Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 December 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 18 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 20 >
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.


December 19

[edit]

02:13:42, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Aganija05

[edit]

Hi. I got my article declined because of refrencing issues, but I got that fixed. I used reliable sources, such as the bands credits on album releases and their bio on their record label's website. I want to resubmit it. Even though it's sort of a stub, I'm proud of it. Could you tell me how to resubmit my draft? Thanks. Aganija05 (talk) 02:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aganija05: You can just click the blue Resubmit button. However, it will get declined again for the same reason, and probably permanently this time since it likely means you don't have other sources. You need to add sources that meet the threshold of being reliable, independent and in-depth. The previous reviewer already explained this. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 12:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:45:54, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Octino

[edit]


Hi there, i was wondering if you could give me any advice on how to improve my article ? It's my very first one, so any advice I can use on this one, or any future ones would be very helpful.

Thank you!

Octino (talk) 09:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Octino. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Most businesses are not notable. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative. No amount of editing can fix the problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again.
You are welcome to write about something else; we have nearly 6 million topics to choose from. If you're only interested in writing new articles about extant companies, you may wish to explore alternative outlets. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:48, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Alx27alx

[edit]

Hello, i would like to get assistance in order to make the topic more notable for wikipedia. The company i am writing about is pioneering on the swiss market trying to help solve the problem of vacant homes. I understand that perhaps i need to refocus the writing, but i would really appreciate your tips. The idea to add a wiki page came after i saw guestready page on wiki, that is a very simple business and does have an approved page.

Alx27alx (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alx27alx: What you need as a minimum is reliable independent sources that cover the topic in-depth. GuestReady article isn't great, but it has such sources. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:36:58, 19 December 2019 review of submission by Gvsnraju

[edit]


Gvsnraju (talk) 14:36, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


can you give me exact information why you are rejecting. if you have reliable source i will provide to you. can you do it for edit?

@Gvsnraju: The threshold is having multiple reliable, independent and in-depth sources. The ones in the article fail at least one point each. It is unlikely there are any better sources or presumably you would have already included them. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:38:42, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Gscroggins

[edit]


My article has been in the "reviewing phase" for quite a long tim now and was wondering when it would be finished? Gscroggins (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gscroggins, The review process is currently taking at least 8 weeks, please be patient. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:45:44, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Donald Sylvester

[edit]


I know why my article was rejected. I have more references but don't understand how to format them. Perhaps they are merely footnotes?:

Extended content

Fab TV

[1]

Hollywood Reporter:

[2]

Deadline:

[3]

Variety:

[4]

[5]

Indiewire:

[6]

BAFTA

[7]

Collider:

[8]

AwardsDaily

[9]

Consumerguide.com

[10]

Matthew Toffolo

[11]

BoomLibrary

[12]

BFI

[13]

The Exorcist, Revised 2nd Edition, Mark Kermode, P.127

[14]

The Encyclopedia of Musicians and Bands on Film, Melissa U.D. Goldsmith, Paige A. Willson, Anthony J. Fonseca, P.332

[15]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xitxFigsn14
  2. ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/ford-v-ferrari-sound-team-featured-thrs-behind-screen-show-1255117
  3. ^ https://deadline.com/video/james-mangold-ford-v-ferrari-matt-damon-interview-oscar-contenders/
  4. ^ https://variety.com/2019/artisans/production/james-mangold-crew-ford-v-ferrari-1203393985/
  5. ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/ford-v-ferrari-sound-team-featured-thrs-behind-screen-show-1255117
  6. ^ https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/ford-v-ferrari-sound-design-1202190953/
  7. ^ http://awards.bafta.org/award/2006/film/sound
  8. ^ https://collider.com/ford-v-ferrari-review-christian-bale/
  9. ^ https://www.awardsdaily.com/2019/12/16/joker-1917-ford-v-ferrari-lead-mpse-motion-picture-sound-editors-announce-nominees/
  10. ^ https://blog.consumerguide.com/speed-sound-ford-v-ferrari/
  11. ^ https://matthewtoffolo.com/2018/03/08/interview-with-supervising-sound-editor-donald-sylvester-logan-walk-the-line-310-to-yuma/
  12. ^ https://www.boomlibrary.com/blog/interview-donald-sylvester/
  13. ^ https://www.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2bb58e295f
  14. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=jLiUKCPQWj8C&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=donald+sylvester+sound&source=bl&ots=dpwbWZ6AuB&sig=ACfU3U3O0rxPpmzNCJF3qDJZZc-yg2WpOA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwizrtvAvsLmAhWFKn0KHdHMDjkQ6AEwCXoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=donald%20sylvester%20sound&f=false
  15. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=_TP3DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA332&lpg=PA332&dq=donald+sylvester+sound&source=bl&ots=aOp4YtLXVT&sig=ACfU3U0pyCo25UHvcUeWGAKbM1GlIchohA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjqgOmLwsLmAhVtIDQIHawOAL04ChDoATAAegQICxAB#v=onepage&q=donald%20sylvester%20sound&f=false

I hope these references will be enough to permit my article to be published. Thank you!


Donald Sylvester (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Sylvester, You can simply add them, along with the info they support, as you have them currently. You can then use a handy tool called ReFill link here to automatically create nice, filled references. If you need further help, leave a note on my talk page. You might also wish to read referencing for beginners. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 03:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:48:16, 19 December 2019 review of submission by TLHistory

[edit]

I have added more credible sources and added more background information. TLHistory (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TLHistory. The bulk of any article should come from independent, reliable sources. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three such sources. The draft cites one. Find two more, and minimize the use of her and her employer as sources.
The opinion piece in The New York Times is not a reliable source for facts (it may not be used as a source for "was a founding member ..."). It is reliable only for opinions. Those opinions must be attributed, they may not be stated in Wikipedia's voice ("According to feminist Nona Willis-Aronowitz, Densmore believed ...").
Remove Prabook. Being user-generated, it is not a reliable source. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:19, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:58:31, 19 December 2019 review of draft by Nsomnaik21

[edit]


For niche industries with significant prominence in healthcare (i.e. precision medicine), what are acceptable sources for references? I've written an article citing in-depth articles from prominent third party, industry sources but it was declined with the note that these sources aren't prominent enough. While there are many articles that offer a high-level overview of this industry, company specifics are unlikely to be written up in NYT or WaPo. Given that, what sources would be acceptable? I can also cite scientific journals but most are behind a paywall which I'm trying to avoid. For this article, I followed the rough template offered by The Foundation Medicine article and cited articles from many of the same publications. Guidance is welcome!

Nsomnaik21 (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nsomnaik21. Examples of sources that could demonstrate notability include independent press coverage and analyst reports. The New York Times would be fine. For business coverage, The Wall Street Journal might be even better. Other metropolitan newspapers work too. Often a large paper near the company's headquarters has coverage. Check The Mercury News in San Jose. Academic journals are unlikely to say much about the company unless they're business studies. There is no need to avoid paywalled sources.
Remove Crunchbase, it is considered generally unreliable, and use of the source is generally prohibited. Although NASDAQ-traded companies are often notable, there is no guarantee that Personalis is. Being public for six months may not be long enough for significant coverage to have developed. You may need to wait a couple of years. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_December_19&oldid=985268752"