Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 February 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 17 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 19 >
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.


February 18

[edit]

01:03:23, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Abhuwan14

[edit]


I was creating a page of singer Avinash Ghising, he is a singer of Nepal since last 2 decades. He has sung. more than 2 dozens of songs and some were awarded too. But during his starting period at Nepalese Music Industry he got less covered by media and newspapers because of lack of publishing media and under developed society so it has been quite difficult to gather reference about him in today's date. I do have some snippets of his News published on national daily of past. Can i use those as reference ? Or how do i maintain his references ? Please do help me .


Abhuwan14 (talk) 01:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to see the links that were provided in the message as to why the article was decline? Those links will lead you to pages that can fully answer your questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:30, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:27:24, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Llll5032

[edit]


Hello, Afc Help Desk! I am writing about an article draft for Timothy Shea that is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Timothy_Shea Shea is the new U.S. Attorney for D.C., and is in a lot of news related to current events. But the draft review is scheduled to take 4 months or more. Do you have advice on how this can be expedited? Thank you for taking the time!

Llll5032 (talk) 01:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no process to expedite an article. Considering one subject more important than another would be a breech of neutrality. Someone will get to the article when they can. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:28, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Thanks for your answer and explanation! Llll5032 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:21:58, 18 February 2020 review of submission by 2600:1700:4080:52C0:E127:4A32:5372:CEF8

[edit]


I'm requesting a re-review because I believe my subject is notable enough, he is featured several times on a major and reputable music blog named Respect. These are independent, reliable and not self-published.

All in all, we appreciate the consideration and hope we can come to an agreement.

2600:1700:4080:52C0:E127:4A32:5372:CEF8 (talk) 02:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I'm requesting a re-review because I believe my subject is notable enough, he is featured several times on a major and reputable music blog named Respect. These are independent, reliable and not self-published.

All in all, we appreciate the consideration and hope we can come to an agreement.


2600:1700:4080:52C0:E127:4A32:5372:CEF8 (talk) 02:23, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you didn't read the articles that were linked to you multiple times in the declines of your article, otherwise you wouldn't have said what you did about the Respect blog. Further, your article was outright rejected because you kept submitting your article over and over again without actually showing that you were attempting to make improvements in good faith. A cursory google search of the subject shows that they do not come close to meeting the standards of WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST. I would advise that you hold on the article and come back if the subject happens to start meeting either of those two guidelines. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:00:56, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Tlauf8

[edit]

I'm looking for help. The feedback I'm getting is that there are not enough citations and that the article is not of a topic renowned enough. The organization has several thousand members, receives grants from San Diego county and more. What's missing?

Tlauf8 (talk) 05:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 05:26, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tlauf8 That the group has several thousand members is actually meaningless as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Wikipedia has articles about subjects that receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how the subject meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability, in this case, the definition of a notable organization. Membership is not one of the listed criteria. As noted by the reviewers, primary sources do not establish notability. Neither do routine announcements, staff interviews, or press releases. The draft reads as a promotional brochure, describing the "mission" of the organization- which is unencyclopedic as it is impossible for an independent reliable source to verify, as an organization's "mission" can change at any time. If you haven't already, you should read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:45:36, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Adityaminz2004

[edit]


Adityaminz2004 (talk) 06:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself. Very few people are notable in the Wikipedia sense. shoy (reactions) 14:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:35:15, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Shilpuaery

[edit]


The Sarin Memorial Legal Aid Foundation 07:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shilpuaery (talk • contribs)

10:10:44, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Renukaapollo

[edit]

Please advise how can I edit my article. Renukaapollo (talk) 10:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Renukaapollo:, as well as reading as if it came from a company brochure, the absolute killer is the complete absence of any sources. An article on a company needs at least 3 sources that are in-depth (c 10+ lines each), reliable, independent (which also rules out interviews), and secondary (newspapers, books etc). Nosebagbear (talk) 14:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:39:44, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Dazstrange

[edit]


Dazstrange (talk) 10:39, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I didn't want this article to sound like advertising, wondered if I could get some pointers on how to make it less like advertising? Thanks

@Dazstrange: Your sandbox was deleted as unambiguous advertising as well as a copyright violation. If you want to try again, write the article in your own words instead of copying and pasting. shoy (reactions) 13:59, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:32:28, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Ebubay01

[edit]


I have been working on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sola_Adepetun and not been successful, I have included mentions which are not passive in it but this keeps getting declined. I would appreciate help with this.

Ebubay01 (talk) 11:32, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ebubay01! If you have not already, please visit the WP:RELIABILITY page, which details what types of sources you can and cannot use, and what sources are considered reliable for articles.
--Torontopedia (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:47:28, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Elnencatala

[edit]

Politic-ed draft

Elnencatala (talk) 13:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd like some help regarding my draft on Politic-Ed. I have submitted it, and it has been rejected due to a lack of references, I now have more references, how can I resubmit it? My draft is in my sandbox.

@Elnencatala: - while you have added more references, as far as I can tell, most are not meeting the requirements. They appear somewhat duplicitious, such as telegra.ph. It and telescope don't have any way of indicating that they're either generally reliable sources or independent. The Medium source is unclear if it's reliable (Medium is a little variable on this front), but more relevantly, is almost entirely about the founder, rather than the company itself. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:38, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:17:25, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Lynnglassford

[edit]


I have removed several paragraphs that my have been perceived as advocacy.--Lynnglassford (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lynnglassford (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lynnglassford! I would recommend that you review these two pages, WP:RELIABILITY and WP:MOSLAYOUT, concerning the sources on your page and the overall layout of the article. Two suggestions would be to find other sources (ie. credible media outlets) instead of focusing heavily on legal cases and parliamentary transcripts, and improve the layout of the article - add an appropriate infobox, alter the headings, etc.
--Torontopedia (talk) 20:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:45, 18 February 2020 review of submission by DylanStone17

[edit]


After the first decline, I added notable citations and third-party references supplemented with internal links where relevant. However, it's been two months since the reattempt to be published, but it still hasn't been reviewed yet. How do we notify the right person(s) to review our latest submission?

Thank you, Dylan

Dylan Stone (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dylan, I would say continue working on the article, you can edit it and add and/or remove the content while you await a review. One recommendation I have is see if you can locate additional sources, preferably from notable media outlets or other reliable sources ( WP:RELIABILITY ), and expand on the information in your article. Add more details about the founder of the company and how he started it (and why), how and why Josh joined, etc. Where appropriate, add headings - see WP:MOSLAYOUT for help. This may help ensure you meet the notability guidelines ( WP:NOTE ).
Additionally, I did notice that you may have forgotten to re-submit the article. Once an article is declined, it is removed from the list of articles to be reviewed until you re-submit it. You can add the submit tag (found here on the end page: WP:WIZGO) at the top of the article to submit it again. Please do not remove the decline message.
--Torontopedia (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:00:11, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Sukoner

[edit]


Sudip Koner 18:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

You have repeatedly written an article about yourself, and these have repeatedly been deleted because like most of us, you are not notable in Wikipedia's terms. Please stop. Theroadislong (talk) 18:28, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:43:25, 18 February 2020 review of draft by Mpgriffin

[edit]


Hi! I am looking for examples of reliable sources and specific references to which sections read like advertising copy. I added many more sources earlier today, but they seem to be rejected. Thank you! Mpgriffin (talk) 19:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mpgriffin! Please check WP:RELIABILITY and WP:MOSLAYOUT.
--Torontopedia (talk) 19:46, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:05:09, 18 February 2020 review of submission by Kebajikan111

[edit]


Kebajikan111 (talk) 20:05, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


WHATTT????

Your submissions are being declined and rejected because they do not meet WP:GNG Wikipedia is not a cookbook to add non-notable dishes to. This was explained in the decline message of a myriad of your articles and instead of making an effort to improve the articles, you just kept resubmitting them in an attempt I guess to get them through. As you admitted to on my talk page, these food items aren't really even known to a broader audience much less are they notable. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_February_18&oldid=985274444"