Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 August 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 21 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 23 >
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.


August 22

[edit]

03:24:44, 22 August 2021 review of submission by Jaintnp

[edit]


Jaintnp (talk) 03:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC) Jaintnp (talk) 03:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)my article is rejected[reply]

Jaintnp I assume this is about Draft:Sushma Adhikari; it was declined, not rejected. You have not provided independent reliable sources showing how she meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable actress. 331dot (talk) 06:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jaintnp (talk) 10:15, 22 August 2021 (UTC) National news channel are not reliable source ?[reply]

Hi Jaintnp. A national news channel such as News 24 (Nepali TV channel) is typically reliable. For example, [1] is reliable for the credits list of the "Saathma" music video. It is not a reliable source for the statement, "She has appeared in numerous music videos". Also, "reliable" is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient one to demonstrate notability. The blurb is a primary source announcement without any independent analysis or significant coverage. Contrast it with [2], from another national news channel and about another music video performer. The News 24 piece doesn't show how Adhikari meets the notability criteria for an entertainer. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jaintnp (talk) 14:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)according to your comment, I tried to correction it Properly. Can you check it[reply]

08:40:52, 22 August 2021 review of draft by Bfrasure

[edit]


I think this re-review was forgotten.. it's been quite some time.

Bob Frasure (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The tone is inappropriate and IMDB, Ebay, TVGuide.com and Pinterest are NOT reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 13:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:08:00, 22 August 2021 review of submission by Fredellis01

[edit]


I want to create a table for wikipedi page about a person, but have trouble seeing how to do that. Can I do it in Visual editer? Fredellis01 (talk) 10:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fredellis01. What you mean by a table? Are you talking about the panel that appears in the upper right corner of many articles, such as John Pilger, next to the lead section (in the desktop version of Wikipedia) - the panel that contains a photo and summarizes key points of the article? If that's what you mean, it's called an infobox, and is created using a template such as {{Infobox person}}. In the visual editor, insert one by clicking on the Insert drop down menu and selecting Template. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:56:38, 22 August 2021 review of submission by LeaHoz

[edit]


LeaHoz (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I reviewed carefully the feedback from Wikipedia team members and I removed all weak and insufficient references and weak copy and content. Would someone be able to review and let me know if you think it's better and if I can proceed to another review for possible publication?

You would need to approach the reviewer that rejected the draft directly and explain why things are different now from when it was rejected. 331dot (talk) 14:04, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:32:35, 22 August 2021 review of submission by K.Mukherjee1996

[edit]


K.Mukherjee1996 (talk) 14:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:22:18, 22 August 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Doberran

[edit]


First of all I want to excuse me for my poor English. I am Dutch and I am looking for somebody who may help to proceed.

I am confused because the article I try to publish on English Wikipedia has been refused 2 times although the same article has already been published in German Wikipedia en Dutch Wikipedia. See https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosje_Glaser and https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Glaser. The reviewer told me that the reason for not publishing is because there should not be enough reliable resources. I was a bit surprised because several reliable sources had been added to the draft. As has been advised by the reviewer I studied again and again all the instructions about reliable sources for English Wikipedia ( I did it already for the German en Dutch Wiki) and improved the reliable sources in presentation and in number. The second draft was refused shortly after my submission by another reveiwer using the same kind of argument that there were not enough reliable sources. I habe ask her/him tot specify her/his remarks and comments, told that the article had been published In German and Dutch Wiki and heard nothing back from her or him, also not after I ahev send a reminder.

So I don't know how to proceed and ask for help. Is there somebody who is willing to help me publish this article? I will be very pleased. ( In German Wikipedia a German of Wiki has helpend and it was published within short notice. Thank you very much and have a nice day Doberran (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Doberran (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doberran Hello. Please understand that the German Wikipedia and Dutch Wikipedia are completely separate from the English Wikipedia. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. 331dot (talk) 18:50, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The comments I did receive say that the sources mentioned in the draft should not be relable enough. The comments are quite general. I don't know how to proceed and improve the specification of the mentioned reliable sources without some more specifications of what is wrong about the sources mentioned in the draft and why a mentioned source is not considered reliable. Therefore am requesting assistance and will be greatful if somebody helps me to find the right track to proceed Doberran (talk) 19:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doberran: when I look at Draft:Roosje Glaser, I am struck by the fact that although there are 17 works (books and newspaper articles) listed in the "References" section, there are very few footnotes in the article. There are two main issues here. First, it is unclear which sources are used to support the information in the Wikipedia article, that is, which of the listed sources discuss the facts presented in the article. A "References" section should list those sources; currently it looks like you use the heading "Footnotes" for that purpose. Any sources that are not used in the article, but might be useful further reading, can be listed in a section called, for instance, "Further reading".
Second, when you add information to a Wikipedia article – or, in this case, a draft – it should be clear to the reader where that information came from. This is shown by the footnotes in the text, and when one reviewer said "add inline citations", that's what they meant – "inline citations" is the same thing as "footnotes" (in this context). The entire section "A young girl before the war" has no footnotes, and so the reader can't tell where the information came from: one single source, or several? And is the entire section "Liberation dance" based on one single source? Probably not, but you need to tell the reader exactly which piece of information came from which source. All this is explained, with guidance on how to go about adding footnotes, in Help:Referencing for beginners which is also linked from the AfC reviewer's comment.
This may seem a bit contradictory, but it is also not helpful to our readers if there are too many footnotes. Right now there are five footnotes, five different sources, listed after the last sentence in the section "Biography". Do all five sources support the same information, or are different parts of the first section supported by different sources? If it is the latter, the footnotes should be moved to the information they support, as described in the help page linked above. Do some of the sources perhaps repeat the same information? If so, some of them should be removed. All this is discussed in some detail in this information page.
I hope this may have helped make things a bit clearer. I am fairly convinced that Glaser is notable, and you probably do not need to add new sources – you simply need to make it more clear how you have used the existing sources. --bonadea contributions talk 11:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Bonadea|bonadea,

Thank you very much for your explaination. It helps me a lot and gives me better insight how in the English Wikipedia sources are presented in articles. I will make more clear how I have used the existing sources. After I have done that I will resubmit the article. Again thank you for your help and have a nice day. Doberran (talk) 12:45, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:59:02, 22 August 2021 review of submission by Abm1994

[edit]


I need live help for creating Prashna page .I don't know from one page is to another I want to go but I couldn't complete my first page . I think I need help from you people to get the page done so I can see the changes you do it . Abm1994 (talk) 18:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abm1994 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please read the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 19:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I read the suggestions read the comments left by reviewers. I just follow the guidelines by the community and I have given the references. I will follow the suggestion . Abm1994 (talk) 12:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abm1994 As the draft was rejected, it won't be considered further at this time. If you have additional comments, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. This is easier to do in the full desktop mode, even in a browser on your device. The mobile and app versions do not have full functionality. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abm1994 I rejected the draft because the majority of the article is unsourced. I can accept if you fix the issue. SL93 (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can accept the page , I will try to fix the issue and if possible I will ask for help . My source for the article is I google about it and get the info from various sight . I will try to fix the issue for sure .

I am trying to communicate with all the reviewers specially SL93 and 331dot. I fixed the reference list with references of the draft .

21:46:09, 22 August 2021 review of submission by Israelinfonews

[edit]

why this yes: Mole Baby

and the game Draft:Fast Fox no?. Israelinfonews (talk) 21:46, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Israelinfonews Mole Baby is also likely inappropriate and I have marked it as such, thank you. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to be created and go undetected. We can only address what we know about. If you want to use other articles as a model, make sure the one you want to use is classified as a "good" article (see the talk page).
Your draft just tells about the app. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability.
Your username seems to be that of an organization; if so, you will need to change it immediately; please make a request at Special:GlobalRenameRequest. 331dot (talk) 21:54, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:18:50, 22 August 2021 review of draft by Hhebert01

[edit]


I am trying to establish a page for Mass Soccer as its an important group and cited by several other soccer pages in Wikipedia but no one has established the page yet. My initial draft was deleted and moved back to my draft. It said I needed more citations so I added two more. Can someone let me know what I am missing and why or why isn't my sources the type that fit the requirements? I will gladly make necessary edits as needed.

Hhebert01 (talk) 22:18, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hhebert01 Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia has no interest in what an organization wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the subject choose to say about it. Please see Your first article. Note that text cannot be copied here from elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Hhebert01: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising platform. This draft is not only irredeemably promotional, but it is an obvious copyright violation of the organization’s own website. On this basis, I have tagged the draft for speedy deletion. A proper encyclopedia article should be based on verifiable references to reliable sources which are independent of the subject—we are generally not interested in what a subject has to say about itself. If you wish to recreate the draft, please start over from scratch with this in mind. --Finngall talk 22:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_August_22&oldid=1041408892"