Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 1

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< October 31 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 2 >
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.


November 1

edit

02:29, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Qk193

edit

How can I make it approved? I have all the citations and info on the soccer player. Qk193 (talk) 02:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Qk193: football players must now show notability per WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. You must also cite the sources correctly so that they can actually be verified. Currently this draft fails on every count. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:07, 1 November 2023 review of submission by RobertRedfield

edit

Hello, My draft is rejected with the reasons that there are not enough reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. But 3 of my 4 references do fit that criteria. Please provide more specific requirements such as "need 10 or more" or "Reference 1 is not independent" or ... something else, and I'll do the best I can to satisfy them.

I would really appreciate the guidance in order to focus on the most effective edits. Thank you.

Robert RobertRedfield (talk) 04:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RobertRedfield: the first source is obviously close primary one, so that doesn't count. The next two are about the person, not about the film. The last source seems okay, but it alone isn't enough. (It's also very local, which usually means the threshold for covering local news is very low.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DoubleGrazing - thank you for the guidance and that helps me understand. Makes sense. More articles are being written about the film as it plays in film festival (e.g. on Nov 6) and so I'll add that media coversage when available. Thanks again. RobertRedfield (talk) 16:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:54, 1 November 2023 review of submission by ZaidoonHJ

edit

Dear assistant team, Greetings I am trying to create content regarding Journal of Faculty of Medicine Baghdad; and I try my best to do so unfortunately the references on such topics for subject from Iraq are rare and it is not available most of the time any suggestions to help me do so. Sincerely Zaidoon Jabbar MSc Clinical Embryology 

ZaidoonHJ (talk) 05:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that the references on such topic ... are rare is almost a definition of "not notable". If you cannot find the (reliable, independent) sources, then there cannot be an article. ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:30, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Alan347

edit

Hi, why is this draft being declined please ? Alan347 (talk) 07:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alan347: it was declined for the reason given in the decline notice (the grey box inside the larger pink one), namely that there is no evidence that the subject is notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:09, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Congrats.deberg

edit

I'm not very experienced at creating brand new pages on Wikipedia (I used to create with an account with my personal name which I've requested deletion in the meantime for personal reasons) and I'd like to learn how I can improve the current draft in order to address the following comment: "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia."

I'm happy to collaborate on other articles too. Either already created or pending approval. Congrats.deberg (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Content like " attracted customers on a global scale, and partnered with multiple industry players" reads like something from their marketing brochure. Theroadislong (talk) 08:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:43, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Nitajk

edit

I have quoted major mainstream Indian newspapers in my article like the Hindustan Times, Times of India and The Indian Express. I was asked to remove these links and add "reliable" sources. Please let me know what you mean by reliable sources. My username is Nitajk. Nitajk (talk) 08:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nitajk: you were asked to replace inline external links, which are not allowed, with inline citations, which are required. Please see WP:REFB and WP:ILC for advice. (And note that Moneylife is not considered a reliable source.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Times of India is also not a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 09:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:05, 1 November 2023 review of submission by 80.155.22.6

edit

What can I do, to upload a translation of the german Wikipedia? 80.155.22.6 (talk) 09:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is acceptable on the German Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable here. Each Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. The English Wikipedia tends to be stricter than others. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:03, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Gozips1870

edit

I am trying to create a page for a prominent political scientist. I am wondering about the use of independent sources. I understand that I cannot use sources of a university she is employed by, but can I use sites of past universities she was employed by since they are no longer connected? Also, how do I navigate mentioning her research if I must use sources that do not have a vested interest in the individual? Gozips1870 (talk) 13:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gozips1870: you can use close primary sources to support non-contentious factual information, eg. the person's current position and research interests, etc., but you cannot use them to establish notability per WP:GNG. You also cannot cite them as a neutral source on qualitative matters, so eg. if her current university website says that she is a "leading expert" on something, that wouldn't be acceptable to quote. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: If you're seeking to demonstrate notability per WP:NACADEMIC instead, then it is possible to do this even by citing solely primary sources, eg. her university website stating that she has a named chair, or a major journal confirming that she is their editor in chief. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I did cite the university webpage that noted that she was the appointed director of an applied politics institute. Did I do that part incorrectly? Gozips1870 (talk) 13:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gozips1870: you did it partly right. The citation is correctly formatted, but it appears at the end of the body text, rather than immediately after the statement that it supports. (And the other citation doesn't appear in the body text at all, but rather in the 'References' section, where it supports nothing.) Especially in articles on living people, inline citations must be done so clearly that the reader should never wonder where a particular piece of information comes from, it should have the corresponding citation right next to it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That was not specified during the initial rejection so I appreciate your explanation. Gozips1870 (talk) 13:36, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:15, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Actorsaurabhsuman27

edit

How to live the article.? Actorsaurabhsuman27 (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to resubmit it for review, but you must first address the concerns given. Be advised that writing about yourself is highly discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a person. 331dot (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:55, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Flexibilityandcommunity

edit

I am wondering which sources I mention don't meet the criteria? thank you Flexibilityandcommunity (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fleximilityandcommunity It's not necessarily the sources themselves that are the issue, but their content. The raising of funds is a routine business activity that does not contribute to notability. Awards do not usually contribute to notability unless the award itself merits an article(like Academy Award or Nobel Peace Prize). "Startups" almost never merit articles- a company typically must be established and recognized in its field enough that independent sources choose to write about it and what makes it significant. Please see WP:ORG.
If you work for this company, that needs to be declared per the Terms of Use, see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No I do not work for them and am not affiliated in any way, shape or form. I have no connection to them at all. I am an avid gamer and lover of all things nerdy. In our community of Prince George, this store is well known and most of us geeks here love it. Personally, I believe it deserves a wiki page. Momzilla007 (talk) 17:32, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I must apologize. I have responded in the wrong area to the wrong comment. Please disregard. Momzilla007 (talk) 17:34, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:07, 1 November 2023 review of submission by 2400:1A00:B060:A298:88F:F021:E969:1F24

edit

to make good draft. what should be done? 2400:1A00:B060:A298:88F:F021:E969:1F24 (talk) 16:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing can be done- the draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise a company. 331dot (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:28, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Momzilla007

edit

Looking for a bit more feedback. After reading the notability requirements, as I understand it, I have cited 2 acceptable sources and now I just need to find 1 more? Is this correct? Momzilla007 (talk) 17:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Momzilla007 At a glance I'm not sure any of the sources you have now are acceptable (for notability purposes), which do you think are your two solid ones? -- asilvering (talk) 20:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the 2 acceptable sources were the CKPG and the MyPGNow articles. They are both news articles. However, I've discussed this with my mentor and they have suggested that because it is a local store and not so well known outside of this area, it is not a great addition to Wikipedia. Admittedly, it is only a local treasure to the geeks of northern BC. So I am going to put the article to the side and focus on other stuff on here until the day comes that Game Quest is more notable in a larger area. :)
Thanks for responding. I appreciate the help with this. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia and I see I have lots to learn still. :) Momzilla007 (talk) 23:47, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Momzilla007 The PGNow one is almost certainly written by Game Quest - see how it has no byline, just "staff"? That's usually a good hint that an article is a PR piece. It's fair to use as a source for facts but doesn't tell us much about notability. The CKPG one, I would say that is too short. For an article on a company, you're looking for something more in-depth than that. Good luck with your future editing! -- asilvering (talk) 01:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it does feel kind of sales pitchy, so that makes sense...I did not know that if there was no author it was likely written by the store itself. This is good info. Thank you. Always learning! Momzilla007 (talk) 02:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:17, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Haidar2521

edit

I have written this article without any bias or supporting or promotional content, but then also a reviewer found it as "cited sources promo" and did not accepted it. I want an assistance who can help me out from this issue, so that my article got published. Haidar2521 (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot read Hindi sources, but I suspect the reviewer labelled the sources as promotional based on the concerns described in WP:RSNOI Mach61 (talk) 02:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But i got those sources only for my subject. as my subject is an Indian politician. now what should i do, so that it will be published without any issues? Haidar2521 (talk) 16:51, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Maliner, can you provide some additional clarification? @Haidar2521 it may be a couple days or so before Maliner can reply. I can say is he does not hold a state-wide or federal office so fails that part of WP:NPOL and sources that are mostly was the subjects says are not useful for notability, nor is routine coverage (standard election coverage, press releases/announcements, etc). S0091 (talk) 17:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@S0091 I am pretty much familiar with the reputed Hindi sources. Most of the cited sources are junk failing WP:RS. KhabarGali, Taza Khabar, Chattisgarh are really not good sources. Punjab Kesari and Dainik Bhaskar sources are passing mention So fails WP:Sigcov. He fails WP:NPOL too as you pointed out. Cheers. Maliner (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Maliner thanks for the quick reply. Very helpful. S0091 (talk) 18:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@S0091 Most welcome. Maliner (talk) 18:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21:07, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Walkadwill

edit

I have read the article about reliable sources and have iterated the draft several times to eliminate any other unreliable sources but I'm still getting declined and need someone to be quite specific about the areas on the article that are non-compliant. Could someone please help me? Thanks Walkadwill (talk) 21:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Walkadwill most of the content is unsourced and it looks like the sources provided are standard announcements about her exhibitions and/or interviews so not helpful for notability. The obituary was not written by a journalist so also not helpful. See the notability guidelines for artists. Generally for artists you need critical reviews of their work from reputable publications (ArtForum, major newspapers, etc.) or to demonstrate they have had solo shows at major galleries or museum, etc. S0091 (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:28, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Craleigh25

edit

Hi there, I am new and feel this is a place in the community worthy of covering. It's been included in multiple versions of the Michelin guide. Unfortunately I do not know what other information to include. I would appreciate the help Craleigh25 (talk) 22:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page 25 of this Washington Informer review works. However, the draft is currently written like an advertisement; please use a more encyclopedic tone Mach61 (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Negative student newspaper review Mach61 (talk) 02:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WaPo Mach61 (talk) 02:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:17, 1 November 2023 review of submission by 209.166.64.238

edit

I have provided more than enough sources that prove that this band is noteworthy enough to have an article. I do not understand what other bit of information needs to be provided to show that this band with over 500,000 monthly listeners is worth inclusion in the compendium of human knowledge. 209.166.64.238 (talk) 23:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP, the draft is rejected so will not be reconsidered. See WP:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. S0091 (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:19, 1 November 2023 review of submission by Brian.butt

edit

I have provided more than enough sources that prove that this band is noteworthy enough to have an article. I do not understand what other bit of information needs to be provided to show that this band with over 500,000 monthly listeners is worth inclusion in the compendium of human knowledge. Brian.butt (talk) 23:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've asked for help in multiple locations- this duplicates effort. Please use one forum at a time.
The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Anyone can put music online, so the number of listeners is not indicative of notability. As noted by a reviewer, you have not demonstrated that this band meets WP:BAND. A threat of legal action doesn't do it. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a particular reason you are so invested in this draft? You've edited about no other topic and have attacked those who have looked at it in the past. 331dot (talk) 23:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_November_1&oldid=1183877036"