Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 June 23

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< June 22 << May | June | Jul >> June 24 >
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 23 edit

09:19:13, 23 June 2022 review of draft by Blumate edit


Hi, my draft was just declined because "Not clear that they have notability.". The article already exists in the German Wikipedia and I just wanted to translate it. In the German article there were no problems with the notability. Can you help me fix this problem? Should I just add more sources? Thank you in advance. Blumate (talk) 09:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blumate (talk) 09:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blumate (talk) 09:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blumate: each different language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own rules and policies, including for notability — and of the ones I've come across, the English-language one is probably the strictest in that respect. Therefore having an article in one language doesn't in any way guarantee that it can be replicated in others. (I'm saying this without commenting on whether your subject may be notable or not.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your answer! I didn't know that there are different policies.
I am still pretty sure that the subject is notable. But I have mostly German independent sources. Is there still a way to prove the notability with only German sources? Blumate (talk) 10:37, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sources don't need to be in English — so yes, German sources are absolutely fine (assuming that they otherwise meet the relevant standards, of course). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again for your answer.
So in order to prove the notability I now need to add more reliable sources.
Could you maybe tell me where I can find an overview of the standards that the sources need to meet? Or send me a link? So I can check the already existing sources in the article and maybe add new/better ones. Blumate (talk) 11:04, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're trying to show notability per the general guideline, then WP:GNG tells you what's needed; it in turn links to further definitions of the various components making up that standard.
Alternatively, there is a specific guideline for academics, WP:NPROF, which doesn't require significant coverage in secondary sources. You need to make it clear which of the criteria 1 thru 8 in WP:NACADEMIC is met, and provide reliable evidence to support this, just saying that NPROF is met isn't enough.
Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing Thank you for your help!! Blumate (talk) 13:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:02:01, 23 June 2022 review of submission by STAUBERMGMT edit


Hello there,

My recent article was denied. It wasn't meant to be promotional. Perhaps there are to many links. I can delete them. Can I get some more tips on what to change to approve my article? Thanks

STAUBERMGMT (talk) 10:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Draft deleted, user indeffed) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:20, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:55:03, 23 June 2022 review of draft by Miklonzo edit


My name is Claude-Michel Nzotungicimpaye. I wrote this article about my late father, with his CV being my main source. I did my best to provide online references (sources) where available. Please note that some of these references are in French as we are from a francophone country. Moreover, a version of this article exists in French with more or less the same references (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_Nzotungicimpaye). That being said, I realized that the reviewer(s) of this article declined its publication. Please what specific section(s)/part(s) of the article need further references?

Miklonzo (talk) 13:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Miklonzo: Each Wikipedia project has its own standards and practises; when it comes to sourcing English Wikipedia tends to be amongst the strictest. Your main issue is demonstrating notability; at a glance I'd argue you need to shoot for WP:NACADEMIC here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments! I updated the page by removing two sections (Teaching & Research) in order to comply with the requirements by Wikipedia. Perhaps we will add these two sections in the future after gathering sufficient references/sources to back them up. I'm going to resubmit the draft page for consideration for publication. Miklonzo (talk) 16:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:49:03, 23 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Skillgirl edit


Wondering if there is an appeals process for the article’s declination based on lack of “notability?” It seems that the first woman ceo of an established (117-year old) national nonprofit supporting 35,000 museums and a published author, frequently quoted by the New York Times and various media outlets is notable. The Atlantic, Washington Post, and Politico found the subject notable enough to cover her appointment to the position and, subsequently, her work with specific articles (not just passing mentions). Additional media outlets such as The Chronicle of Philanthropy have covered her pioneering work. These citations are all included in the submission. Appreciate any advice. Skillgirl (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Skillgirl — a few things:
  1. Firstly, I didn't reject your draft, I only declined it, so the 'appeals process' is that you address the reasons for declining, and resubmit. And even if another reviewer is prepared to accept it as it stands, therefore effectively overruling me, they won't do that until you click that blue 'resubmit' button, because currently the draft isn't even in the review pool.
  2. 'The first woman CEO', and claims-to-fame of that ilk, are not inherently notable; you still need to show notability by the WP:GNG route.
  3. Being 'quoted' in MSM is also not a notability criterion; being significantly covered is. So if the NYT quotes her in an article on the museum sector, that almost certainly won't contribute towards her notability. If they write an article on her, that potentially does.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:18, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:55:08, 23 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by MarinaGraceJohnson edit


My article has been turned down as I said I was unpaid, in fact I am paid and I am writing on behalf of a client. This is not my business. Also none of the links go to material produced by the company itself, but to published articles about the company by other publications. Can you tell me how to change my profile from unpaid to paid, as this might improve my submission. Also advise on why the citations are not accepted when they are in fact independent. Many thanks.


MarinaGraceJohnson (talk) 14:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MarinaGraceJohnson: the instructions for disclosing your paid status, and your employer or client, can be found at WP:PAID.
Disclosing is mandatory, and won't in and of itself 'improve your submission', but it at least means you're no longer in violation of the UPE rules. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:41:23, 23 June 2022 review of submission by The all and brand new jimmytoast edit


The all and brand new jimmytoast (talk) 15:41, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Courtesy link: Draft:Chikn nuggit
Twitter is never going to be an acceptable source for notability and even if it were one source cannot justify an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:57:05, 23 June 2022 review of submission by Cgdunnckmbc edit


Cgdunnckmbc (talk) 16:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cgdunnckmbc: Your only sources are the school itself. This is not acceptable and does not help for notability in the slightest. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:55:31, 23 June 2022 review of submission by 216.180.78.222 edit


216.180.78.222 (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopaedia project, not a creative writing website. Try a different website. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Um hi what is this

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_June_23&oldid=1095561626"