Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 August 14

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 13 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 15 >
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 14

edit

01:36, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Walijordan

edit

Requesting assistance with all editors to get one of my articles accepted. The editor that rejected the article notated that there were only mentions of the subject in question however, majority of the major articles focus on the subject. Additional articles have been added to support notability of the subject to include an award winning film the artist has original music in. I would like assistance from established editors to issue proper corrections and additions for article approval. Thank you. Walijordan (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Walijordan: Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked as "critiques" in my signature):
You have one usable source; the rest is junk. One source is not enough to support an article on any subject, let alone one on a biography of a living person. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:52, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Mohasafa00

edit

I'm a little confused as to why this article wasn't published. Another article followed the same protocol and it was published but this one did not. I have updated the draft with more esteemed publications surrounding the title although I don't believe it was necessary. I'm asking for help with this article. Mohasafa00 (talk) 01:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:15, 14 August 2024 review of submission by ClassifiedBagel

edit

I need to add more references. How do I add more references? I'm a PS5 user. ClassifiedBagel (talk) 05:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:REFB for how to add references inline.
Distractify is not regarded as a reliable source: see WP:RSP
I cannot see the portalvirtualreality.ru source - it gives me a 404 - but unless it is a discussion about the suicide, published by a publisher with a reputation for editorial control, and fact-checking, then it is worthless for Wikipedia.
Unless you can find several sources which all meet the triple criteria of being reliable, independent, and containing significant coverage of the subject (see WP:42) then you will be unable to establish that the subject is notable in Wikipedia's sense. and every minute you spend or have spent on trying to write about it will be time wasted.
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:32, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Ricarda.O.Huch

edit

Feedback for submission English translation: Page Clemens Apprich Englisch Ricarda.O.Huch (talk) 08:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for a review. As stated at the top of the draft, there is a significant backlog so it will take time for someone to get to it. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ricarda.O.Huch While you wait, you can disclose your connection to Mr. Apprich, which you must have as you took an image of him and he posed for you. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:33, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Karnish 16

edit

I have done research and added reference as well but where am I going wrong ? Karnish 16 (talk) 09:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karnish 16 Are you associated with Affinity Global?
You are summarizing the routine business activities of the company, not significant coverage in independent reliable sources that discusses how the company meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company as they see it. Press releases are not independent sources. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @331dot No i am not , I am working with Justdial limited company . Karnish 16 (talk) 10:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So Affinity Global is your client? 331dot (talk) 10:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No , not in any ways connected Karnish 16 (talk) 11:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:02, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Phenomenon 10

edit

Hello,

The second version of the article I submitted meets your criteria for verifiable, reliable sources (please see reference section of article). The sources are (also) published, reliable, secondary, and independent of the article subject.

Why, therefore, specifically, was the article rejected?

Thank you. 

Phenomenon 10 (talk) 13:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Phenomenon 10: the referencing doesn't sufficiently support the draft contents, with some of information either unreferenced or referenced with citations that don't actually reliably verify it. Many of the sources also seem to be primary, which is probably why the reviewer felt they didn't establish notability. (I'm only speculating here, as I wasn't the one who reviewed this one myself, so if you want further elaboration you should ask the reviewer directly.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.
On the same date (14 Aug. 2024) I did contact the reviewer directly, and I have not had a response back yet.
Can you please (I know you must be busy) cite for me in detail. the 1. unreferenced information, and 2. referenced but not verifiable information.
Further, please provide me with 3. some indication of desired ratio to primary/secondary sources [I thought I was careful about this, but possibly not careful enough].
4. Is there anything you might recommend so I can improve this article?
Thank you! Phenomenon 10 (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:31, 14 August 2024 review of submission by IFDProductions

edit

declined for just saying reason for advertisement when that is not the case, I am certainly not getting paid to do this and I just want this page documented. Can you give me a real response and not an automated message on to why or what I need to do to get this page accurate. IFDProductions (talk) 18:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IFDProductions: Regardless of whether the page is promotional, we don't cite YouTube unless the video is produced by an outlet we'd consider to have editorial oversight (such as Kerrang!) and is uploaded to that outlet's verified channel, and anything the subject themselves puts out is useless for notability (connexion to subject). We are looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that have discussed the subject at length, are written by identifiable authors, and are subject to editorial oversight and fact-checking. Without sources of that calibre we can't even begin to discuss having an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox Submission

edit

I recently have finished most of my Sandbox, and I have wanted to submit it, but there is no place to submit it at! I have checked different articles on Wikipedia on how to submit it, but so far no luck! Can someone help me? Xuppu (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have now successfully submitted it. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Timtrent managed to add a submit button Xuppu (talk) 01:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:12, 14 August 2024 review of submission by RNGHit

edit

Hi! I'm pretty sure I linked somewhat independent sources to show notability of the person. Please let me know if I need to include more independent citations. Sorry for any inconvience! (And sorry if I misspelled anything :( ) manwithafriend1 (talk) 21:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See the comment that @MarcGarver left on your draft. ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:06, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Kalinators

edit

I cannot see the submit button after the latest achievement by the subject (me) and multiple media reporting about the subject (me) and the links were added. Please submit and approve the draft as I don't see the submit button. Kalinators (talk) 22:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Observation: The only change to the draft, since it was rejected on 5 August, was the addition of a reference to a wixsite. —C.Fred (talk) 22:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the wixsite is there not to prove notability, but to prove the factuality of the subject leading the ranking in the Ulm Backgammon Open yearly.
If you look more closely, you will notice the added last paragraph combined with 3 seperate independent website reporting on the subject's achievement of the Master M3 title. Kalinators (talk) 22:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the rejection reason in the first place was a personal bias from one editor directed towards the subject, hence it was not a truthful review. Kalinators (talk) 22:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kalinators The submit button no longer appears because the draft has been rejected, which means it will not be considered further. You should focus your efforts on a personal website or social media where you can tell the world about yourself and your accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then you can add it back, or I will have to create and submit a new one. As you can see, there are now 10 independent media having reported about the subject. So it clearly must be on wikipedia. Kalinators (talk) 22:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot Kalinators (talk) 22:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kalinators If you have fundamentally changed the nature of the draft and addressed the concerns of the reviewers, you should first appeal to the reviewer that rejected the draft. 331dot (talk) 22:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As stated above, the editor who rejected it multiple times has a personal bias against the subject. This is why I kindly requested another editor to approve it. Kalinators (talk) 22:53, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That the reviewer did not tell you what you want to hear does not mean that they have a personal bias against you.
You have not demonstrated that you are notable as Wikipedia uses the word. A runner up to a youth competition is not likely to draw the significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Again, I advise you to abandon this effort. Typically, articles are written by independent editors, not the subject themselves. That's the best indicator of notability- a person trying to force the issue and do it themselves is not usually successful- I've never seen it happen in my many years here(though it probably has, it is rare if it does). 331dot (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll go back 2 months when I first posted it. I posted links to the reports of the tournaments and stuff like that, then someone told me that references should be independent media, so I posted the two that were there already, but then someone told me they need 3, so 1 more.
Last month, a main Stuttgart media wrote an article about me (source no. 1 in the draft), so I added it and resubmitted. The same editor who had in the first place approved the other 2 articles, jumped in to say that they don't approve them now. So they were contradicting themselves. Then the personally biased CFA jumped in and refused to review it, rejecting it directly.
Anyway, since then, a further achievement has been added to the draft, and a further 3 media reporting about the subject. This was added to the draft and a new one was created to be submitted. CFA was quick to decline it, stating as a reason "No improvements since last decline at Draft:Kalin Stefanov (backgammon_player).".
However, if you look at it, you will notice that a whole paragraph was added reporting on the recently achieved mastership title, with the 3 new independent media reporting about the latter, and also the Bulgarian news agency, which had in the past already reported on the subject's successes, so was already in the sources.
So basically, if you look at it, you will see that the editors' comments just don't agree with reality. Kalinators (talk) 23:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:49, 14 August 2024 review of submission by Addresstour

edit

Hello dear! I would like to publish article about my business. Please provide any instruction to publish professionally and correct. And please explain reason of rejection publishing article. Addresstour (talk) 23:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_August_14&oldid=1241685645"