Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< May 12 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 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.


May 13

[edit]

01:37:10, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Qtd1103

[edit]


Hello, if you could tell me why this draft was declined, and how I should fix it or your recommendations, I would really appreciate. Thank you Qtd1103 (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 01:45:27, 13 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Knowledgeispower9

[edit]


I received a message stating I can’t use Wikipedia for soapboxing or advertising. That was not the purpose of the article I posted.. So why did it get rejected ?

Knowledgeispower9 (talk) 01:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:40:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by ArtAfg

[edit]


ArtAfg (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


04:57:47, 13 May 2020 review of draft by JCCB1898

[edit]


hello, i don t understand why my source is rejected. please advise. Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of. thanks Carsten JCCB1898 (talk) 04:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JCCB1898. To illustrate the problem, examine one sentence of Draft:James C. Critchell-Bullock: "In 1950, Bullock left England with his family to live in Kenya where he committed suicide on March 30, 1953 and was buried at the City Park Cemetery of Nairobi, Section 11, Lot 95."[1]
What the archives finding aid that you cite for this statement actually says is: "Around 1949/1950, Bullock moved to Kenya, living at Mbagathi Ridge, Karen, Nairobi, where on 31 March 1953 he died, aged 54."
The source says something similar to what you've written, but it differs in many particulars. You write that the move happened in 1950, whereas the finding aid says around 1949/1950. You say he moved with his family, but the source doesn't mention them. You say he committed suicide, but the source just says he died. You say he died a day earlier than when the source says. Finally, you say where he is buried, which isn't in the source. You must summarize the source in your own words to avoid infringing copyright, but in doing so you may not make statements that are not directly supported by the source.
When you write "Sherborne is holding all the material, like letters and photos and from that content the wiki is made up of," do you mean that you got information from the primary source documents listed in the finding aid, rather than from the finding aid itself? If so, the accurate citation would be to the document, hypothetically: Daphne Critchell-Bullock (31 March 1953) Letter to The Explorer's Club, New York. James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive, Sherborne School. Box 2. Folder 4. "Yesterday my husband took his own life." Beyond the problem of accurate citation, there is the problem that Wikipedia articles should cite mainly secondary sources, they generally shouldn't cite primary sources. This is one of the major differences between academic writing and writing for an encyclopedia.
If independent, reliable, third parties have written newspaper articles, magazine/journal articles, and/or books about Bullock, you may be able to salvage the draft by citing them and rewriting the text to summarize what they wrote. Editors could give you more targeted advice if you explained in a few words on your user page why you're interested in writing about Bullock, e.g. I'm an archivist for Sherborne School, I'm a relative of Bullock, I've written a book about Bullock, or whatever the case may be.

References

  1. ^ "James Charles Critchell Bullock Archive" (PDF). The Old Shirburnian Society.
--Worldbruce (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:58, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Molee4real

[edit]

Please specify what to improve, because the person I mentioned he is a musician in my country, he is popular not only that he has gaining a lot of respect through his company after helping young generation through sports, I have provided all references to prove my statements, but the answer is ur submission was declined. please help me to know why was declined, and if the reason provided is not really how can I know? because I don't see the reason there for the declination. Thank you. I love EnWiki Molee4real (talk) 05:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help me on what to do guys? Molee4real (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I have noticed something, my English is not proper because we use Swahili in my country but, I am in English class ton improve my English. so please Team, if you consider my language to justify please consider the reason I provided. I might be right with my article by I have poor English. but soon or later I will be good. Molee4real (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Molee4real. The reason the draft was rejected is that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the English Wikipedia). Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing can improve the draft to the point where it would be accepted here.
If you wish to improve Wikipedia and your English, consider translating articles from the English Wikipedia to the Kiswahili Wikipedia. Biographies of notable people such as Charles Mangua, Yusuf Kifuma Chanzu, and Collins Ochieng are missing there. The English versions are short, and it should be easier for you to read them than it would be for you to write a new article in English. For more information, see Wikipedia:Translate us. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:59:09, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Sarupbanskota

[edit]


I've re-written the article to take out the promotional tone. In April 2020, Next.js and its creator Vercel Inc. received a fair amount of press coverage in publications like Forbes, Tech Republic, The Register UK, etc. I've included links to these references within the article, and more can be found on a web search.

Next.js powers the React websites of companies like Hulu, TikTok, Starbucks, AT&T, Nike, etc.

I believe these reasons make Next.js noteworthy to be considered for inclusion into Wikipedia.

Sarupbanskota (talk) 06:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:19:14, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Bqurtas

[edit]


Bqurtas (talk) 07:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(For the archive) 10:59, 13 May 2020 Materialscientist talk contribs blocked Bqurtas talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Using Wikipedia for promotion or advertising purposes). More at User talk:Bqurtas. Since the page was deleted as an advertisement in the meantime, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:46:41, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Nitinsainimp

[edit]


Nitinsainimp (talk) 07:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nitinsainimp You don't ask a question, but your draft is a clear advertisement for what I assume is your school. If it is your school, you must review and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something, that's considered promotional. If you just want to tell the world about your school, you should use social media or your own website. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:12:30, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345

[edit]


Zagreb12345 (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zagreb12345 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards of having reliable sources and notability. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:34:04, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ivikaspanwar

[edit]


Ivikaspanwar (talk) 12:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ivikaspanwar You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:11:52, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345

[edit]


I would like you to review the entire page.

Zagreb12345 (talk) 13:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zagreb12345. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can change that, so volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. Write about something else (we have over 6 million existing topics to choose from, see Wikipedia:Community portal if you aren't sure where to start) or write somewhere else. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Zagreb12345 Wikipedia only reports on what reliable sources have said about a topic, your draft has zero sources let alone reliable ones, which is why it has been rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:21, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Hardi Parmar

[edit]

Harshit Sheth is one of the most dynamic minds in Mumbai.In a town like Mumbai where one finds riches as well as poverty.He since a young age has been trying to blur the lines from educational point of view.I am a Journalist, I came to know about his story when I interviewed him for the portal , the youth.

Hardi Parmar (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hardi Parmar You offer no independent reliable sources with significant coverage(no sources at all, for that matter) showing how he meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone or posting a list of their accomplishments. These reasons are why your draft has been rejected, not just declined, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be sufficiently improved. You are welcome to edit about other topics in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:55:15, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Ductus1619

[edit]


Ductus1619 (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page currently has zero reliable sources. In addition, it reads more like an advertisement, which is contrary to the purpose of wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on =SAFESUBST==time:H:i:s, j F Y}} for assistance on =Wikipedia:Articles for creation|AfC=submission by 24.122.136.243

[edit]



24.122.136.243 (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has currently zero reliable sources. All articles on Wikipedia must have at least three reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Note that many articles were created before we started the ridiculous AfC process, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS if you find one. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:48:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by 212.103.243.120

[edit]


There is nothing substantial wrong with the 'Graeme Baber' article. Every statement within it is referenced from web sources from which the truth of its content can be verified. Reviewers have been persistently critical on edits. The penultimate reviewer stopped the article on 1st May, and the final reviewer on 2nd May refused to re-review it and then delete if there is no change of view on the part of the then reviewers, as requested in the delete statement inserted after the penultimate review. One would think that one was trying to post this draft in 'The Lancet', rather than in the main on-line dictionary.

Please make the minor edits necessary to bring the current 'Graeme Baber' article into a suitable form for the draft to become a webpage within Wikipedia. With thanks.

212.103.243.120 (talk) 17:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you attempted to delete the article, but now want it added to mainspace? It sounds like you have some internal conflicts you might need to work out. In the meantime, a fellow editor has rejected the article which means they felt there is no shot of fixing the article enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia. As such, it will not be considered further. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


19:54:56, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Teamwizardmedia07

[edit]

Please review it again we have updated the details about mr aditya belnekar we will keep on updating i requestwikipedia team to review this article once again thankx Teamwizardmedia07 (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

who is "we"? Since the filer has been indeffed, there is nothing left to do here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:33:26, 13 May 2020 review of submission by SdearrSET

[edit]

Hello I'm new: I'm trying to post an article about and for the company I work for as an objective answer to "who is Set Solutions". My rejection makes sense because the article was empty and poorly formatted, but I don't know what to compare to except for giant organizations like Optiv. Is there a minimum businesses requirement for references? I understand that I can't be impartial as an employee, but I thought that's what the community and moderators are for - how is the information verified which needs to be verified? The short statement on my submission is objectively correct, though I could just copy/paste from a press release on Yahoo if that's more helpful.

SdearrSET (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SdearrSET First, you must review and comply with the paid editing policy; this is a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. You should also review conflict of interest.
Your draft was rejected, not just declined, which means that there is little to no chance that it can meet Wikipedia guidelines. You seem to have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is; it is not a place to merely tell about a company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable company.(please read) Wikipedia has no interest in what a company wants to say about itself, only in what others say about it. Because of this, not every company merits an article here, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:59:40, 13 May 2020 review of submission by Zagreb12345

[edit]


Zagreb12345 (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


22:15:06, 13 May 2020 review of draft by KplusWequalsU

[edit]
We need help getting this article up to wiki standards to reach mainspace please give informative feedback and edits thanks appreciate your help

KplusWequalsU (talk) 22:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? You have been given advice by reviewers, is there something that you don't understand about it? 331dot (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_May_13&oldid=985275932"