Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 January 13

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< January 12 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 14 >
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.


January 13

edit

02:19:12, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Ktrhny

edit

Hi! Please review this article one more time. 2 links was removed. Ktrhny (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ktrhny, no references. search on google shows no usable articles for references thus notability unknown. assessment by reviewer is correct. – robertsky (talk) 02:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:01:01, 13 January 2022 review of submission by AnthonyWayne155

edit


I don't know why Wikipedia rejected the articles I wrote about GDRP's history, what it is, and why it's vital to society. AnthonyWayne155 (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because we don't accept blatantly obvious advertizement. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:12, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:20:15, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Ktrhny

edit

Please review changes. Thanks! Ktrhny (talk) 05:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ktrhny. The subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone article). Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:00:10, 13 January 2022 review of draft by Paul Peens

edit


Hi, I am struggling to upload jpeg. pictures and our logo with this article. I have read the tutorials pages and followed the instructions very meticulously with no success. I have renamed the pictures to something very specific to our school but still nothing. I was really hoping to get someone to help me upload the pictures. It is 3 jpeg images I took with my own camera and would like to appear as Thumbs next to the article. The page that directs one to someone who will create the article for me also just takes me back to "create new article." So I am attempting to do it myself but am open to suggestions...


Paul Peens (talk) 07:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother until you get the sourcing for this page sorted. The images are not going to help the draft at all. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:50:37, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Rafa Garcia Aguado

edit


I am requesting assistance because: - I tried to add some information on Wikipedia about CUE Podgorica. - On 18th November you texted me saying that the info was too commercial and needed to be more historical. - I adapted the text twice to make it as Wikipedia wish but got no answers and text is not published.

What should I do next? please I need your help. thanks,

Rafa Garcia Aguado If you feel you have addressed the concerns given to you, you may resubmit the draft. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:06:03, 13 January 2022 review of submission by 103.103.33.42

edit

Hello sir. How can I make it perfect and get it approved? 103.103.33.42 (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been removed as advertising. There was no way in its present form that it would be acceptable to Wikipedia. See WP:PROMO. TechnoTalk (talk) 02:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:07:56, 13 January 2022 review of draft by Arthistorygirl202

edit


Hello, I am assisting with creating a wiki page for a highly acclaimed artist and would like for the page to be taken out of the draft stages. It has been flagged as using non-reliable sources which is not the case, considering the information was gained from an interview with the artist that has been published online and is cited as a course. Please take down the flags for the citations and draft stage or let me know how to do so.

Thank You. Arthistorygirl202 (talk) 14:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arthistorygirl202 Interviews are not an independent reliable source, and not acceptable for establishing notability. The flag is correct. 331dot (talk) 15:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What you called a flag was the decline message from a reviewer, it must remain until and if the draft is accepted. "Flag" usually refers to a maintenance tag on an article. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:46, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Favour Enom

edit

please revie w this i didnt make any mistake Favour Enom (talk) 15:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:33:38, 13 January 2022 review of submission by Calvinn1

edit


I am posting here because the last variation of my draft was not accepted into the main space for supposedly "passing mention" in the sources. The article contains a review from a well-known critic, charts, and other media publications that describe the person and some nominations in as much detail as possible. Ranks 4th as the most followed Likee blogger. And this is also confirmed by an authoritative source in the article. Collectively significant as a blogger and singer.

Calvinn1 (talk) 18:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Calvinn1NewsMuz is the only source that shows any notability. Interviews, Awards (Unless a Grammy or equivalen), Bios do not confer notability. Also, while not a criteria here, she is 11, maybe let a kid be a kid without having a wikipedia page follow them for the rest of their lives.Slywriter (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Slywriter, what does age have to do with it? Letidor won the Runet Prize in 2013, which is why it is very authoritative. The owner of Letidor is a well-known company Rambler. 7 days is also a very famous media, they describe her biography in full. And in general, being in the top position in a well-known application is strong, and this is confirmed by the source. Calvinn1 (talk) 18:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Calvinn1I said that part was a personal opinion and has no bearing on the articles merits. No idea what Letidor and Runet have to do with this article. Back to the merits, 7 Day is useless for Wikipedia as its an unsigned bio page, not something ever used as a reliable source on wikipedia plus read heavily promotional and likely had input by the subject or her agents.Slywriter (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yet Letidor remains a fairly authoritative site. About 7 days, I can not answer anything. By the way, NEWSmuz.com also confirms the popularity of the blogger in Likee. Do you really not consider it significant to be one of the most famous in a global application? Also in the article there are charts from BandLink. Calvinn1 (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Its an interview with her mom, does not confer notability. Neither do charts.Slywriter (talk) 19:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But in the same place, after all, the article was not written entirely in the form of an interview :) Less than half of the article is an interview. And for some reason you sidestep the fact that Likee is famous and the charts. Calvinn1 (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charts DO NOT confer notability. No side-step. Third time I've said it now. And it's an interview and no its not half interview/ half article. Likee being popular also not really meaningful. Wikipedia cares about independent reliable sources. You generally can not create notability with primary sources. Finding better sources and resubmit is a much more fruitful use of everyone's time than trying to convince reviewers that your sources are special when they have already taken the time to look and found them lacking.Slywriter (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks :) Calvinn1 (talk) 19:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict, what I get for being long-winded) I don't see the relevance of a Runet Prize either. It was awarded to "SUP Media - Letidor project" in the category "Safe Runet". It isn't clear what the SUP Media - Letidor project was, or in what way it was safe (safe from hackers, safe for children, a safe space for expression?). Whatever the answers are, the prize clearly has nothing to do with whether Letidor has a reputation for accuracy and fact checking, in other words, whether it is a reliable source.
Some content in the magazine 7 Days may be reliable, but the draft cites their "Encyclopedia of Stars", a sub-section of their "Stars" section, next to "Gossip Column", "Private Life", and "Ratings". This looks like tabloid journalism of the sort that Wikipedia does not consider reliable. On all of ru.wikipedia.org, 7days.ru/stars/bio is cited only 2-3 times, suggesting that Russian-speaking Wikipedians don't think much of it as a source.
NEWSmuz.com is a blog self-published by "Guru Ken". If he's a subject matter expert, you may cite it for his opinion, but under no circumstances may you cite it for matters of fact about a living person, doing so is a violation of WP:BLPSPS. Popularity in a social media app such as Likee has nothing to do with notability. BandLink is not an acceptable chart on Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:35:33, 13 January 2022 review of draft by 103.199.69.109

edit


103.199.69.109 (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but have you considered just adding this short draft as a new section to Internet Society? TechnoTalk (talk) 02:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:18, 13 January 2022 review of draft by JackCanada1970

edit


Hello - I am working to get this page finalized and OK for publishing. I think we have now cleaned it up and ensured that it meets the burden needed to be considered to be notable, but I would welcome a look over by an experienced editor. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alexa_Swinton

JackCanada1970 (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JackCanada1970: - When you say we, if you're referring to working with RolfeSwinton, you may have to declare a conflict of interest. See WP:COI. WP:NACTOR requires that the person have significant roles in multiple shows. I've not watched the series And Just Like That so can't judge whether Alexa's role is significant, but hopefully others can. TechnoTalk (talk) 02:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hi - no I meant edits made by myself and by BD2414 - the last two people to edit this.

Thanks TechnoTalk! And re significant roles - having the lead of one ABC show, and then a key recurring character in another (And Just Like That) + leading role in a major feature film seem to more than meet that standard compared to other actors I looked up. For example - Robert Bailey Jr who was another cast member in Emergence. Thanks again for input and feedback - reviewed your edits and I understand what you did - very nice cleaning up - much tighter and removing of extraneous text! JackCanada1970 (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JackCanada1970. I see some real problems with that draft. For example, one of her roles is is described as "groundbreaking", an extraordinary claim that is cited to the headline (never a reliable source) of an interview of her (not a reliable, independent source). The "groundbreaking" claim is attributed to "the media", which is a plural term. A single headline is not "the media". Where are the reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to Swinton as a person and an actor? Please see WP:THREE and mention your three best sources. Cullen328 (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_January_13&oldid=1066778684"