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 Eric Bruhl Cartman (talk | contribs) at 11:15, 6 September 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


August 31

00:47:48, 31 August 2020 review of submission by 2804:14D:7E82:A39F:E1A6:CA7A:866:C4F8


2804:14D:7E82:A39F:E1A6:CA7A:866:C4F8 (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Because it's a very famous object show worldwide and has atleast 600 Million views, and it's very well made[reply]

And yet there is not one reference in the article that would suggest that any journalist from any reliable source has ever seen it! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:59, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:29:17, 31 August 2020 review of submission by ColourfulKharacter


Hi. I am trying to understand the notability for indie films. This one, 1956 Central Travancore, has been picked up by film festivals and received considerable coverage in independent media, and yet it is rejected for publication repeatedly. I've seen far less substantiated articles being accepted for publication, like Savam by the same director coincidentally, for instance. Or this one that was a winner at the same festival.

I have read the notability guidelines backwards and forwards, and the specific entry of film too. I feel that this entry qualifies, but apparently it doesn't. I am super confused at this point, so I would appreciate some help.

ColourfulKharacter (talk) 04:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ColourfulKharacter My suggestion would be that you ask the reviewer of your draft directly why they made the decision they did. In any event, please see other stuff exists. It is usually a poor argument to cite other similar articles as a reason for yours to exist; those articles could be problematic as well. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. We can only address what we know about.(I've tagged one of the articles you mention as having issues) This is why each article is judged on its own merits.
Your draft seems to be cited largely to press release-type articles or other routine announcements. (I say that while noting that I cannot understand the non-English sources given) This is not the significant coverage required. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Thank you for your reply. I understand that there are lacunae in the process; I was not using the other articles as an argument for mine to exist. I am merely pointing out that I am confused by what is considered notable for indie films specifically, because there appear to be entries that are notable in their own right but lack significant coverage.
I have already read other stuff exists as well. I was asking for help to understand if there is a rubric I missed about indie films, which by their nature do not receive significant coverage, but are notable for the strides they make in non-commercial cinema.
Thank you for your suggestion of contacting the reviewer; I will do so. ColourfulKharacter (talk) 14:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ColourfulKharacter I am not aware of specific notability criteria for independent films; all films are judged using the same criteria. Unfortunately, the requirement that a subject get significant coverage in reliable sources does prevent some topics from appearing on Wikipedia either significantly or at all- but verification is an important principle of Wikipedia. If an independent film has made strides in non-commercial cinema, somebody unaffiliated with a particular film needs to say so and explain why. 331dot (talk) 14:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:48:41, 31 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash


Studyash (talk) 07:48, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


08:15:55, 31 August 2020 review of submission by Alvin kipchumba kosgei

Request on 08:15:55, 31 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Alvin kipchumba kosgei


i do not have the suitable experience to continue editing and researching this amazing article that requires a suitable and experienced editor i hope it would not be a problem.thanks


Alvin kipchumba kosgei (talk) 08:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This would need reliable independent sources with significant coverage. Not acceptable sources include:

09:12:05, 31 August 2020 review of submission by Aie555


I've reviewed the draft and removed all sources that do not meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability. I've added some new sources that should make a better case for notability.

Aie555 (talk) 09:12, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aie555 The draft was rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. Swapping out the references will not solve the issue of notability; please review the definition of a notable company. No amount of editing can confer notability on this business, it must be apparent from significant coverage in published, independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Thank you for the clarification. I've reviewed the listed resources prior to my edits and tried to adapt the draft accordingly. Since the last time the draft has been reviewed there have been some new developments which are cited using new authoritative and independent sources. If the new coverage is not enough, what steps can I take to help publish this article? Aie555 (talk) 09:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aie555 I see that this is the only topic you have edited about, do you have a connection with Memsource? 331dot (talk) 10:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Yes I do. I've disclosed my conflict of interests on my user page.
Aie555 You don't say what your COI is. If you are an employee or other paid representative, you need to make the stricter paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement. As I said, no matter how much you edit your draft, you cannot confer notability on this company. It depends on significant coverage in independent reliable sources that show how this company meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable company. If the company does not meet this definition, it would not merit an article at this time. Not every company does, even within the same field. Ideally, an article should be written by an independent editor that has taken note of significant coverage of this company in reliable sources and chooses on their own to write about it. If you have been tasked with creating this draft, you will have to disappoint your superiors- pursuing this further will, to be frank, only waste your own time and that of others. Feel free to show your superiors this discussion. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Thank you for your reply. I believe that I've made the appropriate disclosure, as I will neither receive or expect to receive any financial compensation for my edits. I have also not been tasked to edit it, my contributions are entirely voluntary. As for the issue of notability, I've added a few sources relating to recent developments which were covered by independent and reputable sources (Forbes, Slator, CzechCrunch). My other edits were primarily focused on removing primary sources, sources of questionable independence, and anything that resembled a sales pitch. Aie555 (talk) 11:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aie555 What exactly is the nature of your conflict of interest? Something can be promotional without being a "sales pitch". Being promotional does not just mean soliciting customers or selling something, at least to Wikipedia. Promotional includes merely telling about the subject. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: I understand your point regarding promotional content, but this article could only be considered promotional if the provided sources do not make a convincing case for notability. I believe that my edits have addressed the concerns of previous reviewers and have gone further to establish notability. I would welcome any substantive feedback on the draft itself and the provided sources. As for my conflict of interests, I work in the language technology industry and have professional relationship with Memsource. I have not been tasked to write this and do not expect any compensation, financial or otherwise. Aie555 (talk) 17:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, swapping out the sources doesn't change the notability of this company. You could ask the reviewer who rejected your draft if your changes change their opinion, and I certainly don't speak for them, but I don't think it will succeed. It may help if you specifically cite the parts of the notability guidelines you feel you have met, and run all the sources through the criteria described here. Unless you can convince them to change their mind, there isn't much more that you can do. 331dot (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:32:11, 31 August 2020 review of draft by 2A02:587:B80C:700:15B1:918B:9D88:DD1C


Although the process is still ongoing for a draft biography of Vassilios Joseph Lefakinis (a pioneer businessman from Greece), I see there is a comment that implies the article is a SPAM. Where this stands for? What do I need to pay attention in order not to have such characterisation? Thanks! 2A02:587:B80C:700:15B1:918B:9D88:DD1C (talk) 10:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing such a comment. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:07, 31 August 2020 review of draft by Eswnav


Eswnav (talk) 13:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone improve this article.

Request on 13:58:43, 31 August 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Ackee123


Hi, I would like to start over with this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adegoke_Steve_Colson

Please can soemone help me? I understand the issues better now. To be clear the person who I spoke with about the content which I had based my material on said that he is happy for me to actually use his content, but I would rather start anew to have a clearly encyclopedic article. Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this, but have had to sort out the family health stuff, and things arebetter now


Ackee123 (talk) 13:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:22, 31 August 2020 review of submission by Abbas Kwarbai


Abbas Kwarbai (talk) 16:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 1

00:42:30, 1 September 2020 review of draft by PeteStacman24


Hello, how do I shorten the name of my draft article from "Izuku Midoriya (character)" to just "Izuku Midoriya"? (Asking since the "character" in the draft's header just feels pointless.)

PeteStacman24 (talk) 00:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PeteStacman24: I've made the change for you, and you can now find the article at Draft:Izuku Midoriya. Since the non-Draft article Izuku Midoriya is a redirect, there's no current need to disambiguate with "(character)". Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:02:13, 1 September 2020 review of submission by Aniket Gaikwad46


Aniket Gaikwad46 (talk) 07:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC) } I'm aniket Sandeep gaikwad and I'm Instagram influencer and cricketer[reply]

i Born in 20/09/2002

Age:18


I upload photos and videos on Instagram as a Instagram influencer

I'm cricketer and I played So many matches

And the point you are makin here is what? Please do NOT create a new section every time you answer. Just answer. Fiddle Faddle 07:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Aniket Gaikwad46, Wikipedia is not a social media site where you can make a profile for yourself. Wikipedia hosts articles about people who meet its notability criteria. Pi (Talk to me!) 22:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:39, 1 September 2020 review of submission by LucyNakahara


I have again changed my article does it look better?

LucyNakahara (talk) 10:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing changed since last decline. You don't expect us to look up the simple things, right: difference This still doesn't meets WP:BLP and WP:NPERSON. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:15:40, 1 September 2020 review of draft by IanTEB

Hi! My draft article, Nick Robinson (YouTuber), was declined 6 days ago on August 26, and since then, I've added additional reliable secondary sources. Does it look any better?

IanTEB (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IanTEB, No. Lose any of your massive list of references that do not give significant coverage to Robinson. Read WP:42, WP:PRIMARY, and WP:SELFPUB. You are bombarding us with references and many have to go.
More references is not the way to go. Fewer and better references is. If a reviewer cannot see the wood rom the trees they will often pass by without reviewing your draft. Why? Because they are human. Fiddle Faddle 20:28, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:19:18, 1 September 2020 review of draft by Wiki Editor From NY


How do I submit this page for review?

Wiki Editor From NY (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Editor From NY, you use the blue button at the bottom of the big grey box that is hiding in plain sight on your draft Fiddle Faddle 20:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:11:35, 1 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Skancc


I have added source and reference, Iam not understanding what Else I have add kindly guide me


Skancc (talk) 22:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skancc. Indian Talent Magazine publishes artist-authored profiles. It is basically advertising, not an independent source. The remaining cited sources are passing mentions of Mahadev, not significant coverage. In the reviewer's judgement, sources do not exist that are independent, reliable, secondary, and contain significant coverage. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2

11:21:38, 2 September 2020 review of submission by Ciamasky1


Have made changes, requesting advice Ciamasky1 (talk) 11:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ciamasky1. The cited sources are directory-type listings instead of significant coverage (indiancompany.info, economictimes, tofler.in), or are regurgitations of press releases, so not independent. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:57:27, 2 September 2020 review of submission by Dereena

Hi, how to check the quality of content without posting it directly into the Wikipedia?

Dereena (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Dereena#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:03, 2 September 2020 review of submission by E. Miller1

Please review edits, as I believe they are more in line with the guidelines. Thank you. E. Miller1 (talk) 16:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No... it is still just advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:33:55, 2 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Evan0512


I went into Google and there were several reliable sources that relate to Lubelska: Only PopKult and Stock Spirits. Second, I didn't see either English or Polish sources that tell more about Lubelska. All I see are pictures of the vodka, but I looked at Stock Spirits. It was somehow copied from adverts partially, and when I search Google "Lubelska," it shows mostly unreliable and useless sources. The image about old Lubelska photos came from Wordpress and when I search Lubelska in Polish wikipedia (for example: w:pl:Lubelska), it doesn't show up.

Evan0512 (talk) 18:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Evan0512: As fascinating as your blow-by-blow description of your day is, I cannot divine your question from it. What assistance do you seek from this help desk? --Worldbruce (talk) 04:50, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 3

Request on 06:58:44, 3 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Unpluggedbrain


Hi, I am a new editor on Wikipedia, I work at Betconstruct (disclosure on user page), the company has asked me to write an article for the company. The article I wrote was rejected twice, once because it sounded like a promotion (I managed to fix this issue with the help of another editor) and now because of WP:GNG. I am looking for directions and advice to fix the issue and make an article that fits with Wikipedia's standards. BetConstruct is a B2B company, it doesn't get much media coverage, but it is still a major actor in the gambling industry, comparable to Betsson and Kindred Group or BBiN, thus I still believe that the company is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia.

I would like to collaborate with a more experienced user to prove notability and fix any other issues that the article has.

Thanks in advance


Unpluggedbrain (talk) 06:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unpluggedbrain If your company does not have significant coverage in independent reliable sources, it would not merit an article at this time, and no amount of editing can change that. You need to be able to show that the company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company with such sources. The requirement for significant coverage in independent reliable sources does result in some subjects not being as covered(or not covered at all) on Wikipedia compared to others, unfortunately. Feel free to show your superiors this message. 331dot (talk) 07:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot It does get coverage, but mainly on websites covering the gambling industry, such as SBC News and igamingbusiness (sources used on the Wikipedia pages of other B2B gambling companies). It has been mentioned quite a bit on independent media but the articles are generally not about the company itself but it's brands, so it's a passing mention "brand x subsidiary of BetConstruct". It has also gotten a lot of press coverage locally, in Armenia, would that be enough to establish notability? Thanks. Unpluggedbrain (talk) 07:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unpluggedbrain As stated in this portion of the notability guidelines, "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability". Only being written about in trade publications doesn't help establish notability. I would add that the draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. To be frank- and I apologize- you will only be wasting your own time and that of others by pursuing this further, at least until your company receives significant coverage outside of trade publications. 331dot (talk) 07:45, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot I understand, well thanks for the clarifications. A final question, if and when the company gets more coverage (let's say in a year or so), how should I proceed? Unpluggedbrain (talk) 07:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unpluggedbrain You would need to start a fresh draft and submit it for review, just as you did your first one. If you do not edit your current draft for six months, it will be deleted due to inactivity and then you could recreate the draft in a year(or whenever). 331dot (talk) 08:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
331dot Ok, thanks again for the help! See you around.

07:53:54, 3 September 2020 review of draft by JW254


Hello, I need help merging the contents on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Havoc_of_Choice to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wanjiru_Koinange.

The feedback given was to merge the contents on the book with that of the author. Thanks

07:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)JW254 (talk)

08:43:26, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Haruto.S


I have added more information to the article, including the history section and more references. I hope it has become more competent to be included in Wiki. If not, it would be very appreciated if you could let me know your advice on further improvement.


Haruto.S (talk) 08:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


08:44:50, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Sharrisonhuang


Sharrisonhuang (talk) 08:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sharrisonhuang You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please see the autobiography policy. Your draft, which was completely unsourced, was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:44:02, 3 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Xenderdom


need help for my wikipedia page creation. Getting rejected


Xenderdom (talk) 09:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at the teahouse. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:24:29, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Dezignme

i make an artical about iliaskhn that is was not publishd make my life Below this line, tell us why you are requesting a re-review. Take as many lines as you need.-->}}

Dezignme (talk) 10:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No indication how this meets WP:NPERSON. [1] is a directory entry lacking WP:SIGCOV. [2] is something by the subject. I suggest you use alternative outlets. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:20:00, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Ranjithpdevadas


Ranjithpdevadas (talk) 12:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This lacks any form of reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:35, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:20:54, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Ritzz07

Hi! this draft:JioTV has been declined because of notability concerns. I have added more notable references (its been 1 week only after the rejection so I got only 1-2 additional references) in order to fix this and added the explanation in a comment. I would really appreciate if someone can have a look at this draft. After then I'll resubmit this for review. Thank You Ritzz07 (talk) 13:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ritzz07, as you are practically asking for a re-review, I will submit the article for review on your behalf. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:12:14, 3 September 2020 review of draft by DEVEGOWDA S R


Filmography of V. Ravichandran mentioned clearly in the main page. What is the valid reason to create this page?

DEVEGOWDA S R (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't know what's one's intention to create an article. If you mean why this is in draftspace, it has been moved because it was undersourced. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:28, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:20:14, 3 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Hoodlife06


Hello, this is my first article on Wikipedia, and after the last review my submission has been rejected. The reason for this was: The topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I need help and information how I can make the article notable or which changes do I need to make for this article for it's notability.

Thank You

Hoodlife06 (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoodlife06: The declining reviewer included in their decline note a message and a link to our notability guidelines. The short story is, the mere existence of a musician/rapper/person does not guarantee inclusion in a global encyclopedia. You have to demonstrate that the subject is notable, that is, that major mainstream sources are discussing the subject, his work, his impact, his history, his life, etc. Lyric sites, blogs, his Soundcloud presence—these simply don't do that. I could create a Soundcloud account and proclaim myself a musician, but that doesn't mean anybody cares about my mad brand of key-smashing. So until this individual receives a good deal of coverage in multiple mainstream sources (big newspapers, big magazines, etc.) he will not likely be suitable for inclusion here. Hope that helps. Regards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:26:49, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Smokethatskinwagon


this living person was nominated for a CMA Award

https://www.cmaworld.com/cma-announces-nominees-for-the-54th-annual-cma-awards/

Smokethatskinwagon (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:04:43, 3 September 2020 review of submission by Eshawn Scipio


I was creating an article about Paralegals in which I would link a page that is about me the owner, With the creation of my article for Eshawn Scipio; it is a user page as well. I am sorry; I am very new to this!

Eshawn Scipio (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 4

01:58:11, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Kaundeepak


Kaundeepak (talk) 01:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i am an indian

Hi Kaundeepak, Wikipedia is not a social media site where people create profiles about themselves. It is an encyclopedia where articles are written about topics that are sufficiently notable. Your draft has been rejected as it isn't the type of thing that wikipedia hosts.Pi (Talk to me!) 02:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:59:09, 4 September 2020 review of draft by Sagar.6630


Sagar.6630 (talk) 03:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:59:41, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Sagar.6630


Sagar.6630 (talk) 03:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sagar.6630, Wikipedia isn't a social media site where people can create profiles about themselves, it is an encyclopedia where articles are written about notable topics. Your draft has been rejected as it is not the type of thing Wikipedia hosts. Pi (Talk to me!) 04:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Please could you review the below draft

Draft:Adeeb Ahamed (businessman)

The reviews in deletion review had asked to create a new separate draft and resubmit(Kuruvillac (talk) 09:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Kuruvillac I've fixed your link to a proper internal link(the whole web address is not necessary). You have submitted your draft for review, and a reviewer will look at it in due course, please be patient. Efforts to "jump the line" don't usually work. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:29:42, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Nirjhor1

Hello, I've removed any line that may seem promotional. Please advice me if I need to change any other line or remove any other line Nirjhor1 (talk) 10:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nirjhor1 Your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further(even if not deleted). Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:36:51, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Kburke423


Kburke423 (talk) 12:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:58:18, 4 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 108.45.183.111


My submission of a bio for Walter Paul Blass was rejected on August 4 because it did not have proper footnoting. The article is footnoted, so I need to know what is improper/inadequate about the footnotes. Thank you!

108.45.183.111 (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Will A. Irwin[reply]


108.45.183.111 (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@108.45.183.111: I have cleaned up the referencces quite a bit, and added a maintainance tag to the veryy top of the page. The "Personal life" section needs a source, as well as the first part of the "Career" section. If you need the same reference multiple times, you can use named references. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:31:16, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Johnperdro


Can you please let me know why the article is rejected? Johnperdro (talk) 16:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johnperdro Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. It was blatant advertising, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves and what they do; we are only interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 16:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnperdro I see you declared a COI, but if you are employed by this company, you must make the stricter paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 16:33, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:44:31, 4 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Maddielovescolours


Hello! I'm trying to create an article about "Time Out Dolls". These things will sometimes pop up in flea markets and secondhand circles online, and they're usually met with a lot of confusion. So I want to create an article that could help explain things and clear said confusion. 

While I can find a lot of content about them online, ranging from sewing patterns, to blog posts, to photos, I'm really struggling to find reliable, verifiable resources. What can I do now?

Maddielovescolours (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maddielovescolours (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maddielovescolours If you cannot find independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the topic, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:12:13, 4 September 2020 review of submission by Kuchisakeonnanaughty

Please Don't Reject Me

Kuchisakeonnanaughty (talk) 21:12, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 21:13:26, 4 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Kuchisakeonnanaughty


But I Will Be Famous

Kuchisakeonnanaughty (talk) 21:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability requires verifiable evidence. The draft does not have such evidence and I don't believe such evidence exists. Username6892 21:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:21:50, 4 September 2020 review of submission by 217.210.112.72


217.210.112.72 (talk) 21:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wikipedia is not a vehicle to promote your facebook channel. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 5

06:31:43, 5 September 2020 review of submission by Jfavela599


Jfavela599 (talk) 06:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jfavela599 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:24:28, 5 September 2020 review of submission by 86.98.17.201


86.98.17.201 (talk) 12:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:01:56, 5 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Amunyer


My name is Arthur Munyer and my work is Neural Somatic Integration. I would like to be part od Wikipedia.What is it that is rejected in my article? Thanks for your support Arthur Munyer


Arthur Munyer 14:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Amunyer, your draft was rejected as a copyright violation. It appears to have been copied from [3]. Wikipedia can't host copyright violations. Pi (Talk to me!) 14:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:06:46, 5 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yara Korkomaz



Yara Korkomaz (talk) 14:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yara Korkomaz, Wikipedia isn't a social media site where people create profiles, it's an encyclopedia where articles are written about topics (including people) who are adequately notable, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Pi (Talk to me!) 14:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:26:17, 5 September 2020 review of submission by Yara Korkomaz


Yara Korkomaz (talk) 14:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


14:28:41, 5 September 2020 review of submission by Yara Korkomaz


Yara Korkomaz (talk) 14:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


how can i create an information page here for me please i need some details !! ?

Yara Korkomaz Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or merely provide information. We have articles about people who meet the special Wikipedia definition of notability, typically written by independent editors completely unconnected with the subject. Autobiographical articles are strongly discouraged. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 14:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:49:09, 5 September 2020 review of submission by Yara Korkomaz


Yara Korkomaz (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

who will talk about me dear ?? i want to have an article about me on Wikipedia ! how we can do it ? or how can i have it ? or how we will do it ??? i need an answer pleaseeeee i see all singers have wikipedia articles ! !

@Yara Korkomaz: Please see the responses already posted above. Asking the same question over and over will not change the answer. Wikipedia is not about you. --Finngall talk 16:35, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yara Korkomaz It is not true that "all" singers have Wikipedia articles. Only those that meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable singer- and as already stated, those articles are typically written by independent editors. 331dot (talk) 16:40, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:45:30, 5 September 2020 review of draft by Willairwin


I asked before, on Sept. 4, but perhaps my question did not go through.

ON August 4 my article (a bio) entitled Walter Paul Blass was rejected because it had improper or inadequate footnotes. The article does include footnotes. Can you please tell me how they are improper or inadequate? Thank you very much.

Willairwin (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)Will Irwin[reply]

Willairwin (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:12:08, 5 September 2020 review of draft by Willairwin


I apologize. I did get a response to my September 4 help question from Victor. Please ignore my re-submitted question. I will try to get answers to his suggestions and revise.

Willairwin (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)Will Irwin[reply]

Willairwin (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:43:14, 5 September 2020 review of draft by VirdiOnline


VirdiOnline (talk) 18:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, i have created a wiki page about an indian Punjabi music producer Named Sukhpal Sukh. He is working in industry since 1990, while creating wiki page i have added as much reference i can find on internet, less information available on net about Sukhpal Sukh is just due to his lack of social links, activities. That's why he was still unknown for most of the new generation. My motive to make his page was just to share information and work he done in past for music scene.

I just want to know what i need to do that this article could move to main space. As these are the only available information and links published by indian news agencies and web portals which i have add as references. I need help from editors i don't want that a legendary artist stay unknown for most of audience of new age.

VirdiOnline References do not need to be online or free to access(it helps, but is not required). Print-only sources are fine as long as they are available to the public(documents in private hands inaccessible to the public are not acceptable). Please understand that Wikipedia is not for merely sharing information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of (in this case) a notable creative professional. If this person does not have significant coverage in reliable sources(again, they need not be online), he would not merit an article at this time. If you just want to tell the world about this person, you should use a personal blog/website or social media. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:04:28, 5 September 2020 review of submission by Kumerican


Kumerican (talk) 19:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kumerican, your submission was rejected, meaning it is unlikely to be reconsidered. Eternal Shadow Talk 19:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kumerican You would need to show that this terminology is in general use and discussed in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:41:02, 5 September 2020 review of draft by HobokenNjHappy


I am having trouble determing if I put "

This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Title of your draft.

" on my page or page I want created

HobokenNjHappy (talk) 22:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HobokenNjHappy. It belongs on your user page. No {{UserboxCOI}} template goes on Draft:Suellen Newman. There's another template that goes on the talk page of the draft, but I've taken care of that one for you. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:32, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 6

03:20:42, 6 September 2020 review of submission by Eswnav


Eswnav (talk) 03:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


What can I do?

03:49:33, 6 September 2020 review of submission by Neelkanth99


the reason's for rejection  is completely misinterpreted and misunderstood .

Question 1 ) : Blatant self promotion created by the subject himself. - > For your kind information Subject is no more.

It's not a self promotion and nothing is promoted here for marketing or trying to grab attention .This page was completely re-written without any self praising and just the neutral facts about the subject , The Subject is my father who was a Mathematician and the subject is no more and the facts gathered is by the author who is the son of the subject because the autthor of this page has these information .

Reason 2 : Neutral information mentioned.

This page was written only with the references to the research work done by him and documented and no peacock words or praising of subject anywhere . Please mention if any , I dont see anything referenced in praising of the subject.


Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: This page appears to have been written to praise its subject rather than to describe the subject neutrally. Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view Neelkanth99 (talk) 03:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


07:49:36, 6 September 2020 review of submission by Bhattsachin30


My article is not getting accepted I want to know why? Bhattsachin30 (talk) 07:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhattsachin30 (talk) 07:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhattsachin30 As you were told by the reviewer, the topic does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. As your draft was rejected, not just declined, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:15:05, 6 September 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Eric Bruhl Cartman



Eric Bruhl Cartman (talk) 11:15, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=977007191"