Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 March 6

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< March 5 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 7 >
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.


March 6

edit

02:05, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Cinderellathegirlheneverloved

edit

I want to spread the awareness of god being real. Cinderellathegirlheneverloved (talk) 02:05, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@cinderellathegirlheneverloved: wikipedia is not a place for your fiction. ltbdl (talk) 05:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
dupe ltbdl (talk) 05:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.


God is real

edit

Some people think god is real so I think they should be able to write a topic about god and what they think about him. Cinderellathegirlheneverloved (talk) 02:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:28, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Mnuan

edit

Hello, could someone review the draft article Battle of Sochi (1918)? Mnuan (talk) 02:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@mnuan: be patient. ltbdl (talk) 05:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:29, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Mnuan

edit

Requesting review for the draft article Battle of Gagra (1919) Mnuan (talk) 02:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see above. ltbdl (talk) 05:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:21, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Lainisah Maruhom Sumpingan

edit

My boss asked me to write her a biography and make it visible in Wikipedia. Please help me how can submit it or make it visible in Wikipedia. 

Lainisah Maruhom Sumpingan (talk) 03:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@lainisah maruhom sumpingan: tell your boss that we don't allow that. see this. ltbdl (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:11, 6 March 2024 review of submission by TAPPANHEHER

edit

Hello I have submitted an update /second draft to an article in the Article of Creation for John Elliott Tappan by adding the page numbers for the references. How can I replace the first draft with the updated second draft? In the Contributions section there is no clear to access articles in the Articles of Creation, which has been very confusing. TAPPANHEHER (talk) 05:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@tappanheher: the "first draft" is at Draft:John Elliott Tappan. ltbdl (talk) 05:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't usually work that way: it would have been better to edit the text in place.
The easiest way is probably to simply delete all the text from Draft:John Elliott Tappan, and copy the source from the second draft into it. (You'll need to copy the source, or you won't get the formatting, citations etc). For tidiness, you can then inset {{db-author}} (just as it appears here, with the double curly brackets) at the top of Draft:John Elliott Tappan (second draft), and an admin will come along and delete it. Normally you shouldn't move text from one page to another without attributing it - see copying within Wikipedia) but if you are the only author of it, you can. ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following comments have been moved here from the next section by ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have now added all pages for the references and citations. The references a book published by Palgrave/St Martin's Press in New York. The book lists all the institutions that are referenced in the book, most importantly the personal letters of John Elliott Tappan that are still in the archives at Ameriprise. I am very curious how Wikipeida could state this does not "show significant coverage about the subject in a published, reliable source that is independent of the subject." Please provide with a full and detailed explanation, and I will be happy to provide anyone who asks with a PDF copy of the book, which can be bought online directly from Palgrave Press. I look forward to receiving the reply shortly. TAPPANHEHER (talk) 06:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@tappanheher: you've responded in the wrong section. ltbdl (talk) 09:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What section should I respond then? Please advise. 87.121.72.20 (talk) 10:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this section, "05:11, 6 March 2024 review of submission by TAPPANHEHER", where I have now moved it. You accidentally added it to the next section, #05:23, 6 March 2024 review of submission by 103.160.240.51. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you don't need to provide a PDF. Citing a reliably published book is adequate.
I am not a reviewer, but I know that normally more than two separate sources are required to establish notability. This is not a policy, but a rule of thumb, and the reviewer may feel that the two sources you have cited are adequate. But if you can find another source that meeds 42, I think it would be worth citing it. I think that citing a source that discussed why Tappan and the investors' syndicate are imporant would be a good idea. ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:23, 6 March 2024 review of submission by 103.160.240.51

edit

Why is it rejected? Tell me and I'll try to fix it 103.160.240.51 (talk) 05:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

read the decline notices. ltbdl (talk) 05:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Any help on how to fix this problem, please 103.160.240.50 (talk) 05:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you have all the information you need. ltbdl (talk) 06:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments that should have been in the previous section moved there by ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:13, 6 March 2024 review of submission by 1Tytonidae1

edit

How can I prove that this topic is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia? I added more citations from major sources since initially submitting the article for review. Do I need to resubmit the article? 1Tytonidae1 (talk) 07:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@1tytonidae1: the draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. ltbdl (talk) 09:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:15, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Whirosss

edit

This is my first experience with Wikipedia. Can you guide me? 

Whirosss (talk) 07:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Whirosss: I'm not quite sure what this is, but it's not in English, so couldn't be accepted here on the English-language Wikipedia as it stands. Besides, it's entirely unreferenced. And in any case, it has been rejected and won't therefore be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you try on id-wiki. Try id:WP:1. ColinFine (talk) 17:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:37, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Desouki27

edit

what should i change for the page i created to be accepted and submitted Desouki27 (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer left you a message as to what was needed; please review it, and the policies linked to therein, carefully. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:21, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Joeworgan

edit

My submission was declined for Draft:Grant UK because it 'appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia'. Can you advise which sections refer more like an advertisement? Joeworgan (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The entire thing. Wikipedia is not a place to tell about a company and its offerings, an article about a company should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please see Your First Article. I will add specifically that niche industry awards do not contribute to notability, unless the award itself merits an article(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award)
If you work for this company, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, see WP:PAID. Please also see conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joeworgan: it's promotional, because it's basically the company telling the world about itself, citing its own website, various press releases and routine business reporting / churnalism, with little or no content that is of any encyclopaedic value. The entire 'Products' and 'Support for X' sections belong to their website, and we've no interest in the business awards they've received.
What is your relationship with this subject? I've posted a message on your talk page regarding conflicts of interest (COI); please read and action as appropriate. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:41, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Dragisdr20

edit

why my dissubmission Dragisdr20 (talk) 13:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dragisdr20... was rejected? Because there is no evidence that the subject is notable under any of the applicable notability guidelines. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the messages on the draft carefully, this will explain why. 331dot (talk) 13:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:27, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Tod888

edit

how many articles are required for the notability of an article? I've added two articles from six articles found on Google, I thought they were valid, and I also wanted to ask about the length of the article. cause currently it's a short article. I'm not an expert on articles so what changes do you recommend? Tod888 (talk) 14:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tod888: per WP:NCORP, we need to see significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. 'Multiple' isn't actually defined anywhere, but is usually taken to mean three or more. Your two sources both seem to be based on the company's publicity efforts, so probably aren't independent, and in any case not enough to satisfy NCORP. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:31, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Awtodd@gmail.com

edit

I've made edits to my draft, but no response? Awtodd@gmail.com (talk) 14:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Awtodd@gmail.com: if you want us to review your draft again, you need to resubmit it by clicking on that blue 'resubmit' button. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:54, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Chinedu Ogugua

edit

good day , my name is chinedu ogugua , i submitted an article on the history of my town which was declined yesterday , i made edit on some of the errors raised by the reviewer but some i was not able to do because i did not understand it clearly . please can i get an assistance to edit my article to Wikipedia standard 

 Chinedu Ogugua (talk) 14:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Chinedu Ogugua: your draft is entirely unreferenced. We need to be able to verify all the information from reliable sources. In fact, you should only summarise what reliable published sources have previously said about the subject, citing those sources as you go against the information they have provided. See WP:YFA for advice on article creation, and WP:REFB on referencing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:45, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Matthewcooper1998

edit

Just have a question about the rejection of this article. I understand that Theresa Cheung is not mentioned in this article. However, there is a setion which mentions The Premonition Code, that Theresa Co-authored with Dr. Juilia Mossbridge (also mentioned in the article). If, on the article, I specify that Theresa's Co-authored book, The Premonition Code, was mentioned in the linked Guardian article, would that be appropriate? Thanks! Matthewcooper1998 (talk) 16:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Please see notability is not inherited. It's possible for a book to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability but not its author; or vice versa. An article about Cheung must be based mostly on sources which are about Cheung, not sources about her work which do no more than mention her. ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:32, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Arkadev.ghoshal

edit

Need help creating a page for my organisation. I work for a news organisation that does not have a Wikipedia page yet. I need help creating this page.

Wikipedia does not let me create this page because I am an employee of/related to the organisation.

What should my next steps be? Arkadev.ghoshal (talk) 18:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link: Draft:South First --Finngall talk 18:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Arkadev.ghoshal: it is true that you cannot publish such an article directly, but you can submit a draft through the AfC process – go to WP:YFA where you find everything you need to get started.
The first thing you must do, however, is to disclose your paid-editing status. I will post instructions on your talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, seems I had already posted a generic COI notice earlier. Well, now there's the more specific paid-editing one there as well. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot!
I will get this started right away! Wish me luck! Arkadev.ghoshal (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Arkadev.ghoshai. Generally, when an inexperienced editor tries to create a new article, they have a miserable and frustrating experience, because they don't yet understand a number of basic concepts about Wikipedia. If they are trying to create an article about a subject they are close to, it is even more tricky, and they are even more likely to have a frustrating time. (I know you have had your account for a long time, but you haven't made many edits, so I count you as inexperienced in Wikipedia).
My advice to you is, first, read WP:BOSS, and show it to your boss.
If you are determined to proceed, then my next advice is to put it aside and do an "apprenticeship", where over a period of weeks or months, you make several hundred edits (that stick) to existing articles, and learn about basic principles such as notability, reliable sources, and neutral point of view. Then you can come back to it and read your first article. ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:57, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Fracy Pants

edit

The article I created for Bertrand Meniel was rejected because it lacked reliable sources. But I linked to sources everywhere I could. Perhaps I did not use the righ formats? One editor in talk suggested I create a reference list, but I am unable to discover what that means or how to do this some other way than create the footnotes and links I submitted. I need help and instruction on how to appropriately show the soureces I linked. Fracy Pants (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Bertrand Meniel was declined not rejected, you were told to read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources correctly. Theroadislong (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:21, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Proximcode

edit

Please Help Us Mentioning the issue, why our article has been rejected? Proximcode (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No sources and basically an advertisement will always be rejected. Wikipedia is not a place for a topic to merely tell about itself. Please read WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 21:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:41, 6 March 2024 review of submission by SpaceElegont

edit

This is not a page for any big visitors, but a free and easy to use place to jot down some information about something local. Ex: Friends. Please reconsider this SpaceElegont (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpaceElegont Wikipedia is not free web space for you to use as you wish. 331dot (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:22, 6 March 2024 review of submission by Raisingmamaygma

edit

please advice me why you reject Raisingmamaygma (talk) 23:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Because, Raisingmamaygma, that draft in no way resembles an article. Here, at random, John Nottingham, that looks like an article. What you submitted looks like a very poorly formatted resume full of completely irrelevant information, besides some attempts at self-promotion: "Reymark has done more than 160 freelancing projects in the last 4 years and he have good knowledge in Google Adsense." In fact, it is so blatantly promotional (besides a violation of all kinds of policies including WP:BLP) that we have no choice but deleting it. Please try LinkedIn for this kind of thing. Drmies (talk) 23:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_March_6&oldid=1213528729"