Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 August 24

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 23 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 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.


August 24 edit

00:55:28, 24 August 2022 review of draft by ChristianClarina edit


Hi, I’m requesting help as ChristianClarina. My first and only Wikipedia article keeps getting rejected because it lacks reliable sources. I don’t understand this, as I have referenced two books, (a) b Humphries, Mark Osborne A Weary Road: Shell Shock in the Canadian Expeditionary Force, 1914-1918. University of Toronto Press, and (b) Price, G. Ward, The Story of the Salonica Army (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1918, 2nd Edition). There are three references to the London Times (including the detailed obituary for Erin Massey). There are three other newspaper references, (Newcastle Courant, 1st. August 1884 (Gale database), Exeter and Plymouth Gazette, 13 July 1906 and the Western Times, 13 July 1906). There is also a reference to The National Archive of the UK; Kew, Surrey, England; War Office and Air Ministry: Service Medal and Award Rolls, First World War. WO329; Ref: 2323 and http://www.abitofhistory.net/html/rhw/c.htm I would really appreciate an explanation as to why these are considered not to be reliable sources.

ChristianClarina (talk) 00:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianClarina: Page numbers are hard-required for print citations; none of the sources you proffer has them. The extensive quotes also need to be removed; you do not need to quote a source to cite it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 01:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ChristianClarina you say "keeps getting rejected", but I can only see one decline, back in April (and no rejections, which is different and more terminal outcome). What am I missing? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DoubleGrazing. I've actually made several submissions over the last couple of years. ChristianClarina (talk) 05:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ChristianClarina Were those submissions under a different username perhaps? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:08:33, 24 August 2022 review of submission by WikiSoundtrack edit

Hello,

I was wondering how I can make my article better so it can be published. WikiSoundtrack (talk) 03:08, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Courtesy link: Draft:Pavlos Kyriakou -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiSoundtrack: you need to provide context and content to help the reader understand more about this person, and specifically why they are noteworthy enough to have been included in a global encyclopaedia. You also need to show they're notable, meaning that they've been covered in multiple reliable and independent publications; see WP:GNG. None of that is currently the case. (And please note, IMDb is not considered a reliable source, and Google search results is no source at all.) See WP:YFA for advice on how to create an article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:52:26, 24 August 2022 review of submission by LowLevel73 edit

Hello! The draft for the upcoming video game "Return to Monkey Island" was submitted for review several times four months ago and (correctly) rejected for WP:TOOSOON. Due to the repeated inappropriate submissions, it also received a warning.

I'm a new submitter who has completely rewritten the draft before resubmitting and I'm waiting patiently for it being reviewed. Still, I'm curious about AfC processes and I wanted to ask whether previous rejections and warnings might somehow slow down the reviewing of the new draft.

Cheers! 

► LowLevel (talk) 05:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speaking only as a editor from the VG wikiproject, the article at the state that it was in by the 2nd or 3rd review would have been a place that we at the Wikiproject would have readily created the article in mainspace as its initial announcement and preliminary development information (atop being a game in a notable series) would have been sufficient. Now this editor has greatly expanded the article with more development information and we have a release date less than a month away so this is clearly ready to go. However, I didn't want to promote it out of the AFC process cycle. --Masem (t) 11:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:LowLevel73 - I will answer one question. The previous rejection is (or at least should be) a block to further review. An editor should not resubmit a draft that has been rejected, at least not without discussing the reasons for the rejection; reviewers may nominate an article that was rejected and is resubmitted anyway for deletion. The AFC reviewers are not consistent in the use of rejection or in how rejected and resubmitted drafts are dealt with. In your case, you have tried, by coming here, to discuss the reasons for the rejection. I have not reviewed the draft in detail but will respond. I think that I disagree with the original rejection. It appears to have been rejected because the submitter was resubmitting it too persistently after being declined. I don't think that a rejection was necessary at that point. So, because you have tried to discuss the rejection, and because I am not sure whether it should have been rejected, I have removed the rejection. Your draft is now in a state of having been declined and resubmitted. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the answer, @Robert McClenon, I understand the process better, now.
    If I may provide a suggestion to hopefully improve the process: the fact that a large submission button stays in the draft page even after a draft is rejected might mislead other editors like me, who might not be aware that the draft shouldn't be resubmitted before discussing its rejection here. Maybe a simple way to reduce other undesired submissions could be to explicitly mention this requirement in the rejection banner?
    Thank also for removing the rejection! ► LowLevel (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    User:LowLevel73 - I and a few other editors have been saying for some time that the rules, or lack of rules, about rejection are poorly stated and confusing. I am not optimistic about any clarifications about rejection of drafts, at least not in the 2020s. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @LowLevel73: AFAIK, a submit button should not appear on rejected drafts (unless the templates have been manually changed / tampered with). The only button that should be there at that point is a blue 'Ask for advice' one, which brings the user here to the help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello @DoubleGrazing! I don't know if the templates had been manually changed, but here is a link to the old revision of the draft that showed to me both the "Ask for advice" and the "Finished drafting? Submit for review!" button. ► LowLevel73 (talk) 10:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:22:40, 24 August 2022 review of submission by IamNasirZaman edit 


hello wikipedia team you know i'm an international model And I have given you many of my news source reference links And you have also approved my Wikipedia page But now the speedy deletion notification is coming on it, it should be removed as soon as possible . i am very thankful to you but this issue  be finished as soon as possible If you want any other about me news link reference link go source gender then I can provide you But you should not delete this page

IamNasirZaman (talk) 06:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@IamNasirZaman: there's no speedy request on this draft, you must be thinking of the other draft which was deleted three times. In any case, if there were a speedy request on it, and you wanted to contest it, this wouldn't be the place to do that as that's not an AfC matter.
And neither is your current draft, strictly speaking, an AfC matter any more, as it has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hello wikipedia team you know i'm an international model And I have given you many of my news source reference links And you have also approved my Wikipedia page But now the speedy deletion notification is coming on it, it should be removed as soon as possible . i am very thankful to you but this issue be finished as soon as possible If you want any other about me news link reference link go source gender then I can provide you But you should not delete this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamNasirZaman (talk • contribs) 06:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@IamNasirZaman: We do not care about what other articles from you have made it to mainspace. We judge each draft on its merits. And congratulations, your whining has won you a critique from the Bastard Helper From Hell.
So your sources are essentially a bust. Let's look at your article text - and I have words for the Award section.
  • Imi was [born] into a Punjabi Muslim family in Lahore Pakistan[...] - Source? (Get used to that word and that link; it is going to be a fucking running theme.)
  • He hails from the Data Ganj Baksh in Lahore[...] - Source?
  • [...He] went to London when he was 18 to get a diploma in administrative management. - Source?
  • On Friday, he told Samaa TV that he was scouted by a modeling agency at 18 hasn't looked back ever since. I never thought I'd be among the big names in international fashion industry, but it all worked out on its own said Subhani. - There is a lot to unpack here:
    • We do not use relative periods of time like "Friday". You need to provide a specific date (In this case, Aug. 21, 2020 per the date on the relevant source).
    • Direct quotes must always be identified as such with quotation marks and attributed. There is no leeway here.
    • This entire paragraph - and most of the one preceding it - is plagiarised from the SAMAA source, and should be removed from the article on that basis alone. Material that has been copy-pasted from elsewhere is, and MUST, be removed upon discovery.
  • [...]Imi is a best known for his modeling work with renowned Pakistani fashion labels[...] - Source?
  • [...Imi] also mark his Television debut in 2013.[sic] - Source? What is cited there is not fit for purpose.
  • Imi won lux style award is the big achievers... - This entire sentence borders on word salad. Turns out there's a reason for this - most of it has been plagiarised from the Thenews.com.pk source.
  • 17th Lux Style Awards Best Model Male of the year - won - Source? I note our own article on the awards does not list him as winning the award, only being a nominee.
  • 19th Lux Style Award Best Model Of the year - won - I am going to be as blunt as a fucking atom bomb here: THE SOURCE DOES NOT SAY THAT AT ALL. Users have been indefinitely blocked for deliberately misrepresenting sources, and I cannot see this as anything but a wilful and deliberate misrepresentation since it's pretty obvious from even the most cursory of skims of the source that there is no generic "Model of the Year" category (it's gender-divided) and that even in the Male Model of the Year category he did not win it.
  • 20th Lux Style Awards Best Model Male Of the year - won - THE SOURCE DOES NOT SAY THAT AT ALL. In fact, the source explicitly states that the lists on it are merely the nominees for the 19th Lux Style awards, and predates the ceremony for those. This is something that would have been noticed with a quick skim of the source.
  • Hum Style Awards Best Model Male - won - THE SOURCES DOES NOT SAY THAT AT ALL. Once again, Imi is a nominee, with someone else winning in his category.
If I were you, I would start coming up with a very good reason why you shouldn't be sanctioned for blatant misrepresentation of sources. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 08:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano Terms like "Friday" remind me of those persistent Internet rumors which went around the world and back, such as the one about the sick boy who wanted to get cards in the mail. Many years later, the e-mail still said "Last week, ..." and it was still being forwarded. Sigh. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, IP, it's because the content was plagiarised from a published story with a fixed date on it (Aug 21, 2020, which was a Friday). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:06:11, 24 August 2022 review of submission by Kalan.Bond edit

I believe there is nothing wrong with my article and if you look at a similar Article by Yach Bol we have similar layouts and if their is anything I am doing wrong please let me know. Kalan.Bond (talk) 13:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kalan.Bond: the reviewers have, one after another, pointed out what is wrong — have you actually read any of the messages? If you just keep resubmitting the draft without addressing any of the reasons for declining, inevitably it will get rejected in the end. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:12, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kalan.Bond Please see Other Stuff Exists (click here). Other articles can be bad, and they might have been added to Wikipedia before there was a review process -- and maybe these other articles need to be deleted. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:24:27, 24 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Gareth Beyers edit


I am helping the company I work for publish a Wikipedia page. This is a new metaverse project that is leading the way in Africa.

We have several publications across pages like Forbes, Mail and Guardian, and a local News site.

I had some trouble with the basic format of referencing and interlinking.

Is there someone who can look at my draft and explain what the minimum requirements would be for us to get something published?

Thank you for reading my message. I hope someone can help me. All the best,


Gareth Beyers (talk) 13:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Beyers Wikipedia has articles, not pages. Most of your sources seem to be announcements of routine business activities, which does not establish notability. To merit an article, the company must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to wrote about it, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Please tell us your three best independent sources.
Thanks for making the proper disclosure- something many fail to do- but to be frank it is going to be very difficult for you to succeed. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, even more so with a conflict of interest. Also be aware that there are good reasons for your company to not want an article. 331dot (talk) 14:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gareth Beyers to expand on 331dot's excellent comments, please see Other Stuff Exists (click here). You mentioned that other articles "were accepted so to me means they pass the basic requirements". This is plausible, but as 331dot says (below, I think), many articles were added to Wikipedia in the past, before there was any review process at all. Some of these need to be improved or deleted, but with 6 million articles, we don't always notice the bad ones. Good luck. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

331dot Thank you for clarifying that. I have a large list of various publications. Our article is not promoting our company nearly stating what it is we do. Referencing a few other similar organizations that have published articles have similar structured articles with similar citings. Decentraland The Sandbox Axie infinity

Any help is appreciated.


@Gareth Beyers: word of advice, don't try to copy other articles (unless they are expressly rated as Good Articles), as they may have issues which you won't want to replicate in your draft. Make sure you follow the relevant guidelines instead. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
DoubleGrazing They were accepted so to me means they pass the basic requirements and should be a indicator of what is allowed. Gareth Beyers (talk) 08:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gareth Beyers That other articles exist does not necessarily mean that they were accepted by anyone. The AFC process is only required of new accounts, IP users, and those with a conflict of interest. It is not required of all users, and it has not always existed. There are any numerous ways to get inappropriate articles past us. We can only deal with what we know about. As DoubleGrazing states, if you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those classified as good articles. Those have been thoroughly edited and vetted by the community. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, when you say "Our article is not promoting our company nearly stating what it is we do", that's the definition of promotion. You do not have to be soliciting customers or selling something. 331dot (talk) 08:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you @331dot. Thanks for that link. Would I need to redraft the article for re-submission? Gareth Beyers (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gareth Beyers Any article about your company must not merely tell of the existence of the company and what it does- as I said above, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Sources that just document the routine business activities of the company(such as its commencement of operations, or interviews with its staff) do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:41:13, 24 August 2022 review of submission by Go.patriots01 edit


I am still adding information and new articles and achievements.

Go.patriots01 (talk) 14:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Go.patriots01 but this draft has been rejected (twice) and won't be considered again. Please understand that Wikipedia is a global encyclopaedia, not a social media or blogging platform where you can publish anything and everything. If your friend one day becomes so good and famous at something that the media are reporting on their achievements, then you may be able to summarise those reports into an article on them; until that happens, you need to drop this. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:25:04, 24 August 2022 review of draft by Glasgow87 edit


I have had feedback (21/08/22) from my draft submission for 'sustainable healthcare' stating that it breaches copyright. This was not intended and I would like to correct the relevant areas and re-submit. I would like to know which bits are a breach of copyright - can you be more specific to help me make more focused changes and to prevent the article being bounced back multiple times? I have put in some direct quotes but always put a reference point in after these - is this allowed? If you could give me more specific direction I would really appreciate it. Thank you

Glasgow87 (talk) 19:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Glasgow87: I can only find one passage which looks like a copyvio, namely the first para of the section 'Environmental issues in sustainable healthcare'. Other than that, you may need to ask the reviewer directly.
And yes, short quotations are allowed, but they must be clearly marked as such; just citing the source isn't enough. See MOS:QUOTE. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_August_24&oldid=1107441329"