Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 March 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 12 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 14 >
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.


March 13

[edit]

04:39:05, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Azim.atma

[edit]


I am not very much on why this article has been declined? I need to know specific reason. I have just use School information, nothing promotional or advertisement materials. I have given all references to create this article.

Azim.atma (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Azim.atma, The specific reason was provided. You need to prove the notability of the subject. WP:GNG Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 04:52:04, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 2020USER

[edit]



2020USER (talk) 04:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020USER, Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:30:29, 13 March 2020 review of submission by 45.64.227.49

[edit]


45.64.227.49 (talk) 06:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:36:33, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Tjkeeran

[edit]


I have removed the sections Prepay plans and External links, if you find that as a promotional material. Please let me know if any other sections need edit. Apologies for the inconvenience.

Tjkeeran (talk) 07:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Munjarin Abony (talk) 10:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:03:16, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Munjarin Abony

[edit]

{{Lafc|username=Munjarin Abony|ts=10:03:16, 13 March 2020|page=

Hi, I am interested in knowing specifics on why my page is being declined. The reason states "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject...". Do I need more reliable sources? Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.

Spherical45 (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spherical45 You need independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject himself, not just citations of his accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:56:34, 13 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Munjarin Abony

[edit]

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

12:37:54, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Eeberbach

[edit]


Eeberbach (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Can somebody else, more competent in computer science and mathematics than Sulfurboy review our Evolutionary automata draft submission to Wikipedia? To whom can we officially complain? We made substantial corrections for Sulfurboy three times. This time he "invented" as the new pretext for rejection that our submission is "not notable" enough in his opinion. Nobody else mentioned that to us before. Does it mean that before it was notable and now it stopped to be? We are recognized experts in the area of computer science, mathematics and evolutionary computation with hundreds of reputable reviewed publications, with Ph.D. and D.Sc. degrees in those areas, thus we know perfectly well what is notable in that area. It is a complete nonsense that a neutral encyclopedic submission, supported by multiple reliable sources, on foundations of evolutionary computation and its expressiveness, something that is badly missing in evolutionary computation, is not notable enough. It provides new venues for research and knowledge in that area, and Wikipedia readers (specialists and general public) deserve to read about that. What else can be more notable on this subject? See for comparison existing Wikipedia pages on evolutionary algorithm, genetic algorithm, genetic programming, evolutionary computation. Are they not notable too? Sulfurboy, with his Bachelor in political science and English, does not have the slightest idea what is "notable" or not in that specialized area. He may not like our submission, but he is not Wikipedia's God and does not have, we hope, an absolute power on submissions to Wikipedia. We never had such problems with publications before, but compared to Wikipedia, the reviews were done by the experts in specific area and not by ignorants. Note that the ignorant reviewer rejected before Alan Turing's, the founder of computer science an AI, famous "Intelligent Machinery" report labeling it as a "schoolboy essay". Of course, we cannot compare ourselves with the genius of Alan Turing, but we strongly believe that Sulfurboy would reject Turing's submission too if he had a chance. Fortunately, he had not. We spent one year on corrections to Wikipedia of this specific page, and it was a very unpleasant and frustrating experience so far. Note that our submission to Wikipedia does not constitute an original research, but it is based on such research. We hope that our comments will not be ignored and the last version will get an independent, neutral formal review.

Sincerely,

Eugene Eberbach and Mark Burgin

Firstly, attacking other editors calling them "ignorant reviewers" will not help you here, secondly you are sharing your user account which is expressly forbidden. Theroadislong (talk) 13:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstand the core purpose of Wikipedia. No article should require a review by anyone "more competent in computer science and mathematics". If the article does not provide sufficient context and explanation to a general reader without speciality technical knowledge, then the article simply isn't suited for this encyclopedia in that state. There is no academic essay-style content on Wikipedia, everything must be directly attributed to sources without conclusions, synthesis or bias. Fact-source(s), fact-source(s), etc. You jest that "Sulfurboy would reject Turing's submission too if he had a chance", but that would indeed likely be the correct decision by any of the reviewers. We do not accept content based on primary sources, original research, synthesis of sources or essay-like exploration of topics like one finds in academic writings. Your extremely hostile tone suggests you have no desire to actually adapt your work to Wikipedia requirements, so I agree with the decline. Wikipedia is not the platform for this publication in this state. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:55:55, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Cjhmace

[edit]


Hi. I am waiting for a draft in relation Chris Guest (Artist) to be reviewed but have received a comment to say that if the page is accepted I will need to create a disambiguation from Chris/Christopher Guest. I am assuming this means the actor Christopher Guest but my query is how do I create this disambiguation as I seem unable to find any information on how to do this. Also do I need to do this now or will it only need to be done if my page is accepted? Thanks for your help!

Cjhmace (talk) 12:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cjhmace. Robert McClenon's comment about disambiguation is more for any future reviewers that for yourself. Novice editors are not expected to know all the ins and outs of the encyclopedia. If you're interested, the process is described at Wikipedia:Disambiguation. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:47:38, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Jack Cherrett

[edit]

Hi, I was just wondering if there is anything you'd suggest that I can do to get this published, Thanks Jack Cherrett (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Cherrett Your band needs to be shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable band, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Facebook posts and locations the band has played do not do it. Not every band merits a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:25:50, 13 March 2020 review of submission by Arjun dhiman11

[edit]


Arjun dhiman11 (talk) 14:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arjun dhiman11, what is your question, exactly? Sam-2727 (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:48:17, 13 March 2020 review of draft by M.A.Sarmiento

[edit]


I have made a few revisions to my page and have eliminated outside sources but I think I am still struggling with figuring out what language is considered neutral or encyclopedic. If someone could read through my draft and point out anything that really stands out I would appreciate the help. Also, should I cut down the lists of commissions, panels, publications, etc? Thank you! M.A.Sarmiento (talk) 14:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

M.A.Sarmiento Before you edit any further you need to make a statutory declaration, you have a conflict of interest and you need to declare this on your user page. Theroadislong (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Theroadislong Thank you, I believe I correctly noted COI on the article. Please let me know if I made a mistake. Thanks.
M.A.Sarmiento, you made a slight mistake in the placing of the template. I have corrected it for you. As to regards for neutral language, as editors have said in the past, you should remove all the "select" sections. These skew the neutrality of the article to portray the subject in an overly positive manner. Also remove language like "custom-made, one-of-a-kind" as this makes the article read like an advertisement. If you have any other questions, let me know and I'll be sure to answer them. Sam-2727 (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:37:23, 13 March 2020 review of submission by MC Choji

[edit]

Information required in order to have this article on this specific person published on wikipedia. MC Choji (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it is not suitable for Wikipedia, there isn't anything you can do. Theroadislong (talk) 17:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:08:13, 13 March 2020 review of draft by Laurenroche1

[edit]


Laurenroche1 (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Laurenroche1, I assume you are asking why your article was declined? It is because your references don't establish the notability of this person, and may be unreliable. All of your sources are autogenerated (i.e. not reliable), or not independent of the source. For an article to be notable, references must be independent and reliable of the subject (articles from the website of a golf course the subject helped design aren't independent). Also, Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a reference. Finally, the decliner noted that this reads like a resume. Wikipedia articles shouldn't just be a blatant collection of every single one of a person's accomplishments. They should address parts of the subjects life, without going into too much detail. Adding an indiscriminate collection of facts can skew the neutrality of the article, giving undue weight to one section of the article. To learn more about this, I encourage you to read WP:Notability, WP:Neutrality, and WP:TooMuch. Feel free to ask me any other questions you might have. Sam-2727 (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:32:53, 13 March 2020 review of submission by 74.51.153.252

[edit]


I am working with my school mate and friend Actor Ciby to get his wikipedia page setup. This would help him in reaching to his audience and know more about his life. I am not sure why it's being rejected multiple times. Can I get a layman example of mistakes I am making? 74.51.153.252 (talk) 23:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For an article to merit inclusion into Wikipedia, the subject of the article must be notable. That is, the subject of the article must be supported by multiple independent, reliable sources that cover the subject of the article significantly (that is, not just trivial references). You currently have two sources. imdb isn't considered a reliable source by Wikipedia editors, so it doesn't meet the reliability criterion, and a link to a netflix show isn't independent of the subject (Nor does it likely mention the subject beyond trivial coverage). Not everybody merits inclusion into Wikipedia, and AFC reviewers have determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't. I would recommend that if you enjoy editing Wikipedia, you find another article to create (or expand on the many existing Wikipedia articles). A list of potential articles to create can be found at WP:Requested Articles. Sam-2727 (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_March_13&oldid=985275678"