Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 May 5

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< May 4 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 6 >
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.


May 5

edit

03:34:20, 5 May 2021 review of submission by 2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F

edit


2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F (talk) 03:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:11:19, 5 May 2021 review of submission by Momin nabi mir

edit 
There are alot of people in my area or country who want to copy my name, and activties and there are a lot of platforms where it asks for nam on wikipedia like instagram verification and so on .so please i would like you to publish my page please.

Momin nabi mir (talk) 04:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every claim that could potentially be challenged for any reason whatsoever MUST be cited to a strong third-party source that corroborates it or, if no such sources can be found, removed. This is a hard requirement when writing biographical content about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is not negotiable. I personally am of the opinion that social media should not be using Wikipedia for any sort of verification scheme due to its crowdsourced nature. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:44:32, 5 May 2021 review of submission by 2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F

edit

HLO SIR KINDLY REVIEW MY PAGE THIS IS GENUINE AND AUTHENCTIC PAGE THIS PAGE IS ABOUT GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL IT'S MY HUMBLE REQUEST TO THE ADMIN TO RE-REVIEW THE PAGE THANK YOU 2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F (talk) 04:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every claim that could potentially be challenged for any reason whatsoever MUST be cited to a strong third-party source that corroborates it or, if no such sources can be found, removed. This is a hard requirement when writing biographical content about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is not negotiable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:35:23, 5 May 2021 review of draft by 46.140.63.202

edit


I truly need help because I have been making this page about this swiss entrepreneur who owns a pharmaceutical company supporting cancer patience, but it has be rejected 3 times due to its bibliographical likeness. I tried following other pages’s format in order to be correct yet it says that it looks too much like a CV.. help?

46.140.63.202 (talk) 06:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is stuffed full of blatant advertising such as "As a family-based and values-oriented company, Riccardo believes that it’s Helsinn’s people who have been the main ingredient in its successful recipe in the past decades." totally inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:00:08, 5 May 2021 review of submission by 217.74.215.134

edit


217.74.215.134 (talk) 08:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. No sources, no article, no debate. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 08:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:51:57, 5 May 2021 review of submission by Beeloser

edit


Beeloser (talk) 09:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Tim's comments make perfect sense and clearly I should have realised.... What I was attempting to do was reflect how the BBKA is made up of a large number of regional associations. Should I simply remove the urls to each sub-organisation? Each region can decide whether they are notable enough in their own right to create their own page? Beeloser (talk) 09:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beeloser: If there aren't articles about each region already I wouldn't bother with a template like this, I would instead make a comment on the main organizations page about how many regions are covered with no sort of list. The regions don't decide if they are considered notable enough for Wikipedia. Wikipedia has policies WP:N to help identify notable subjects. We also strongly discourage people or groups writing about themselves on Wikipedia WP:COI. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 14:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:58:22, 5 May 2021 review of draft by JohnH.Jackson VP

edit


The draft of the page has been rejected due to a lack of objectivity, I tried to delete the words and paragraphs being subjective or implying a value, but I would like to know how I could improve the draft still. I took also a look at other similar pages (and also at the page about "other stuff exists" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Other_stuff_exists to see the relevance of the comparison) to improve the draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willem_C._Vis_Moot & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_C._Jessup_International_Law_Moot_Court_Competition)

In the meantime, I added a few citations that are neutral (in a sense that coming from 1. not the subject of the article nor the people related to it and 2. relevant sources and entities) and continued with making the text more neutral to fit with the pillar n*2. For one of the comments made about the fact that it sounded more like advertising, I tried to delete the parts that were not purely factual, but I wonder if this includes the description of some technical aspects of the topic of the article?

JohnH.Jackson VP (talk) 09:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:40:09, 5 May 2021 review of submission by 2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F

edit

RE-REVIEW PLEASE 2402:3A80:BAF:D48A:89AD:9CBA:84DD:5A9F (talk) 10:40, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:42:34, 5 May 2021 review of draft by Dr Salfiyah Shameem

edit 
Hello sir, i have a few questions:

1) why was my article deleted if i had mentioned the several references into it? 2) Aren’t three references enough? 3) How many more references should i include? 4)what sources are required to be filled in. Thanks and regards

Dr Salfiyah Shameem (talk) 10:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Salfiyah Shameem Your draft was declined, not deleted. Please review the autobiography policy to learn why writing about yourself(while not forbidden) is inadvisable, and please also read why an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. You offer no independent reliable sources with sigificant coverage of you, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Citing articles you have written does not do that- we want to know what others have chosen on their own to say about you. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:22, 5 May 2021 review of submission by 1samirpatel1000

edit


1samirpatel1000 (talk) 10:43, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1samirpatel1000 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company; Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company.
If you work for this company, you must review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you may need to make. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:08:19, 5 May 2021 review of draft by 2402:800:61AE:AF97:758E:ADD2:DA7:DA4

edit


Draft:Harry Nelson (Attorney) The page was declined because of being "improperly sourced" - I do not understand what a 'proper source' is if Forbes, etc is not proper. Thank you for your assistance.

2402:800:61AE:AF97:758E:ADD2:DA7:DA4 (talk) 12:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes citation is to an article written by the subject of the draft. That does not establish notability. A Wikipedia article summarizes 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. None of the sources you have offered are appropriate, for differing reasons. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 13:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:25:30, 5 May 2021 review of submission by ABSTYS

edit

Please reply ABSTYS (talk) 13:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABSTYS Please place follow up comments in the existing sections you have created, instead of creating additional sections. That won't get you a reply any faster. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I replied above namely, your draft was rejected, it is one line long "Ravi Prakash is the founder and CEO of Screamer.in and COVID EXCHANGE' and gives no indication of passing notability guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 13:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15:31:58, 5 May 2021 review of draft by Kepler-1229b

edit


🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 15:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kepler-1229b It is very simple - you ask a question, you get an answer - you do not ask a question, you get no answer.... CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did. It got erased.🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 19:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kepler-1229b I do not know where you asked but in your contributions log there is no question of yours listed. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:08:03, 5 May 2021 review of draft by S Tallim

edit


The Draft:Bhupinder Singh Mahal is now fully revamped. Does the revised draft meet Wikipedia criteria? S Tallim (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)S Tallim[reply]

S Tallim (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi S Tallim. That question will be answered by the next review. The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed for 3 weeks. The current backlog is 5 months, so you're probably looking at October. Reading a few paragraphs at random, I think it very unlikely that the draft will be accepted in its current state. The violations of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are too severe and too rampant. It's such a mess that I can't easily tell whether the topic will ever be acceptable. You may find Help:Your first article helpful. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:56:29, 5 May 2021 review of draft by Getdizzi

edit


I have requested to get help for submitting and publishing the article I wrote for my subject. I feel that I have made the appropriate changes and have not seen an update or gotten any feedback that I am aware of in how to fix it or have it go live. Can someone please help me? It has been months.

Getdizzi (talk) 18:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getdizzi You need to click "resubmit" in the notice at the top in order to formally resubmit it. I'm wondering if you have an association with this person. 331dot (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_May_5&oldid=1022538630"