Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 October 30

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< October 29 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 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.


October 30 edit

00:46:56, 30 October 2020 review of draft by 180.246.48.94 edit

I have a draft on Draft:Joel Nielsen (music artist) that although pretty good (and I have a primary and backup reference), its still looking very flimsy. Can anyone give a review for my draft?

And i need a picture of him.
180.246.48.94 (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello IP, I've left a comment on the draft. Dylsss(talk • contribs) 01:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:58:26, 30 October 2020 review of submission by 70.54.104.165 edit


70.54.104.165 (talk) 02:58, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Snowycat I updated the entry "Gifted Education International." I should tell you that it is not a predator journal. It has been published since 1982.

03:03:29, 30 October 2020 review of submission by 70.174.25.169 edit


Evan has made significant headway with the Neptune Fest Scandal, causing a local outcry from media outlets in the area. His expansive efforts into to technological innovation (HeyyyU) and nonprofit activities are commendable. Since so few high schoolers are doing this. I find it necessary for such an article to be posted.




70.174.25.169 (talk) 03:03, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, he does not meet our qualifications for notability to create a Wikipedia article. We appreciate your efforts, however, this is not a fit for Wikipedia. Snowycats (talk) 04:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:41:56, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Saksham08 edit


Saksham08 (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Saksham08: The draft currently contains no evidence whatoever that this subject meets WP:NCORP. See also WP:CSMN. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:28:36, 30 October 2020 review of submission by SEOBYSGNR edit

@SEOBYSGNR: exactly zero of the sources used in the draft are independent of the subject. It therefore currently fails WP:NCORP. What would realy be needed now is your WP:THREE. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:27:17, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Damola33 edit


I need assistance in reviewing the article and also I have taken out all copyrighted content. The article is written in WP:NPOV and all sources are verified. Damola33 (talk) 09:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


09:36:19, 30 October 2020 review of draft by GeeMcLagan edit


I want to ABANDON my attempts to make an entry for myself - Graeme McLagan. It is clear that it violates wikipedia rules. I have tried to follow wikipedia procedures and have already entered {{Db-g7}} in an attempt to DELETE the draft entry, but am unsure whether this has been correctly done. I would be grateful if someone could check and get back to me. Thank you. GeeMcLagan (talk) 09:36, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't. I've put the deletion tag in on your behalf, linking to you making the request here (so that it can't be construed as me acting against your wishes). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:25:35, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Robertgrh1 edit


I'm struggling to understand what I'm doing incorrectly. I took out all wikipedia references and left in only external ones but this still does not seem to be effective. The organization I'm trying to profile has plenty of press coverage etc and is genuine but I still can't seem to get it right. I suspect I need to do something fairly simple but don't know what. Thank you in advance for any assistance you are able to give. Robert


Robertgrh1 (talk) 10:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


This is about Draft:Global Business Coalition Against Human Trafiking; the first necessary, which I have just done for you, is to move it to the correct spelling Draft: Global Business Coalition Against Trafficking. The next steps, which are up to you, is to remove all material that is promotional or likely to be of interest only to those associated with the project. This includes such jargon as "highlight the challenges that businesses face" or " help the initiative grow and more fully realize its mission over the long-term." or "to understand and right-size their response" ; adjectives such as "leading" ; name-dropping ; and, in general, any material that would seem appropriate for an organization web site. After that, you can deal with errors such as not using external references in the text & making sure each reference shows the title of the website,
But that still leaves the fundamental issue that almost all the references are from the organization itself or its affiliates, or republications of them. You need substantial 3rd party reliable published sources, not blogs or postings or mere notices. Perhaps the lack of such references is a reflection of the apparent fact (based on your text) that the organization had not yet actually done anything but issue plans and press releases. DGG ( talk ) 00:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:54, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Lekshmiss edit


Lekshmiss (talk) 10:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


https://www.google.com/search?q=silvius+boby+silva&tbm=isch&chips=q:silvius+boby+silva,online_chips:certificate+ofparticipation&client=firefox-b-d&hl=en-US&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiQxP3hkNzsAhVF8DgGHdThDgoQ4lYoBHoECAEQGA&biw=1133&bih=654

silvius boby silva is famous software professional and laboratory qc

why you rejected my submission??????????????????????????????????????????

Hm... I would not say that rejection with this exact reason was the correct thing to do. Howewer, the draft likely needs to be rewritten in mayor parts. I am going to insert 7 Steps in creating an article below:
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:58, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:10:23, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Sreekuttypp edit


Sreekuttypp (talk) 11:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See the answer in the section just above. Please do not paste the text of the draft in this page, and don't use more than one account (there is more information about that on your user talk pages). --bonadea contributions talk 11:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article is poorly written and only has one "source" which is just a Google image search.--Excel23 (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:28:19, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Rajinder Singh Meena edit


Rajinder Singh Meena (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Repeatedly submitting an article without so much as reading the critiques of the reviewers just wastes your time. In addition, we are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:40:33, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Excel23 edit

I need a second, or third, opinion on my draft. Excel23 (talk) 15:40, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excel23, the sources are a bit excessive, near the point of WP:REFBOMBING, but the subject is probably notable. A few of the sources are a bit unreliable as well, so that may be a bit problematic. Eternal Shadow Talk 20:58, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Eternal Shadow, thank you I think I took out the sources you referred to.--Excel23 (talk) 23:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excel23, 1 to 2 sources for each important statement should do. Eternal Shadow Talk 23:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:14:19, 30 October 2020 review of draft by CasaBasaSF edit


Not sure if naming convention is correct, nor how to move to draft space, thought I was in the draft space. Finally, I do know K.A. Colorado though we are not close friends. He is a friend of a friend, and organized an art show I participated in over 30 years ago. I've heard from him a handful of times through the years, generally when there is a more technical need. I set up his Facebook page for him so he thinks I'm the go-to for tech. But an artist/climatologist that deserves to have his work recognized. Thank you. CasaBasaSF (talk) 18:14, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CasaBasaSF, Your draft is now at Draft:K.A. Colorado, the proper place. You still have a conflict of interest with him. Please see the reviewer's comments to get started on your edits. Snowycats (talk) 00:27, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:34:59, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Benyak2 edit


Benyak2 (talk) 20:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benyak2, You have made some improvements, however, there is no need for the laundry list styles of everything towards the end of your article. Snowycats (talk) 00:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewers have accused this wiki entry as self promoting and reads like an advertisement for the Sholette. This reads no differently than most other wiki sites of academic scholars. I am at a loss to know how to change this to make acceptable. Please give concrete examples of what is not acceptable, and.or a concrete example of a wiki entry that is acceptible that can be used as. template. Please send to (Redacted)

Procedural note, Helpers at {{subst:FULPAGENAME}} or any other Wikipedia help desk will respon on-wiki not by email. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:18:27, 30 October 2020 review of submission by Lnayar edit


1. Please provide specifics on what constitutes the rejection of the biography because the subject was a noted author in his field, who led many other junior writers and folks in the field, who are alive and on Wikipedia. Links have been added to those Wiki pages. An example is M. Leelavathy who received her doctorate under S.K.'s guidance, so did Padma Subramanyan. There are plenty of others.

2. He won the Kerala Sahitya Acadamy award, which is a prestigious award.

3. He was famous all over Kerala and Tamil Nadu literary circles.

4. Please click on the external links to see unbiased secondary writeups and pages devoted to S.K. Nayar. There are many newspapers and other publication clips that are in regional languages and in English as well that can be added.

5. I have sources and references added and did not think that adding foot notes/citations would make a difference. But can include that.

Please provide more specifics that will help publish this page because this is a long over due deserving biography of an individual who contributed extensively to language and literature.


Lnayar (talk) 23:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lnayar, Let's clarify first: here at AfC, a decline and a rejection are different. Your article was declined.
You have used 0 inline citations to prove your points, and therefore, do not demonstrate notability as the credibility of your statements can not be verified. Snowycats (talk) 00:26, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Lnayar: It seems obvious, and indeed it is, to include the name of the article when you're requesting help or clarification about that article. Since you are asking about Draft:Dr. S.K. Nayar, to see the most glaring problems, one need not venture beyond the second and third paragraphs of the lede, which are so full of "reverence" for the subject (and believe me, that's the nicest way I could put it) that it is entirely incompatible with a neutral encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialise family members, and especially not to drool over them, which is why we strongly discourage people with obvious conflicts of interest from editing articles they have a conflict with. Even if you were somehow able to remove all of the non-neutral language (and again, you should not be editing an article if you have a conflict of interest), you would also need to demonstrate that he "contributed extensively to language and literature", by showing the community references where established, mainstream, independent sources wrote about him in depth, not just passing mentions like this catalogue, which just indicates he wrote some stuff. You need to read the details surrounding our General Notability Guideline. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_October_30&oldid=987133869"