Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 October 31
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 30 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | November 1 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
October 31
[edit]05:57:22, 31 October 2015 review of submission by Sunildattbhatt
[edit]
The previous version was rejected
- This one faces rejection for the same reason. I have left a substantial comment on the draft intended to help you. Please return here with further questions once you have read it. Fiddle Faddle 10:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
10:26:42, 31 October 2015 review of submission by Iwantprivacy
[edit]- Iwantprivacy (talk · contribs)
I'm trying to get my brand's page established on Wikipedia but having a tough time. I have provided lots of independent resources where my brand has been talked about but for some reason it is not being approved. My brand's competitors already have presence on Wikipedia with far fewer mentions. Can someone please help and guide me on this?
Iwantprivacy (talk) 10:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Iwantprivacy: First, it is not currently submitted for review. Second it will fail on referencing. At least one reference doesn't mention the org at all, others are passing mentions, interview (which establish facts but not notability) and similar pieces. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
- You have just declared a conflict of interest. This is acceptable during the Draft stage but not thereafter. Please read WP:COI. Fiddle Faddle 10:35, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- Timtrent - I responded to IWP's query on my talk page yesterday, with much the same response, although you went into much more detail than I. Thanks for expanding. Onel5969 TT me 13:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: I try, but do not always succeed, to put myself into the contributing editor's shoes, and do my best to give them more than enough information to help them to move forward. Since we depend on their enthusiasm and skill to add new articles here I think we all need to try to do ever better than we did the last time we helped someone. Even so, the times we fail are simply the times we fail. Your response was excellent. I like to think mine was too. But we can both improve. Fiddle Faddle 14:09, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Timtrent: Thank you so much for your detailed responses. I have substantially edited the article with better references and more detail about my company. However, I read the COI guidelines and what I gathered from them is that I'm ineligible to submit my company's page. Is that correct? I don't know of any other way to get my brand's page listed. All my references are from independent sources and I'm just trying to establish my brand's presence on Wikipedia, that's all. Please help me out.
- @Onel5969: I try, but do not always succeed, to put myself into the contributing editor's shoes, and do my best to give them more than enough information to help them to move forward. Since we depend on their enthusiasm and skill to add new articles here I think we all need to try to do ever better than we did the last time we helped someone. Even so, the times we fail are simply the times we fail. Your response was excellent. I like to think mine was too. But we can both improve. Fiddle Faddle 14:09, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- Timtrent - I responded to IWP's query on my talk page yesterday, with much the same response, although you went into much more detail than I. Thanks for expanding. Onel5969 TT me 13:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Iwantprivacy (talk) 08:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Iwantprivacy: Customer and practice says you may edit it right up to the time it is accepted, but not beyond that point. Fiddle Faddle 13:33, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
15:26:44, 31 October 2015 review of submission by 80.42.191.43
[edit]- 80.42.191.43 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
80.42.191.43 (talk) 15:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
can a page be made for the ghost of greville lodge a film with prunella scales?
- This depends only on the available referencing. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make such a draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
- Please enjoy researching and creating the draft. Fiddle Faddle 15:31, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
20:01:16, 31 October 2015 review of submission by ErcScotti
[edit]
Hello I've just had my first Wiki article (or editing) ever accepted (Start status), and have made some improvements.
One of which was revising so the page was no longer an Orphan. I added eight appropriate links to the page. But now how does the “Orphan Notice” go away? (Since it is no longer accurate.)
Thank you, it's great to get involved!
ErcScotti
ErcScotti (talk) 20:01, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @ErcScotti: Any editor in good standing may remove any banner that is deemed valid to remove. This includes you and me. Fiddle Faddle 20:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)