Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 June 26

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< June 25 << May | June | Jul >> June 27 >
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.


June 26

edit

06:15:49, 26 June 2021 review of submission by Joshua Gooden

edit


Tanner Rozankovic has recently hit big in the media again within the past 4 weeks having over 6 million views together in videos about him and his projects, I believe Tanner is well suitable for a biography page here on Wikipedia and would like to request a re-review of this page.

Joshua Gooden (talk) 06:15, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Gooden, That draft is one big soapbox. The sources are unreliable, there are so many neutrality issues, and nothing suggests that the subject is notable, per both our notability criteria for biographies and our general notability criteria. To be frank, the draft seems like one big advertisement, which is probably why it was rejected in the first place. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Curbon7 (talk) 06:22, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:16:43, 26 June 2021 review of submission by Abhayesports

edit

How is this topic not notable? As per my understanding of wikipedia’s policies i see this very easily passes GNG and has strong RS. This was last time deleted due to storm of comments by sockpuppete. I’d like to know the reason of declining of this submission with respect to Wikipedia’s policies. What policy does it fail? I have checked, it meets WP:GNG, WP:Basic very easily. Also I’m being labelled as if I’ve taken money for this but my sole reason is to add this article to Wikipedia because I believe this would be a good addition. I have came across way too many articles who don’t have enough reliable sources, but they still stand here. Why is that? Does wikipedia have diff policies for diff people? Warm Regards---Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 06:16, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abhayesports Please read other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean that yours can too. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to pitch in and help, you are welcome to help identify other inappropriate articles for possible action.
Your draft was declined because it just told about the person and what they do. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. It's not enough to just tell us what the person has done, it must summarize what others say about why the subject is significant.
For a more specific answer, please ask the reviewer directly. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, Thank you for the clarification, the tone might not be good yet but how does that make the subject non-notable? As per my understanding and research on wikipedia, the notability is defined by multiple Reliable sources and as per 3 best sources rule, Zeyan Shafiq clearly meets them, last time there was an AfD for it and it was stormed by fake people trying to get the article down, i'm up for a discussion on which policy has the reviewer(Hatchens )followed while declining it? There must be something that this subject fails, otherwise the only reason which i can think off is the reviewer has declined it because i have a COI with this subject since he is my employer, but i tried to make it very neutral just because i think it definitely deserves an Wikipedia article just like other CEO's in the space, i tried to trim the promotional content as much as i could and i feel it is a good fit for the encyclopaedia at this version and maybe if some more volunteers would help in they could trim it further and make it much more neutral.Warm Regards---Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 17:16, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:34:17, 26 June 2021 review of submission by 2A02:A465:C8D5:1:B80A:5789:DBD7:E263

edit


The draft article "Henk Jan de Jonge" has been moved to the start-class. I have looked at the suggestions for improvement of drafts in this class. However, in my view, all the references are to reliable, verifiable, impartial sources or to objective, peer reviewed scholarly publications. The content of the draft seems reasonably complete. If there are other imperfections (grammar, style?), could you please point these out to me?

2A02:A465:C8D5:1:B80A:5789:DBD7:E263 (talk) 09:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2A02:A465:C8D5:1:B80A:5789:DBD7:E263, Bumped it to C-class. Curbon7 (talk) 11:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:36:00, 26 June 2021 review of draft by Annaoue

edit


I want to know how I can submit my draft for review. It’s called Draft:& (Loona EP).

Annaoue (talk) 10:36, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Annaoue, I've done this for you, but in the future you can do it by typing {{subst:submit}} at the top of the draft. Spicy (talk) 10:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That album has not yet been released. The draft is too soon until 28 June. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

11:34:12, 26 June 2021 review of submission by TheProBodyCoach

edit


TheProBodyCoach (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TheProBodyCoach You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a subject, not what it wants to say about itself. Please review the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:24:55, 26 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mannitish

edit


My draft article about Kanchan Adhikari rejected and reason given that there is lack of notability about the person. I don't understand how can article reviewer can comment this. Kanchan Adhikari has done tremendous job in the marathi film industry, she is an old, popular and respected name in the industry. Her films are among best feature films in the marathi film industry. all these have been shared in reference URLs.

Mannitish (talk) 13:24, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mannitish Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. The draft is not rejected. It has been pushed back to youi for further work. Instead of telling us here what she has done, make the draft show us. The reviewer has told you how. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:24, 26 June 2021 review of submission by Dick Weissmann

edit

The submission was rejected so soon, it cannot be assumed that any proper consideration was given to the content. This is disappointing and unacceptable. Even if this article is rejected at this time, it will be approved within months. The Dick F. Weissmann meme is the subject of considerable investigation, for which considerable research will be published in the coming months. The memes, which existed tacitly within certain environments, are being collated and published. There are plans in the pipeline to depict derivations of the Dick F. Weissmann meme in other mediums. This will eventually turn out to be the "Murphy" or "Karen" of a particular setting. Therefore, even if the content does not seem important to the bot making the decisions, it soon will be undeniable, and this submission may just as well be accepted at this point in time. Dick Weissmann (talk) 14:48, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing unacceptable here is this draft, considering it is some combination of a poorly-sourced autobiography, a poor attempt at humor, blatant self-promotion, and a copyright violation; the latter two reasons are why it has now been deleted. --Kinu t/c 15:08, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A bot didn't make the decision; articles are reviewed by human volunteers since there's too much nuance involved in reviewing article drafts for a bot to be anything but a hindrance. You also have it completely backwards; the sources need to exist first and then the article can be written. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 02:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:58:03, 26 June 2021 review of submission by 2405:201:5C01:B06C:38A4:8654:8DFD:9133

edit

Please tell me how i can publish this article. Imposior is an author and my dear friend. He has website at which he posts his stories. Please tell me how i can publish this article. 2405:201:5C01:B06C:38A4:8654:8DFD:9133 (talk) 14:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this draft is not notable. --Kinu t/c 15:03, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:25:55, 26 June 2021 review of submission by Sanarkroid

edit

I need help to publish my draft at Draft:My Beautiful Laundrette (EP), but I can't cause when I submitted it for article creation, a reviewer said me that my draft "do not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied" and that "it reads like an advertisement", so help please

Sanarkroid (talk) 15:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sanarkroid I've fixed your link to be a proper internal link; the whole web address is not necessary. Your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears that the topic does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of the notability of music. No amount of editing can change that, so you will have to let the matter rest until the notability can be later demonstrated. 331dot (talk) 16:10, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Release section is a blurb to sell the CD. That is advertising. McClenon mobile (talk) 19:35, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:16:27, 26 June 2021 review of draft by Loyalkent

edit


I created my first article draft. It is an article about a corporation, Island Creek Oysters. In the article, I have defined the business, identified the founder, chronologically detailed its history, and provided a contextual basis for the business. I am in no way affiliated with the business in question or persons involved in the business. It has been rejected because it reads like an advertisement. How can I appear any less biased? Loyalkent (talk) 16:16, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Loyalkent A Wikipedia article must do more than tell about a company and what it does. It must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Most of the sources you offered are press release type stories or announcements of routine business activities, which do not establish notability. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot :meters Thank you, that was helpful. I just created a page Duxbury Yacht Club -- is it up to snuff with respect to notability and reference variety?--Loyalkent (talk) 13:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)loyalkent[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_June_26&oldid=1031511763"