Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 October 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 18 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 20 >
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.


October 19

[edit]

01:33:30, 19 October 2020 review of draft by Recyclingright

[edit]


Hello! I have tried several times submitting my draft AfC, however the 'submission-received' box has not appeared at the bottom of the page. I believe that I have authored the article correctly with very notable sources, but it does not seem to be pending review. I just want to confirm it is on the waitlist to be reviewed.

Thank you for your time! Recyclingright (talk) 01:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried submitting the draft for you, and I also could not get it to work. I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone more experienced than me should definitely take a look. AviationFreak💬 03:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Recyclingright, I resubmitted the draft under your name. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 06:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Recyclingright, AviationFreak, and AngusWOOF: There is an unclosed html comment on the page, preventing anything below from appearing. I will fix it as soon as possible. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01:50:10, 19 October 2020 review of draft by ImranAaýan99

[edit]


ImranAaýan99 (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't asked a question, but your draft lacks any sources. Please also see WP:AUTOBIO. AviationFreak💬 03:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:27:59, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Robertleyva2002

[edit]


Robertleyva2002 (talk) 02:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't asked a question, but your draft was declined because it does not show WP:N. AviationFreak💬 03:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:30:43, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Karthik CL

[edit]


Dear Sir,

I have included some more information which should boost the notability of the subject. Please have a look at the page and suggest changes if required.

Karthik CL (talk) 05:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:17:57, 19 October 2020 review of draft by Henry Cuevas

[edit]


I would like to request support regarding an article that I wrote. The article is about a medical device company that develops and manufactures mesh nebulizers. I added references to describe events related to the company and information from websites and publications; however, the article has been rejected twice because references from news outlets and other websites are not considered valid.

I will very much appreciate some guidance on how to overcome this issue, as I have noticed that other articles contain the same type of references, but have been successfully published.

Thank you for your support.

Henry Cuevas (talk) 09:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Cuevas Note that other similar articles existing is not a reason for yours to exist, see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. We can only address what we know about. Standards also change over time, so that what was once acceptable is no longer. If you'd care to point out some of these other articles, we can address them; we could use the help.
Regarding your draft, it is sourced to nothing but press releases or routine information. That does not establish notability as defined by Wikipedia, for companies that is defined at WP:ORG. A Wikipedia article needs to summarize significant coverage found in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about the subject. That does not include press releases(which are not independent), announcements of routine business transactions, or brief mentions(such as basic company information). Please see Your First Article for more information.
If you work for or are otherwise associated with this company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on disclosures you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:33:45, 19 October 2020 review of submission by DipSagarregmi12

[edit]


DipSagarregmi12 (talk) 10:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been rejected and as such will not be considered further. Repeatedly submitting a draft without making significant changes to address the reviewers' concerns is a waste of their time and yours. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 11:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:50, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Captilia

[edit]


Captilia (talk) 12:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:50, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Captilia

Hello I'm have hard times to publish any article .. Kindly advise

@Captilia: I assume this referes to User:Captilia/sandbox. I have so far seen the following problems:
  • The page reads like an advertisement, but Wikipedia does not host advertisements. It contains peacock terms. If I were to grab a red pen and mark everything that falls under this pint, there is not much left.
  • The page makes excessive use of <big>-Tags. Normally, you shouldn't need to use them at all.
  • The page makes excessive use of bold text. use it sparingly.
  • The page currently fails WP:V. If I were to determine where the information in the draft comes from ,I would need to grab google myself.
  • In conjunction with the previous point, the draft also fails to meet WP:NCORP or WP:GNG.
  • The draft uses external links in the article body. this is not allowed. Plain external links are only allowed in a specific section, usally called "External links".
  • Upon a routine investigation, I also determined that a substancial amount of text is identical to the organisation website. Please never do that. Even if we could get the legal aspects resolved, 99% of the texts not written for Wikipedia is also unsiutable for Wikipedia (see the first point).
For future attempts, try to follow these steps:
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:41:50, 19 October 2020 review of draft by BettyKong

[edit]


Hi, I am Betty. I would like to see if this article now is up to standard. Most of the references are in Cantonese or Chinese and we believe due to the nature of the subject it should have an English page.

Please let me know what could help to improve the article.

Thanks


BettyKong (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BettyKong, If you want a review, please submit the article. Snowycats (talk) 03:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:57:44, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Athousanddaysbefore

[edit]


Thanks so much for your assistance, Snowycats. I removed the header that was mistakenly placed near the bottom of the article.

Athousanddaysbefore (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:39, 19 October 2020 review of draft by Chouhan777

[edit]

Hello , I would like to add the Bio data of a scientist Known to me who is working Indian film and television industry. Please let me know the process of Successfully Adding such profiles. Thanks In Advance



sanju (talk) 16:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chouhan777 Please understand that Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not one. Wikipedia has articles. You've been given comments about your draft; please heed them, and if you have questions, please ask by editing this existing section. 331dot (talk) 16:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You should also review the autobiography policy; Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 16:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:28:27, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Excel23

[edit]

The article on Western Telematic was previously not sufficient as it was poorly made. However, upon further inspection of the company, its products and overall history I have determined that it is worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. I have reworked the entire article so that it is better sufficient to meet Wikipedia standards.

Excel23 (talk) 20:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excel23, Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,763 pending submissions waiting for review. Snowycats (talk) 03:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


21:25:46, 19 October 2020 review of draft by Ishanshah012

[edit]


Hello! I am requesting help for my draft "Clinical Practice and Cases in Emergency Medicine". This Wikipedia page is for an emergency medicine journal. It is affiliated with another journal, Western Journal of Emergency Medicine (WestJEM), which has its own published Wikipedia page. I followed a similar format to that of WestJEM's and other medical journals, but the draft has not been accepted. What else can I add/change to the draft. Thank you so much, I really appreciate the help! Ishanshah012 (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ishanshah012, "Inadequate attempt has been made to address previous advice". Read the advice from the previous reviewers, make changes, and then re-submit after those changes have been completed. Snowycats (talk) 03:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Snowycats! Thank you for your feedback! I believe I have addressed the previous advice by adding the references under "Abstracting and Indexing". Those references are published journals and journal databases in which Clinical Practice and Cases in Emergency Medicine journal is included. If this is not enough information, can this article be accepted as a stub? Thank you!Ishanshah012 (talk) 05:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ishanshah012, I don't believe that WP:WEASEL has been addressed. Snowycats (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Snowycats! I have made those edits and believe have addressed WP:WEASEL. Is this suitable to re-submit? Thank you! Ishanshah012 (talk) 04:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ishanshah012, You are free to submit an article at any point after you have made substantial changes since the past review(s). =) Snowycats (talk) 05:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Snowycats Thank you so much for your help!! I really appreciate it =) Ishanshah012 (talk) 01:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:56:00, 19 October 2020 review of draft by Tabrez123

[edit]


Tabrez123 (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tabrez123, It already exists. Please read the comment from the reviewer. Snowycats (talk) 03:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:57:19, 19 October 2020 review of submission by Tabrez123

[edit]


Tabrez123 (talk) 22:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tabrez123, It already exists. Please read the comment from the reviewer. Snowycats (talk) 03:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My article has been declinied. please help to get it published.

23:58:53, 19 October 2020 review of submission by 2604:2000:E010:1100:3048:49B9:5798:3217

[edit]


Zero explanation given for rejection, which doesn't seem cricket.

2604:2000:E010:1100:3048:49B9:5798:3217 (talk) 23:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spike 'em, could you provide clarification on this one? Snowycats (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what happened here, as I definitely typed out my decline reasons, which were: He is a cricketer who fails WP:NCRIC (his only listed appearances on Cricinfo are in 6-a-side games) and the references added seem to be WP:ROUTINE coverage of cricket matches. Spike 'em (talk) 06:46, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
p.s. another discussion about this: WT:CRIC#Help?. Spike 'em (talk) 06:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
p.p.s. Have added decline reasoning to draft. Spike 'em (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_October_19&oldid=985290694"