Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 December 30

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< December 29 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 31 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


December 30

edit

03:21:35, 30 December 2019 review of submission by Esotericmagik

edit


Esotericmagik (talk) 03:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply] 

why was this declined

03:22:20, 30 December 2019 review of submission by Esotericmagik

edit


why did this happen Esotericmagik (talk) 03:22, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Esotericmagik: You're going to want to try this tutorial to get a basic understanding of what this site is and how it works. After that, I've written a guide that explains how to write articles that will not be deleted.
Wikipedia is not a social media site, nor is it a place to promote anyone (or their social media accounts). You didn't cite any independent professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources to demonstrate notability (Youtube and Instagram are not reliable sources, and her own Youtube and Instragram accounts are not independent). Ian.thomson (talk) 03:43, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:06:24, 30 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by VishwaNayani

edit


Hello, I am Vishwanath, I am here to know what is the issue with my draft as I cannot understand the reason for its decline. This is the draft link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sri_Balaji_Educational_Society If there is a issue regarding the sources I am still collecting Also I cannot understand that there is a need for adding template on my talk page, If it is a necessity please provide me with step by step process The article is no way related to me or my personal interests.

VishwaNayani (talk) 05:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Answered on talk page.) — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 07:03, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:43:15, 30 December 2019 review of submission by Dkmohta

edit

My article is rejected stating that it is not notable. I would like to draw the attention that "Sahitya Academy Award" itself is very renowned and is very prestigious award. Mr. Soni is awarded with Shitya Academy Yuwa Puruskar in the year 2016. I have given sufficient references of the same.

Apart from this he has authored/ translated more then 10 books.

I again request you to re-review my article and kindly approve the same.

Dkmohta (talk) 05:43, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


05:57:44, 30 December 2019 review of draft by Barryc25

edit


Article should not have been rejected. Please review it again. Thank you.

Barryc25 (talk) 05:57, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barryc25. The draft was declined (which allows you to improve and resubmit it), not rejected (which would not give you the option of resubmission). The bulk of any article should be based on independent, reliable sources. At first glance, about 90% of the draft is based on what the organization says about itself. As the reviewer indicated, you'll need to throw away most of the sources you've cited and the content they support, or radically condense it. The draft should mainly summarize what independent sources like the Vancouver Sun and The Globe and Mail say about the organization. Also, Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source, and should not be used as a reference at all. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:00, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:06:05, 30 December 2019 review of submission by VishwaNayani

edit

Hi Harshil, I am new to publishing article, can you advice any tips regarding my rejected article as well as the changes and additions that are required to be accepted by the Wikipedia. VishwaNayani (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

VishwaNayani, It has been rejected, as I am afraid that it is not notable. There is no amount of editing that can fix that. Instead I recommend you work on some existing articles, and improve those. Creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do on WIkipedia. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:26, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:36:44, 30 December 2019 review of draft by Zxcmnb00

edit


Hello. It said it will take 4 mouths or more to review my draft. It takes too much time. Can I withdraw it?

Zxcmnb00 (talk) 09:36, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Subsequently declined by Theroadislong. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:33:54, 30 December 2019 review of draft by Arjanhalili

edit


Hello! Can someone help me with this article I've been working on? I added some references and made some changes to it but the draft still got declined and I'm not sure how to continue from here. Arjanhalili (talk) 14:33, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arjanhalili, The issue here is that the sources you have do not show how the subject is notable. We don't just write about everyone here on Wikipedia, otherwise it would be unwieldy. Thus we have a set of standards for inclusion, which we call notability. The relevant guideline is the creative professional notability standards. Any topic may also simply meet the general notability guideline. So to get this article accepted, you need to find sources that meet those requirements. If you can't do that, then the subject is not notable, and we cannot write about them. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:19, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:21:56, 30 December 2019 review of draft by Hescher88

edit


Wondering if there are any edits I should make on this page or if it is ready for review.

Hescher88 (talk) 19:21, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hescher88 I have accepted your draft, it could do with some categories added. Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hescher88, I see that it has been accepted as a draft by Theroadislong, so congrats! But you can always keep working on, and improving, articles that you have created. With luck, you could take this article to Good Article quality, or even the vaunted Featured Article quality. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:35, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:34:52, 30 December 2019 review of submission by TabBytes

edit

Hello Moderator , I did not recieve any message from you. I added a comment on 25 Dec for a draft. Please check ( 11:24:10, 25 December 2019 review of submission by TabBytes ) . Thanks TabBytes (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TabBytes, I'm afraid I don't see the comment. What is your question? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited solecraft article and added references. Please review it if its ok or I need to add more references. Thanks TabBytes (talk) 22:16, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TabBytes, You would need more reliable and independent sources. Think quality over quantity. But I'm afraid that I don't think this company will meet our standards for notability. I suggest you work on existing articles instead to get a feel for Wikipedia. Creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:54:48, 30 December 2019 review of submission by Bhavegaut

edit


I am at a loss as to what the issue is. The page has many external references attesting to the importance of the field of matrix biology and then the history behind how the ASMB is a major organization promoting matrix biology. It also has significant information on the history of the organization including past presidents, past award winners, meetings, etc. When I compare it to existing Wiki pages for similar organizations such as the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_Biochemistry_and_Molecular_Biology) or the American Society for Cell Biology ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_for_Cell_Biology) I don't see large differences and thus cannot see why these have been accepted as Wiki pages while my submission has not.

Bhavegaut (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bhavegaut, Be careful about comparing your article to existing ones. Many of the articles on Wikipedia were created before we began the rigorous Article for Creation process. That means a lot of ...honestly junk articles were created, and many of them have slipped through the cracks. You can read more about the logical fallacies involved in article comparison at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. One of the issues here is that the societies you have linked have 10+ times the membership as the ASMB, which means they are larger and more likely to be covered by reliable sources. Regardless, those articles are still quite poor.
What you need here is better sources. You need independent and reliable sources that give significant coverage to the subject, as per the general notability guidelines. The scientific papers you have are not the right sources here. If you remove those, then you only have the ASMB's own website, which is not independent. You need external coverage. If such external coverage does not exist, then the subject is not notable. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 00:07, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK - thanks for your thoughts. I honestly don't see your point on the other organizations as simply being bigger shouldn't justify much and if they are poorly written and got through the cracks then they should be removed and asked to be edited to reach your now higher standards. But putting that aside, I guess I just wanted to clarify your definition of external references - so the notion is that what you are looking for is not references pointing to the importance of the subject matter of an organization (i.e. matrix biology) but rather references to the organization itself. For instance, if a university has a news article on one of its professors winning an ASMB prize then that would be an external reference on the organization. Or alternatively, if a newspaper covered the organization or one of its members and their activities with the ASMB that would be an external/acceptable reference? Just trying to make sure I understand the definition as honestly it is not clear from the guidelines.

Thanks, Gautam Bhave, MD, PhD Assistant Professor of Medicine Vanderbilt University Medical Center — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhavegaut (talk • contribs) 21:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bhavegaut, You are right, we need sources on the organization itself. We have plenty of articles about matrix biology, where scientific papers are the preferred source. But this page is not about matrix biology, its about an organization, whose focus just happens to be matrix biology. Newspaper coverage of the organization would be ideal. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:56:39, 30 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Phil7strang

edit


Lloyd Strang sang at the Metropolitan Opera Company in NY from 1959 thru 1970. he is referenced in several links by the Met and appears in one of your Wikipedia listings as well as someone who performed at the Met 170 times. I guess I do not know the proper way to list or link the references. He also sang and played with the Sammy Kaye Big Band from 1949-1955 and is on several of Sammy Kaye's albums listed as one of the three Kayedets. I would love it if someone other than me (his son) made the post but I would hate to see his notable contributions lost to history. He also was the lead singer for the Larry Clinton Orchestra hit in 1947 of "Ooh Looky there Ain't she Pretty"


Phil7strang (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Phil7strang, What you need here are reliable sources. Please see referencing for beginners. If you can link me 5 + news articles or other publications that are focused on him, please do so on my talkpage I can help you in going forward. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:47, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_December_30&oldid=985268872"