Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 March 24
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < March 23 | << Feb | March | Apr >> | March 25 > |
| 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. |
March 24 edit
Hi all,
I have had some helpful feedback on my page for Elizabeth Ford and some editors appeared willing to support it on mainframe. However 'Sulfurboy' is particularly non-helpful with his rejection.
First of all, I think that Sulfurboy has attempted to respond to the first edit, not the second that everyone else was looking at when they were suggesting it's readiness for the mainframe.
Secondly, Sulfurboy says I haven't used references that can be checked: yet, all the printed information is available in the State Library of Western Australia. As part of the second edit, I put in extra refs, but I don't think he has seen them and instead has repeated his idea that I haven't used references and have used colourful emotive language.
Just to add to that, Sulfur boy's criticism re: the mention of awards is really unwarranted, given that this is just a list of awards she received in her lifetime. I am not promoting her - I am simply writing down what she received as is mentioned in the art books in the library.
Further, I was working within a wider project to bring Western Australian female artists to the fore with the Lawrence Wilson Art Gallery. So, it boggles my mind that he can right this off so easily.
Last, I apologise if I don't respond in the right forums in the right way but I find this framework immensely difficult to negotiate. Please help. My only motivation is to see an esteemed artist find her place - without prejudice.
Regards,
Mem 271
Mem271 (talk) 05:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Mem271, Sorry that you've had such a rough time navigating the structure of drafts, but this is the right place to ask. We're glad you're here, and tackling underrepresented women. I hope you take some of Sulfur's advice, they have provided lots of inline tags that can help direct your cleanup. I'm pinging them Sulfurboy, hopefully they can help you figure things out. You might also wish to ask for help at WikiProject Women in Red's talk page, they specialize in making articles for women. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping CaptainEek Mem271, I'm sorry you found me to be "non-helpful". After your last tirade in which you accused (without cause) a fellow reviwer of gendered bias, I chose to go above and beyond what I normally would do in a review process as to keep everything above board. Very clear reasons for rejection were provided to you and including what could be improved instead of just rejecting with a boilerplate template. Further, I went through the extra effort of tagging each spot in the article that is unsourced puffery or opinions. Playing victim, accusing others of prejudice, and complaining about perceived wrongs in the system will not serve as a substitute for actually putting in work to improve the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 07:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Mandlanotyawa (talk) 06:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Mandlanotyawa, Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 07:14, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
09:08:00, 24 March 2020 review of draft by 76.170.151.178 edit
76.170.151.178 (talk) 09:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
11:08:48, 24 March 2020 review of draft by Salut65 edit
Wanted to include this article in the wikipedia, and the resources are strong with the proper news links. Please advise if there is anything else that needs to be included. Thank you. --Salut65 (talk) 11:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Salut65 (talk) 11:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Salut65:, I understand your concerns but the history section has unnecessary details, which repeat in title holder section and there is no inline citation in the head section. Also, there is already a page existing Miss Pakistan World, why do you need to create a new page with alternate title. You simply can make Draft:Mrs. Pakistan World, a redirect page to Miss Pakistan World by placing #REDIRECT Miss Pakistan World tag on the page. Cheers - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Every entity is different - For example please check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._World and then there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_World and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_World
Miss World has a bigger history section as it started 100 years ago. But Mr. World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_World is new and has the similar concept as Mrs. Pakistan. If fact is has lesser info than Mrs. Pakistan World. Please note that If you look at this link for India - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_India Most of the contests are done by the same company but each event and entity has its own name and brand. Miss World cannot list Mr. World and Mrs. World under its section. Similarly, Femina Miss India cannot list Miss Diva and Femina Look of the Year under one section. As each event has a unique identity. Miss is for single women and has the history of single women, MRS is for married women and cannot be listed under a single "Miss" category. Same goes for Mister category which is male only.
If you look at this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Diva , here you will find that Miss Diva is a part of Femina Miss India, even though Femina Miss India is a beauty pageant but has separate identity. All these events could have redirected to Femina Miss India but they don't and cannot as each event has its own identity.
Please do let me know if there is something that can be expanded. Mrs. Pakistan World has its own identity and cannot be listed or redirected to a "Miss Pakistan" category. I will be still working on the article, as I do think that it was a premature submission. But any other advise would help.
Thank you. --Salut65 (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
12:29:27, 24 March 2020 review of submission by Rogerkuznia edit
- Rogerkuznia (talk · contribs)
Hello all, I am seeking feedback on why this article was rejected. I've revised it twice, and I believe the only reason for its rejection is because I am a paid editor. I understand the 5 pillars of Wikipedia, that Wiki cannot be a soapbox or vanity press or advertising platform, and this submission is none of those. It has 16 sources -- nothing in the submission lacks a source -- which should be a clear indicator of notability. My submission is written in a neutral tone (I learned that in prior drafts). I've followed all the rules, including acknowledging that I am a paid editor, and yet I think that's the sticking point here. But among those five pillars, there's a line that "The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions." Please take a critical look at my submission, and tell me what is wrong with the copy. It follows the Good Article criteria, with the exception of lacking an illustration, audio or video. Thank you. Rogerkuznia (talk) 12:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Draft is just a paid for puff piece with multiple non notable awards “EY Entrepreneur of Year Southeast Award”, Most Admired CEOs of 2020”, “Champions of the New Economy”, Professional of the Year”. Theroadislong (talk) 13:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
14:29:17, 24 March 2020 review of submission by ProtectONE original edit
Please, I wrote this article, this is a story of TICKLESS brand, I tried to wrote it in formal form, not focus on advertising, I know this is an enciclopedy. If my work is not good, please help me to write it in the acceptable form. I tried to delete thing which were more "advertised text" so I would like to ask you to read it again.
ProtectONE original (talk) 14:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Spam, and user has been blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
15:42:31, 24 March 2020 review of submission by Kingof23s edit
Kingof23s (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi there Kingof23s. Not every article is notable for inclusion into Wikipedia. To merit inclusion into Wikipedia, the subject of your article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. Currently your article has none. Also if you have a conflict of interest, please declare that following the guidelines on the page I have linked. Thanks and let me know if you have further questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 18:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Kingof23s, I rejected your article as it isn't notable for inclusion for Wikipedia. In doing so I had to fix the submission template that you had. But it seems as if the software thinks I submitted the article. So now I'm going to copy and paste the decline message on your talk page. Hopefully this doesn't cause any confusion! Sam-2727 (talk) 18:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
16:04:09, 24 March 2020 review of draft by Arief Salim edit
- Arief Salim (talk · contribs)
Hi there,
My name is Arief and I am writing a Wikipedia article about Associate Professor Mohamed Dirani, who is the current Managing Director of Plano Pte Ltd and holds several Honorary roles in the Singapore Eye Research Institute and Centre for Eye Research Australia.
Referring to my second submission, which was declined on 5 March 2020 with the following comment: "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."
I received this exact comment for my first submission rejection. From there, I improved the second submission by omitting subjective wording and sentences, as well as any form of 'sell' in the new submission. However, the second submission was also rejected with the same comment. Therefore, may I inquire on how to best address this comment so that my submission can be approved?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Arief Salim (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Arief Salim, I think the advertisement part of your article comes from phrases like "connecting people through love and art" and this unnecessary description of the company ("The company manages smart device use and eye health among children and adults, with an emphasis on the management of myopia"). I think the more pressing concern is (1), all information must be verifiable. If the information on his accomplishments/life in general can't be verified in sources then it should be deleted. Also, a Wikipedia article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. Your first source seems to be some sort of press release so not independent while the second is user generated content so also not independent. Let me know if you have further questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 00:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
16:06:21, 24 March 2020 review of submission by Kingof23s edit
Kingof23s (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
16:56:15, 24 March 2020 review of submission by Bobswift12 edit
- Bobswift12 (talk · contribs)
I'm looking to understand how to build a business page that isn't seen as advertising? Other businesses have pages, what are your suggestions?
Bobswift12 (talk) 16:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Bobswift12, there are a lot of things that go into writing a neutral article. I'll only touch on the main points here. You say "they offer creative, strategic, and technology services for their clients." This is opinion written as fact. "Creative" services is a very opinionated statement, but it is written as if it is 100% true. This can be modified into a fact. This occurs throughout the article. The article gives undue weight to "accomplishments" or details that support the company. For instance "These are referred to as P.O.T.I.S. They stand for Passion, Ownership, Teamwork, Impact, and Skills" is certainly not needed in any neutrally written article. I should also note that the subject of your article likely isn't notable. That is, it is supported by multiple independent reliable sources that mention the subject of the article with more than a passing reference. I would encourage you not to edit this article further though and perhaps move onto other articles that are already included in Wikipedia. Your article has been rejected, which means it is unlikely it will be reviewed again. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Article edit
- Solangelo19 (talk · contribs)
They rejected my article it was a pretty good article too. I'm hurt.
Solangelo19 (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Solangelo19, There's no reason to be hurt. Nothing about the rejection was meant to be personal. I would recommend checking out the welcome message on your talk page. It has a good starting point of links and articles to read about how to create and contribute to Wikipedia. Cheers Sulfurboy (talk) 18:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
22:22:09, 24 March 2020 review of submission by Alina Karastamatova edit
Alina Karastamatova (talk) 22:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Dear Sulfurboy, thanks for approving my page. However I have to draw your attention to the fact that this page was planned to replace already existent one - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegro_and_the_euro, which provides much less information on the matter. I count on your support. Alina
- You should not have submitted a draft article but instead have edited the existing one here Montenegro and the euro. Theroadislong (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
22:48:56, 24 March 2020 review of draft by Cinephile786 edit
- Cinephile786 (talk · contribs)
UNFAIR REJECTION OF ARTICLE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Danish_Renzu The person has notable press on him : www.danishrenzufilms.com, two feature films and still it's not being accepted here.. please advice.
Cinephile786 (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Let's go off of WP:GNG to make this simple. In brief, that means you must have multiple independent reliable sources to back up your article. Here's a source by source analysis. [1] seems to be an autogenerated profile of sorts, perhaps a user written profile, and thus doesn't meet the reliability criterion. [2] could be debatable in meeting the notability criteria. It is mostly interview (not reliable or independent), but does have some introduction before it. [3] demonstrates notability. However you need multiple (typically interpreted to mean three) sources that meet these criteria. Just add these sources to the article and you will meet the notable criteria. Next, you should clean your submission of "advertisement" like content. That is, a lot of your submission seems to be written like a promotion. Wikiepedia articles must be written in a neutral tone. For instance, "starring Academy winning" doesn't need to be there. Also subtle phrases like "He even took" suggest an opinion of the author of the article, which means that the article isn't written in a neutral tone. Please clean up these issues before resubmitting. Sam-2727 (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)