Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 February 7

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< February 6 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 8 >
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.


February 7 edit

02:08:28, 7 February 2020 review of submission by Bzcons44 edit


We have gone out of our way so that the article is purely factual - not an advertisement!

We followed similar wording to that of Wikipedia's articles on IC Markets, an Australian-based online retail forex, Saxo Bank, a Danish investment bank specializing in online trading and investment; and IG Group, a UK-based company providing trading in financial derivatives.

The topic is sufficiently notable considering there that are many Wikipedia articles already published on the topic.

The article is not an advertisement and if it is deemed it is, then so are the three mentioned above! How come they are published? It doesn't make sense.


Bzcons44 (talk) 02:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bzcons44, Who is "we"? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:17, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

'We' are people that are interested in Forex.

Bzcons44 Well for starters, accounts are single use only. Also, if you have any sort of monetary relationship with HF markets, you must disclose that fact by following WP:PAID.
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. The IC Markets article is pretty bad. The Saxo bank article is not bad, but yours is nothing like it.\
While the article may be factual, that doesn't make it encyclopedic. Our coverage requires neutrality. That is, the wording, tone, and sourcing, must not be biased for or against the subject. At the moment, it paints the subject in an overwhelmingly good light, and is in essence free advertising.
The real issue here however is that the subject just isn't notable. We don't write about all companies, and this one seems to be run of the mill. I reccomend you work on editing existing articles some, to get a feel for our process, before working on making articles from scratch. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:33, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 03:06:04, 7 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Happypillsjr edit



I am requesting assistance with this article because it fails WP:MUSICIAN but wondering there's any suggestion to approve it.


Happypillsjr ✉ 03:06, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happypillsjr, sadly, Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability might apply.
If there is significant coverage you haven't included in the article, you can add it, but if it doesn't exist your only option is to wait until they've done more stuff, hence had more coverage to base an article on. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 12:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

03:17:18, 7 February 2020 review of draft by Cre8tiveIQ edit


Hello, I've found more references online but they are youtube interviews. How do I go about referencing them and do they qualify as reliable sources? Cre8tiveIQ (talk) 03:17, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cre8tiveIQ, Interviews do not count towards notability, and should be used only sparingly. YouTube is not a reliable source, unless its copies of a news broadcast from a regular reliable source, such as the BBC. Even then, it really shouldn't be used. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 04:48, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cre8tiveIQ (talk • contribs) 05:00, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:33:46, 7 February 2020 review of draft by Annemmtv edit


Hi, requesting help for an article I had submitted for review. The content is on OTT platform "ManoramaMAX". The article was submitted for review twice and was rejected twice, both times because it sounded like an advert. Kindly requesting another review & help on how to improve the content. Anne VT 05:33, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Request on 07:13:09, 7 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Diosganar edit 


I really want to know why my article is rejected

Diosganar (talk) 07:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Diosganar, The article has been deleted, so can only be seen by admins.
It was deleted because it was deemed unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to promote businesses. Articles should be written neutrally based on what reliable sources have previously written about the subject - if there aren't enough reliable sources to write an article, then the business isn't notable enough. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 10:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
and given your user page states the business was founded in 2019, it almost certainly hasn't received enough coverage to base an article on. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 10:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:30, 7 February 2020 review of submission by Thuthignr edit


Thuthignr (talk) 10:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:08:02, 7 February 2020 review of submission by Zoya888 edit


I'm confused about why she's not considered notable enough. I'm also stumped on sources. While yes, I do cite Vox as primary source material (in more of a bibliographical sense), I tried very hard to look for other people writing about her to describe her life, her work, and her impact on the field. I brought in sources from NPR, academia, and other newspapers.

What aspect of these sources are still dinging this article? I'm happy to bring in others, but don't want to keep making the same mistakes. A wizardly librarian (talk) 13:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:46:30, 7 February 2020 review of submission by Eslimarketing edit

  • Username missing!
    • No draft specified!

Esli_Pollet_Water_Group

Hello. I was trying to enter company info in Turkish, but got rejected and I don't know why. Could any one tell me how to submit correctly? Many thanks.

Eslimarketing (talk) 13:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eslimarketing First, you will need to change your username immediately. Please visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest to request a username change. Usernames cannot be that of a business per the username policy. You must also read and comply with the paid editing policy, a Wikipedia Terms of Use requirement. You should also read about conflict of interest. Your draft was declined because you did not demonstrate with significant coverage in independent reliable sources that your company meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:46:17, 7 February 2020 review of draft by WriteIncunabula edit


Hello, I'm creating a page for an artist, and have uploaded some photos from flickr. Several of the photos are still there, but I noticed two of them appear to have been removed. I re-posted one, but the other won't go up via the Flickr to commons bot. A message flickers briefly on screen that I think reads the photo is already up. But it's too quick to be sure, and I can't find the image anywhere.

Also, I'm awaiting editor feedback, but am looking for any tips to make the page better. I've taken complete transcripts down from interviews and made sure to source every fact statement, but there are several interesting details I've left out for the sake of just sticking to basic facts and maintaining objectivity. I don't want the page to be "flowery" or sound as though it were promotional in any way, but I also don't want to exclude facts of interest. Any advice would be most welcome. Thanks!

WriteIncunabula (talk) 16:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When you say you are creating a 'page' for an artist, do you represent the artist? 331dot (talk) 16:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:41:24, 7 February 2020 review of submission by IamMattDavies edit

I thought that it would be a notable topic to include (similar to that of Parliamentary train) and it has over references which are, of course, from reliable, published sources.

I disagree that the term is a neologism because it has varied use (especially since All the Stations).

Finally, it is not about the website, but about the term in general and the stations that ARE least used. IamMattDavies (talk) 18:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IamMattDavies, I would personally remove the mentions of the least used stations website, except maybe an external link. There seems to be too much focus on what they say, when they aren't a reliable source.
I would also move it to something like least used railway stations in the United Kingdom or something similar.
But overall, it is probably a notable enough topic.
Thanks, ~~ Alex Noble - talk 20:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
also, you might want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 20:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:50:44, 7 February 2020 review of submission by StevePoulsen edit


I am attempting to create a new article. As this is my first one and time, I am struggling a bit to understand some of the requirements, and could use some clarification. The first submission was declined because the references did not show significant coverage, in reliable, secondary, sources that are independent. This actually made sense, as I had only linked to the subject's own website. So today, I decided to dig in a bit farther and find external information sources. To that end, I reworked some of the languages, and added new references to other sites, primarily news coverage sites, and then resubmitted.

It was shortly rejected again. For the same reason, and not adequately citing reliable sources. As best I can tell this means that unless the information can be referenced to an independent source, it will not be considered. Is this is correct? If the only location for some of this information, is the subjects own site, can that information not be included?

Any other information that would get the article publishable would be appreciated. I have a list of similar conventions that I want to do articles for as well but I want to get one thought he process first before I try others.


StevePoulsen (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

StevePoulsen From examining your draft, it seems that you are writing about your own event. That means you have a conflict of interest you must formally declare; if you receive any compensation whatsoever(not just cash money) for your work with this event, you must declare as a paid editor as well. In looking at the sources, one (and part of another) is an interview with you, which is not an independent source. The rest are just very brief mentions or citing the mere existence of something(like the comics). Wikipedia requires significant, independent coverage from sources that have chosen on their own to write about your event. If such sources do not exist, it would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:59:24, 7 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Audreyne edit


Hello!

I am currently trying to create a page for musician Daniel Aged (of Wikipedia-page-having group Inc. No World) but have had both drafts thus far rejected. I have included links about both the group and Aged as an individual so I am curious as to what might legitimize my page more.

I would sincerely appreciate any and all guidance that could possibly get the page published and up to Wikipedia's standards!

Best, Audrey


Audreyne (talk) 22:59, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article (not just a "page") you are trying to create does not show that the person has significant coverage in independent reliable sources. That coverage must go beyond brief mentions or routine announcements. In addition, it's not clear that the person meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable musician. Lastly, you seem to be saying that this person is notable because they have worked with other notable people- however, notability is not inherited by association. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:10:23, 7 February 2020 review of draft by Nandasiri Gunaratne edit


I started this article with the intention that the others will also send some sources and references. I noticed there was another person update this document. But with no references. please let me know one sentences that i have not written in neutral format. Then taking that as an example i will correct the rest of the article. I requested that from the previous editor too. Still waiting for his response. Please assist me since this is my first article on Wikipedia. Thanks. Nandasiri Gunaratne (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:12:55, 7 February 2020 review of submission by Vikulgupta1703 edit


Hi I have done more change and added board of directors in my page. Is that looks ok now. I did changed the subject also. Please let me know what changes we need. Thanks in advance.

Vikulgupta1703 (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for being an advertisement, deleted for being a copyright infringement, and   On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Vikulgupta1703#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_February_7&oldid=985274800"