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 Redmercw (talk | contribs) at 15:07, 11 July 2019. 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


July 5

01:16:22, 5 July 2019 review of submission by EagerBeaverPJ

@CASSIOPEIA: Hi, so a few days back you told me to elaborate more on how the water crisis came about, and I have been working with another editor to add some more information that you wanted me to add. Do you think it's fine to be published as a real page now? I feel like other editors could help us elaborate more on the different sections once we publish it. EagerBeaverPJ (talk) 01:16, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EagerBeaverPJ Good day. Thank you for adding more info and sources. Reviewed and accepted - see 2019 Chennai water crisis. Please add more content as info is available - see 1998 Sydney water crisis for example. Thank you for your contribution and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:21:19, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Fulber


Fulber (talk) 04:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

how do I quote or refer to published books and magazines that the artist has appeared in? thanks in advance.

Hi Fulber Welcome to AfC help desk. Pls see referencing for inline citation info and instruction. You also would use Template:Cite book template to cite books ; Template:Cite web template to cite sources from internet or Template:Cite journal for journal. Do use "horizontal template format". Since I am, do read WP:My First Article if you havent. Let us know if you need further assistance. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:46:57, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Rica Ethier



Rica Ethier (talk) 05:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:03:16, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by NeilJudson



NeilJudson (talk) 07:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilJudson: please see the message I've left you regarding undisclosed paid editing. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:26:03, 5 July 2019 review of submission by 194.243.213.83


194.243.213.83 (talk) 07:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC) The draft article contains no references or sources. Dan arndt (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:04:02, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Ruby838

The reason for the rejection last time, which was "not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia". I supposed that there was not enough reference, so I provide links where the content was collected. If there is any mistake in content which is not suitable or if I'm still in the wrong direction, please give me detailed advice, thank you.

Ruby838 (talk) 09:04, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 09:23:50, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Medicalresearchindia2



Medicalresearchindia2 (talk) 09:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:06, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Medicalresearchindia2


Medicalresearchindia2 (talk) 09:47, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:46:56, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Ejvalerio


Ejvalerio (talk) 10:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


11:15:21, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Bernat Paredes


Bernat Paredes (talk) 11:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bernat Paredes: Draft:Lola Pirindola tales is not a subject suitable for a Wikipedia article. Please read WP:N. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:50:16, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Miityu

I am trying to publish an information page for the brand "Healing Hotels of the World". I tried to rewrite it many times now, added several reliable sources and used quotations. I also didn't use promotional adjectives or similar to avoid a selling indication. But it gets rejected every time. I also checked similar pages to compare the style but nothing is different. Miityu (talk) 11:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Miityu: I have reviewed the draft and read the various references. Together there's not enough secondary, independent, in-depth coverage of the company to meet the WP:NCORP criteria for inclusion. Please also note the message on your user talk page about a possible conflict of interest, which you've not responded to. You must do so before editing further. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:34, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Raga vedha

I have updated details in WP:NCOMPANY and Added References. Raga vedha (talk) 12:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Raga vedha: all you've done is add your LinkedIn page as a reference. Anything published by you or the company is not an independent source. Please re-read WP:NCORP. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:16:46, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Suhani Kanwar


Suhani Kanwar (talk) 12:16, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I have added references wherever required, but still unsure why the page isn't getting published. I would like to know specifically what changes are required to be made so that the issue can be fixed quickly.

````

@Suhani Kanwar: There is no quick fix, because the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). There are plenty of search results for the name, but they're little more than mentions in the credits. They are not significant coverage. Examples of significant coverage of a TV screenwriter would be: [1] [2] and [3]. Contrast them with the draft's deepest source, [4]. She may become notable as her career progresses, but right now it is WP:TOOSOON. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:35:18, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Axsli

I was wondering if the post could be re-reviewed as I have resolved any problems and then published, I would also appreciate if you told me anything I need to improve. Axsli (talk) 12:35, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Axsli: - the reject is still the reasonable judgement. Sources have to be independent - this means any website from a company he worked at can't help prove notability - it has a reason to be biased. The same applies to interviews. Sources need to be in-depth, secondary (newspapers, books etc), reliable and independent. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:39, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:58:38, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Shilpaga05

Because I have added some references according to the Notability that you should see once.

Shilpaga05 (talk) 12:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


15:18:08, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Anandregunathan


I have added further links of reliable sources of information. Also, have added a link to the organization's official Annual Report. The organization for which the wiki page is being made is an Not-For-Profit organization whose daily operations and facts may not always be reported to news agencies everyday as it cannot afford to spend its money on heavy marketing and news. Also a lot of news coverage has happened in Indian local language news media which may not be of help to quote here (as it is in languages such as Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc). Besides this, I have also quoted the English news coverage.

It is important to create a wikipedia page for this Not for Profit organization because it is now big enough in size that it is able to feed 200,000+ children with free nutritious breakfast, and wants to serve up to 1 million needy children in the near future.

In case you have any other advice/suggestions/edits for this page to be published, kindly let know.

It is of prime importance that as a wikipedia contributor i would like to ensure the best and most accurate information be published.

Anandregunathan (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Anandregunathan: - firstly, the biggest issue the article faces is its blatant advertorial tone. To give one example "Annapoorna has had a roller coast ride right since its inception. There has been no looking back from the start, and the number of children benefitted have grown exponentially. 20 Million+ Meals have been served so far !" is complete non neutral and not in an encyclopedic tone.
Sources in other languages are fine. However an annual report doesn't help prove anything more controversial than things like name & location. Wikipedia requires secondary sources that are independent and reliable. A company's report has strong reason to present a positive viewpoint.
As a smaller note, an article shouldn't "talk" to its readers. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:35, 5 July 2019 review of draft by MemeTrooper


I was wondering if I could use the current logo I put for the article? It was removed when I saw the draft, but can i put it back? Also, what happens if i submit it for review and it is declined? MemeTrooper (talk) 15:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MemeTrooper: - fair use generally only authorises usage of a logo in an article. Its presence won't hinder a draft being accepted, and it can always be uploaded and added once it becomes an article again.
Most drafts that aren't accepted are declined. You get a summary explanation, possibly a longer explanation (you can always ask the reviewer to be more in-depth), and can fix it and resubmit. Obviously, given the delays atm, it's preferable to get it right first time.
I would suggest asking Onel5969 if they can clarify specific promotional points (I would just briefly say that it speaks constantly about the pluses and successes of the company)
A bigger issue is that the draft seems to only be sourced through sites linked to the company. Sources need to be in-depth, reliable, independent (sources with no reason not to be fully accurate. This also rules out most interviews), and they need to be secondary sources (newspapers, books, etc) Nosebagbear (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: - The logo's description apparently says non free content rather than free use, but i could have sworn it was put as free use when I first added it to the article. Also, am I just asking One if the article will be approved simply for listing the successes of the company? I didn't completely understand why your directing me to him. MemeTrooper (talk) 16:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)MemeTrooper (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MemeTrooper: - To clarify, I was saying that currently the draft only talks about the company's positive actions. They may (or may not) be accurate, but it would still give a one-sided viewpoint if neutral and even negative info wasn't included. However, it's some of the phrasing that is also potentially problematic. Ask Onel for some examples on what made the article (now draft) promotional,
How would you know the logo was free use - has the company declare it such? Nosebagbear (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: Probably not, my memory just may be wrong since I put the logo in the article months ago. I was given a notification that it is an orphaned non free image. I'm a bit confused on it. It says in the message that I can readd it if I think it is useful, but I thought that non free images can't be used Wikipedia and only fair use can. Am I able to add it back because I was told I can in that message?MemeTrooper (talk) 17:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MemeTrooper: - acceptable forms of photos for Wikipedia (not WikiCommons) are public domain (which is totally free use), a suitable license (functionally free use within Wikipedia) and fair-use - which means it hasn't had any license granted, but US copyright law permits certain usages.
I suggest asking for some help at the Teahouse - there you'll be able to get a photo expert, whereas I just know enough for my own usage.
As above, I would say that notability is the primary issue the draft faces atm Nosebagbear (talk) 09:59, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:43:25, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Nachlassprofi

18:43:25, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Nachlassprofi


Entrümpelungsfirma Nachlassprofi (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


20:28:39, 5 July 2019 review of submission by 103.66.233.56

COZ I AM VERY NEWER FRIST TIMER ON WIKIPEDIA SO IF POSSIBLE PLEASE HELP ME FOR THIS ARTICLE WHICH IS ABOUT ME IF I DESERVE OTHERVISE ITS MY LAST TRY THANKS YOU ALL....AND WKIPEDIA20:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)103.66.233.56 (talk)****** 103.66.233.56 (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not write in ALL CAPS. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 09:14, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:33:42, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Explicitmultimedia


I JUST SUBMITTED A DRAFT AND IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED.. CAN I HAVE HELP OF KNOWING THE CORRECTIONS TO MAKE?

Explicitmultimedia (talk) 21:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicitmultimedia: Please do not write in all capitals, it is regarded as shouting. I've declined the draft for the reasons stated on it. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 6

00:03:57, 6 July 2019 review of draft by Explicitmultimedia


Explicitmultimedia (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

made so many changes on my article

00:45:48, 6 July 2019 review of submission by Rumbidzainokutenda

I have made a lot of changes on my article ,I need to know were i can correct my article in order to make it perfect.

Rumbidzainokutenda (talk) 00:45, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:02:23, 6 July 2019 review of submission by Crvins


Crvins (talk) 06:02, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:34:31, 6 July 2019 review of draft by Humblemogwai


So I am uncertain about a image I am using for the artist, it is a image that is on their office bandcamp site but I am not sure what I should put for Licensing. any recommendation suggestion. Also this is my first time ever doing something like so i wanna make I do things legit and thanks.

Humblemogwai (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:03:40, 6 July 2019 review of submission by Humblemogwai


Hello I would like some help/advice with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sincere_Engineer) specifically on what i need to add or what is missing. Also I still have some more information that will be added to the draft. ((Sidenote)But I just wanted to see the procedure of making article and so far I like it.) Humblemogwai (talk) 09:03, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria for musicians and ensembles can be seen here. Theroadislong (talk) 09:29, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:21:46, 6 July 2019 review of submission by 2409:4056:2092:78A8:F6A3:A2B6:74FD:86F1


2409:4056:2092:78A8:F6A3:A2B6:74FD:86F1 (talk) 09:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:40, 6 July 2019 review of draft by Cdaubie


Cdaubie (talk) 12:34, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I wrote an article about Rodolphe Blavy in April, and I still do not find it on the platform ? How about the revision ? It was a hard word of researched and be happy to see it on Wikipedia but I got any news form you since ...

Can you help me ?

Thank you, Caroline

@Cdaubie: The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed for about two and a half months. About 700 drafts have been waiting longer. The current backlog is just over 4 months. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:10:37, 6 July 2019 review of draft by Maryhlcalia


Maryhlcalia (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I re-submitted the changes which I was requested to do and I have not heard back from the reviewer. Can you please help me to see if indeed he has received them and I have done his wishes accordingly. I realize so many people are requesting help but if you can update me, I would so much appreciate it since it has been since April. Thank you, Mary

@Maryhlcalia: The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed for just under 3 months. About 475 drafts have been waiting longer. The current backlog is just over 4 months. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:38, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:50:55, 6 July 2019 review of draft by Moonover


Moonover (talk) 17:50, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:52:52, 6 July 2019 review of draft by 92.15.255.165


92.15.255.165 (talk) 19:52, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:55:25, 6 July 2019 review of submission by 92.15.255.165


92.15.255.165 (talk) 19:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 7

03:10:19, 7 July 2019 review of draft by Chinnu1215

My article Draft:Baby Annie was rejected twice for reliable sources please help me to get verified

Chinnu1215 (talk) 03:10, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:00:58, 7 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by CBDB2016


Hi, I wrote an article for Haim Tukachinsky. I am wondering why it was rejected. The reason I got was undefined. I was writing it because he was a friend and I had gotten specific instructions to input the information. Was I missing something that was the basis for the article to be declined? I am a bit confused because there is an article in the Hebrew Wikipedia that was published and I am basing it off of that. CBDB2016 (talk) 13:00, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CBDB2016 (talk) 13:00, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

* Response was provided on editor's talkpage. Dan arndt (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 8

03:03:09, 8 July 2019 review of submission by 118.140.152.66


The Page showing the information itself that is Charity organization, in Wikipedia have lot of organization registered so this one of them, it's not violating any policy of Wikipedia and also it's good one to keep the page. Thanks

118.140.152.66 (talk) 03:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

* Response provided on editor's talkpage. Dan arndt (talk) 06:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:19:40, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Jordi Scott

hi hi

For the page of Jeffrey Feinman, the reference list was updated and requested for further review.

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

wonder if it is okay now.

pls help.

thks and regards Florence Jordi Scott (talk) 04:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:02:43, 8 July 2019 review of submission by 2605:A000:B109:5100:7025:561B:4807:D0BD

Because I didn't even finish edit the draft, and nothing is wrong with that draft and if is wrong can you fix it

2605:A000:B109:5100:7025:561B:4807:D0BD (talk) 05:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:03:36, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Andrew nyr


Andrew nyr (talk) 05:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:11:02, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Andrew nyr


Andrew nyr (talk) 05:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:14:59, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Andrew nyr

Please decline instead of reject because it will be harder to resubmit and wikipedia's policy is only reject is the topic is unacceptable on wikipedia and decline when edits still have to be made. Andrew nyr (talk) 05:14, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

* Response provided on editor's talkpage. Dan arndt (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:23:26, 8 July 2019 review of draft by PG77kanpur


hello, I have been working on the article "Abhay Karandikar". I had done my research prior to creating the article and found no such Wikipedia articles with the same name. My article also has a considerable amount of references from credible sources. Yet, my article was declined from being published. Can I know the underlying reasons that lead to the rejection of my article despite being backed up by credible references? PG77kanpur (talk) 05:23, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PG77kanpur. The draft has failed to convince the reviewers that the subject is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia).
If you believe you can prove that the subject meets one or more of the inclusion criteria, then rewrite the lead to make that obvious. Being on leave from IIT Bombay does not make him notable. Having been a dean or institute chair there does not make him notable. Being the chairman of TSDSI does not make him notable. Holding patents does not make him notable. Being a consultant on BharatNet does not make him notable, and Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. It should not be cited as a reference, nor should medium.com and wiki.mozilla.org, which are not reliable.
For examples of well-written leads, see biographies of academics in WP:FA. Vannevar Bush, for example "was an American engineer, inventor and science administrator, who during World War II headed the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), through which almost all wartime military R&D was carried out, including important developments in radar and the initiation and early administration of the Manhattan Project. He emphasized the importance of scientific research to national security and economic well-being, and was chiefly responsible for the movement that led to the creation of the National Science Foundation." --Worldbruce (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 06:47:20, 8 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Coloradoweatherdude


I think it's important to have an article that talks about the Cheyenne WY fire department. I know Cheyenne is a small city but it would be nice to have an entry about it's fire service. Maybe an editor with more experience on Wikipedia would consider stepping up and getting an article created. Thank-you.


Coloradoweatherdude (talk) 06:47, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:10:47, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Hongkongfoodlover123

Why was the article declined? Hongkongfoodlover123 (talk) 08:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hongkongfoodlover123. As the reviewer commented, the draft fails WP:NCOMPANY. Most businesses are not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). See WP:BFAQ#COMPANY for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:56:14, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Newyorkupdate

Hello, I've been trying to publish my post for a month now - still not quite sure why it gets declined every time. Could you help me? What information do I need? Do I need more references?

Thanks in advance. Newyorkupdate (talk) 09:56, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Newyorkupdate. Searching Google Books and Google News turns up a few photos credited to Tombor, but no writings about Tombor. So you're probably wasting your time trying to publish an encyclopedia article about him.
Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their subject. The draft cites none. Pretty much every statement in a biography of a living person should have an inline citation that supports it. There are some external links in the body of the draft (where they are not allowed). Perhaps you meant for them to be references. You could reformat them according to Referencing for beginners, but the ones I examined either don't mention Tombor, or make only passing mention of him. They are not significant coverage, so they do not help demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 14:18, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:47, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Medicalresearchindia2


Medicalresearchindia2 (talk) 09:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


10:46:08, 8 July 2019 review of draft by Jasonuptempo


Need help to get my submission accepted. This is my first attempt at creating a Wikipedia article and I'm really stuck now on how to improve or if i can actually improve at this stage to make it get accepted. I tried to make it better prior to this and it's been declined again so I'm in need of assistance.

Thanks!

Jasonuptempo (talk) 10:46, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jasonuptempo. It probably isn't possible to improve the draft to the point where it would be acceptable. What is needed is significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources that are independent of Estasia. The cited sources are largely announcements based on press releases from Estasia (so not independent), or are brief mentions. Examples of signficant coverage of a DJ (in this case Clive Campbell a.k.a. DJ Kool Herc) would be:
  • Toop, David (2000). Rap Attack 3: African Rap to Global Hip Hop. Serpent's Tail. pp. 17–19, 60–76. ISBN 978-1-85242-627-9.
  • Ogg, Alex; Upshal, David (1999). The Hip Hop Years: A History of Rap. Channel 4 Books. pp. 13–18. ISBN 978-0-7522-1780-2.
  • Ruog, Louise (February 24, 2008). "Music might save Bronx homes". Los Angeles Times.
--Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:13:02, 8 July 2019 review of submission by 185.179.3.130


I'm very suprised, that my article was rejected as not sufficiently notable. Article starts to describe the first post-quantum blockchain and it is something new in the blockchain area. Why is it less notable than any other article about blockchians that wikipedia contain? For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filecoin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verge_(cryptocurrency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEO_(cryptocurrency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_(payment_network) ... and many others

Another question is that submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. What pillars does this submission contadict? I can't see anyone.

185.179.3.130 (talk) 11:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


11:51:37, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Sindysparkles

Hi, I have amended the references. Could the article please be reviewed once more? Many thanks. Sindysparkles (talk) 11:51, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sindysparkles: - hi there. The same issue is still there. As a biography, Wikipedia requires sources to be inline (that means attached to specific facts - the little blue numbers you see in other articles). Currently your sources are general, at the bottom, applying to the whole article. Help:Referencing for beginners gives 3 methods (depending on how you're editing) to make inline sources. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:45, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Sindysparkles

Hi there, I have re-submitted the references this time in-line. Would you advise to remove some of the exhibitions since these are collected from the artist's website? I don't want it to be all from one website. Many thanks! Sindysparkles (talk) 12:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sindysparkles: - sorry, for uncontroversial things like exhibition dates (people rarely make them up), just ensuring that there's a link to the website would suffice. In any case 1 ref for the entire set would be sufficient unless someone started challenging it.
However, I would definitely still advise removing some - even in the past it reads as somewhat promotional and, in any case, obviously takes up loads of room. You could tidy them up into a few lines of prose "in Summer 2018, he showcased X at locations Y & X" (don't include all of them even in prose form) Nosebagbear (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:37:21, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Leviungi

I'm sorry for the wordings in on here the page pls check or help the new draft. On local news, actually pageant camps are on the content of national news and then tv. Leviungi (talk) 13:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:22:33, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Aballenger8

I think you should re-review my page because I made it better and I think it would be really cool for me to have a Wikipedia page because in order to get your own Wikipedia page you have to be famous in some sort of way and I don't think I'm gonna be famous anytime soon. but in case I become famous i will remove it so that other people can make me one. thank you for your time, and please think about my request.

Aballenger8 (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Can you please give me another chance to fix it and prove you all wrong. I made it better than it already was. I just really want a Wikipedia article because my friend has one and I think its really cool. I would really like to have one. When I'm older I can come back on here and see what i said and what other people said on it. Thank you for your time and i hope you change your mind-

Ana's little sister (i hope to be like her someday...)

Aballenger8 (talk) 20:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aballenger8: Unfortunately, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social networking site. It is limited to including articles about people, places, or things that are "notable", which means that there are already reliable sources such as books or newspapers that are talking about them. If your friend has a Wikipedia article, it either means that they are notable, or it just means that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:22:38, 8 July 2019 review of submission by Andrew nyr

i added proper refrences Andrew nyr (talk) 21:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


July 9

02:04:45, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Andrew nyr

I have cited mutiple secondary sources. the only criticism Andrew nyr (talk) 02:04, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:01:56, 9 July 2019 review of draft by Emsport2000


I submitted my article over three months ago, and it still hasn't been reviewed. When should I expect it to be reviewed? Thank you

Emsport2000 (talk) 03:01, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Emsport2000: - I've reviewed and accepted the article. While max time is currently 15 weeks, I suspect this one was in the queue for the while as a bit of an anomaly with two excellent sources and a real dearth of others findable/present. In any case, I felt it passed WP:GNG, though a new page patroller will also take a look at it. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:24:22, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Theaveragezach


Hello there! :) Would like to understand what went wrong with the submission or this :D Your experience, expertise and advise in this would greatly help! Theaveragezach (talk) 04:24, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theaveragezach. Most business aren't notable (aren't suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). See WP:BFAQ#COMPANY for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:21:19, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Timjarvis59


Timjarvis59 (talk) 06:21, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:22:15, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Timjarvis59


Timjarvis59 (talk) 06:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


07:38:17, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Manishsinghon


Manishsinghon (talk) 07:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:06:41, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Sindysparkles

First, thank you @Nosebagbear for all your help and suggestions. Second, I think the article is almost ready and would really like review if possible :) Many thanks in advance. Sindysparkles (talk) 09:06, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sindysparkles: your draft is in the pool of drafts awaiting review for 3 hours. The current backlog is about 4 months... Please be patient. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you sorry! Was just asking for advice :) thanks again

10:19:36, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Stermotich


Hello, my article as the follow was declined, can you tell me why?

SES - Solo Extreme Swimming

It is a new discipline of solo long-distance swimming where the swimmer does not receive any support from outside and do not supply the route earlier. The idea is to enjoy in long-distance swim and permanence in water by following the coastline.

The solo extreme swimmer carries all necessary attached to his body (hip bag, backpack or similar). It is not allowed to pull or push the equipment. The swimmer can use swimming goggles, diving mask and/or snorkel. It is prohibited to use swimming gloves or similar, swimming or diving fins and any other swimming gadgets.

When a solo extreme swimmer establishes SES record, it is prohibited for him to exit from the water or relax on any floating object. Drinking and eating should occur into the water without touching the river, lake or sea bed.

Solo Extreme Swimming is most demanding long-distance swimming activities due to bad hydrodynamics, low speed, refraction waves near the coastline and no support at all.

By the actual law in most countries, there is no limitation on swimming close the coastline, but there is a limitation to swim on open shore without boat support due to the risk of being killed. Solo Extreme Swimming had his birth in Istria / Croatia in 2019.

Stermotich (talk) 10:19, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Stermotich: - it was rejected because it didn't have any sources to show notability, and additionally there did not appear to be any suitable secondary sources visible on the internet.
If you can find 1 or 2 sources, I'd suggest adding a section to the Long distance swimming article. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:22:34, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Stermotich

If I put a way SES?... Is ok to you to publish somewhere else the description on the web? What reference do you need?

Stermotich (talk) 10:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Stermotich: Sources being used to show notability should be: In-depth (c. 8+ lines), independent (no reason to be biased, and also rules out interviews/press released), reliable (generally accurate source) and secondary (newspaper, book, etc) Nosebagbear (talk) 18:49, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:07:43, 9 July 2019 review of submission by 2605:A000:140D:4903:C8A1:1355:754F:21F8

I add more links 2605:A000:140D:4903:C8A1:1355:754F:21F8 (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:37:32, 9 July 2019 review of draft by Stiflegold67


I'm having trouble understanding how much cited content is needed for Commissioner Chuck Eaton. It has been rejected twice. It's a statewide elected position in GA.

It's common for PSC Commissioners, across the country to have Wikipedia pages, and they have less content than Eaton's proposed page. Maybe I'm missing something. Thanks in advance for your help. See below of examples:

Brandon Presley of MS Tim Echols of GA Jeremy Oden of AL


Stiflegold67 (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:02:35, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Romeonew

There is considerable resource in this article, due to which it comes in the Notable category of Wikipedia.--Romeonew (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Romeonew. You are mistaken, at this point in his career he is not notable. The draft cites a few reliable sources, such as The Times of India, Dainik Jagran, and Dainik Bhaskar, but they either don't mention Thakur at all, or mention his name only in a long list of credits. They are not significant coverage of him. Download sites like Netflix, Amazon, and YouTube don't demonstrate notability (Netflix doesn't even mention him). The remaining cited sources are not reliable. I recommend that you stick to the reliable ones listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force#Guidelines on sources until you have gained more experience in evaluating sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:39:48, 9 July 2019 review of submission by 2601:81:4000:6215:587A:68F:FC9E:669B


2601:81:4000:6215:587A:68F:FC9E:669B (talk) 21:39, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


22:53:14, 9 July 2019 review of draft by Aproudlock2010


Aproudlock2010 (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:53:14, 9 July 2019 review of submission by Aproudlock2010


I am looking for help to edit/ change the name of my draft for my client. I wish for it to be changed to Alexander Proudlock

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Aproudlock2010#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 10

05:10:28, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Kingsbangkok2020


Kingsbangkok2020 (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:21:53, 10 July 2019 review of submission by SanjayGogia

I want to publish a Wikipedia page for Sanjay Gogia, who has received many scholarships, had been a politician, is a lawyer & has written books on the same. If I am missing out something or has overpraised the subject or has violated any guideless, kindly help me with precise information. SanjayGogia (talk) 07:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SanjayGogia: What you are failing to understand is that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Experienced volunteers have explained this repeatedly. No amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. Editors who refuse to accept a consensus may find themselves in violation of the disruptive-editing guideline. That can lead to loss of editing privileges, and potentially other sanctions. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:38:14, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Bobbysinghnow


Bobbysinghnow (talk) 07:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note, I've submitted the article for Speedy Deletion - it's an unambiguous advert. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:54, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:00:01, 10 July 2019 review of draft by Rathiiikhushi01


Rathiiikhushi01 (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:56:07, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Mccloughlin


I have updated the article completely and conformed to your requirements.

Mccloughlin (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


12:14:02, 10 July 2019 review of draft by Presdec


I have been asked by the chef to create this page, she is a personal friend. I want to ensure that i've adhered to the disclosure rules appropriately.

I also am trying to keep to the spirit of other chef's wiki pages and have heavily borrowed both structure and formating from other famous chefs. I want to ensure that what I propose as a final page is an appropriate wikipedia page. Presdec (talk) 12:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft is stuffed full off totally inappropriate non neutral, trumpery and puffery "Celebrity fans like Jean Paul Gauthier, Carla Bruni and Pierce Brosnan dine alongside the Greek power set and globetrotters" "worldwide known advertising agency," "gastronomical prowess" " audience and fans around the globe" "gastronomic journey" "pioneering authentic Greek gastronomy" "unconditionally answers the call to humanitarianism" "over a dozen best-selling cookbooks" "boasting record ratings" "prestigious Greek cooking school" for example. Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the advice. Understood, i'll edit accordingly and let you know. My aim is to make this a proper wiki page not advertise/promote etc. Presdec (talk) 12:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to make a re-write of the page, I would apreciate some input. Presdec (talk) 13:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:30:45, 10 July 2019 review of draft by Sameerbhosle9


Sameerbhosle9 (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can I request you to delete any one page and publish the changes. We will follow the that page thereafter.

Hi Sameerbhosle9. If you have created two drafts about a topic and now wish to delete one, add {{Db-g7}} to the top of the one you want deleted. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:20:23, 10 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Laurenlewis


I submitted an article (American Political Thought: A Journal of Ideas, Institutions, and Culture), for creation. American Political Thought is a new, major peer-reviewed journal of political science, which, like other similar journals, should have a Wikipedia article describing it. However, I received notification that the submitted article was rejected for reason: "undefined." What does that mean? Why was the article rejected?


Laurenlewis (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Laurenlewis. See the reviewer's comment below the pink box at the top of the draft. You may find Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Writing guide helpful. The WikiProject also has an essay about the notability of journals. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:13, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:41:49, 10 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by MarcoLaudato


Hello :)

My article submission has been rejected. May I have more information about what was wrong with my article? In which way can I improve it to make it acceptable for Wikipedia standards?

Thanks for your help.

Kind regards, Marco

MarcoLaudato (talk) 15:41, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MarcoLaudato: - currently (nearly) all your sources are primary or otherwise non-independent. Sources need to both not be from the organisation but also not inclined to give non-neutral coverage about it by any connection. Nosebagbear (talk) 17:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:37, 10 July 2019 review of submission by MarcoLaudato


The previous version of the article has been rejected due to "Fails WP:NCOMPANY requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. The organization's websites are primary sources and not acceptable reference."

I apologize for the inconvenience. In this new version, which I kindly ask to be re-reviewed, I have added further independent references. In particular, I have added as main reference the L'Aquila University web page dedicated to the center. Moreover, regarding the center scientific journal, I have added also the reference to its SCOPUS page.

I believe that in this new version the article is acceptable for the Wikipedia standard.

Thanks for your attention.

Kind regards, Marco

MarcoLaudato (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate - please don't repeat any query until 48 hours have passed to give us a chance to answer them

17:31:40, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Kzmba212


Kzmba212 (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


17:45:26, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Kzmba212


Kzmba212 (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello,

I have written an article about the first online magazine dealing specifically with Afro-Latin rhythms (kizomba, semba, kuduro, etc). Until now there has never been a magazine on this subject and I found it interesting to write about it, however, the user Dan arndt has rejected my article, the reason he has given is "undefined", I don´t know what it means. I would like to improve my article and I would love it will be published at Wikipedia, What do you advise me to do?. Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Agora_Kizomba_Magazine Thanks

--Kzmba212 (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:03:43, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Jnthibeault


So I didn't get any feedback on the initial review. I think it was just punted to deletion because of the perceived copyright violation (which was erroneous). I would really like to get some constructive feedback on the article to know if I can submit it for formal publication or if I need to tweak it in whatever manner. Thanks!

Jnthibeault (talk) 18:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:53:53, 10 July 2019 review of draft by JSpice85

Hi I would like to know why the actors in the film The Creatress are credited in the film in Wikipedia but when clicking the link in their pages, the page doesn't exists or doesn't show properly? Can you approve the page so actors can be properly credited? Thank you!

JSpice85 (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JSpice85: The links show up in red because no one has written an article on that person yet. If that page will be created by anyone, the software behind Wikipedia will make it blue. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:38:29, 10 July 2019 review of draft by Shoethorn7685


This is my first submission. It is fully proofed and revised, and ready to go. How do I submit it for review? I thought that I hit "Submit for Review", but cannot tell the status.

Shoethorn7685 (talk) 21:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shoethorn7685: You submit your draft for review by adding {{subst:submit}} Anywhere on the page and hitting the normal save button you already know. If you copy the code from here, copy it when viewing the page to make things work as intended. Note on file: the current backlog is about 4 months, so please be patient. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:05:10, 10 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Roachmin


My article got declined and I'd like to know why. If it is too short I can work on it some more with my colleagues but I was expecting it to be open to the public first.


Roachmin (talk) 22:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Roachmin: - it got rejected because no suitable sources were used, as explained by the reviewer - twitch/Imgur aren't suitable.
You need sources that are reliable, independent (usually excluding interviews), in-depth and secondary Nosebagbear (talk) 10:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:56:31, 10 July 2019 review of submission by Chrisjaymes2

More sources have been added Chrisjaymes2 (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


July 11

04:31:32, 11 July 2019 review of submission by Forallerrors

Hello. I dont understand why they are saying the topic is not relevant enough. Star Alex was suggested to be written about on wikipedia multiple times. I have followed Star's work since her gifboom days (when she was in middle school she was famous already) Now she has become famous on another application (instagram) and is making huge changes in the modeling industry as a petite model. She is changing the standards of beauty and just because her name is Star, means that all of the information about her online is getting hidden behind irrelevant searches. Star Alex is a notable person and should already be included in wikipedia, which is why I submitted an article on her. I am really dissapointed. The article was a lot of hard work, and effort, and Star deserves to have her information on wikipedia considering she is notable enough for me to have found countless accounts of people pretending to be her, or fan accounts for her. Please let me know if we can fix this and give fashion model Star Alex her first wikipedia page. Forallerrors (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Forallerrors: - firstly, Wikipedia "notability" isn't the same as relevance (which would be unbelievably hard to objectively judge - we'd never agree on it).
Multiple dummy accounts or fan accounts can be used to reliability verify facets or even be used as a good indicator of notability (a person could duplicate these things to push a person in if we used that as a criterion).
Instead, you need some sources that are reliable, independent secondary sources. The current included sources (those that cover her in depth) generally aren't independent (they have reason to not be neutral about Star Alex)
I fully get that her name makes her extremely tricky to search "google unfriendly" - I suggest using "Star Alex" and then adding key words always associated with her, which should pare it down. Looking in google news will also help filter to the types of sources we're looking for. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:37:08, 11 July 2019 review of submission by Gerard-Odonovan


I am requesting a review with the article or biography i made with Gerard O'donovan. I made some changes and i was hoping this was right. Please help me. thank you Gerard-Odonovan (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerard-Odonovan: - while it is much less promotional, improvements in the editing can't fix a lack of notability. All the sources remain non-independent (and they need to also be reliable, in-depth and secondary). Nosebagbear (talk) 10:25, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:55:51, 11 July 2019 review of draft by Franceslk


How do you edit a citation that i used the template to create?

Franceslk (talk) 09:55, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Franceslk: - hi there. I don't know if you're using Visual Editor (looks a little like Word) or Source (lots of {{ }} everywhere)
In Source, go to edit, and in each source you need an additional specification. Add "|title=Appropriate Title A" [Exclude " "] within each template, changing the title as appropriate. If you aren't wanting to add a title, you can just change the specifications as you wish.
In Visual, click on the blue number, click "Edit" in the sources box, and add/change the appropriate info.
If you give a specific case (and editing style) I can tailor my answer Nosebagbear (talk) 10:30, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:03:28, 11 July 2019 review of submission by Aliso4ka2013

11:03:28, 11 July 2019 review of draft by Aliso4ka2013


Hello! For the third time I've been trying to get an approval for my article to get published. Users who made a review left a message that the article references doesn't show significant coverage. But I added 23 references including Associated Press interview and Reuters article. I think it's proven resources with not just a mentions and I don't understand why my article declined. What can I do? Thank you! Aliso4ka2013 (talk) 11:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:56:26, 11 July 2019 review of draft by Tproveau


Tproveau (talk) 12:56, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I got this message: This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

There aren't any references per say (this page is just an explanation of the e-library) but I have a few links to external sites that are reliable (like the World Health Organization). Please advise.

Thanks!

Hi Tproveau. Thank you for your contributions. On Wikipedia, notbility is a test used by editors to decide whether a topic warrants an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia aims to have articles about topics that have gained significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, as evidenced by significant coverage from reliable, arms length sources.
The draft references no such sources (the World Health Organization is reliable, but not independent because it established and owns the library), so the draft fails to demonstrate that the topic should be included in Wikipedia as a stand alone article. To continue with the topic, you'll need to come up with some independent, reliable, secondary sources that cover the library in some detail. The bulk of any article should be based on such sources, rather than on non-independent sources.
If you can solve the above problem, there are additional problems to fix. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an instruction manual, so the entire "Users Guide" section should be removed. It also is not a place to promote or advocate something. An organization's vision or mission statement is usually regarded as promotional, so use care when discussing its purpose and target audience. Don't state something as fact in Wikipedia's voice if it's an assertion by the organization. Instead attribute the statement to the organization inline. Finally, external links, those that take the reader away from Wikipedia, are not allowed in the body of an article. A limited number are usually allowed in an "External links" section at the very end. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:54, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:03:13, 11 July 2019 review of draft by Maviveloso

N needing help to develop the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mavi_Veloso Hi It's been awhile we're trying to create the page . The wikipedia seems to be a very complex thing to do though. After some time trying and not succeeding and being rejected it seems i'm not actually able to develop this page. Is there another way we could do it? how can i collaborate to someone more experienced to help develop this page about the artist Mavi Veloso?

Maviveloso (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:07:25, 11 July 2019 review of draft by Redmercw


Hello -- can you please provide an estimate of when W. Patrick Murphy draft page will be reviewed? It has been pending for 10 months, and I really need someone's help with getting it approved. Please help! We have revised this page countless times.

Thank you very much.

Christian Redmer

Redmercw (talk) 15:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -- can you please provide an estimate of when W. Patrick Murphy draft page will be reviewed? It has been pending for 10 months, and I really need someone's help with getting it approved. Please help! We have revised this page countless times.

Thank you very much.

Christian Redmer

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=905805339"