Help desk
< May 19	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 21 >

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.

May 20

09:47:15, 20 May 2016 review of draft by 68.2.123.163

68.2.123.163 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Swift 3D (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can someone find more sources for this please? Thanks! 68.2.123.163 (talk) 09:47, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This is for questions about the Articles for Creation process. Be bold and find sources yourself. st170e^talk 16:36, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:01:05, 20 May 2016 review of submission by 24.218.139.80

24.218.139.80 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Péter Farkas (writer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I created an article for one of the more important, award-winning contemporary Hungarian writers based on the same format as other relevant Hungarian writers. Added authority control, references, award information, etc. Submission was declined for "lack of notability", which is strange as the author is one of the better-known writers in the country (as opposed to quite a few others with articles already existing). Would like to ask for help in what to improve for notability. Also would like to ask if it is already possible to link the Hungarian, Czech and German language pages to the draft. 24.218.139.80 (talk) 16:01, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To demonstrate Notability you need to reference at least a few articles published in mainstream media such as major newspapers or magazines that include substantial discussion of Farkas and his work, but are not written or published by Farkas or any of his agents, representatives or associates. If you can find any, academic sources are generally regarded as the best. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:28, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions! I added several newspaper articles from large German newspapers discussing his works and some Hungarian academic and literary sources discussing his relevance. This should establish his Notability as one of the more relevant contemporary Hungarian authors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.139.80 (talk) 02:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why there has been no review of the updated page yet. Is there any reason given that relevance has been added?

16:28:46, 20 May 2016 review of submission by Justin Jaron Lewis

Justin Jaron Lewis (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Yitzhak Buxbaum (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My draft article "Yitzhak Buxbaum" has been turned down for a third time. As you can imagine this is frustrating, since I have reworked the article after every rejection, trying to address the critiques and recommendations provided. I am requesting either a re-review or more assistance.

This time the reviewer suggested that more promotional language has been added. But all the added citations were attempts to establish notability - which was the main point of reviewers' earlier comments. That is, Buxbaum's work has been recognized as good and important by a variety of sources. I can happily delete the quotations, but please explain how to establish someone's notability without including favourable comments on their work.

Earlier reviews of the article commented that there was a lack of reviews of Buxbaum's books. At this point, the draft cites four reviews of different books by Buxbaum from different, independent sources (Tikkun, Sentinel, Hadassah Magazine, The Algemeiner), as well as references to his books in other sources.

The citations also demonstrate the respect according to Buxbaum by people considered notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles, and beyond his own Jewish community. Not counting publishers' websites and the like, seventeen independent sources are cited, including six printed books from significant authors and publishers. It is true that none of these books have an in-depth discussion of Buxbaum, but all of them acknowledge his importance.

I am troubled by the implication that any personal connection with Buxbaum would invalidate the article. I am a tenured university professor publishing work on Hasidism; in that capacity, I frequently use and cite Buxbaum's books. I have avoided citing my own citations of Buxbaum exactly in order to maintain objectivity, but they are, in fact, further evidence of his significance.

Is the message is simply that without something like a front page New York Times article or an existing biography in an encyclopedia, nobody is going to get into Wikipedia?

If not, either acceptance of the article or more guidance in revising it would be greatly appreciated.Justin Jaron Lewis (talk) 16:28, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your questions have been answered at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:07, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:08:02, 20 May 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Dmlpartners

Dmlpartners (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Project EATS (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I agree that Project EATS should be a new stub under the organization Active Citizen Project... but I'm not clear how to start a new stub or do I submit to a different place to propose as a new stub? Thank you for letting me know. Darlene

Dmlpartners (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you misunderstood the advice. You ask about how to start a new stub. However, a stub is a very short article. You were advised to add a section to an existing article that is currently a stub. Edit and expand Active Citizen Project with reliable sources. Is that clear, or do you have more questions? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:11, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]