Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 August 31

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 30 << Jul | August | Sep >> September 1 >
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 31

edit

06:49, 31 August 2024 review of submission by TorhoKO

edit

Hi, my submission has been declined a couple of times - and I'd like to get help in editing. I think the author is indeed worth an article on wiki, just like many other of her generations' authors from Estonia already have. I've provided lots of third party sources, that confirm her notability so I'd really like to get an perspective on what to change to get approval for the article. Thank you very much for your assistance. TorhoKO (talk) 06:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TorhoKO: the sources are book reviews, a database entry, and links to Finnish and Latvian publishers of her books, none of which contribute anything towards notability for her (though the book reviews might help make the books notable).
Whether "many other of her generations' authors from Estonia" are featured in Wikipedia articles isn't how we determine notability. She will have to establish notability in her own right, either via the general WP:GNG or the special WP:AUTHOR guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TorkhoKO, in all honesty, I have my doubts that an Estonian writer who has published four childrens' books is a convincing claim to notability. In the 21st century publishing ecosphere, I could write four children's books tomorrow, one about a baby eagle, one about a baby raven, one about about a baby sea otter, and for my granddaughter, one about a unicorn colt with rainbow coloration, and have all four published immediately if I have enough money to spend. Your draft needs to make it clear how this this author meets WP:NAUTHOR. Cullen328 (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you might be able to write them but I wonder if you can repeatedly secure support by the Estonian cultural endowment for their publication and translation. So I beg to differ and I'll add a reference to the cultural endowment selecting to support the publication. Also the publishers are not random self-publishing houses but established Estonian publishers. 80.235.122.205 (talk) 07:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
not exclusively book reviews, her books have been repeatedly selected as some of Estonia's most beautiful books. And being translated and published in both Finland and Latvia is a notable achievement as well. 80.235.122.205 (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, if her books have been awarded or picked on some 'most beautiful' lists, these feats might help make those books notable, but unless we're talking Pulitzer or Nobel calibre recognition, they really won't make her notable. And having books translated really is no achievement, either, especially children's books (stereotypically, lots of pretty pictures and very little text).
I'm not categorically saying this person couldn't be notable, but so far there has been no evidence of that.
BTW, please remember to log in whenever editing. Thanks, --- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see how one of her books being placed on somebody's list of 30 "beautiful books" published in Estonia or Latvia or Finland is a claim of notability. There are countless media outlets that publish "Top 25 under 25" listicles, and such "award" lists are ubiquitous on the internet. Similar list articles do not establish notability unless the awarding organization and the award itself are the subjects of Wikipedia articles, and the receipt of the award is covered in reliable sources independent of the awarding organization itself. Cullen328 (talk) 07:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow.. so are you claiming there's only Pulitzer recipients on wiki? @Cullen328 It's Estonia and not just some list but an annual competition and selection by a jury of experts organised by the Estonian Writers Union.
I really get your points and I would like to appreciate them, but they seem quite distanced from reality working as an author in North-Eastern Europe and getting public money to have books published and translated and featured by established outlets in recognizing their notability. I assume I should have made this article in Estonian first, then there would be editors maybe understanding the context better. TorhoKO (talk) 07:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say only Pulitzer-winning authors can have articles in Wikipedia. I said that if you're relying on winning prizes or awards to establish someone's notability, those have to be of significant standing (and even then, it's far from clear that notability can be thus established).
You're certainly welcome to create this article in the Estonian Wikipedia (assuming you can satisfy their notability and other requirements, of course). The English-language one is not 'special' or 'superior' in any way, it just happens to be the biggest.
And not that it matters in the slightest, but as it happens, I have a somewhat better understanding of North-Eastern European circumstances than you might think. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it somehow significant that this author obtains public money to publish her work? The US has a similar program. If you're saying that the fact she obtains public money makes her notable, that would probably be the same as receiving an award- that government program would need to be shown to be notable first. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TorkhoKO, I do not see the Estonian Writers Union mentioned in your draft. Am I wrong? If not, why not? I am not saying or hinting or implying that the Pulitzer Prize is the only notable award for literature. There are clearly hundreds or even thousands of such awards that are the subjects of Wikipedia articles that establish the notability of such awards, and winning a notable award is a piece of evidence in favor of notability. But they need to be properly referenced in the draft. I see no claim that she has received a notable award in your draft. Your comment maybe understanding the context better is not productive because your responsibilty as an author of this draft (perhaps eventually an article) is to make the context and the notability clear to any English speaking high school student in Nigeria or India or New Zealand, or even an older man like me living in California. We do not need Estonians in particular to detect notability. We need that evidence to be clearly present in the draft. We need rigorously written prose and supporting references that convince experienced Wikipedia editors from any country that this person is notable. I am not that hard to convince. Convince me. Cullen328 (talk) 08:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll update - thanks for that remark. TorhoKO (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think it's significant to get this kind of support, cause there's an expert jury that looks at applications and decides which kind of literary works they want to support. Thanks for you comment. TorhoKO (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why Cole Massi1 (talk) 07:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:10:36, 31 August 2024 review of draft by Himaldrmann

edit


I'm confused by the "AfC" thing—the pages on article creation seem to suggest that I can simply create an article and didn't need to go through the review process, since my account and # of edits meet or exceed the requirements to do so.

Is this the case? If so, how do I, uh, un-submit my article (Draft:Hinc illae lacrimae) & just publish it, instead of waiting 4+ months(!)?

(Not that it's really urgent or anything... but still! It took several hours for all the phrasing, sourcing, & OCD-editing... so I want it accessible, darn it! :P)

Cheers & thanks,

Himaldrmann (talk) 08:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Himaldrmann: usually you could literally just undo your submission, but seeing as you created the whole thing in a single edit, that's not an option. You can remove all the AfC templates from the draft, but that's a bit messier.
You can then move the article into the main space, which will have the effect of removing the Draft: prefix from its title. New page patrol will then come along at some point to run the proverbial ruler over it.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much!
One request for clarification, if you have an extra sec: does removing the Afc templates automatically move it into the main space, or is that some second action I must take afterward?
(Sorry, I OCD-edit wording/grammar on articles a lot but this is the first time I actually created one--I saw that the Lacrimae rerum article didn't have "hinc illae lacrimae" in the "See also:" section, and when I went to add it, I found there was no "hinc illae lacrimae" page... I'm supposed to be doing actual work, but, well, I just couldn't let that stand--... Lol!)
Cheers,
Himaldrmann (talk) 08:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh, I think I see it (the "Move" link, surprisingly enough...).
NOW my only question is, re the templates: do I need to somehow remove "transcluded" templates (and if so, uh, how--)?
Thanks again, and my apologies for my slow(-in-the-head-)ness,
Himaldrmann (talk) 08:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Himaldrmann: no, removing the AfC templates doesn't move the draft into the main space, or v.v.
Let me know if you'd like me to do all that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Himaldrmann, please be prepared to explain why this topic belongs on the English Wikipedia instead of Wikiquote. It seems more appropriate for that other website to me. Cullen328 (talk) 08:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tbh, I don't know if it isn't more appropriate for Wikiquote or not—I based the decision to create it on Wikipedia partly because there would be room to explain a bit about & include examples of notable historical uses, and I had the impression Wikiquote entries were mainly "just the quote"; and partly on the fact that entries like Lacrimae rerum existed (...and I wanted the articles to include each other under "See also" as a pleasing symmetry, heh, because I'm obsessive-compulsive–).
But if more experienced editors object, I won't kick up a fuss or nothin'!
Himaldrmann (talk) 11:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help! Please accept this sham trophy until I may craft you a better one: ✨🏆✨
Cheers once more 🥂,
Himaldrmann (talk) 11:41, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, I didn't actually do anything, because another reviewer had already done the deed by the time I got there. But I'll keep the trophy in a safe place (aka. the pawn shop) until Theroadislong comes to claim it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This got me wondering what the origin of the word was and apparently it's ..."derived from the Greek tropaion, referred to arms, standards, other property, or human captives and body parts (e.g., headhunting) captured in battle". I'll let you keep it this time. Theroadislong (talk) 13:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:27, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Arnavvibhuti

edit

The book is available on Google books and multiple other sites globally. I am not able to add references. Kindly add references and create the article. Arnavvibhuti (talk) 09:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arnavvibhuti I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion. If you are unable to add references, the topic cannot be on Wikipedia. Any article about this topic must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. The text that is there now- even if it were sourced- is a blatant advertisement. That's not permitted on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Arnavvibhuti: sorry, but that's not how this works, we don't fulfil article creation requests here at the help desk. If you want Draft:Echoes Of Kotdwar to be accepted, you need to provide evidence that it is notable, either per WP:GNG or WP:NBOOK. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:55, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Kaeez06

edit


Clarification on Reference Requirements for School Articles Hello,

I recently submitted a Wikipedia article for Matha Senior Secondary School but it was declined due to insufficient references. I understand the importance of citations, but I noticed that similar school articles, like the one for Bishop Moore Vidyapith, Cherthala , have been accepted with only a single citation from the official school website.

Given that Matha Senior Secondary School is a well-established educational institution, I believe the reference requirements might be more flexible, especially since it is common for school articles to have limited external sources. Could you please clarify why the article was declined and provide guidance on what constitutes sufficient referencing for school articles? Additionally, how can I ensure that my submission meets the necessary standards?

Thanks in advance. Kaeez06 (talk) 09:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaeez06: we don't assess drafts by comparing them to whatever may exist out there among the nearly 7m articles in the English-language Wikipedia; we do so by reference to the currently applicable policies and guidelines. And no, those requirements are not 'flexible', they are pretty much hard and fast. This draft needs to demonstrate that the subject is notable, either per WP:GNG or WP:ORG, and it currently falls well short of either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kaeez06 (EC) fixed your header, the name of the draft is supposed to go where you had "Clarification..." written. Just because another article exists does not mean that it was "approved" by anyone. There are many ways to get inappropriate articles past us, and you would not be aware that they were inappropriate as an inexperienced user. We haven't yet gotten around to removing all the inappropriate articles, as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can, when they can. See other stuff exists. Many articles about schools were created before policies were tightened up a few years ago(see WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES) and existence is no longer sufficient to merit an article. The school must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization.
If you would like to help us, please point out other inappropriate articles on schools so we can take action. We need the help. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:27, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Parsita

edit

What information i am missing? I understand the importance of citation. I have cited links from reliable sources about the subject including newspaper journals. I have taken reference of another wikipedia subject https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishaan_Ghosh. Please assist. Parsita (talk) 10:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Social media is not a reliable source. YouTube is not a reliable source, unless the video is from a reputable media outlet on its verified channel. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An acceptable Wikipedia article is a summary of what independent reliable sources have published about the subject: nothing less, and very little more. As far as I can see not one of your citations is to a reliable source that is wholly unconnected with Majumdar and contains significant coverage of Majumdar. That means that you have nothing at all to base your draft on, and it cannot possibly be an acceptable article. ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Realiable If there another way to send a Screen here it would Second to it takes secong to submit Jweighed1 (talk) 16:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:03, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Jweighed1

edit

for safety Measure Of Fraud And Zero Trust Artificial Intelligence Law Jweighed1 (talk) 16:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jweighed1. You apparently submitted your sandbox User:Jweighed1/sandbox, but that has no content. (Another editor has undone the submission).
Please read WP:YFA to understand how to create a Wikipedia article.
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) 16:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:09, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Rresha

edit

what do i need to reference in this article to get it approved Rresha (talk) 17:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First you can tell us what your relationship is with him, as it appears he attempted to write this text himself at Draft:Magnus Achor. You might also want to let him know that he has likely improperly claimed the photo(with a watermark) as his own personal work and has improperly claimed that he personally owns the copyright. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:45, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Ansaar20

edit

Please add this is new company Ansaar20 (talk) 17:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ansaar20: If it is a new company then the odds are it cannot meet the requirements for a Wikipedia article at this time. We are not a directory or billboard. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:21, 31 August 2024 review of submission by SUNIL SUNDARI

edit

I am Sunil kumar meena 

My Wikipedia page should be made public My Wikipedia page should be made public SUNIL MEENA (talk) 18:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an encyclopaedia NOT social media. Theroadislong (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SUNIL SUNDARI: Absolutely not. We are not going to accept an unsourced two-sentence "article" on a living person. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:14, 31 August 2024 review of submission by Robertabonaldo

edit

problems having article accepted Robertabonaldo (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Robertabonaldo: that's not a question; do you have one in mind you'd like to ask? You've resubmitted the draft and it is awaiting another review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_August_31&oldid=1244299275"