Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 October 12

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< October 11 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 13 >
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.


October 12

edit

02:14:31, 12 October 2019 review of draft by Ramongonsalis123

edit


I have resubmitted this article a number of times and the references are correct and from reliable sources, but it keeps getting declined I need help in resubmitting it in the correct way Ramongonsalis123 (talk) 02:14, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ramongonsalis123:   Declined. Medium is a blog host, not a reliable source. The draft fails to establish that the subject is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Choose a different topic to write about. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:49, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:11:28, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Harish139

edit


Hi Sir, what can I do with the article? Do I have to delete it? or can I make any modifications to the topic so that it will get approved? If there is a possibility for the approval, please tell me what modifications I have to do.

Harish139 (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:05:12, 12 October 2019 review of submission by 5.36.254.4

edit


5.36.254.4 (talk) 06:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please find book reviews or information about the publication, so that you can write more than a plot summary. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:10:44, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Jackson646

edit


Jackson646 (talk) 10:10, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson646, No question has been specified. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Jackson646 Your page does not have references that show notability. The subject is not even mentioned on those references. To be reviewed you will have to submit the page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:52, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:34:13, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Lucasankunding45

edit


Lucasankunding45 (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lucasankunding45, No question has been specified. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lucasankunding45 was advised to ask for help. Your submission appears to be some sort of essay. But here we have an encyclopedia with pages on a particular topic. You may wixh to take a look at Video game controversies. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:26:06, 12 October 2019 review of submission by Beyhiveboys

edit

The article I created was needed since the page of Angel Locsin will be congested. Each awards I put on the article have their own sources/links and are valid so I don't see anything wrong with information. Also, there are too many awards page by local pinoy celebrity that exists even though they don't have proper links and citations. I hope this draft will finally be approved.

Beyhiveboys (talk) 13:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the user keeps adding this content to the article and has not responded to any request for discussion besides this post. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:15:14, 12 October 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Def-Mornahan

edit


I am writing this to lay out the situation around the draft Society of Catholic Scientists articles. I am a member of the Society and in contact with its leadership. I am also in contact with their volunteer social media person, who wrote the first rejected draft article. He discussed the situation with me (obviously, through email off of wikipedia's internal channels), and I decided to write an alternative article. My article was rejected, with no reason being given other than the existence of the prior rejected article. I told him about this, and he has marked his draft for deletion.

Having read the COI policy the other day, I recognize ways in which I may fit that definition as stated: 1) I am an active member of the organization in question. 2) I discussed writing the article with another person who is an active member of the organization and responsible, if on a volunteer basis, for some communications for the organization. 3) I have been paid by the organization for consulting work: specifically, to interview leadership members and conference speakers and release these interviews on my own independent podcast. (I was not paid to draft this article; however, this work was starting at the time I did so.)

So there is the situation. While I would certainly prefer that my article be posted, and think that it is adequately neutral and about an organization of reasonable interest for inclusion in wikipedia, I am not attached to that outcome. What is appropriate in this situation? Def-Mornahan (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC) Def-Mornahan (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Def-Mornahan. Thank you for disclosing your connections to the organization. Editors with these kinds of connections often find it difficult to draft an acceptable article, but you are not prohibited from attempting to do so. It would be best to place your disclosure on User:Def-Mornahan so that you don't have to repeat it over and over.
Your version should not have been declined as a duplicate because Draft:Society of Catholic Scientists was not also waiting to be reviewed at the time. Therefore the decline has been reverted. It may be declined for another reason.
It's bad practice to start a new version under a different name. It can lead to confusion. It's also a copyright violation to copy parts of Mpwiesner's version without attribution and without ensuring that the history of their page is preserved. The best way to fix it would be for you to copy the contents (the portion below the AfC reviewer comments) of Draft:Society of Catholic Scientists (revised version) to Draft:Society of Catholic Scientists (also below the AfC reviewer comments. After you've done that, you may {{ping}} me, and I'll tidy up the AfC submission templates so that the right draft is reviewed. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:33, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:50:10, 12 October 2019 review of submission by FossilDS

edit

Hi, I'm new here to Wikipedia editing, and I was just wondering how to make my article better, so it can pass peer review. Sorry if I am wasting your time, and I will delete the article if it is not notable enough.

Thank you very much!

FossilDS (talk) 21:50, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FossilDS. The draft needs a few more sources that are independent of the park administration. See if a major metropolitan newspaper in the area has written about it. A local library or historical society may be able to suggest other sources. You could also reach out to Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey. Study articles Forest Park (Portland, Oregon) and Millennium Park. A draft needn't be that long to be accepted (6-8 good sources should suffice), but those featured articles are good examples of the range of possible sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_October_12&oldid=985270198"