Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 17 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 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.


March 18

[edit]

03:46:42, 18 March 2020 review of submission by 73.191.192.154

[edit]

Minetest is by far the most popular open-source minecraft-style game available, and is actively maintained. It fits well in lists like List of open-source video games -- it is apparently fine for all of these games to have their own wiki page, so I see no reason why minetest should not also be allowed to have a similar page. 73.191.192.154 (talk) 03:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minetest as to why this game does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:09:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by VenkteshN

[edit]


Hello, My name is Venktesh and I am working for CELETTE based in India. Celette is a French company situated in the township of Vienne France. We have been the market leader worldwide for designing, manufacturing Collision Repair equipment since 1952 and CELETTE and its products have been approved by major car manufactures across the globe.

In the initial stage we had asked a third party to create a page for us in Wikipedia who did not provide correct information as per wiki guidelines and due to which it has been rejected multiple times and the third party has also retried various different IPs to get success. We now asked them to stop updating the page and we directly trying to frame contents per guidelines instructed by wiki. We really wanted to have a page for us in wiki with following all its guidelines in a appropriate way.

We kindly request you to re-review the content submitted by me and request you help on improvising the content to fit wiki rules and kindly help to make the page live. VenkteshN (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

VenkteshN The draft is currently not acceptable. It is sourced to little more than press release type articles, which do not establish that your company meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Wikipedia requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to give the significant coverage about your company, not simply republish a press release or announcement. You will need to read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:37:22, 18 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Ianpalmer

[edit]


Hello

I have submitted this article which has been rejected twice. It is for a TV manufacturer called Cello Electronics. They have been established for 20 years and are the only remaining TV manufacturer in the UK. They appeared twice on BBC Breakfast and once on BBC One Show in the last 12 months. Cello have made some notable product developments over the years with solar-powered products for Africa being one of the latest interesting ideas. They are well covered in the press with these developments.

I have added citations and references where appropriate, but the article continues to be rejected. I have also been careful with language and tone to make sure it doesn't read like an advertisement.

I wonder if you could help advise me on any specific changes I need to make to the article in order to get it published for the benefit and interest of Wikipedia readers.

Thanks for your help.

Ian Ianpalmer (talk) 10:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ianpalmer (talk) 10:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has been rejected, creating an article about your own company is probably the hardest task on Wikipedia and you will find few editors willing to help you. I suggest you find other articles to improve. Theroadislong (talk) 10:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:12:54, 18 March 2020 review of submission by WikiWriter4Peanuts

[edit]


WikiWriter4Peanuts (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWriter4Peanuts, I'm assuming you're asking why your article has been nominated for speedy deletion. This is because the article has been interpreted as an unambiguous advertisement. If you wish to protest the speedy deletion, this isn't the correct place. I see you have already contested the speedy deletion, so there is no further action you can take here. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would encourage you to find a page already created to edit, or create one from a list of topics other editors have already established as likely notable (found at WP:Requested Articles). Sam-2727 (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:17:36, 18 March 2020 review of draft by Meimaar.93

[edit]


Hi, I am writing an article about an architecture company based in Eindhoven, Netherlands (UArchitects). I am struggling to publish it because of the content sounding too promotional. I would like to ask for help regarding some ways I can make the article sound more neutral and still publish the information in it. The awards and projects that I have mentioned in the article are quite known in the Netherlands and I have added references to the source of the award information as well. The submission was already declined twice by reviewers. Is there a way that you can help me publish this article without it sounding like an advertisement for the company? Meimaar.93 (talk) 13:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meimaar.93 " has received a number of prestigious national and international awards" sounds VERY promotional and are ANY of these awards notable? Theroadislong (talk) 13:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:26:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Annisd

[edit]

Hey, Let me know when you have reviewed this and if it is now okay. Thanks, Danielle Annisd (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Annisd, unfortunately your article has been rejected, which means no further action can be taken on it. It was rejected because the topic likely isn't notable (that is, mentioned in multiple independent reliable sources), and the article is written more like an advertisement than a neutral encyclopedic article. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would encourage you to check out one of the many articles already created. Creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, and it's best to begin with editing already existing articles first. Sam-2727 (talk) 15:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:31:08, 18 March 2020 review of draft by TheBirdsShedTears

[edit]


Please review this draft as part of the AfC help desk. Thanks TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheBirdsShedTears, Done. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:34:02, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Pw55823

[edit]

I submitted an article for a review from my sandbox and i was decline. please I need help to improve my article

Pw55823 (talk) 17:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pw55823, unfortunately your article has been rejected. This means an experienced editor has determined that the subject of the article isn't currently notable enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. This means that there aren't multiple independent, reliable sources that discuss the subject. As a side note, your article is written in a promotional tone (with phrases like "has always been drawn to the sound of music"), but Wikipedia articles must be written in a neutral tone. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I recommend you edit an already created article, as creating your first article is one of the most challenging tasks on Wikipedia. Feel free to ask anymore questions you have here. Sam-2727 (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pw55823. The topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia), so no amount of editing can make it acceptable. Unlike other platforms you may be familiar with, such as Facebook or LinkedIn, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself or your friends. It is an encyclopedia, it summarizes what independent, reliable sources have written about topics that have attracted significant attention from the world at large and over time. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:38:27, 18 March 2020 review of submission by RGws

[edit]


RGws (talk) 17:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RGws, your article was rejected, which means an experienced editor has determined that it isn't notable. If you enjoy editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you find an article already created to edit, as creating your first article on Wikipedia is one of the hardest tasks to do. Also, please don't remove "rejection" notices from a page in the future. They should remain for maintenance purposes. Sam-2727 (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:05:46, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Severen Tezvel

[edit]


Thank you so much for your honest feedback. I am grateful for your time as I know it took much effort to not only review, but to also point out specific issues that I needed to sort out. I hope you will find the edits I made now fit Wikipedia's standards and you will allow the school to have a Wikipedia page. Thank you again for your time and for your consideration.

Severen Tezvel (talk) 18:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:21:40, 18 March 2020 review of submission by SouL Viper

[edit]


SouL Viper (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This query has already been answered. Please don't submit repeatedly Nosebagbear (talk) 01:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:12, 18 March 2020 review of submission by SouL Viper

[edit]


SouL Viper (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This query has already been answered. Please don't submit repeatedly Nosebagbear (talk) 01:10, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:27:44, 18 March 2020 review of submission by 2409:4040:410:191E:BC25:2E79:AEC4:2CF0

[edit]


2409:4040:410:191E:BC25:2E79:AEC4:2CF0 (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Suraj rajvardham07 (I'm presuming you or someone you might know) has already requested a review at the help desk for this submission. These comments still stand: the subject has been reviewed by experienced AFC reviewers and determined to be not notable. It has been reviewed by others (including me) and we agree with the original assessment. If you want to edit Wikipedia further, I would recommend turning your attention to editing pages that have already been created. Creating an article on Wikipedia is a difficult task and it's much easier to start out by editing pages that already exist. If you have further questions, feel free to ask them here (a more specific inquiry would be appreciated, though). Sam-2727 (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:29:57, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Pubg Noob

[edit]

I haven't violated any of the Wikipedia guidelines please once againrebiew my page Pubg Noob (talk) 20:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pubg Noob: - hi there. Your draft has some promotional language, but also an absence of sources that are all of: reliable, independent, secondary and in-depth about the individual themselves. Nosebagbear (talk) 01:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:05, 18 March 2020 review of submission by Jainemark

[edit]


Jainemark (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, could you give me some tips?

Jainemark, if you could be more specific about what tips you would like, I would be happy to be more specific. Your article was rejected because it isn't notable. I recommend that you read WP:Notability. It can be confusing, so if you have any questions on it, feel free to ask me here. In short, to be included in Wikipedia, an article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources. An experienced reviewer at AFC has determined that the subject of your article likely doesn't meet these requirements (that is, these sources don't exist). If you want to continue editing Wikipedia, I would recommend you edit one of the millions of existing articles already on wikipedia, or if you want to create an article, take a look at WP:Your First Article. Sam-2727 (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:54:38, 18 March 2020 review of draft by WriteIncunabula

[edit]


Hello, I've recently gotten back into Wikipedia writing, which caused me to revive an old article I worked on, which was rejected. Draft:Reverend Peter Farmer. I see a few adjustments I'd like to make in tone, but the final rejection for the article was due to a lack of broad coverage for the individual in question. He's certainly not famous, although I would argue his impact is quite notable, if somewhat regional, across many generations. The big reason I think the decision might change now is that the school which the person founded has recently gained additional notability, in that it's newest headmaster is a former NFL player who was captain of his team when it won a Super Bowl. While this doesn't have a ton to do with education, the headmaster did earn an advanced degree in education from UC Berkeley and it will be interesting to see how he does at the helm of the school over the coming years. The individual for this rejected article, Father Farmer, is a beloved figure in the region, and the story of how he founded the school by scrounging used government surplus warehouses and laying irrigation systems with his own hands and those of other volunteers is, I would argue, objectively of merit.

So, before I take the time to edit the page all over again, and see if I can dig up a few additional, properly-sourced facts, I was hoping some more experienced editors could let me know whether I'm wasting my time or not. Thank you very much, by the way, for yours.WriteIncunabula (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


WriteIncunabula (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WriteIncunabula, you've come to the right place for such queries (in the future, you might also find WP:Teahouse helpful). Wikipedia policy says that notability isn't inherited. So while a school might be notable, this doesn't mean a former headmaster is also notable. In Article for Creation, there are three options for us: we either accept the article, decline the article, or reject the article. Your article was declined, which means further improvement could get it to a standard required by Wikipedia. A rejection would mean that an editor has determined that the subject is inherently not notable enough. That being said, let me explain Wikipedia's notability standard very briefly (you can read the full details at WP:Notability). The subject of an article must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources (and the subject of the article must be mentioned significantly in these sources) to be considered notable enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. At Articles for creation, we also require you to put those sources in the references of the article so that we can verify the notability easily. I see that you have a lot of obituary like references. But for the purposes of notability, these are generally not considered independent of the source (as they are written by close family). The one source you currently have that could meet these notability requirements is source 5. You likely would only need one more to qualify, so keep looking.

Another thing that is critical in Wikipedia articles is neutrality. In fact, this is one of the so called "five pillars" at Wikipedia. Phrases like "extended excursion" and "offer insight into his years as an academic and spiritual teacher" are written in a "dramatic" tone. That is, they exaggerate factual information by concealing facts. For example, instead of "extended excursion," why not write the exact amount of years? Note that these are just examples. There are quite a few places like this in the article.

Finally, some style considerations. Generally Wikipedia articles don't contain long quotes. A lot of the quotes you have use "dramatic" language that I mentioned earlier. I would recommend you remove the section with quotes from the obituary. This makes the Wikipedia article itself read like an obituary, which it isn't. Although the submission would likely be accepted without changing this, I would add a caption on the photo currently captioned "FrFarmer-with-Tim-Allen1967 (35992564400)." Finally I should note that section titles (such as "The All Saints' Day School Years") shouldn't contain links in them.

These are the main problems that I see. Once you try fixing these problems, feel free to get back to me here and I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have. Sam-2727 (talk) 01:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the thoughtful response. Your suggestions regarding style and neutrality were something I've been improving over time, and planned on editing the page with that in mind already, but the added details have helped clarify a few things I hadn't considered. Thanks also for your offer to take another look once I've (attempted to) fix some of these issues. I'll be taking you up on that! WriteIncunabula (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WriteIncunabula, no problem! If you would like to ask me questions in the future, I'd recommend you take them to my talk page User Talk:Sam-2727 as in a couple days a bot will come over this conversation and archive it. Thanks! Sam-2727 (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_March_18&oldid=985275734"