Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 September 28
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < September 27 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 29 > |
| 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. |
September 28
[edit]03:55:14, 28 September 2019 review of draft by Chicken0me
[edit]- Chicken0me (talk · contribs)
I've been writing my first Wikipedia page. It's for the Christian Game Developers Conference. I've submitted it several times now, and it’s been declined several times. The first time it was declined was because it contained text which had been copied from another source, I've now fixed that. The second time it was declined was because it wasn’t adequately referenced, I've also fixed that.
But now it’s being declined because it’s references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. I really feel that this topic does deserve a Wikipedia page, and I don’t really understand what’s wrong with the references I have.
After compared to some other Wikipedia pages such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Praise, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylorville_New_Zealand, I really don’t understand why mine doesn’t meet the criteria.
I would really appreciate it if you could point out to me exactly what’s wrong with the references I have and anything else I may be doing wrong.
The link to the draft is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chicken0me Also I have made a few changes since I’ve last submitted it, but I’m afraid to try resubmitting it in case it is declined and deleted.
Chicken0me (talk) 03:55, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Chicken0me. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article does not mean it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. So generally it isn't productive to compare a draft to other pages. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best or second best.
- A new article need not be as long or as good as Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology, but it is an example of how one might structure a conference article, how much weight to give various aspects, and what types of sources to use. Conferences are a difficult category to write about well. Try setting the topic aside for a while and improving existing articles instead, until you've developed a deeper understanding of how Wikipedia works. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:45, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
09:53:25, 28 September 2019 review of submission by ZorgerGT
[edit]Hello, could you tell me what exactly needs to be fixed on this page to publish it? ZorgerGT (talk) 09:53, 28 September 2019 (UTC)Zorger
- Hi ZorgerGT. The reviewer's comment, below the large pink boxes at the top of the draft, zeros in on the main problem with the draft. Every statement likely to be challenged needs an inline citation to the reliable published source where you obtained the the information. In the biography of a living person, assume that almost every statement is likely to be challenged. How, for example, do you know that "Lakhtachev was born on February 9, 1962 in Miass, Chelyabinsk oblast, USSR"? Go through the whole draft and add inline citations. Help:Referencing for beginners explains the technical details. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- Wale Baggis (talk · contribs)
Hi, I submitted a write up on the man, the music called 'The Alfresco Beats' but the article has been declined twice now. I am writing to thank you for your time and attention, however, please delete all sensitive links I shared with you and delete all copies of such documents therein from your database and systems. Since you do not deem the articles as relevant I think its appropriate not to withhold any document or data related to this. To avoid prosecution,please delete all my data in your database and obliterate my account forthwith. Thank you. My apologies for taking your time. Bye.
86 people here Filter users in channel
Wale Baggis (talk) 12:25, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- I have tagged your sandbox for speedy deletion as a copyright violation, please also read Wikipedia:No legal threats. Theroadislong (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
16:11:21, 28 September 2019 review of submission by Taron Wright
[edit]- Taron Wright (talk · contribs)
I am new to wikipedia so this is my first article I'm trying to publish. As part of a college assignment I have been tasked with writing an article on a recognizable female engineer. This is why I choose Elizabeth Donnelly. She is the new CEO of Women's Engineering Society England. However after publishing the article for review, I got the feed back of "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia" and "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)". I'm very unsure about how to approach these problems because I thought I was very objective in my article, I do not know how I made it read like I was advertising the person. Also the sources of information on Elizabeth Donnelly's childhood and education are very scarce. They only come in the forms of interviews or her LinkedIn which appears not to be acceptable according to wiki. I was wondering what i can do to get this published or should i just give up and find a new person with more independent sources. Any help would be appreciated, thank you Taron Wright (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Taron Wright (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Taron Wright. It will be difficult to get Draft:Elizabeth Donnelly published because of the lack of reliable, in depth, secondary sources that are truly indpendent. So change topic. Instead of trying to create a new article, spend some time improving existing ones to become familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 98% of articles are rated less than "good" by the community, so there is much room for improvement. See Wikipedia:Community portal for ways to help. Find a WikiProject aligned with your interests, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Engineering or Wikipedia:WikiProject Women scientists, each of which has identified thousands of articles in their scope that need clean-up. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:10, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
18:28:12, 28 September 2019 review of submission by Brewcrewmike
[edit]- Brewcrewmike (talk · contribs)
Why are there 29 teams that have an MLB season on here, but for some fricken reason not the Brewers? If you are too much of a smart alec and want to create it yourself then be my guest you idiot.
Brewcrewmike (talk) 18:28, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
18:29:53, 28 September 2019 review of submission by Brewcrewmike
[edit]- Brewcrewmike (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
Apparently, my article isn't good enough for you idiots, so if you want to create it then go ahead. It better come out tommarow stupid wikipedia.
Brewcrewmike (talk) 18:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Brewcrewmike: I'm pretty sure that calling Wikipedia editors idiot's or stupid is not going to help your case. Please read WP:CIVIL. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:17, 30 September 2019 (UTC)