Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 February 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 8 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 10 >
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 9

[edit]

05:13:54, 9 February 2020 review of draft by Azurerae

[edit]


This author has an IMDB id and one of her books made into a movie. Still not considered notable? --Azurerae (talk) 05:13, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can write your own IMDb profile, so that shows no notability whatsoever. Theroadislong (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but what about the fact that her book was made into a movie? --Azurerae (talk) 14:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't a notable film (no article) and you have a press release as a source which isn't considered reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see. The movie comes out on the 14th of this month. Thanks for the info. So, what is a reliable source for a movie then? --Azurerae (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, sources like PR Newswire and SoapCentral.com aren't acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azurerae (talk • contribs) 19:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Press releases are never reliable sources because they are not independent, see WP:PRSOURCE. Anyone can issue a press release. shoy (reactions) 19:33, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:27:34, 9 February 2020 review of draft by Hyacknot

[edit]

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

FIRST TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING HELP ON THE LINE BELOW THIS LINE. Take as many lines as you need. -->

It's been quite a while since this page was submitted for review. It's been worked on by wiki contributers as well and everything seems to be in order both in format as well as details. The page is necessary to serve as a bio and increase credibility of Arjun Chatterjee as a film director. Sincerely request that this be moved to the main article page soon. Thank you very much.

Hyacknot (talk) 06:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hyacknot Reviews are conducted by volunteers, who do what they can when they can- in no particular order. There isn't really any way to speed things up, as there are thousands of draft awaiting review. You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:43:52, 9 February 2020 review of submission by Flokiittbi

[edit]


Flokiittbi (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Flokiittbi: Sorry, but the company is not notable and there's nothing we can do at this time. The article is a PR piece. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:11, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:11, 9 February 2020 review of submission by Sidgujjar1000

[edit]


Sidgujjar1000 (talk) 14:15, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:10:22, 9 February 2020 review of submission by Sukoner

[edit]


Sudip Koner 16:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

A quick search on Google would show that, like most of us you are probably not notable enough for an article. Theroadislong (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:34:37, 9 February 2020 review of submission by EduCow

[edit]

I recently created an article regarding an extinct species called Centrobunus braueri. I got a message saying that the article wasn't adequately supported by reliable sources. I used the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) website for this, which is basically the most reliable and quite honestly, the only source that I can use since this is a not well-known species, but is notable enough to be found on the Wikipedia article IUCN Red List of extinct species IUCN Red List of extinct species Should I re-submit the article for review, or should I try to find a second reliable source?EduCow (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)EduCow EduCow (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't use ICUN as a source though, you added it as an external link, please read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources. Theroadislong (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi EduCow although it was on the ICUN website that is definitely a reliable source, that source does not cover all the information in the article. I looked myself for other sources but came up blank other than lots of mentions in the group of species declared extinct at the same time. If you can find another source or more that would be great. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If anyone thinks the ICUN listing is enough happy to see it pass. KylieTastic (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also looked for further sources but came up blank. Theroadislong (talk) 18:55, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:25:32, 9 February 2020 review of draft by Nature987765

[edit]


Nature987765 (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. My draft has been rejected twice. I understand and accept why it was not accepted the first time because I was wrong to put that she was a ‘model’. She is a socialite, an activist in raising awareness about epilepsy and works in fashion PR. I don’t understand why it was rejected the second time and the reason given was that it was not in a formal enough tone. If anyone wishes to check my draft, he or she will see that I have separated the sections accurately and I have provided plenty of different and reliable sources. I’m confused as to why it was rejected and I’m not sure what I can do to make sure the article does get accepted. If anyone can help me, I would be grateful.--Nature987765 (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nature987765: For one thing, you are citing a lot of facts about a person from the person themselves. That is never a reliable source. I am not sure the person is even notable. Are there any in-depth sources where it isn't just her being interviewed? It all looks like run-of-them mill celebrity gossip and tabloid material and nothing encyclopedic. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:02, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your reply. Well, some of the agencies she has worked for have provided a brief biography about her. If you look on Getty Images, you will see she has appeared at many different events (parties, openings, etc) with some very famous people. She is the ambassador of a charity which helps promote awareness about epilepsy. She is from a very wealthy family and is a known socialite, she associates with many other socialites (I have linked to a few on the draft). There are many articles which contain a lot less information and fewer sources, so I don’t understand why Fleming’s article isn’t enough to be accepted.

What do you suggest I should do? I have sourced different agencies she has either worked for or still works for and I have provided different sources from the BBC to interviews about her activism about epilepsy.--Nature987765 (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC) There are independent articles which have been written about her, such as: “Hum Fleming, the woman who can’t remember anything that happened six months ago” - Helen Rumblelow (The Times).--Nature987765 (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC) @Hellknowz: I have provided various sources to support that she works for different fashion/model agencies and I have quoted writers and interviewers who have given their thoughts on Fleming. Obviously her activism about epilepsy is going to include her own thoughts because she suffers from it which is what made her become active about making people more awareness in the first place. And, Fleming can’t be that unknown considering she was invited to Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank’s wedding. There is more to her than just being the great-niece of Ian Fleming.--Nature987765 (talk) 19:18, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nature987765:All these things you mention -- socialite, charity, agencies, activism, etc. -- do not by themselves establish notability on Wikipedia. It has to be 1) significant coverage in 2) independent 3) reliable sources. I can't suggest anything else at this time but to make sure you have shown such sources. I think The Times might pass, but it's behind a paywall, so I can't check. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 20:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:22:35, 9 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by John BG Johnson

[edit]



John BG Johnson (talk) 22:22, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is there anybody that can assist me to finish this article? THANK YOU.

Your draft has been rejected "This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia." I suggest you try editing some of the many thousand existing articles, which require improvement. Theroadislong (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:15:24, 9 February 2020 review of submission by 69.165.140.203

[edit]

I am requesting assistance because the article is about a match-3 game by Playrix 69.165.140.203 (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your subject is not notable. There is nothing you can do about this. To have an article, you need significant coverage in reliable sources. You don't have this. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 14:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_February_9&oldid=985274813"