notable subjects. Such articles will never be written, which results in an unmanageable list of requests, a "graveyard of bad ideas", to borrow a colleague's phrase. In my experience, some requested articles are written. It may take a long time, but I believe it is a good route to take if you sincerely believe the topic is notable. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:26:11, 7 June 2018 review of submission by Amosnear


I'm not even sure why the person who reviewed seemed to not like the concept of colon hydrotherapy, which subject DANIELLE ARSENAULT actually studied and got certified for, it was just mentioned once on the education part of the profile.

Amosnear (talk) 07:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined for the reasons stated on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:48:32, 7 June 2018 review of submission by 27.252.148.240


27.252.148.240 (talk) 07:48, 7 June 2018 (UTC) Well kill this page[reply]

14:06:13, 7 June 2018 review of submission by TechvitalCompitar


TechvitalCompitar (talk) 14:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


June 8

00:32:13, 8 June 2018 review of submission by Cheryl Fullerton


I requested help to include a picture of the album cover on the article page and didn't receive any input. I have tried to post album covers before and was told I couldn't do that, yet other album articles have the album covers on the article page. Can someone please advise me in this regard? I would also appreciate any suggestions on improving the article because it has been designated "stub-class" which is a very unflattering designation!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2018 (UTC) Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton, Good day. Your question has been answer in Acoustic Highway. In the future, please stick to one talk page to ask you question so it would not waste Wikipedia volunteers' time and resource to answer question in multiple talk pages if they dont know you have posted them. Thank you and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:54, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize! After submitting the question, I realized it was probably the wrong place to ask, so I went to the "Teahouse." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheryl Fullerton (talk • contribs) 22:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:31:55, 8 June 2018 review of submission by Kavenville


She is an artist she has acted in kannada tamil & malayalam serials. her articles has come in famous news papers of new zealand. which has been attached in the references request you to kindly re review & approve. Kavenville (talk) 08:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kavenville: I left a comment on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:41:18, 8 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Glundo


I dont know how to do any thing in wikipedia.

Glundo (talk) 12:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glundo, Good day. Please visit WP:Your first article on how to write a page in Wikipedia. Please note that the subject in your sandbox does not include any source nor it demonstrates meeting Wikipedia notability guidelines. Content added in a page need to be supported by independent, reliable sources with significant coverage such as from newspaper. Please see WP:MUSICBIO for nobility for musicians. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Totally unsuitable, covering a child. I've blanked it. Don't put up tjings like this again. Legacypac (talk) 21:40, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:22, 8 June 2018 review of submission by 41.46.255.18


Can you please read this article and approve it? 41.46.255.18 (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's been submitted and will be addressed. Backlog is about 1000 pages and two weeks Legacypac (talk) 21:38, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:50:58, 8 June 2018 review of submission by Dvoleich


I've worked hard to cite secondary source coverage of the firm and its partners, and have added 30 total sources, 16 of which are different publications. I believe these sources (The Wall Street Journal, Crain's, Chicago Tribune, TechCrunch, AmericanInno, Business Journals, and tastytrade as well as various organizations on which the partners serve as board members) qualify for the reliable, independent, and secondary criteria set out in the notability guidelines.

Does the partners' sitting on the board of the organizations (like American Cancer Society and Jewish United Fund) disqualify those as non-independent sources? Even if it does, there are still 10 "journalistic" sources that substantiate the facts in the article. Also, the previous time it was rejected (by RoySmith on 5/17), the reasoning was that it "read(s) more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia," but not for notability. I fixed the offending "sales-y" language, and now I'm flagged for notability again – did removing the advertising language somehow make the sources less notable?

I'd just love to learn what the issues are that are affecting notability so I can rectify. I've disclaimed my conflict of interest (I work for Origin) from the start, and would just love to know what needs to happen to get this article approved. Thanks so much.

Devon Leichtman, Marketing and Community Manager at Origin Ventures

Dvoleich (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 9

Request on 05:09:23, 9 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Erocakaericg


Hello, I was declined to on write a brief summary on Eric Guadiana. Everything is factual. Please advise to why it is not accepted Thank you kindly Erocakaericg (talk) 05:09, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erocakaericg. Factual is good, but submissions are required to be verifiable. Anything added to Wikipedia must be based on information published in reliable sources. The usual way to allow readers to check information is to cite your sources using inline citations. See Referencing for beginners for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:56, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:58:36, 9 June 2018 review of submission by Visualstudies


I need some information if I have a chance for Heinz Nigg to appear in Wikipedia or not. Since the last decline I have made substantial changes. What more can I do do? The sources quoted do–in my opinion–adequately show Heinz Nigg's notability with significant coverage (also citations, which a helper from Teahouse advised me to add. And the sources are reliable secondary sources independent of Heinz Nigg. What more can I do?--Visualstudies (talk) 07:58, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Visualstudies (talk) 07:58, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 10

HNL questions

Can you Create the 2018-19 Calgary Flames season 2018-19 Pittsburgh Pengiuns season and 2018-19 Tampa Bay Lighting season please. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 20:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

68.102.39.189, Greetings to you. You have raised the same question in here as well as in 2018-19 NHL season, and your question has been answered. Please do not raise the same question in multiple help talk page as it would waste time and resources to answer the same question to the same editor for all of us are volunteers an there are many areas in Wikipedia we provide our volunteer our service and not merely in help desk. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 00:00, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:45:07, 10 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by J4lambert


I am requesting a re-review of the article draft I submitted because it is a translation of an article from Japanese Wikipedia. J4lambert (talk) 22:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

J4lambert (talk) 22:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi J4lambert. Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the Japanese Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. The reviewer expressed the concern that a large part of Draft:Christelle Ciari does not cite any sources. There is a source, for example, for Ciari being one of the recorded voices on the Yamanote Line, but not for any of the other 30+ lines.
You may request another review of the draft by clicking the blue "Resubmit" button in the large pink box at the top of the draft. However, if the sourcing has not been improved, the next reviwer might decline the draft again or might accept it only after removing the unsourced content. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 11

01:18:05, 11 June 2018 review of submission by 2601:18A:417F:F6AA:D44B:3DAC:920B:3A34

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

03:51:10, 11 June 2018 review of submission by D4n2016

I added 3 sources and wonder why the user declined the draft, using those 3 sources. D4n2016 (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:41:02, 11 June 2018 review of submission by 103.233.141.236


I am connected to Delhi 47 Km as a film publicist, the information shared is right and i have not tried anything which is related as promotions. We as a movie team need this article to be published just for the information about the film. Please help me how this article can be sustained at Wikipedia, your esteemed platform, thanks, your sincerely... 103.233.141.236 (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 103.233.141.236 Welcome t AfC help desk. Wikipedia would only accept sourced content from independent, reliable parties such as newspaper or publications. Since you are connected to the company, you have a conflict of interest which Wikipedia strongly discourage a COI to edit the affected page. If you are the author of this said article Draft:Delhi 47 Km, you need to disclose your affiliation in the article talk page and on your user page. Pls see here on how to disclose your COI. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:36:15, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Vicoaers

I'd like to know how I can improve my article, so it can be accepted. Every time I submit for review, I receive different feedback, which is also always too broad to be able to understand truly what the reviewer meant. If a certain source(s) do not belogn there, let me know. If a sentence reads promotional, please let me know. Keeping me in the dark the whole time is not helping anybody. Vicoaers (talk) 08:36, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined for the reasons explained on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:48:01, 11 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Purplehearts


Please advise what in the article sounds like an advertisement and how it can be corrected? It is all biographical information and the sources cited are longstanding reputable publications. How can it be made more neutral?

Purplehearts (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Purplehearts. Most of the content (Early life, Foolproof Body, Philanthropy, and Personal life) doesn't come from the cited sources, which makes the draft come across as promotional. More fundamentally, although the cited publications are reputable, the specific pages cited do not help demonstrate Adeleye's notability because they lack independence or depth. Black Enterprise is a primary source interview without independent analysis, it's Adeleye in Adeleye's words. Entrepreneur and InStyle are very brief, and the former is again in Adeleye's own words. Wikipedia is more interested in what other people have to say about her. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:43:12, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Thomas123987


Hi! I am new to Wikipedia editorial, however, I tried creating an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:C_J_George). The submission got declined as the reviewer said the references I used were "primary". I would like to contest this that the subject in discussion is a famous business person and the references I provided were all national dailies in India. Agreed, I may have gone to the extreme by using the term "revolutionised" but the references I provided sure doesn't seem primary. Can someone please help in this regard? According to the reviewer, the references were interviews but I would like to ask, why would reputed national dailies choose to cover a story on a person if they don't see that person fit? Also, only part of each of the references I provided are snippets from the interview. Most of the content are claims by the news organisation. When I say National Dailies, these are some of the biggest national dailies in India, and a couple even in the world. I'd like some guidance on this. Thomas123987 17:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

20:15:47, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Doncram


Doncram (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what all that subst / template stuff above is. This is crazy.

I am an experienced editor, did participate in AFC a bit some years ago.

I have a simple question: how can I add an AFC comment. This is about Draft:A. Warren Gould. There used to be an AFC comment template which was used. It seems I am supposed to click in some tab to add a comment, but despite my having Preferences set to include "Yet another helper AFC whatever" or the like, I see no such tab to click.

--Doncram (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doncram. The way you did the AFC comment is fine for an occassional comment. I took the liberty of reformatting it as if you'd used the AFCH script. Comments via the AFCH script are removed automatically when the draft is accepted. Another alternative would be to use the draft's talk page.
With your preferences set as you described, you should, on draft pages, have a "Review (AFCH)" option near the top of the page, to the right of the watchlist star, probably in a "More" dropdown. If you select Review (AFCH) you'll then get a panel with a large yellow "Comment" button. Being in the "Inactive reviewers" section of the participants list should be sufficient permission. If not, I'm sure someone will correct me. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may have to be an Active reviewer. Test it out. Legacypac (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, the "More" dropdown leads to a "Review AFCH" option, and it looks like it should work going forward. --Doncram (talk) 22:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 12

04:26:19, 12 June 2018 review of submission by Jean Scott Thomson


I had a draft entry on Clive Wilkins deleted because of apparent copyright infringement. I have copyright control of the assumed offending text and have removed it from the 'offending source' and place where, what was considered to be similar material, appeared. The section describing Clive Wilkins success as an artist taken from newspaper cuttings is simply what it is, a listing of newspaper cuttings, used to reference and date the subjects success as an artist. Te text only appears on Wikipedia. Is this enough to continue using the material? If not how do I go about proving I have the right to use this material, which I collated, collected and originated in the first place! I could rearrange the order of the texts, but what is said will remain the same.

Jean Scott Thomson (talk) 04:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:24:37, 12 June 2018 review of submission by Donnascb


Donnascb (talk) 08:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Donnascb, Unfortunately the subject is not notable under Wikipedia guidelines. Comments are same as previous reviewer. Please read WP:Your First Article for further info and see kindly read Wikipedia notability guidelines. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:02, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:37:43, 12 June 2018 review of submission by MiaMaiaHK


Hi, I would like to know why my article declined? Thanks.


MiaMaiaHK (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MiaMaiaHK, I believe you are referring to page User:MiaMaiaHK/sandbox. If you read the top box on the page, it indicated the content is promotional which Wikipedia would not accept for article as such to be published. Also, your username is the same as the company name/brand of the article, which might mean you are affiliated to the subject of the article, which means you have conflict of interest (COI) here. Wikipedia is discourage editor with COI to edit the content or create the affected article. You could find how to disclose your COI here. Please read WP:Your First Article to understand what is required and how to write an article in Wikipedia. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:50, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:33, 12 June 2018 review of draft by Razar08


Hi, how can we create an official wiki game page? with modding instructions and etc. Razar08 (talk) 09:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Razar08, Greetings to AfC help desk. Your draft article Draft:Creating an Addon - Frontier Pilot Simulator has been rejected as Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference, not an instruction manual, guidebook, or textbook, for such it is not pass the requirements to merit a page in Wikipedia. - pls see WP:NOTGUIDE and read the comments given in the box at the top of the draft page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:37:36, 12 June 2018 review of submission by Semimbatic

Unfortunately my article about Matthias Tanzmann is not yet published and I don´t know how to change this. Someone wrote "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability". I deleted the references I have put below the article and really tried to write it in a neutral language. How can I change it to finally publish it? Semimbatic (talk) 11:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semimbatic - Not all subjects are suitible for Wikipedia. As a new editor, you need to prove that the subject in question (Mr. Tanzmann) is notable enough for wikipedia. That means you need to show that reliable independent sources talk about the subject in depth. I think the reviewer didn't think the sources given let the subject meet the General Notability guidelines. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:52:43, 12 June 2018 review of submission by Nyonicarol


Nyonicarol (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:28:03, 12 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Jawillia


The reason given for declining this article were "The mentions of PRxPR are brief in the references used; can you find sources that provide more extensive coverage", however, at least two of these articles spoke more than just casually about the purpose of this organization. Coverage of Hurricane Maria's effects on Puerto Rico, and specifically how to help is not easy to come by, but in fact PRxPR is the one organization most mentioned in these articles. The reason is - as my article attempts to state, that PRxPR is made up of Puerto Rican Businessmen, and ALL expenses to run the organization are covered by them. I am not affiliated with this organization in any way, just think that it deserves this inclusion.

P.S. several of the other "Non-governmental organizations" I looked up prior to submitting this have even less significant/fewer citations. This is not an easy category to find citations for...


Jawillia (talk) 19:28, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jawillia. PRxPR sounds like a commendable organization. I agree with the reviewer, however, that the coverage of it is too brief to justify an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia doesn't include things because they're worthwhile, or because more people should know about them. It only includes things of which the world at large has taken significant notice.
Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines does not mean they have been in any way "approved". It may simply mean that no one has gotten around to deleting them yet. They are not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best, such as Seacology. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19:59:27, 12 June 2018 review of submission by Asymetrical722

You deleted my article Sheet Timing or someone did for infringing on a copyright but the site in question is actually mine and there is literally NO other examples anywhere I've found but your site is so damn complicated needlessly I don't even begin to know how to respond. Milowerx.com is my own website and I actually TEACH Sheet Timing at studio Arts here in Los Angeles so I am definitely an authority on Sheet timing and can speak on these matters. I am not infringing on anyone's copyright except I guess my own. I learned how to sheet time at Hanna Barbera back in the early 90's and have been doing so for the last 30 years. You should undelete this page and let it stand.

Asymetrical722 (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Asymetrical722. If your website is the only source of information about the topic Sheet Timing, then Wikipedia should not have an article on the subject. The encyclopedia covers only topics that have gained significant attention by the world at large.
If there are multiple, independent, reliable sources that go into some depth about Sheet Timing, then it would be a viable topic. In that case you might be able to use material you've published elsewhere as a source, although scholarly or news sources are much preferred to commercial websites. Citing your own work is not encouraged, because it's difficult to be objective about it, but it is not forbidden if it's done carefully. You may even be able to use copyrighted text you've written (there are links to the procedures for donating it to Wikipedia in the second paragraph of the speedy deletion notice on your talk page). Generally, however, even if you surmount the copyright problem, you will not be able to use the text from your website because the way to write for an encyclopedia is so different from the way to write for any other publication. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 13

04:44:14, 13 June 2018 review of submission by FeWorld


My article was recently declined Draft:Ice_Poseidon on grounds of notability. I would be grateful if you could provide feedback on why this article wasn't notable so I can improve it as I have sources from Rolling Stone, Vice, CBS, Polygon, Fox and others which are directly about the subject.

I tried contacting the reviewers for feedback but the first reviewer refused and I have not received a response from the second.

Any help would be appreciated. FeWorld (talk) 04:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FeWorld. Based on a random sample of the cited sources, I disagree with reviewers who have found the topic non-notable. The Rolling Stone source is a strong one. Player.One, although not as deep, is significant coverage, and reliable. International Business Times was dismissed when Ice Poseidon was seen as notable only for the bomb threat, and all the sources were about that single event. Now, coupled with sources that are not about that event, IBT should be fine, but I recommend using only the most reputable 1-2 sources about the bomb threat.
Not all the news is good. Twitter is a lousy source. It's self published and primary. The factoid it supports, and indeed the entire "In the media" section, is not encyclopedia-worthy content. Delete the section and the source. Dexerto and Right This Minute are dead links. That's a bad start for an article. If my random sample is representative, half the draft's sources should be thrown away. That will concentrate focus on the best sources, and make it clearer that the subject is notable.
The previous, now deleted, article was the frequent target of vandals. If the draft is accepted it's safe to assume that it too will be targeted. The best defense against it being completely trashed is to start with as robust a version as possible. For this reason I encourage you to improve it as much as you can in draft space and not to rush to get it moved to article space. I've left some specific comments on the draft, but they're just a beginning. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:02, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I very much appreciate your feedback and will work on all you have listed FeWorld (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:35:33, 13 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by MachineMGMT1



MachineMGMT1 (talk) 15:35, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15:39:41, 13 June 2018 review of submission by MachineMGMT1


MachineMGMT1 (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to figure out if my wiki page needs more references, more notable references, or is just referenced wrong - is anyone able to help me? :)

Also will adding an image, or a contents box make it more likely to get approved?

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE!

@MachineMGMT1: Draft:Cam O’bi doesn't need more references, an image, or an infobox. Possibly fewer, better references would help. More importantly, it needs to be accurate - he isn't a Grammy Award winner. And most importantly, you should disclose your connection to the subject. --Worldbruce (talk)

Request on 18:40:48, 13 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Jmsmrchn


Hello! I want to ask why this particular article was blocked. On which chapter un the article "What wikipedia is not" I should pay attention?

Thank you in advance

Jmsmrchn (talk) 18:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jmsmrchn, I believe it is the "primary research" under WP:NOT#OR. Please read Wikipedia notability requirements - see here WP:N and WP:Your First Article. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 14

02:36:37, 14 June 2018 review of submission by Gbabeux


NOTE: I want help, not to resubmit the draft for review yet. Hi, I would like some help with my existing draft. It has been refused for the following reason : "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies." The reviewer left this comment : "There is all kinds of personal style unsourced material and the page lacks an encyclopedic tone. Deleted a few days ago from mainspace G11 advertising Legacypac (talk) 05:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)"

I have contacted him on his talk page to ask him if he could point me to some solution but he only pointed me to some errors and did not propose any solution. I do understand the tone needs to be changed but I would like to know how you guys would change it to a proper tone for Wikipedia. Maybe some parts of the draft should be removed/added ? Also, I would like to know if there would be a solution concerning the references. The reviewer said that they were not reliable. I have found 123 links concerning Ajay Mathur and could not find anything more reliable. The thing is if I do not use those sources, then I do not have references and if the article does not have references it will be declined again and again ... This is a bit frustrating ... I would like help ! Thank you in advance. Gbabeux (talk) 02:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gbabeux. Perhaps there's nothing reliable to find, and Wikipedia should not have an article about Mathur. That's a solution.
Novice editors are usually advised to cite at least three indpendent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. The first two sources you cite are blogs, and the third is written by a PR firm. They are worthless for demonstrating notability. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources lists some sources that Wikipedians have generally found reliable for writing about albums and musicians.
Which criterion of WP:MUSICBIO do you think Mathur most unambiguously satisfies? What are the three best sources you can find that prove he satisfies it? Make your case for notability in the first sentence or two of the lead, per MOS:BLPLEAD. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:21:46, 14 June 2018 review of submission by Dr Vizy Dahiya


Dr Vizy Dahiya 07:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC) I have recently submitted a page for publish by the name CURA Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., but its rejected. I am an employee of CURA Healthcare and wanted to create the page just for information purpose. Kindly guide me what should be the content of the page so that its published on Wikipedia.

Hi Dr Vizy Dahiya, Welcome to AfC help desk. Please note that you have a conflict of interest (COI) here. COI means any any person, who is affiliated to the subject of a Wikipedia page (family members, friends, client, employers, yourself and etc), involves in contribution of the page. If a person is paid to write about a subject, that is a financial conflict of interest. COI is strongly discourage on Wikipedia as COI editors would/might not able/aware to write the article in a neutral point of view. For COI, editor need to disclose your COI when involved with the effected article, . COI discloses need to be made on user page (your user page), article talk page and on edit summary of an edit you made. You could find how to disclose COI here. You could also place {{request edit}}on the article talk page and state your suggestion. Prior trying to improve your article, pls make sure the subject of your article is notable according to Wikipedia's guidelines - see here organisation notability requirements and if it meet the requirement, please make sure your write it in neutral point of view. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07:22:14, 14 June 2018 review of submission by Filip Vachuda

Christmas Island is not a nation, but every other territorial football team ie. not an independent nation has 'national football team' as its name. Even Cocos Islands, which have the exact same status as Christmas Island, is called 'national' football team. Therefore according to precedent Christmas Island should be called 'national football team' too.

Filip Vachuda (talk) 07:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Filip Vachuda Greetings to you. Both Cocos and Christmas Islands are not an independent nations, for such national team might not be suitable. Secondly. Both are no considered meet the notability as they only play against each other and no other international teams which would most likely to be deleted or proposed to be deleted. Lastly, article are assess individually. thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

13:46:08, 14 June 2018 review of submission by Wikieditor1808


Wikieditor1808 (talk) 13:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

14:17:53, 14 June 2018 review of submission by 69.172.183.125

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Hi, I'm new to all this. So am not completely sure how to ask for help.

I created a draft article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Koho_Financial ).

Someone reviewed the article, and it said: "Submission declined on 10 June 2018".

The reason given was: "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue.".

I am trying to understand this.

AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM MISTAKEN, BUT it sounds like the focus of the complaint is this: "Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject".

AND AGAIN, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM MISTAKEN, BUT in particular, this: "significant coverage".

I think I don't understand what "significant" means in this context.

Wouldn't having multiple articles written on the company in the Financial Post, The Globe and Mail, TechVibes, BetaKit, BC Business be "significant"?

(Especially the Financial Post and The Globe and Mail tend to be considered top publications in Canada.)

(And TechVibes and BetaKit are big in the Canadian tech scene.)

If "no", then what would "significant" look like?


69.172.183.125 (talk) 14:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It would look more like a substantial article, and less like a collection of regurgitated press releases. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:37, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:53:36, 14 June 2018 review of submission by Mehulcreative


I just drafted a page Sudhir Desai. But the works Section has disappeared? Could you please let me know why?

Mehulcreative (talk) 20:53, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mehulcreative, Good day. I have reinsert the "Works" section back for you. There are referencing issues in the page. Please visit WP:Referencing for Beginners and please read the Wikipedia nobility guidelines for WP:AUTHOR to make sure the subject meets the guidelines as no amount of editing and referecing will merit a page in Wikipedia if the subject fails to meet the notability requirements. Let us know if anything else we could help. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 22:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)e[reply]

Request on 21:55:54, 14 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Eujoe


Hi need help with this article. i need help with referencing and notability issue

Eujoe (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eujoe, Greetings to you. Your article has declined for five times with four different reviewers. All of them pointed to the same issue as of why the article does not merit a page in Wikipedia - the subject does not meet Wikipedia notability guideline (pls see - WP:JOURNALIST). If the subject do not have reliable, independent sources (from major newspaper, reputable journals) that "directly" talk about Chamwada and review his works then that is noting to demonstrate his notability in Wikipedia and a page in Wikipedia is not permissible. Have a good day. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 22:29, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I Believe that the subject is notable. he is widely known. just try searching his name on google. his various works are also available.

are there any pointers specifically that you can tell me to actually fix? His show al Eujoe (talk) 22:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eujoe, First of all, you dont need to reply in a "new section". Kindly house all the messages in the same place so there is a thread for referencing if other editors would like to comment or assist in this request. Just click "edit" next to this message title "Request on 21:55:54, 14 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Eujoe", scroll to the bottom and start writing. Please read again of the link I and other reviewers provided to you. It is not what we "believe" a subject is notable/famous/important, but the subject need to demonstrate he has meet the Wikipedia notability guidelines. There might be sources around, but the sources have to be independent, reliable (such as from major newspapers "directly" talking about him or reviewing of his works) that significantly covers the subject. If you need there are then put inline citation in the article and resubmit. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 22:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback.. There are various online blogs, tabloids that feature him. most of his interviews have not been done online bt in TV stations out here. All the shows that he does are also doing well trending on a weekly basis. is there an exception for me to use the tabloids as refrences?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=845906409"