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 Mickane (talk | contribs) at 19:16, 26 May 2020. 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


May 20

01:42:25, 20 May 2020 review of submission by MaryDowningKate

I would like to know why my article was denied. My great-grandmother founded the neighborhood and I am using her a primary source. Other articles have been published on Wikipedia about other neighborhoods in Columbus, Georgia, For example, Green Island neighborhood (and that page does not have any references) MaryDowningKate (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MaryDowningKate, As already stated on my talk page, your sources do not demonstrate notability. Neighborhoods such as this are rarely notable. We would need to see significant coverage of the neighborhood in multiple reliable and secondary sources. Also, please see WP:INN. If you have issues with another article, you can tag it appropriately or nominate it for deletion. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:44:45, 20 May 2020 review of draft by ThisIsACreeper0101


I need help regarding a cite. I was editing the page Draft:BeastBoyShub adding some proper references. And I realize, nearly all of the content on the page is sourced from several videos from the channel itself. I needed to cite the proper timings on the videos, but I can't submit it since youtu.be is blacklisted. How do I cite them? User:ThisIsACreeper0101 (T • C | Fandom) 10:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't quite understand everything clearly. I meant, I can't use the site youtu.be in {{Cite web}}, since it's blacklisted. So how do I cite YouTube videos? And ould I get a reply to this text in clear words? Thanks! User:ThisIsACreeper0101 (T • C | Fandom) 10:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
URL shorteners such as youtu.be are blacklisted, but full length youtube.com URLs are not. The technical difference doesn't really help the draft because YouTube is a generally unreliable source, so should not be cited and does not help establish notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). Moreover, if the links you want to add are to content created by BeastBoyShub, they are not independent. The bulk of any article should come from independent sources. Wikipedia doesn't much care what BeastBoyShub says about BeastBoyShub. It's looking for what sources like books, academic journals, and newspapers say about BeastBoyShub. If such sources say nothing, then Wikipedia should not have an article about BeastBoyShub. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I get it now. Alright; I'll try find sources other than just YouTube. User:ThisIsACreeper0101 (T • C | Fandom) 15:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:41:14, 20 May 2020 review of submission by Alaamri.ae

What is missing from the references? What do you want to check?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alaamri.ae/sandbox ( 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. )


please told me what i do Please tell me what you want specifically from the references .. Anything specifically from the article I must bring a reference for it? thank you ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaamri.ae (talk • contribs) 08:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alaamri.ae. For starters, the draft contains no references. There is an external links section, and perhaps you intended them to be used as references, but when you put them in a section called "External links" you are basically telling the reader that you didn't use them as references. If they are, in fact, where you got all your information, you could change the section heading to "References", but that wouldn't be enough to make the draft acceptable because they are trivial coverage of Al Aamri, so they don't demonstrate that he is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia).
If you can find multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of Al Aamri (not just quote him), then you may be able to justify an article. Then, because he's a living person, you would need to add an inline citation supporting almost every sentence (reviewers are a sceptical bunch, so you can expect almost every statement you make about him to be challenged).
If you are Al Aamri, or are closely connected to him, it's a really bad idea to try to write an encyclopedia article about him. If you are determined to be foolish, then at a minimum you should disclose the nature of your connection on your user page. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:26:14, 20 May 2020 review of submission by Mixalmaxa


Please, help how to change this article

Mixalmaxa (talk) 11:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:43:23, 20 May 2020 review of draft by Nycinuk


Hi - I am very confused why this keeps on getting rejected.

This is a major major development in central London that I walk past when I go to work every day. It's huge and a massive landmark and should be on Wikipedia. It also includes Denmark Street which is world famous. I don't see how my post reads like an advertisement - there is no hyperbole, no inflated claims nor anything that isn't verifiable from the extensive list of citations I have put together and includes coverage in major mainstream UK media for example The Guardian, The Telegraph, The Times, the London Evening Standard, The Independent, Sky News, CityAM etc all reflecting the fact this is a major development with a footfall of millions and is of public interest.

Could I please ask you to re-review?

Nycinuk (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has not been rejected it has been declined 4 times for reading like an advert, and you have still not addressed the concerns about undeclared paid editing. Theroadislong (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:53, 20 May 2020 review of submission by Carlos A Lagos

I am an artist and authoring myself the article as it relates to my being an artist. I understand the COI maybe I forgot to include COI statement somewhere? Thank you for your assistance.Carlos A Lagos (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC) Carlos A Lagos (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Carlos A Lagos: Please note that we strongely discourage users from writing about themselves. I am not an admin and therfore cannot see the contents of Draft:Carlos Lagos. I'm going to ping the deleting admin, @Jimfbleak: if he has some aditional advice. For the monent I want to tell you two things: First, Wikipedia maintains a neutral point of view and second, all contents must be verifiable. Additional advice on creating new articles can be found at WP:YFA. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:47:51, 20 May 2020 review of submission by 157.33.134.52


157.33.134.52 (talk) 12:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 13:25:34, 20 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Chimpwithcans


I am trying to create an article/page for a band in Kenya. The Nairobi Hootenanny. It has been playing since 1967, has had albums made, continues to be the foremost folk group in Kenya and a big part of the Nairobi social and musical scene - but my article was rejected because there is not a lot of coverge of the band out there.

They have an active Facebook page, and they still play pretty regularly.

My question is - should they be classified as something other than a musician? Perhaps something cultural?

They are a large part of Nairobi social life and have contributed millions to charity over the last 50 years.

Any help in classification and publication would be much appreciated.


Chimpwithcans (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chimpwithcans. If there is not a lot of coverage of the band (not multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of them) then nothing else you've said about them matters, they should not be the subject of a Wikipedia article. The encyclopedia summarizes what those kinds of sources have said, so if there are no such sources, we may not write anything. Note that the sources need not be in English, and need not be online. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:36:59, 20 May 2020 review of draft by FICM2020


Hello, I wrote an article but it seems that I have written a french article on the english wikipedia... How can I ask to submit my article on the french wikipedia without rewritting the article. Thank you, FICM2020 (talk) 13:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FICM2020. I believe there is already an article in French about that topic under the name fr:Festival interculturel du conte du Québec. If you have additional information about it, you may add it there. If the two are not the same thing, you may create fr:Festival interculturel du conte du Montréal and paste there the content you wrote. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:41:50, 20 May 2020 review of draft by Katecmorrison


Hello - I am writing to ask if someone could help me with my edit of this article. It has been declined as apparently the tone is not neutral enough for an encyclopedia article. I think I have identified the points which need amending or deleting but I would really like to check this with someone if advice is available, to give myself the best chance of getting it right with the next submission. If anyone is available to advise me I would be very grateful. I have noted the points I think may be problematic below and it would be great if anyone could confirm if these are breaching the formal / neutral tone guidelines.

Many thanks.

Esua has had a lifetime career in the aid and development movement, human rights and women’s equality.

She was founder staff member of the National Alliance of Women’s organisations 1990-95, which brought more than 300 members and women’s organisations together across the UK, and helped to spearhead the formation of the European Women’s Lobby.

In 1995 Esua founded Anona Development Consultancy and has worked with over 100 different not-for-profit organisations on five continents, developing global strategies for WaterAid, Oxfam and ActionAid among many others. She is also an experienced public speaker on issues relating to equality and human rights, including a recent Keynote speech at the Governance Institute Charity Governance Conference 2019[2].

Esua has founded, Chaired and served on the Board of a number of prominent feminist groups and women’s organisations.

she introduced new feminist, participatory approaches to governance.[to the Fawcett society]

Esua has set up a fund to raise money for community development projects, such as schools and public bathrooms for the Village


Katecmorrison (talk) 20:41, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:55:59, 20 May 2020 review of draft by Msjamo1232


On the article I submitted for publishing, there was a comment asking questions about the article. To resubmit, do I answer these questions within the article? If not, where do I answer them? Also, it was declined for not showing significant coverage; but three references were included. What more should I be looking to add?

Msjamo1232 (talk) 21:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 21

00:42:58, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Greg c1988


Hi, An article this week was released on savings.com.au on The Lottery Office and habits during covid-19. I have added a line in also stating the concerns of anti-gambling agencies, rightly-so. Therefore, an extra citation has been added. I have also removed the charity section as they weren't citations to back up facts, but just links to the foundation.

Curb Safe Charmer - is it possible to get an indication on where this article is lacking, I genuinely think it's so much more solid.

Greg c1988 (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Greg c1988: The additional reference is clearly attributed to Jaclyn Wood of The Lottery Office. This type of coverage does not help establish notability. See WP:ORGIND and WP:PRSOURCE. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Greg c1988: InterGame is a trade publication. There is a presumption against the use of coverage in such sources to establish notability. Savings.com.au briefly quotes the company, it is not significant coverage of it. Calvinayre.com is a company press release, so not independent. Licensingnt.nt.gov.au and austgamingcouncil.org.au are directory-type listings, not significant coverage. The only two independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the topic are The Australian and News.com.au, both from March 2019 and about the comapny's practice of "matching" overseas draws. They do not consistute sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time to justify a stand alone encyclopedia article about the company.
Rejection of a draft is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable, so volunteers do not intend to review it again. This is the fifth time that you've asked for reconsideration of the rejection:
  1. April 30, 2020
  2. May 1, 2020
  3. May 2, 2020
  4. May 14, 2020
  5. May 21, 2020
Five experienced Wikipedians have told you that you're wasting your time on this topic. Articles for Creation will not publish it. Your time is your business, but stop wasting other people's time. You are dangerously close to being blocked from editing for not listening to consensus and editing tendentiously.
If, as you say, you have no conflict of interest, then Articles for Creation is an optional process for you. If you want to gamble, you are free to write an article at The Lottery Office without submitting it here. But if the reviewers are correct, it would be deleted if you did so, and quite possibly salted to prevent any further pushing of an unwanted subject. You have received good advice about improving Lotteries in Australia instead. Take it, or move on. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:01:52, 21 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Hip matter


I need help with getting this article published; it was declined due to issues with editing and references.


Hip matter (talk) 04:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:30:51, 21 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sogand Kamranii


Hello everyone , i create an article for Tina Akhondtabar but it was rejected ! please help me guys .

Sogand Kamranii (talk) 05:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sogand Kamranii. The draft was declined, not rejected, so there is some hope, but it's unlikely that anyone who monitors this help desk is fluent enough in Farsi to help you find the independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain the significant coverage of her that the draft needs to demonstrate notability. You might do better asking at WikiProject Iran or WikiProject Film. If you can't find high quality sources, this may not be the time for an English-language encyclopedia article about her. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:24:37, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Tbiw


Tbiw (talk) 08:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC) I develop this article and it was rejected. Please advice me on how to make it approved.[reply]

08:48:20, 21 May 2020 review of draft by SaibalTito


Kaushik Mitra is a well-known, if not notable, personality in Indian advertising and creative industry. A lot of the write-ups that have appeared on him are in traditional media, old magazines and advertising industry publications from before 2010. I will be happy to share scans of these articles, if that helps. Also, I have cited an article from source afaqs.com to talk about Kaushik's awards won at New York, London, Cannes Lions etc. This is in my last edit. Afaqs is Agency FAQs, a well-known, independent and credible site following the advertising industry for now 20 years. Are there any additional details you would like me to share to verify authenticity?

SaibalTito (talk) 08:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SaibalTito If you have independent reliable sources that give this person significant coverage(not just brief mentions, routine announcements, or an interview), please summarize them in the draft. The draft should not just tell about the person and what they do, it should summarize what others say about them. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:17:13, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Jongray404


Jongray404 (talk) 09:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC) Why has this article not been accepted. I have included two outside resources directly referencing the company and additioanl websites that expalin the company's objectives. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.[reply]

Jongray404 Your draft was declined, meaning it will not be considered further as it has little to no chance of being improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. It is not enough for sources to merely mention the company, you must have independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to give the company significant coverage. There is no specific number, but three is usually considered to be sufficient. Those sources must indicate how the company meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. You should also be aware of special rules regarding editing about cryptocurrencies. If you are associated with this company, you must review WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:18:22, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Zwiki2020


Cause this is not a promotional content for the brand Zwiki2020 (talk) 09:18, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]




11:03:22, 21 May 2020 review of submission by OnyxModsLLC


Why was my article declined? My article name is CyberWare Hackers or simply CyberWare Hacktivist Group — Preceding unsigned comment added by OnyxModsLLC (talk • contribs) 11:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi OnyxModsLLC. Draft:CyberWare Hacktivist Group was declined because you haven't made clear where you got your information. In the references section you've written "Twitter" and "BleepingComputer". Neither is specific enough to be verifiable. Moreover, Twitter is a primary source, and Bleeping Computer is user-generated, so not a reliable source. An article needs multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to cite sources correctly. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:19:24, 21 May 2020 review of submission by TISTOS

Hello, Please can you help me on what next to do to set up this information on wikipedia TISTOS (talk) 11:19, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TISTOS Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something. This is an encyclopedia, and as an encyclopedia Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable organization. If you are associated with this organization, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:21:23, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Deep230


Deep230 (talk) 11:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC) Why my article is deleted every time it show that i am promoting a company product but i am creating myself biography page[reply]

Deep230 Wikipedia is not a place for telling the world about yourself, please see the autobiography policy. It is really not for merely telling about any subject, this is why your draft was deleted. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. It seems that you have a conflict of interest(please review). 331dot (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:21:53, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Ca economics

I have added more evidence of citations of Jonas Hjort's work in media and academia. Please reconsider. Thank you Ca economics (talk) 11:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ca economics The draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning it won't be considered further and that there is little to no chance it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. As noted, it appears that this person does not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable professor.
If your username indicates that you represent an economics department at the University of California, you need to change your username at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, and also read and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 12:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:30:11, 21 May 2020 review of draft by LukeBower1982


Robert Adam has authored 5 books on the subject of Architecture.

I request clarity on what reference I should be using to prove he wrote these books?

Luke Bower 12:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't require proof that he wrote them, it requires independent reliable sources that report on the books and him. Theroadislong (talk) 12:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:18:00, 21 May 2020 review of draft by ArborChamp


Hello, I was told to merge this page with another page and resubmit. I just want to make sure that I did it right.ArborChamp (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArborChamp (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:30:17, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Jasveergill11


Jasveergill11 (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:23:29, 21 May 2020 review of draft by GCSE SVC


Thanks, would really appreciate any advice or assistance on getting this article approved or more specific feedback on the exact lines that are causing a rejection - the paragraph is just a summary of facts; additionally, was under the impression it was in the public domain as per Wikipedia's entry: A work of the United States government, as defined by the United States copyright law, is "a work prepared by an officer or employee" of the federal government "as part of that person's official duties."[1] In general, under section 105 of the Copyright Act,[2] such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law and are therefore in the public domain. GCSE SVC (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:34, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Andrew Sanchez-Kane

I would like to know, how may I see this article published on the web. Although it has been reviewed and accepted multiple times, I do not seem to find it online. I have tried tinkering with it, but no success whatsoever. Andrew Sanchez-Kane (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have created a number of versions of this draft Draft:Juan M. Glassford Stettner Draft:Juan Glassford and Draft:Juan Glassford Stettner and placed fake acceptance code on them. Theroadislong (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have redirected the other two draft titles to the main draft title. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:16:20, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Stefanvihar

My article has been in under review for months and still not published. Please specify the exact changes which needed to made in order to help it publish fastor make it acceptable by wikipedia standards.

Stefanvihar (talk) 18:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stefanvihar It was rejected a week ago as contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, but there is another version of it here Draft:Prabhakar Singh which has not been submitted for review, I don't hold out much hope for that one either. Theroadislong (talk) 18:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:38:27, 21 May 2020 review of draft by Nycinuk


Hi - still struggling to see why this article is being rejected. The language is not promotional. The claims are not exaggerated. The statements are backed up by mainstream reputable references. The development has notability. I am not being paid to post this article. Please advise!

Nycinuk (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so desperate to get this draft published? There are no deadlines here. Theroadislong (talk) 18:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:31:23, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Mrcoleprotocol522

Updated article to include more relevant information and sources. Additionally, I have added more third-party source to confirm information in the article. Mrcoleprotocol522 (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mrcoleprotocol522, A fellow reviewer rejected the article as they deemed there is no shot of the subject meeting or notability guidelines. The sources added are not compelling. Since the article is rejected, it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20:22:16, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Johntommy988

hey there, i resubmitted the article about Alexander Kalombe and i haven't hear back, if the article pass or it still have some to be fixed? Johntommy988 (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johntommy988, Your article was rejected which means it will not be considered further. As pointed out on the page, the subject fails WP:NFOOTY and it doesn't look like he'll be passing that guideline anytime soon. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:49:03, 21 May 2020 review of submission by Jainemark


Jainemark (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jainemark, Did you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 22

00:34:28, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Lex9000


I wrote a chemistry page about a specific molecule. I was told it was too esoteric or specific or something. Idk how to generalize it or make it more accessible with out teaching an organic chemistry lesson on the page. I looked at pages for other molecules but they were similar. What should I do?Lex9000 (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lex9000 (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lex9000, I've approved the article. The technical issue can be fixed in mainspace. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:51:37, 22 May 2020 review of draft by GenteelVirginian


I am trying to publish this draft (Draft:COMINT Consulting). The sources ARE good so I am not sure why it keeps being denied.GenteelVirginian (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC) GenteelVirginian (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:24:27, 22 May 2020 review of submission by SowmyaPURUSHOTHAMAN

how to give information about wp:creative. and how to clear the error in the draft. SowmyaPURUSHOTHAMAN (talk) 03:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:06:31, 22 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by TaylorRiess


I'm writing regarding my draft:George_Tourville article. It appears I've been rejected because my subject does not appear in the news enough to be considered notable. However, it only appears that way because the local newspaper only started releasing stories digitally in 2006, so when you do a simple internet search of the guy, nothing too interesting comes up (he did most of his important things from 2002 to 2005). I am a resident of the city of relevance in the article and I, using my local library, searched through archived articles from the two local newspapers. As a consequence, a lot of my sources for the article are basically unreachable for the average Wikipedia user unless they go down to my local library. I understand this is a problem for verification of sources, but is there any way around this? There's really not many interesting articles mentioning him post-2006, so I really don't know what I can do when my local newspaper is my primary source for a lot of information in the article, and for identifying the subject as being a person of importance.

Thanks for your consideration, TaylorRiess (talk) 05:06, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There never has been and never will be a requirement that references must be available online. Simple references, in whatever style you choose, are quite adequate. The big problem is that this guy was the mayor of a small town, and never achieved anything that qualifies as notability by Wikipedia standards; that's why all your references are to the local paper. A mayor of Toronto or even Minneapolis is generally notable enough to justify an article in a global encyclopedia. A mayor of East Gnathole, South Dakota? Not so much. I fear that Tourville falls more into the East Gnathole class than the Toronto class. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:53:30, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Newystats


What do you mean by insufficient context�?

The page is to aid readers navigating through deputies elected to the various constituencies of the department. Should I rename it to a list to make it clear to reviewers what the page is for? Newystats (talk) 06:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:28:11, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Bluegene18

Hello. A more experienced Wikipedia editor has kindly revised this article. Is it now suitable for resubmission? Thank you. Bluegene18 (talk) 08:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:36:45, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Sohinimoitra84

Please could you kindly elaborate why does the article seem to have a Conflict of interest with Zee Bangla? I am trying to contribute to Wikipedia based on information collated from local newspaper, interviews about Bengali Television actors or shows and the involved cast.

The earlier draft had few unnecessary adjectives, and redundant information. The details have been cleaned and the information has been written in more factual format that has been used for other Bengali Television actors on Wikipedia - For eg: Jeetu Kamal,Debadrita Basu etc. Thank you for your consideration.

Sohinimoitra84 (talk) 08:50, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:14:00, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Helpseo7pp


Helpseo7pp (talk) 10:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:14:00, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Helpseo7pp


Any input on why my citations for Experience Travel Group have not been deemed acceptable. All citations mentioned are published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (by Wikipedia's definition!!).

11:52:03, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Rhoknee


I have provided all the links where I picked the content in references but still I was requested to provide citation. Should these be within the Article?

Rhoknee (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhoknee. Using inline citations is a small technical step in the right direction, but it's nowhere near enough to make the draft acceptable. There is a huge gap between what the cited sources say, and what the draft claims. Taking just the first source as an example:
Source-Text Integrity
Cited Source Draft Permissible
MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

ADMISSIONS, 2014/2015 ACADEMIC YEAR
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
WUNYI Aggrey M Ugandan

As an Administrative Officer,Aggrey Wunyi has over 20 years’ experience that spans a number of Ministries, Departments and Agencies. He was born in Luuka District, Eastern Uganda, on 02 January 1976. He is the third born of the seven children of Aggrey Ntange and Namutebi. From 1982, Aggrey attended Budhabangula and Kitwekyambogo Primary Schools, graduating in 1988. In 1989, he entered Kiyunga Sec Secondary for his secondary education. After his secondary education, he joined Jinja SSS for A-Levels from where he joined Makerere University Uganda, to study Social Sciences. He obtained a Bachelors of Arts in Social Sciences (BASS) . Later, he obtained a Diploma, from Uganda Management Institute, in Kampala, Uganda's capital and largest city. Aggrey Wunyi also holds a Master of Business Administration (M.B.A) from Makerere University Business School (MUBS) Wunyi was admitted to the Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) program at Makerere University Business School (MUBS) for the 2014-2015 academic year.
An even bigger problem is that it is unlikely that you will be able to show that an undersecretary and author of one book is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). There simply aren't multiple, independent (i.e. not his employer), reliable, secondary sources which contain significant coverage (not passing mentions) of him. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:23, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:16:51, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Rawsar


I need help on expanding this article. Rawsar (talk) 12:16, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rawsar The article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the book, showing how it meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable book. The sources you have are not such sources. If there are no independent sources with significant coverage, the book would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:39:40, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Emma4ph


How to write a biography about myself

and also what the sample? Emma4ph (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Emma4ph. Unlike Facebook, LinkedIn, or similar sites, Wikipedia not a place to write about yourself. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:26:14, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Andrj163


I've tried submitting this page a couple times, and we've been declined every single time. My colleague (klest001) and I work for the Association of Independent Mortgage Experts which is a non-profit organization that works to assist independent mortgage brokers communicate their value to consumers. One of the ways we wanted to help educate consumers is to maximize the searchability of the mortgage lenders in the wholesale space that offer the best options to consumers starting with UWM and United Shore as they are the largest in the space at this time and continue to add pages as our time allows.

Our organization is uploading the Wikipedia pages as a consumer education tool but our reference material to write the submissions was pulled from articles and press materials which might have contributed to the promotional language. Do you have any advice for the best method to add pages effectively?

Andrj163 (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andrj163 Your draft Draft:United Shore Financial Services has been correctly rejected outright. Wikipedia is not a marketing tool for your organisation. Theroadislong (talk) 14:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:11:05, 22 May 2020 review of submission by As0987


As0987 (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@As0987: The draft is linked in the line above, there is no need to paste the entire thing here.
The draft has been rejected because the subject is not notable. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic has no hope of being accepted for publication. Consequently, volunteers do not intend to review it again. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for your writing. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:16:49, 22 May 2020 review of submission by KRISTIN KRAFT

The draft was denied because the American Wine Society has not appeared in significant publications, yet it has at least as many media mentions as the Wine & Spirits Education Trust, which has an existing page. Can you please tell me the difference?KcaslerAWS (talk) 15:16, 22 May 2020 (UTC) KcaslerAWS (talk) 15:16, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KcaslerAWS. 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 are wanted. 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. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:30:22, 22 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Interpersonalization


Hello, I am trying to create an English translation of a Russian wikipedia article, because there is not yet an English one.

Interpersonalization (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Interpersonalization. Your translation efforts are appreciated, but the draft does not yet show that the organization is notable (suitable for inclusion). 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 Russian Wikipedia, but not the English one, or vice versa. More information about what is needed is on the draft, in the decline message and the reviewer's comment.
Also, if the draft has been translated from the Russian Wikipedia, you must credit the source text (otherwise it's a copyright violation). See Translating from other language Wikimedia projects for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:31, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Priyankasharmaas


please tell what about change my article please help i don't understand what i do for my article Priyankasharmaas (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Priyankasharmaas Unfortunately, your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further as it has little to no chance of being able to be improved sufficiently to meet Wikipedia standards. You seem to misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia in that it is not a place to merely tell about someone; it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable person). Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 19:33, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:54:47, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Vessnex


Vessnex (talk) 19:54, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vessnex You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. You offered no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to indicate why the person you wrote about meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:52:38, 22 May 2020 review of submission by Haiqar888


Haiqar888 (talk) 20:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


i want to delete my draft— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haiqar888 (talk • contribs)

22:49:27, 22 May 2020 review of draft by Mel Lichtenheld


1-I couldn't give the article a page title for the person, Okhee Lee,in place of my title as the user. How can that be done? 2-I couldn't design the info box to my liking and ended up with four drafts, none of which will do. The person who is the topic of the article is an academic, and the info box needs to reflect that, similar to the info boxes in articles for Angela Duckworth or Helen Quinn.

Mel Lichtenheld (talk) 22:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 23

Request on 04:04:18, 23 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Roccie


Hi, I published a new article on Dr. Adrian Richard Lewis, but am having some difficulty with sources - there are a lot out their, but many are based on his employment and/or articles, documentaries, books of his own. What are the best sources to remain neutral.


Roccie (talk) 04:04, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roccie. Wikipedia does not commonly list a historian's less-than-book-length works, only their books, so I recommend removing the entire "Essays Published:" section. To demonstrate a professor's notability, the best sources are reviews, published in peer-reviewed academic journals, of their books. Two to get you started are [1] and [2]. The best places to find reviews are JSTOR, and various databases published by EBSCO and ProQuest. They may offer some degree of access to the general public, but for more, and for subject-specific databases that may be useful, use a library. Ones at major research universities will offer the most access, but large public libraries or WP:TWL may work well enough. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:00:39, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Vessnex

Hi I'm requesting review for this biography to help people know more and share more about Dr. Khant Kywe Soe. He's a well known person on social media, not only for his medical knowledge but also for his articles which are very knowledgealble and positive leading for people. By creating this biographic page, people can reach more about him, and contribute his articles which can lead to the mental and behavioral improving and happiness. Thanks Vessnex (talk) 07:00, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vessnex Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be improved sufficiently to meet Wikipedia standards. Wikipedia is not just for telling about someone or promotional purposes like "help people know more and share more" about him. This is an encyclopedia, where articles about people must summarize what professionally published academic or journalistic independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Blogs and Facebook are not considered reliable sources. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk)`

07:16:39, 23 May 2020 review of draft by Preetikasingh


I want to add this line ( Lakhahi Estate ) infront of Draft name Lakhahi Raj. Means to say like this: Lakhahi Raj (Lakhahi Estate)


Preetikasingh (talk) 07:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Preetikasingh You don't need to worry about the title of the draft, the reviewer that accepts your draft will handle that. Unless there are other articles titled Lakhani Raj you don't need a disambiguation in the title. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:24:51, 23 May 2020 review of submission by ToLoveAgain


ToLoveAgain (talk) 08:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


08:57:50, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Crickbadger


I am requesting a re-review for two reasons. Firstly with respect to notability, this is a recognised competition commemorating one of the most recognised cricketers of our time that has been going for some 20 years, involving the highest standard of school cricket. The standard of the game,the institutions involved, its sustainability and the number of representative cricketers who have played in it contribute to it’d notability. There are many more references that could be included from the institutions that participate in the competition, but to include those would be repetitive.

The reference to a COI is very confusing and incorrect. There is no ‘interest’ either for the Cowdrey Cup of Cambridge University Cricket Club in this article that creates any conflict. The relationship between the Cowdrey Cup XI matches and both Oxford and Cambridge University Crickets Clubs is a matter of fact that is documented in the references provided.

Crickbadger (talk) 08:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crickbadger Your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning it will not be considered further as there is little to no chance it will meet Wikipedia standards. You do not offer independent reliable sources with significant coverage showing how it meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable event. A COI is not just about actual conflict, but a perceived conflict. If you have any association with this tournament at all or the organization that puts it on, you need to comply with WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:43:20, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Thakur Abishek singh chauhan


Thakur Abishek singh chauhan (talk) 09:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thakur Abishek singh chauhan You don't ask a question, but a broken infobox will never be accepted as an article. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, see the autobiography policy. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:47:00, 23 May 2020 review of submission by RichardMcKee


Hi, sorry if I sound inexperienced as I am. I just submitted my first Wiki page, and as you can see, it got declined. I'm not sure what the notice means by "significant coverage (not just passing 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)." Could you explain? Sincerely, Leii

RichardMcKee (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RichardMcKee The notice means that your draft was (in the opinion of the reviewer) lacking such sources. Please review what reliable sources are and read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:19:00, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Grandthinker

What is the process we should follow when someone's draft is rejected, and then they move it to articlespace themselves? Please see the history for Teatro Sá da Bandeira. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To involved parties: (GoingBatty—Theroadislong—Crystallizedcarbon—Grandthinker) I don't see where it was ever rejected. The page was created in article space, then draftified by new page patroller Crystallizedcarbon as "does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published". The author added references and moved it back to article space. WP:DRAFTIFY says that if any editor, including the author, objects to the draftification, the draftifying editor should move it back to article space. So it was reasonable for the author to move it back to article space, and that behaviour is not itself a reason for us to do anything.
Theroadislong moved it back to draft space, which was unwise. If anyone believes the topic is not notable, they should take it to AfD, not return it to draft. If the page is not so bad that it should be deleted, but is deficient in some lesser way, an editor could remove unreliable sources, remove content for which no source has been identified, affix cleanup tags, or improve it themselves. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies I won't do that again, but thought it kinder than sending it to AFD. Theroadislong (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Worldbruce, Theroadislong, Crystallizedcarbon, and Grandthinker: My apologies as well - I didn't look carefully enough to notice that Crystallizedcarbon only made a comment and did not actually reject the draft. GoingBatty (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:44:27, 23 May 2020 review of submission by 45.124.12.106


45.124.12.106 (talk) 14:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further as there is little to no chance it can be improved enough to meet Wikipedia standards. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:35:32, 23 May 2020 review of draft by Fas et nefas

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

I just had my first wiki article submission rejected for "not adequately supported by reliable sources". It's a short article about an academic philosophy journal and I think I have given sufficient sources. I have followed the template of this already published article about an academic journal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erkenntnis and given sources where necessary. Any advice on what exactly to change or how to make the sources more reliable (I link to the homepage of the journal and the institutional page of its editor-in-chief as the only external sources)?

Fas et nefas (talk) 15:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fas et nefas, I've approved the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:43:02, 23 May 2020 review of draft by Monurawal17


Monurawal17 (talk) 17:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have Linked (Delhi)Indian Government website with Reference of subject

I got a message of decline due to independent relaible sources with inline citation not available WP:CIRCULAR

please help to resolve what should i do?

17:46:01, 23 May 2020 review of draft by Eastmeer


Hello. I am trying to create a page for Dezron Douglas -- a page exists in German Wikipedia already here. First, is there a way to merge/translate it into Wiki in English? Second, if not, I'd like to create a page for him and have submitted a draft that was denied within hours, here. I've added references as requested. Is there anything that I can do to either have this page approved OR have the German one exist in English (then I can update it)?

Thank you so much for your kind attention. I'm new to this!

Eastmeer (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eastmeer. If you are trying to create a page "for" Douglas, in other words at his behest, or that of his band, record label, publicist, etc., then you have a conflict of interest that you need to disclose. A biographical article in Wikipedia is about a person, not for them. They don't own it. They can ask for libellous material to be removed, but otherwise have almost no control over it. It may omit things they wish it included and contain material they wish it didn't.
You could ask for translation help as described at Wikipedia:Translation, but you already have a draft, so seem to have moved past the point of translation. The fact that a German article exists doesn't smooth the way for an English one. For one thing, existence doesn't prove that an article meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It could mean only that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. Also, 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 might be acceptable on the German Wikipedia but not on the English one, or vice versa.
Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source, and citing it is circular. Remove that citation, or it will torpedo the draft. Of the draft's other sources, The New York Times piece is the best, although a bit short. The Jazz Times piece is borderline. Although not written in an interview format, a large part of it comes from what Douglas said, so it isn't entirely independent. "What's On" announcements like the Hartford Courant and other trivial coverage such as NPR and Downbeat don't help demonstrate notability. Also, two of them describe him as "rising", which is usually synonymous with "not notable" yet. While you wait for the draft to be reviewed, do your best to find better sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:50, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Ko San Lwin

Duplicate request for comment
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.




Ko San Lwin (talk) 19:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:26:30, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Ko San Lwin


Ko San Lwin (talk) 19:26, 23 May 2020 (UTC) May I know why my draft is rejected. I have cited articles from reliable sources. Ko San Lwin (talk) 19:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The content included promotional puffery such as "Bella product becomes popular among local customers within the very short term, 6 months because the products are high quality and the prices are very reasonable. Some of Bella product starts from 1.3 USD (2000MMK) and the extent to more than 66USD (100,000MMK). Even the housewife working housework is using the Bella products because the beauty products become essential for every ladies, nowadays" which is totally inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 19:48, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:59:24, 23 May 2020 review of submission by Sahilfromlsa


Sahilfromlsa (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sahilfromlsa: Your submission includes zero reliable sources and as such doesn't indicate the notability of that person. Since that person appears to be living, the WP:BLP rules apply in addition. I will add code to allow you tu submit now, howewer, please do not submit before you have addressed the isssiues. You may also want to read WP:YFA WP:42 for advice. Update after seeing the page history: The submission has already been rejected by @Theroadislong:. If you have sources that show that this subject indeed passes WP:NPERSON or a different notability guideline, please paste them here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 24

02:03:37, 24 May 2020 review of submission by Ethanznelson

I am requesting assistance on this page because I recieved many errors in creating it. It is said that this page was "advertising" but I didn't do anything of the sort. Thanks. Ethanznelson (talk) 02:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ethanznelson, High school theatre actors are not notable by Wikipedia's guidelines. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ethanznelson: It seemed to be "for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting" Kennedy Muir.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:21:24, 24 May 2020 review of submission by Johntommy988

dont get me wrong, im new to creating article, im lerning and please if there is any mistates need to be fixed Alexander Kalombedraft let me know what do i need to add so the article can be accepted? 

i followed all the requirements. about his professional career.

thank you! Johntommy988 (talk) 06:21, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johntommy988 Your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, as it seems that this player does not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable football player. 331dot (talk) 10:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:18:46, 24 May 2020 review of submission by SJvZM


The last rejection mentions that the issues from the previous reviews are still present. However, the draft article was substantially revised to adopt the ‘formal tone’ of an encyclopedia article, removing all so-called peacock terms and taking a rigorously neutral position on creation and values of its subject matter. There is not a single point of view being expressed in the article, and citations to sources have more than doubled from the original submission. The article cannot be subsumed as a subsection under Stellenbosch University, as that would mean that each of the hundreds of departments and research projects in nine different faculties should ideally be placed under the single entry of Stellenbosch University.


SJvZM (talk) 13:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SJvZM: I concour that you have rewritten the draft in mayor ways, and from what I can see has Improced. I'm going to ping the reviewer if there is something specific that I haven't seen. Howewer, I want to remind you that per WP:ELNO plain external links don't belong into the body of an article. In addition, some of the sources (e.g. Dailymail) are afaik not reliable. @1292simon:Note: You are not currently listed as a reviewer, and as such are, at least according to the latter page, discouraged from reviewing AfC submissions (But from what I found it should be easy to become one for you). 15:38, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:42:38, 24 May 2020 review of submission by Bluesjuzpretty


Is this enough to be posted now?!

Bluesjuzpretty (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20:13:34, 24 May 2020 review of submission by C4neo


C4neo (talk) 20:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Can you please help create a wikipedia page for Olivia Andem the author. Thanks

Request on 22:51:33, 24 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by ExplorerX19


I'm requesting for assistance on continuing editing a draft article on an upcoming video game calle No Straight Roads. I summited it just now, and got rejected because mainly it was too soon. I'm waiting for more info to come before or during it's release. ExplorerX19 (talk) 22:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


ExplorerX19 (talk) 22:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:37:53, 24 May 2020 review of submission by Eeberbach


I tried to un-reject our draft and made multiple suggested substantial corrections, but for one month I did not hear anything from editors. I request re-review, because the editor who rejected the submission was unqualified (knowing nothing about the area of submission) and strongly biased in his opinions. Eeberbach (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eeberbach: who is "our"? Wikipedia accounts are single-person only. If you are affilated with the subject in any way, please comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations may be in interest as well. As for the draft, I still fail to find some lead that tells me what this is. Most of the Wikipedia articles are read by people with little or no knowlegde of the subjects (at least for my observations) and therefore should say clearly in the introduction what the article is about, e.g. Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales (born August 7, 1966) is an American-British Internet entrepreneur. He is a co-founder of the online non-profit encyclopedia Wikipedia and the for-profit web hosting company Wikia. Futher, your draft currently still uses WP:PEACOCK terms, which should not be used in encyclopedic articles. I am going to ping @Sulfurboy and Theroadislong: as the last two reviewers. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(P.S.: Accusing the reviewers of being unqualified and biased without evidence or diffs isn't exactly going to be taken to your adventage.)
As per my previous comments the lede section still very clearly fails to establish what the subject is even about. Until the draft is written in an understandable format it is not likely to be accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's also very serious WP:OR, WP:TONE and WP:NOTESSAY concerns with the article. Your unwarranted accusations of "unqualified" and "strongly biased" are churlish and baseless. I guarantee every reviewer here would have declined this and many would have rejected it. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:59, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 25

02:02:53, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Belachow

Hi! I have edit out some parts which might seems not in a neutral tone, can you please tell me are the references appropriate? And what more I can do to get it publish. My boss has been nagging me about always failing in making this wiki page, I am very frustrated and tired of this, I am apparently a COI but he just doesn't care. Please let me know what more I can do! Many thanks!!!! Belachow (talk) 02:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:22:58, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Glammazon


Glammazon (talk) 02:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting a review because l finally did correct the External References section and even added a new reference.

Most of the references are still returning 404 codes. Looks like they are one-time-urls. The only url I was able to access was https://www.digitalcomicmuseum.com/index.php?cid=51, which I archived to prevent more dead urls. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:01:08, 25 May 2020 review of draft by Nycinuk


Hello have just added another reference to this development as I just saw it (Musicweek)- still not clear when this article is not being approved.

Also not clear why I am being accused of being paid to create this article?

Suggest an editor googles outernet london to verify the notability

Thanks for your help!

Nycinuk (talk) 09:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nycinuk The reason for the decline has been given to you in the draft several times: "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." Additional comments have been left by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:15:27, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Shanisun


Shanisun (talk) 09:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shanisun You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning it will not be considered further. Please review the reasons given by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:34:19, 25 May 2020 review of draft by Checkmate149


i submitted this article for creation of a new wiki page and was told it doesnt deserve an article. this individual started an edtech platform which has around 100k users in tanzania, he was the 18th most influential young tanzanian out of 50 in 2019 beating the likes of senior government officials like the regional commisioner, Mr. Paul Makonda. there are tens of articles on his work and tens of health articles he has written for the biggest newspaper in the country, The Citizen. the name is Ali Khatau. he is a medical doctor at agakhan hospital and is the chief medical intern plus the head of postgraduate applications among the interns. please google that name and look him up. hes won many awards and many article features in different reliable websites. i dont think the reviewer took enough time to go through the citations we attached to the article. if he had done so, he would have seen the tremendous work this individual is doing in tanzania. i dont blame the reviewer as i understand the large amount of articles needing reviewing for wiki everyday. please review this article and especially the links/citations and do advise. if you still think he doesnt deserve a wiki page, ill respect your decision and wont pursue it further, but i strongly believe he does based on current citations attached. Checkmate149 (talk) 10:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented on Draft:Ali Khatau. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:35:41, 25 May 2020 review of submission by ToLoveAgain


Please re-review this page about Kit David Torres and what is needed for it to be approved. All the references needed were already given which are all viewable via internet - both in UK and Philippines news. Please give regard and take into consideration. Thank you.

ToLoveAgain (talk) 10:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ToLoveAgain Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It seems that the subject does not meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 11:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:35:25, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Uros77


Hi, I tried to follow all of your recommendations. I hope you can review it again and see if it is a good fit now. :)

Thank you.

Best, Uroš

Uros77 (talk) 11:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Uros77#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:48:10, 25 May 2020 review of submission by 27.123.142.39


27.123.142.39 (talk) 11:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft you created was only an introductory sentence about yourself. Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell about themselves, this is an encyclopedia. Please read the autobiography policy for more information. If you want a user page where you can tell the Wikipedia community a little about yourself in the context of your Wikipedia editing or use, you may create an account. 331dot (talk) 12:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:10:52, 25 May 2020 review of submission by PTEKNI

My article submission has declined, I would be grateful, if you could provide me some information about the reasons. PTEKNI (talk) 12:10, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PTEKNI You were given the reasons for the decline by the reviewer on the draft. Do you have questions about those reasons? 331dot (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:29:41, 25 May 2020 review of draft by Samantha Herbst


Samantha Herbst (talk) 13:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm looking for help with the Paid Contributor template.

I recently submitted a Draft article which was reviewed and declined. I have since amended the issues that the editor had with the article sources and included the Paid Contributor template to my talk page. Please can you advise if I have done everything correctly and whether it is safe to resubmit my article.

My submission: Draft: Mint Group

Samantha Herbst (talk) 13:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Samantha Herbst Your draft seems to be sourced to nothing but press releases or other routine business announcements, which are primary sources that do not establish that your company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it, with independent reliable sources who have chosen on their own to give a subject significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Since it was reviewed, however, I have taken out all references to press releases and only included articles run by reputable news agencies and industry journals. These publications would not have published under duress and definitely did so independently... Does it really still look otherwise to you (a genuine question)?

Can you confirm how many times I am allowed to submit and revise? And if my Paid Contributor template is correct on my talk page?

Thank you for your assistance.

Samantha Herbst (talk) 13:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Samantha Herbst Your draft is ALL pure marketing puffery "workspace optimisation aimed at empowering the international workforce" "has worked to expand its service offering over the years" "a global services provider that assists clients" "to offer the South African industry a comprehensive set of integrated IT solutions" is all totally inappropriate content and so is the rest. Theroadislong (talk) 13:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) I could really use some help here. Asking me to "please stop" on my draft is not helpful. Would whittling this piece way down to the bare bones be more appropriate? I'm really doing my best to understand what exactly Wikipedia is looking for here. I changed the sources, would you be willing to have a look if I whittled down the language?

Samantha Herbst (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Samantha Herbst: Wikipedia explicitly excludes trade rags ("industry journals") such as ITWeb and its Alpha and Brainstorm publications, MS Dynamics World, Microsoft Care GH, IT Online, and Engineer IT from sources that can demonstrate notability, because of their narrow audience and often too-cozy relationship with companies in the industry they cover. Using the wrong kind of sources is probably part of why it's so nauseating to read. The draft still does nothing to show that the company is a suitable topic for an encyclopedia article. What is Wikipedia looking for? It's not looking for an article about this company. Consider alternative outlets with different inclusion criteria for your writing. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:16:48, 25 May 2020 review of draft by 2A00:23C7:9C81:CB01:5B:32A3:CFA3:4ECE


Hi

I really fear that this is not being looked at objectively but out of some misguided attempt to make some sort of point.

I am trying to address all possible reasons for not approving this post. Let's go through them all and then the actual post and perhaps you could help (as I believe this is a help desk?) and tell me what you feel needs to be changed.

1. I am not being paid to post this content. You asked me to make a statement saying this and I have already made this statement on one of my earlier requests for help on this help desk. I do not work for the organisation in question but I walk past the site every working day and I'm a journalist (not connected to any of the citations) and don't understand why this is not on Wikipedia.

2. The site is notable. It's a major development in the heart of world famous city. There are public spaces and facilities. There has been lots of press coverage. There is lots of local talk about it. It includes Denmark Street which if you know anything about music is world famous (see it's Wikipedia entry). Google it if you doubt any of this.

3. Now let's turn to the actual proposed entry. As mentioned several requests for helps back there is no hyperbole or exaggerated claims. I have simply put together a narrative about the site based on sources I have found by googling as I satisfy me curiosity. The reason there are so many citations are a) because it appears to be written about quite a lot (because it is a big thing in London) and b) because several of the previous rejections have asked for more sources. I fail to see what better references can be provided than editorial coverage in the UK mainstream press and broadcast media. Have you even looked at the citations? They are "a range of independent, reliable, published sources" - none of whom I work for.

So let's go through it:

--> Outernet London is the name of a mixed use development currently under construction in the West End of London.

It is. Not promotional.


--> Construction follows more than a decade of planning.[1]

True - the future of the site has been a source of much discussion for anyone who knows the area. Also covered in citations. Not promotional.


--> The site is adjacent to the new Crossrail Tottenham Court Road/Charing Cross Road southern exit and runs across Denmark Street - “Tin Pan Alley” with St Giles High Street to the east and Charing Cross Road to the west.

This is correct. Not promotional.


--> To protect against vibration from from Crossrail and Northern line tunnels special construction methods have been used. [2]

So is this. Added to give even more context. Not promotional.


--> The development is due to open in 2020.[3]

What the coverage and hoardings on the site say. Not promotional.


--> It will feature many areas and facilities available to the general public including a 2,000 capacity music venue, a gallery, broadcasting and media facilities, a hotel, bars and restaurants.[4]

All factual as far as I can see. Confirmed by several of the cited sources. Presumably this is useful or do you deem this promotional?


--> The public spaces will feature a number of high resolution video screens [5] [6] including the "World's largest LED screen deployment".[7] [8] Announcements have been made that there will be advertising campaigns using virtual reality [9], augmented reality [10] and artificial intelligence. [11] News reports have indicated that entertainment will be created by Technicolor[12] [13] [14] and Sir Ridley's Scott's the Ridley Scott Creative Group.[15] [16] [17] There will also be residential apartments [18] office space [19] and 20,000 sq ft of retail space[20]. The area immediately surrounding Outernet is also under development from Crossrail and other projects. By 2021 when all these projects complete the Oxford Street shopping area will have undergone significant renewal.[21] [22]

This is all based on what I have read and would seem - to me - to explain why the whole site is notable over and above where it is. Surely the largest outdoor screens in the world are notable? Is saying what the site will contain promotional? A lot of this has been added since my first draft because more references keep on being asked for. It is all factual and based on citations. If you object to any of this part please explain why and which bits?

--> The site includes Denmark Street which is being redeveloped as part of the project. Denmark Street has been synonymous with music in London[23] and has traditionally featured music equipment shops and live music related nightlife. The street is nicked named London's Tin Pan Alley.[24]

This is correct, gives context and completely factual. Not promotional.


--> The redevelopment as part of Outernet has been welcomed by London's Night Czar Amy Lame [25] but the redevelopment has been controversial [26] and also criticised with many commentators lamenting [27] the decline of live music in London [28] and criticising the redevelopment plans. [29] [30] [31]

Also true - citations all evidence this. Not promotional.

--> Outernet London have said they will preserve the music legacy and support live music.[32] It is reported that the redeveloped Denmark Street will featuring busking points and a pro-bono recording studio.[33]

Also true - citations all evidence this. Not promotional.

--> The main construction contractor for the project is Skanska[34] and the developer is Consolidated Developments [35] [36]

Also true - citations all evidence this. Not promotional.


Please advise which parts "read like an advert" to you and how you like those parts written to not "read like an advert" in your eyes. Please also advise which of the citations you seem to think I have written and are not "independent, reliable, published sources"

Thank you. 2A00:23C7:9C81:CB01:5B:32A3:CFA3:4ECE (talk) 14:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you editing whilst logged out? Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:24:24, 25 May 2020 review of draft by DIP UZH


Is it possible to help improve this article according to standard or article can not be published Thanks so much DIP UZH (talk) 14:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DIP UZH what struvk me about the draft is the many claims without sources, so I will place tags where it needs references. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:59, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank You so much for advise. Citations done. You can see the draft text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DIP UZH (talk • contribs) 15:38, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:56:04, 25 May 2020 review of draft by Գարիկ Ավագյան


Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article goes through "Wikipedia:Notability (music)" at least, for these two:

"3. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.

11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network."

Why it was declined? Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect the reviewer failed to find the WP:THREE in the draft. From what I see, some sources in the draft dont appear to be reliable (at least Amazon is afaik not reliable). Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:56:44, 25 May 2020 review of draft by Nycinuk


Have updated further in response to feedback - note if you look at other similar developments that have entries like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_Yards_(development) or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shard (which are both obviously bigger entries as those sites are now complete) they are written in a similar style.

Nycinuk (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nycinuk: Please see WP:OSE for why its often not a good argument to cite other articles for the existence of yours. Howewer, it appears good now from what I see. @reviewers, If I missed something, it would be glad if you highlighted the problematic text in some way. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:31:10, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Michaelbeijer

Hi there, I know very little about how WikiPedia works technically (so excuse me if I am being naive), but I have a question about why the article about CafeTran (the CAT tool) is continually being rejected, when most of the other CAT tools DO have their own articles. This seems a bit odd, if you ask me.

All the other big CAT tools have their own pages:

… so what is so different about CafeTran?

On my Talk page, User:Sulfurboy, said: "Most recent submission was done with zero improvements which is considered WP:GAMING they system.". I didn't intend to try to game the system, just wanted to show my support for the idea of creating a page for CafeTran too, since it is one of the translation industry's most important CAT tools currently. Heck, the biggest online portal for translators in the world (Proz.com) is even offering it as part of its extended subscription package, so how the software can't be notable is really beyond me.

It looks to me like the people continually rejecting it are not familiar with the translation industry at all, otherwise they would immediately recognise that it is indeed perfectly notable. Rejecting it smacks of academic pedantry, iyam.

Michael, the problem is that you (or someone) resubmitted the article for inclusion without making the requested changes. The more people resubmit the page without making the changes that the senior editors think they have requested, the less likely it is that the article is every going to be accepted. I have spent a lot of time and effort and have done a great deal and went through a lot of trouble trying to comply with AngusWOOF's initial requests. Resubmitting the article without attempting to comply with e.g. Theroadislong's request, shows bad faith (even though that may not have been intended). SamHolt6 made additional requests, and although I had thought that I had fully complied with it, clearly something else was still wrong. So, at least you (or whoever resubmitted the page this time) could have taken Theroadislong's request about removing Youtube links seriously. I'm not sure which of the links are considered "blog posts", although there is one link that has the word "blog" in it, so that one could easily have been removed before resubmitting the page. The sad thing is that the information in the article does not even rely on the Youtube links -- all but one of the Youtube links were *secondary* citations, and removing them would not have left great pieces of content unreferenced. I will ask "advice" and ask that we are told which links are considered "blog post" links, and remove the Youtube links, but I fear the damage is done. Once senior editors get it into their heads that a topic is non-notable, there are very few windows of opportunity to get the page "in" again. -- leuce (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:42:12, 25 May 2020 review of submission by CupOfTeaGossip


what am i doing wrong? Eat Your Heart Out Ent 19:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi CupOfTeaGossip. Your submission reads like a product announcement, not an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia may not be used for any form of advertising, promotion, or public relations. Novice editors usually find it easier to build up experience editing existing articles before trying to create a new one. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:04:41, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Squaduser

Hello, I've been inserting the references manually following the guideline in every step. The draft was declined because I didn't use the reftoolbar templates. Should I edit the draft by inserting all the references through the templates? Thank you Squaduser (talk) 20:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Squaduser. The draft should not have been declined or rejected for that reason. You do not have to do anything differently with regard to how the references are inserted or formatted. However, the reviewer raised a second issue that you have not addressed. It would be helpful if you would explain in a few words on your user page the nature of your connection to Erik Stark and what your interest is in editing Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:47, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:39:14, 25 May 2020 review of submission by Eeberbach


I agree that any Wikipedia reader does not need any knowledge of the submission area to read and have personal opinion about it (the only damage will be that not everything will be understood and appreciated by such reader). However, this should exclude the editors who reject/accept the articles, i.e., they have the decision power - the editors should have such knowledge, otherwise they produce their personal and biased (by lack of knowledge) opinion which is very consequential for the author of the submission. And exactly this I experienced with the editor who rejected my submission knowing technically nothing about the area of submission (this follows directly from his comments, what is easy to prove). Thus that editor should prove rather that he knows at least something from the area - not me (I proved that rich by per-reviewed publication record in the area of submission). The person without knowledge of the area of submission should not have the decision power. Eeberbach (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear that English is not your first language and perhaps this is part of the problem with your draft? Perhaps you would be better advised editing in the Wikipedia of your own language initially? The help desk isn't really the place to suggest major changes in the way that drafts are reviewed, you could visit Wikipedia:Village pump where new proposals are discussed? Theroadislong (talk) 08:34, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 26

04:57:31, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Margaret Chung


Margaret Chung (talk) 04:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:57:31, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Margaret Chung



06:07:56, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Editorlanpao


Editorlanpao (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editorlanpao You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further as there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards. It does not appear that the person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable director, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:03:09, 26 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Vishak Vijayan 05


It was just an information post. Was just trying to educate the users about the software.

Vishak Vijayan 05 (talk) 08:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vishak Vijayan 05 Wikipedia is not for merely providing information, that is considered promotional on Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please review Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:32:41, 26 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sachi1307



Sachi1307 (talk) 09:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:43:08, 26 May 2020 review of draft by Saadstockholm


Hello, I dont understand why this subject was declined? What criteria's does not this journalist meet? Can you please describe the issue here and what I need to do?

Saadstockholm (talk) 09:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are all written by him, Wikipedia requires independent sources written by people unconnected to him. Theroadislong (talk) 09:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:22:54, 26 May 2020 review of draft by TheBirdsShedTears

Please review this draft. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 11:22, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBirdsShedTears: This is not going to happen. We dont operate on deadlines. You submitted your draft today There are 1,761 other submissions awaiting review, most of which are waiting longer. Please be patient. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:35:21, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Trashfan


Lionel Baldenweg is a member of the composer trio Diego Baldenweg with Nora Baldenweg & Lionel Baldenweg. This individual page was mainly created for the purpose of finding Lionel Baldenweg in his categories (australian film score composers, male film score composers etc.). Thank you for helping to finalise this article in any way. Trashfan (talk) 11:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trashfan (talk) 11:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:45:44, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Ramzy Arbid


Ramzy Arbid (talk) 11:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


11:45:44, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Ramzy Arbid


14:08, 26 May 2020 Yunshui talk contribs blocked Ramzy Arbid talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) ({{OversightBlock}}) Nothing left to see here. @Ramzy Arbid: you might want to read Wikipedia:Advice for younger editors. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:56, 26 May 2020 review of submission by Mickane


Hey, thanks for the help. Today, i just had my first article published. The problem is when i google search for the person from the article, or google search the person with wiki after their name, nothing shows.

The only way i can navigate to the wikipedia page is access the wikipedia website and do a manual search.

I have read it might be something to do with indexing and an article had to be patrolled before indexing is allowed, it's all so confusing. Ive idea what it means.

Could someone kindly tell me how i would get the article made about an athlete, show up on when i did a google search of the person?

Please and Thanks

Michael Kane (talk) 19:16, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Kane (talk) 19:16, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=959015793"