Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 March 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 1 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 3 >
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 2

[edit]

06:22:46, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Sammy singhh

[edit]


Sammy singhh (talk) 06:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sammy singhh, Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 08:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:08:52, 2 March 2020 review of draft by Ca economics

[edit]


I am requesting help because I followed the format of an existing Wiki article to create a page on a similar topic but have been rejected twice. Ca economics (talk) 09:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ca economics, your article has good formatting. That isn't the problem. The sourcing is the problem here. To be accepted, a Wikipedia article should be supported by multiple independent reliable sources that have significant coverage of the subject of the article. Although plenty of your sources could be considered reliable and having significant coverage of the subject of the article, none of them are independent of the subject of the article. Journal articles written by someone don't qualify for that person for a Wikipedia article because they aren't independent of the subject. While the website of a place the subject of the article works might be reliable, it still isn't independent of the subject. Once you provide multiple sources that meet all three of your thresholds, your article will be accepted. Let me know if you have anymore questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 13:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:37:39, 2 March 2020 review of draft by JBurger9

[edit]


Disclosed COI, wanting to remove Tag in order to resubmit the draft for review. Or is there anything else I still need to do? Many thanks in advance. JBurger9 (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JBurger9 (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:03:46, 2 March 2020 review of draft by C3alex

[edit]


Hello, I am a newbie willing to learn and need help in the following matter: I want to prevent my draft on the Glasfabrik Lamberts being rejected again and then deleted. There have been changes made by another editor since the submisson was declined by Bkissin. In your estimation, is the article now, after these edits, neutral enough to meet the Wikipedia guidelines? Or what passages are still to promotional? (It is really not my intention for it to read like an ad!)

The second reason given for the decline is the lack of sources with signifiant coverage. I'm a little irritated. All information in the draft is now substantiated by reliable, independent sources (books as well as websites and PDFs). Yes, some sources do not treat the Glasfabrik Lamberts in much detail, but the facts are still referred to and therefore evidenced. I am still working on obtaining a company portrait made by a German newspaper, but I am afraid I don't have more sources at the moment.

Thank you for your help.

C3alex (talk) 11:03, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:28:56, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Abdul.alhazred32

[edit]

Hi, I submitted this draft yesterday. It was rejected because it says that the subject doesn't qualify for a wikipedia article. I honestly can't see why, since there are tons of comic book artists/writers on wikipedia, even with stub articles, while the one I submitted is quite thorough and researched. Please let me know what differentiates this article from this one or this other one. Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul.alhazred32 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abdul.alhazred32 Please read WP:OSE. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits, as it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years, because this is a volunteer project. Your draft is sourced to an interview with the subject(which is not an independent reliable source), and two very brief mentions. Wikipedia requires significant coverage of the subject by independent reliable sources. If such coverage does not exist, the subject would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:40:29, 2 March 2020 review of draft by Mapmaker88

[edit]


Hello, I am writing to because I would like further clarification on how my article is not properly supported by reliable sources. It contains links to interviews and profiles in the New York Times, The Guardian, BBC, Pitchfork, MTV etc. ALmost every line is cited and contains 30 sources and it's frustrating to get this type of response again. Thank you. Mapmaker88 (talk) 11:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:34:49, 2 March 2020 review of submission by 2400:1A00:B010:4D67:E05B:C081:8E82:70ED

[edit]


2400:1A00:B010:4D67:E05B:C081:8E82:70ED (talk) 13:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 14:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


14:09:36, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Brucewalker1

[edit]

My submission keeps getting denied even though I am finding reliable sources independent from the source. Why is this? Brucewalker1 (talk) 14:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brucewalker1 I answered this the last time you asked a week ago. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:56:58, 2 March 2020 review of submission by 2409:4066:204:CE9C:7CF5:1B07:F313:7C1C

[edit]


2409:4066:204:CE9C:7CF5:1B07:F313:7C1C (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:21:37, 2 March 2020 review of draft by BethesdaLee

[edit]


Hello. I submitted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Openpath_Security,_Inc.#Openpath_Security%2C_Inc. and it was recently rejected as it "reads more like an advertisement." I do not work for Openpath and as a 3rd party industry expert, I am just submitting a viable encyclopedia article on a company in the access control and security market. The articles referenced in the submission are primarily industry publications and although they may not be main stream to people outside of our industry, those are about notable as our industry has (on top of the Techcrunch, Business Insider etc also mentioned). Also in doing my research I emulated prior accepted articles like Eagle Eye Networks who followed a similar format. I am not sure which part comes off as an advertisement so any feedback would be great. If its the "Product" section, I can edit or delete that but even with that portion, it is credible and real. Thank you BethesdaLee (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BethesdaLee, I would recommend reading the provided links to learn more about our policies here. Some of your comments show that you might not have a good grasp on them yet. In particular, your belief that primary industry publications would be a good source to denote notability when in fact secondary sources are highly preferred. The use of wikipedia as a source in the article is a further indication that you might want to review our policies on WP:RS reliable sources. The whole article feels like a lowkey advert, whether that was your intention or not. The article can basically be summarized as this: 1) this companies founders are great here's why 2) here's why their product is so great 3) some bragging about awards and customers. The whole thing basically reads like a press release and not like a formal, NEUTRAL article. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BethesdaLee (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC). Thank you for the feedback. I made edits based on your suggestions (very much appreciated), what I read, and made the article neutral. I kept to the facts and eliminated any info that came across otherwise and resubmitted. Thank you![reply]

17:31:48, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Inpuikhuan

[edit]


sir my first article on Biju Ningombam was rejected ago. I am new user and this is my first attempt also the reason why i chose this article is that this actress has been my idol few years ago and she has captured enough fans in the Manipur Film Industry by winning awards as well and when i miss to find in Wikipedia its really sad therefore I've chosen to publish on this. Ill be ready to improve whatever feedback reach me. Inpuikhuan (talk) 17:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inpuikhuan, Unfortunately your submission has been outright rejected which means that the subject is simply not notable at this time. I know this comes as a disappointment as you said you are a fan of her. However, Wikipedia always encourages that for this reason you should avoid writing about subjects that you may have a conflict of interest with. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:54:24, 2 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Queenofboston

[edit]


I am trying to create two pages on Wikipedia. These are my first two pages but i have done many edits before. One of the pages is James Kanter, currently a draft. It got refused once with a comment that the reference articles should not be written by James Kanter but about James Kanter. The second time I added about 5 articles about James Kanter. And I mean articles by respected newspapers, not only the New York Times but also for example La Libre. The article got refused within a day with the comment that there are no direct and secondary sources. This is becoming a bit Kafkaesque. I have now a good dozen of quality sources in my article and all of this is being ignored and the comment by the editor is just wrong. Not to mention the double standards when I see other articles about similar topics with close to none quality source. Thank you in advance for advice.

Queenofboston (talk) 18:54, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Queenofboston. I've looked through your draft, and this is why I can say that your submission was declined. The New York Times articles don't count as independent as Kanter was a journalist at the New York Times (all of the articles were in part written by him, from what I can tell). The "La Libre" source does support the notability of this person (from what I can tell, since the article is paywalled and I only speak English). The other article I see that may meet the notability requirements is [1]. But Wikipedia's notability guidelines state that "One story does not constitute multiple works." Since these sources are on the same story, this wouldn't constitute to be multiple works. The intention behind the "multiple works" requirement is that we want various viewpoints to be represented in the article. If all sources are a virtually first hand perspective of his application for Belgian citizenship, then certaintly doesn't constitute multiple sources. Moreover, if these are firsthand perspectives, then these likely don't meet the "reliability" requirement of notability anyway. I think this is how Sulfurboy came to the conclusion that there are no "direct secondary sources" (although I think a case could reasonably be made that a newspaper article on his experience might be considered secondary). Anyhow, the general conclusion still remains that the sources in this article do not currently establish notability. Let me know if you have anymore questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 19:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sam-2727, Spot on. I would like to add I have not ruled out that this person is notable or not. He has a fighting chance, but as Sam said the critical thing we are looking for is secondary and significant coverage of the subject himself. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying, Sulfurboy. I forgot to mention that the subject may still be notable. Sam-2727 (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:00:46, 2 March 2020 review of submission by 2405:201:801:BF34:AC6F:9279:75EB:4C59

[edit]

I'm submitting a re-review because all the information according to me is added with proper references.Ive been interviewed by many magazines but when I link it to my Wikipedia it gets rejected and I get a message that it's promoting and violates the guide lines.My Co star also has the same type of information on his Wikipedia page and he was accepted. Please tell me on what to improve on because everything is already up there. 2405:201:801:BF34:AC6F:9279:75EB:4C59 (talk) 20:00, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've been given some accurate advice on the draft itself. Beware in citing other similar articles as a reason for yours to exist, see WP:OSE. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits. The draft is almost completely unsourced and does not indicate how you meet the notability criteria of WP:NACTOR or even just WP:BIO. I(as others have) urge you to read WP:AUTO to understand why writing about yourself is strongly discouraged; an article about yourself is also not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 20:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:35, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Andthefoxsays

[edit]

I'm not sure why my article failed approval. The reason given was that it did not meet minimum citation requirements, but could someone be more specific? Andthefoxsays (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are at least 7 paragraphs with no sources, all content shoul be cited. Theroadislong (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:30:45, 2 March 2020 review of submission by 92.236.103.75

[edit]


The article i published was declined, with the suggestion that so far only one line mentions could be found in reliable secondary sources and this is not enough. This doesnt make sense- we are a small-but legitimate-society that was founded by James Cyriax ( originally called the society of orthopaedic medicine, vide https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/19/3/164.full.pdf .I believe that this reference alone is enough for the page to be put up. I have added another reference to the main article. would be very grateful for a review. many thanks

92.236.103.75 (talk) 21:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to specify which draft you're talking about. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:43:02, 2 March 2020 review of submission by Lwilliamson

[edit]


What kinds of sources are needed to get accepted into Wikipedia. I really took my time looking for credible sources. The article itself is not that long and 7 sources seemed sufficient. I guess I confused as to why my article got rejected not just declined, if the sources where "not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.". Thanks in advance! Lwilliamson (talk) 22:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lwilliamson, Links to what sources were needed to establish notability were provided multiple times along with the message stating that the advert nature of the article needed to be cleaned up. Further, you were instructed to disclose the payments you were receiving and/or your financial stake in the company which was also ignored. The article was continually submitted without major improvement. As such, it was rejected and will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sulfurboy|Sulfurboy: Yes, I completely understand, every time sources were deemed not notable. I would delete them and find new articles. Also, I did address the disclosed payments in the wiki cleanup. I have never been and have no idea why that remark ended up on page. Is it possible to resubmit this article on this same topic. This company has been around for 20 + years. I really tried my best finding articles and I don't want to give up. Thanks! --Lwilliamson (talk) 16:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion concluded at Wikipedia:Help Desk#My article got rejected, but I want to submit it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_March_2&oldid=985275742"