Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 January 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< January 15 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 17 >
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.


January 16

[edit]

00:57:40, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Mysoreravindra111

[edit]

The page created was a non-commercial page by a customer & admirer of the companies product & services. Have also shared relevant citations from reliable national & international sources. But still why was this post has been marked for deletion?

Mysoreravindra111 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:52:09, 16 January 2019 review of draft by SilviaTRE388

[edit]


SilviaTRE388 (talk) 02:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone has the time- I know you guys are busy- and could help change my page around to make it more 'Wiki' standards I would appreciate it.

I am learning as I go- this is only my second article- but I could sure use the help.

Please feel free to change anything or add anything.

Thank you for your brilliance, your time, work, and patience.

SIl

Request on 04:41:52, 16 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Ginyattri

[edit]


Why did you reject my article? What were the errors in my article?

Giny Attri VSP 04:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ginyattri. The draft was rejected because it appears to be an advertisement, such as might be written by someone with an undeclared conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:23:08, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Penguinmeadow

[edit]


Penguinmeadow (talk) 06:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I am wondering why my article was rejected, this was a famed presenter of Sky News Australia, and his work colleagues have their own articles, referring to James Bracey.

Thank You.

Hi Penguinmeadow. The draft was declined because, with a single source that is independent and reliable, it fails to show that the subject meets WP:BIO. It was subsequently rejected because the second reviewer felt that no amount of editing could overcome the problem. I recommend that you set the topic aside for a while. Creating new articles is time consuming, frustrating, and overrated. There are millions of easier and better ways of improving the encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:55:30, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Riskyishwar

[edit]


My Submission of this Draft declined on the basis of WP:NOP and WP:NOR.I cleared the policy WP:NOP but According to reviewer,the draft was based on opinion basis violating the policy WP:NOR.So he told me to add some sources so i added some sources.I asked him for help but he is not responding,may be he is busy in real life.Please tell me,is it looking good or not?Please give me some advice to improve the draft what to keep or delete? Please inform me,When it will be ready to resubmit before asking the reviewer to do so? IshwarTalk 06:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me.Why no one is responding?IshwarTalk 05:54, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:08:51, 16 January 2019 review of submission by ItsKvrathore

[edit]


Dear sir this article is for one of the best singer from the soil of pride mewar. he is doing work with zee music. and soon his solo album will be release.Wikipedia is one of the best platform for an artist to establish. ItsKvrathore (talk) 08:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsKvrathore: Wikipedia isn't a place to a promote an artist. WP:NOTPROMO is one of Wikipedia's key principles. Please read WP:NMUSICIAN to understand the criteria that we used to decide whether there should be an article about a particular musician. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:56, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Rakeshsharma12345

[edit]


I think this article should be re-reviewed because the music artist who created the music album is of much importance which is very clear when we search for his name on Google. On searching more than 4000 search results along with a Google-generated knowledge panel are shown up, which proves that the person is "notable" Rakeshsharma12345 (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rakeshsharma12345: No, that's not the way it works. Having lots of hits doesn't make a subject notable. The Wikipedia community has agreed criteria which we use to determine whether a musician is notable. See WP:NMUSICIAN. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:40:39, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Arvindsinghb2s

[edit]


I am new to Wikipedia and don't know what kind of Content goes well in the platform of information. I ma good in writing Blogs, Articles but this is my first attempt on wikipedia.. Please help me to live this writeup.

Arvindsinghb2s (talk) 09:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Arvindsinghb2s: Please start by reading Wikipedia:Your first article. Note that you may not use Wikipedia for WP:PROMOTION. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:23:13, 16 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by RazPalea

[edit]


Hello there!

I'm writing because I have been struggling in the process of writing my draft for Gerovital Cosmetics.

Let me start off by saying: I am being paid to write this article on Wikipedia and have disclosed it repeatedly during discussions with moderators, as well as on my talk page.

Now, the issue I'm facing is repeated submission denials, the last one being motivated as, to paraphrase, "this article reads like a paid article and tries promoting what is, essentially, a quack product". Now, I have repeatedly rephrased the draft as to eliminate anything that could be interpreted as subjective towards the brand itself. In the last draft I submitted, there was nothing showing bias as far as I can tell, except, perhaps, a "prizes and awards" section. I would really appreciate any tips or indications I could get that can help me get this article to a publishable version.

Thank you in advance! RazPalea (talk)

RazPalea (talk) 12:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@RazPalea: The deletion discussion makes the reasons for the deletion of the draft clear. There's already an article about Gerovital, which you can help improve. Articles have to be written about notable subjects (see WP:NCORP), provide reliable sources (see WP:V and be written from a neutral point of view, per WP:NPOV. Promotion is against Wikipedia's principles; if an article serves only to promote a subject then it doesn't belong here. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:10:10, 16 January 2019 review of submission by BygByrd1

[edit]


I am the music producer Byg Byrd and I would like to take ownership of the name please?

BygByrd1 (talk) 16:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BygByrd1: please read Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and WP:NMUSICIAN. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:53:30, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Robwward

[edit]

Hello all,

If possible, I'd like some further feedback on the notability of this article's subject. Having read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), it looks to me as though the cited MailOnline, The IET, TechCrunch, Metro, and Business Insider articles meet the significant/independent/reliable/secondary criteria. Any further guidance on establishing notability would be greatly appreciated.

With thanks,

Robwward (talk) 16:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Robwward: - Hi there. Post you commenting here, your draft was reviewed and rejected. The reviewer declined it as overly advertorial. You can ask the reviewer SamHolt6 if that was his sole decline grounds or if he also felt it failed to satisfy corporate notability
A brief look at the sources does give some issues. Firstly, MailOnline is not particularly trusted as a source - a recent community discussion voted to sustain the general refusal of it as a reliable source. A problem across the other sources is that most of it is the writer saying "FiveAI said this, FiveAI's staff member said this etc". This repackaged content is functionally disregarded for considering notability, so the source only counts if there is sufficient other content within the article. I'm not confident enough to make a specific decision on them without extra analysis.
Worth fixing the known problem while hunting for any other sources that may appear in the interim. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:49:59, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Samasaad

[edit]


Our original draft was rejected by reviewer StraussInTheHouse because it was deemed to be "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". In short, we were told that it seemed too personal in context and also it seemed to be an original research. It was suggested that we go through and adjust the phrasing to remove any weasel words are suggestive wording. I have gone through and made these adjustments and am hoping that this is more in line with what the reviewer was looking for. Thanks! Samasaad (talk) 18:49, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Samasaad: Can you clarify who you are referring to when you say "we"? JTP (talk • contribs) 19:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Samasaad: I have re-reviewed your draft. It needs a considerable amount of further work before we'd accept it. It still comes across as an an essay. Please read writing better articles which will hopefully help. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:04, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Emiliegiguere

[edit]


Hello,

I'm wondering if you could help me regarding the rejection of my article on Meccaniche Veloci. What elements could I improve? What should I change? Why do you say it looks "promotional"..

Thank you, Emilie --Emiliegiguere (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Emiliegiguere (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Emiliegiguere: This is an advert masquerading as an article. Wikipedia isn't a place for free advertising. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:17:44, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Palisades1

[edit]


Upon review of the page I submitted I realize it probably isn't ready for publication. I would like to remove my submission for this page. I will need to add category and more info/links. How do I take back my submission? Thanks.


Palisades1 21:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palisades1 (talk • contribs)

@Palisades1: The draft has been returned to the unsubmitted state. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:16, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Crusher123

[edit]


Because of this:

How do I implement the clean up changes? Crusher123 (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crusher123 (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Crusher123: I've left on your talk page more information about your next step. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:35:18, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Booradley44

[edit]


Taking over 2 months to review - why?

Booradley44 (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Booradley44: - It hasn't. it was created as a draft and added to AfC on the 12th December - about 5 weeks. That does make it one of our oldest drafts, but nowhere near 2 months. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_January_16&oldid=879743235"