Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 July 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 22 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 24 >
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.


July 23

[edit]

06:11:09, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Merlin Dizzy

[edit]


Below this line, tell us why you are requesting a re-review. Take as many lines as you need.-->}}

Merlin Dizzy (talk) 06:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


06:12:00, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Merlin Dizzy

[edit]


Merlin Dizzy (talk) 06:12, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:25:17, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Rubim Rebisha

[edit]


Rubim Rebisha (talk) 08:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rubim Rebisha: your (presumably autobiographical) draft was rejected for a complete failure to show notability. It both doesn't have any references (at all) but a check online doesn't show any suitable ones either. No amount of editing can fix that issue.
For future note, if you are writing about a different topic, You seem to have used a template to then fill out. That's fine, but you actually need to fill out all the paragraphs or delete the template text. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:34:18, 23 July 2019 review of draft by Barankeegnu

[edit]


Barankeegnu (talk) 09:34, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for review for 2 months, I've added information after I get the decline reasons, and now I'm waiting for re-review for 3 months already( What should I do to make the process quicker? Thank you

@Barankeegnu: See Wikipedia:A primer for newcomers#Picking a topic, particularly the "Pick something notable" subsection. There are also nearly six million existing articles you may edit without waiting for any reviews. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:41:07, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Kathryn Bosi Monteath

[edit]
I would like to know what is wrong with my article on Britti

Kathryn Bosi Monteath (talk) 09:41, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kathryn Bosi Monteath: - as far as I can tell, this draft was never submitted for AfC review. I can do that for you if you'd like.
As a side note, it shouldn't be written with "we" etc - articles use the 3rd person. e.g. "It is likely that Britti was born around 1600" Nosebagbear (talk) 10:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:03:22, 23 July 2019 review of draft by 49.248.235.133

[edit]


49.248.235.133 (talk) 11:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over 4 weeks and the article is not yet reviewed. I would really appreciate it if anyone reviews it. Thanks.

@49.248.235.133: - as the yellow box indicates, there is a major backlog atm. Currently some drafts have been waiting for more than 14 weeks as we are receiving a massive rate of AfC submissions atm. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:32, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:43:40, 23 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Annfrankedit

[edit]


All the problems mentioned about the article by the reviewer has been addressed. Please review and approve it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Athisayangalude_Venal

Annfrankedit (talk) 11:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Annfrankedit. The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed since early May. The current backlog is 19 weeks, so the draft is likely to be reviewed by late September. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:53:16, 23 July 2019 review of submission by 43.241.130.134

[edit]


43.241.130.134 (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


12:28:57, 23 July 2019 review of draft by Doctorether

[edit]


I am looking to improve the wiki page for the podcast Darker Days Radio.

I created the page in response to the fact that if you search "darker days", the podcast is listed under disambiguation, having been listed by another user. I have taken that as a sign that further information was required to detail what the podcast is and the position it holds within the role play game community.

Further advice on improving the page is welcome.

Doctorether (talk) 12:28, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doctorether. Red links are discouraged on disambiguation pages, so the presence of one on Darker Days might be more indicative of the IP editor who place it there not knowing what they were doing than of the encyclopedia needing an article about the podcast Darker Days Radio.
Contrast the draft with Radiolab, one of Wikipedia's better articles about a podcast. See how the latter cites high quality sources like The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and The New Yorker? Notice that it has won a Peabody Award? Those things show that Radiolab is notable. It may not be possible to show that Darker Days Radio is notable.
Creating a new article is one of the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating things a novice Wikipedian can attempt. If you're interested in podcasting and role-playing games, I suggest you spend some time improving existing articles in the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Podcasting or Wikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing games. The experience you gain will make it easier to create a new article. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:27, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:56:35, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Louisfx

[edit]

Don't have any clue as to why it is rejected. Only thing I can gather is that the reviewer was too busy; didn't understand the content; or the content did not appeal to him. I gather if I can take the time to put it in... someone does give a damn on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisfx (talk • contribs) 12:56, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Louisfx: - Intish probably does meet our notability standards. However it was right to be declined (it might appear rejected, but it's actually declined) - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how-to guide (see points 1 & 6 here). Parts of the draft are already in good form, but major aspects are not. 3rd person language needs to be used throughout (e.g. don't say "so that we can have"). In short, you're saying what it is, rather than trying to teach people how to use it.
I'm also concerned by the extremely long parts of the book you've added to the article. I suspect you're in copyright breach, as there's a limit on how long quotes can be without breaching it, and you're well over.
It sounds like an interesting (albeit just reading it was enough to make me cringe - I don't think i'll be an advocate any time soon) topic, and not beyond turning into a proper draft.
It might be worth looking at some grammar rule articles and seeing how others have laid it out. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:28, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Arielr09

[edit]


Arielr09 (talk) 13:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:11:06, 23 July 2019 review of submission by Jonas84886

[edit]

I do not know why the page regarding the Top 100 NFL Players of 2019 has been declined for being a Wikipedia article. Last year, when I saw the article of NFL Top 100 Players of 2018, the page was kept up, even WHEN the list was not completed. Plus, some of the players have made some accomplishments within the 2018 NFL season, while some players went on the list, but haven't done anything notable. Or, at least for what I know. Like, I feel like now, I should put Andrew Whitworth as part of the 2018 Built Ford Tough Offensive Line of the Year, but other than that, I don't know what some of the players who I have not listed in accomplishment, has done anything of note. And also, yes, the sources were messed up a little bit. I intend to add the YouTube videos of the Top 100 players instead of redirecting to the website of the Top 100. But anyhow, please let me know as to why the page was declined to be put up on Wikipedia. Jonas84886 (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NFL Top 100 Players of 2019 was moved back to article space by Rockchalk717. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:17:56, 23 July 2019 review of draft by Jake.compactcath

[edit]


Hello! I recently submitted an article for publishing, but realized that the title of my article was missing. I unfortunately cannot go back and add the article title and resubmit for publishing, so I would highly appreciate information as to how I can add a title or remove my article from the submission process (this may reach to whoever is reading this after my article has been returned, so this may still apply) this is my first time publishing an article, and any feedback or further steps will be much appreciated! Thank you! Jake.compactcath (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake.compactcath: - I've moved it to Draft:CompactCath (as a note, as a matter of Wikipedia style, we miss "inc", "ltd" etc out of the names.
There are two, substantial, reasons for the decline.
  1. Sourcing - your sources fail to be independent and/or secondary. You need sources that are independent (no benefit in pushing the company), secondary, reliable & in-depth. And, as a company, you need multiple sources of this quality. 3 good sources is vastly better than 10 middling/mediocre ones.
  1. Advertising - this reads more like a product catalogue, setting out what you can buy from the company in great detail, along with how good the company and its items are. Have a look round at some other articles and model yours after the most neutral of those. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:44:36, 23 July 2019 review of draft by 70.170.75.210

[edit]


The draft was declined on the basis that it reads like an advertisement. It isn't my intention to advertise the business. Rather, I tried to stay in line with what another large master-planned community in Las Vegas has done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerlin%2C_Nevada I believe the article is currently written from a neutral point of view, but will change any text which appears to the contrary - I just need it pointed out. I've read the article on spam but was unable to find anything that applied to this draft, specifically. Please advise.

70.170.75.210 (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The point-of-view of the draft is leaning towards the company. You should try to use more neutral words. "Affluent" and "complimentary" are not neutral words. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 03:48, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:06, 23 July 2019 review of draft by TJRobertson

[edit]


The draft was declined on the basis that it reads like an advertisement. It isn't my intention to advertise the business. Rather, I tried to stay in line with what another large master-planned community in Las Vegas has done: [1] I believe the article is currently written from a neutral point of view, but will change any text which appears to the contrary - I just need it pointed out. I've read the article on spam but was unable to find anything that applied to this draft, specifically. Please advise. TJRobertson (talk) 21:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerlin%2C_Nevada
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_July_23&oldid=1135244698"