Help desk
< March 28	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 30 >

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.

March 29

Request on 00:28:56, 29 March 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Tricia.miranda

Tricia.miranda (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Terree A. Bowers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have tried to submit this article a few times, but it keeps getting rejected. The first time, I was asked to cite the piece more, so I provided citations of articles where the subject is being mentioned doing the work we are saying he did, as well as linking to other Wiki pages.

I'm not sure what else I can do to get this published. I appreciate any help or guidance.

Thank you.

Tricia.miranda (talk) 00:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: it appears that the article is largely unsourced. I would visit The site's policy on reliable sources to determine what you can use to support your writing. If a part of your writing is unsupported by a valid source, then the reviewers of your page will see that part as null and void as regards evidencing the notability of your subject matter. So if you don't have a proper source for that part, delete it. Now, whether or not your subject matter is notable enough for Wikipedia is another story, but without good sources you are providing material that cannot be vetted properly (and will very likely be rejected). Additional issues likely include problems with your use of formatting, but that hasn't been brought up by reviewers yet. However, if you can add more sources that are valid under the policy provided earlier in this reply, that will help in better asserting your draft's notability (if it exists). Isingness (talk) 01:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

02:04:30, 29 March 2017 review of submission by CheronA

CheronA (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Siva Kanewaran (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi checking in on my submission from a month ago

CheronA (talk) 02:04, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CheronA. There are 100-200 drafts that have been in the pool waiting to be reviewed longer than this one, so expect it to take a bit longer. Use the time to continue improving the draft, or check out ways to help make Wikipedia better at the community portal. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

07:35:16, 29 March 2017 review of submission by WIZRADICAL

My draft on Narada sting operation was returned twice .I am confused .In the present edited condition is it all right? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Narada_sting_operation — Preceding unsigned comment added by WIZRADICAL (talk • contribs) 07:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC) {{Lafc|username=WIZRADICAL|ts=07:35:16, 29 March 2017|page= — Preceding unsigned comment added by WIZRADICAL (talk • contribs) [reply]

Hello, WIZ. Later today, I'll leave some comments on the draft (and will notify you when I do so). NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:42, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10:00:25, 29 March 2017 review of submission by Kovács Krisztina

Kovács Krisztina (talk · contribs)
- Template:AFC submission (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have already created my article via Articles for creation process, but I am not sure if my article has been submitted for a review. It says: "The reviewer is in the process of closing the request, and this tag should be removed soon." What is the next step in order to make my article accepted?

Kovács Krisztina (talk) 10:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kovács. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. The problem here is that you have asked for a review of an article that you posted directly to Main space. In these cases, the software doesn't quite understand what happened and produces the message that you are seeing. So, did you want a review? If so, I'll be happy to arrange for that by moving the draft into Draft space, where it will enter the queue for drafts seeking a review. If you do not want a review, simply remove the template from the article. Let us know which you prefer. NewYorkActuary (talk) 10:11, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you so much for your help. I would like my article to be reviewed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kovács Krisztina (talk • contribs) 10:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The draft now appears at Draft:Holy Spirit Church (Sajópálfala). Given the current backlog, it will probably take about a month before a review takes place. Feel free to work on the draft in the meantime. If you have any further questions, please ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 10:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kovács Krisztina (talk • contribs) 10:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

13:54:57, 29 March 2017 review of submission by Wendymartinbower

Wendymartinbower (talk · contribs)
- Draft:MD Labs Draft (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I was told the article did not meet basic standards and that it reads as an advertisement. What language per se was not neutral enough. Secondly, would adding the following references be sufficiently "notable": WGN Chicago - WGN Chicago NBC WSAZ Interview - NBC WOWK -TV CBS Parkersburg WV News and Sentinel Before I add these I'd like feedback. Otherwise I will need to withdraw the submission until we get more press.

Hello, Wendy. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. The best source of information as to why your submission was declined will be the person who looked at it. You can find the name and Talk page link for that reviewer in the "decline" box near the top of your draft. On a more general note, when reviewers speak of a draft reading "like an advertisement", they often are not referring to specific language. Instead, they are expressing their concern about the overall content of the draft. If a submission appears to be little more than an extension of the company's web site, or a part of the company's social-media marketing strategy, this concern is often expressed as "advertising". When I took a look at your submission shortly before posting here, I got the impression that I was reading precisely (and only) the sort of material that a company might put into one of its brochures. I, too, would have decline it as "advertising". I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:41, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16:42:36, 29 March 2017 review of submission by JRGarica

JRGarica (talk · contribs)
- Draft:The American Car Prospector (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am having trouble setting up the formatting for my reference page. I have read the Wiki help pages for citations and referencing, but I am unable to properly format the links so they appear how they should with my internal citations. Is it possible to see an example of how one is suppose to be written as? Thanks in advanced.

Hello, JR. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. There were several referencing problems with your submission. First, if you simply want to direct the reader to a Wikipedia article that provides more information on something mentioned in your draft, you should use a "wiki-link", not a footnote. I converted the two references in the first paragraph, using the WP:Piped link technique for one of them. Also, you can't use Wikipedia as a source for statements, so I simply removed the one that was attempting to use Wikipedia to prove that Hames attended the University of Denver. (You'll need to find proof of this somewhere outside of Wikipedia.) The one proper reference now appears as a formatted footnote, for which I used the {{cite web}} template. I hope all of this was helpful. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]