Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 June 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 6 << May | June | Jul >> June 8 >
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.


June 7

[edit]

02:19:14, 7 June 2021 review of submission by Goodlug

[edit]

May I know why the submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia? Which pillar is it? After revising many times, I think the current version is written from a neutral point of view. Thank you! Goodlug (talk) 02:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. This looks like promotion-by-overdetail and verges on an investment brochure. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:24:42, 7 June 2021 review of draft by Οἶδα

[edit]


Can someone please merge Draft:Jubilee with Draft:Jubilee (Japanese Breakfast album) and then move it to the article space? Thanks. Οἶδα (talk) 07:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC) Οἶδα (talk) 07:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:32:57, 7 June 2021 review of submission by 2402:8100:2029:946:BD99:31F3:3516:72C5

[edit]


2402:8100:2029:946:BD99:31F3:3516:72C5 (talk) 10:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:38:57, 7 June 2021 review of submission by Sims rohini

[edit]


Sims rohini (talk) 10:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sims rohini You don't ask a question, but your draft was a copyright infringement. You also seem to work for the subject, please read conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. Please also understand that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, not what a subject says about itself. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:49:09, 7 June 2021 review of draft by Yogeshbabupate

[edit]


Yogeshbabupate (talk) 10:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:17, 7 June 2021 review of draft by POC74

[edit]


Hello! My draft for Pocket Opera Company AfC was declined citing - very generally - inadequate support by reliable sources. 3 of the 4 main sources included are academic peer-reviewed publications. If this does not count as "reliable", then what does? Or are the sources ok but there need to be more? Or are only English-language sources accepted? Two of the publications/articles are actually available in English translations. It would be very helpful to get more detailed and specific feedback if the reviewer takes issue with a particular part of the article or a particular source. Kind regards.POC74 (talk) 10:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

POC74 (talk) 10:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:00:49, 7 June 2021 review of submission by Shaleen987

[edit]


Shaleen987 (talk) 12:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shaleen987 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13:34:12, 7 June 2021 review of submission by Mongolhun12

[edit]


Dear reviewer

I've seen Mongolian youtuber already had wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gremix That's why i wanted to create mongolian notable youtubers wikipedia page and Ireedui Gantogtok has wikipedia page on Mongolian wikipedia page too www.mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/IZ also when i googled "Ireedui Gantogtokh" there is google knowledge panel automatically created for him.

If you want more reference links please advice me he had enough local public presence in Mongolian website and tv shows as i know

Please visit his website and social media accounts for something you're finding

Hope it will be re-viewed and approved soon

Best Regards,

Mongolhun12 (talk) 13:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The attempt to market him in this request and the "what about X?" argument do not help your case a whit. You source a lot of podcasts and YouTube videos, most of which I presume to be connected to the subject in some fashion (i.e. interviews or produced by him). Mongolian Wikipedia having an article on him is irrelevant, as this is en.wp, which has different standards for inclusion and sourcing than mn.wp. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 17:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:23:18, 7 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Rajesh Bhowmick

[edit]


Hello! I tried to publish two questions which are given below

For the eqn. ab + c = t where a,b,c are three consecutive numbers. show that "t" will never be a perfect power?

How we can write 0×2 & 2×0 both in a successive addition way separately?

but all the time it got declined by the reviewers. these are my own original questions & I hope that the innovation in it will be sighted.

Rajesh Bhowmick (talk) 14:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajesh Bhowmick: Wikipedia is not for publishing questions & getting an answer by others (Try the mathematics reference desk or math.stackexchange.com/ for that). If you want to learn what we expect from new encyclopedic articles, check out WP:YFA. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:53:22, 7 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Sasha.akhavi

[edit]


Hi -- my submission of a new page for author Kate Hilton was rejected; the reason given was that googling the subject brings few hits. I think this is in error: Hilton publishes under the name "Kate Hilton," and googling "Kate Hilton author" brings up 9,500,000 results, including many interviews, lots of press, etc. I believe the problem is that the name of the proposed page was changed in the review process to "Katherine Macrae Hilton," and few google hits are returned when that name is queried. I questioned the change at the time it was made, but I was told that it would not matter because searches for "Kate Hilton" on wikipedia would redirect to the page I wanted to create. I'd like to appeal the rejection and again submit the page under "Kate Hilton" instead of "Katherine Macrae Hilton." Thanks -- SA

Sasha.akhavi (talk) 15:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The top results on Google are mostly social media, name-drops (too sparse), interviews (connexion to subject), and not much else helpful. (String: "kate hilton" author) —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 17:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:05:13, 7 June 2021 review of draft by Musalcc

[edit]


I want to delete a draft page I created - it was created over 3 months ago and waiting for review. But someone just published an article on the same topic (created just 2 days ago).

Musalcc (talk) 17:05, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:21:55, 7 June 2021 review of submission by 128.69.36.78

[edit]

I added more lines in the article. 128.69.36.78 (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Two of your sources lack the minimum required information to be viable as sources, and the other three are Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 17:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:03:23, 7 June 2021 review of draft by TheGremlin

[edit]


Hi, I'm curious if one can have 'too many references' in an article. I've been following the format that Asetek & Corsair articles have yet the article keeps getting rejected. Initially I just added references for readers, so they could verify and source further information, however I read your criteria and started factoring this into references also, as well as adding more than 1 where an option. I though this would help, including major new media articles solely focusing their article on this company, however the article still gets turned down, and I'm wondering if I may have too many references. Also, considering the quality of the references on the other articles - some of which are the same - why they were initially published and this one not seems strange.

Please advise thank you


iwanturCAT (talk) 19:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can have "too many references". In particular when they are not so good, this is known as a refbomb or notability bomb. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TheGremlin Yes, Wikipedia wants fewer sources of higher quality, not a large number of poor quality sources. Notability should be able to be determined from only a few sources, not from piecing together a large number of sources. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:08:50, 7 June 2021 review of draft by Menklife

[edit]


Hi! I've been working on a draft article for vocal coach Mary Setrakian. I'm having issues with sources, notability, neutrality/trying not to come off like a promotion (for transparency's sake, I have met and spoken to this subject before and disclosed COI on my user page. This is purely a volunteer project, and she has no input. A friend of mine is also overseeing some of the sources and wrote the initial first draft), and deciding what information to include or omit. Meeting WP:GNG seems to be possible, but I worry about WP:NACTOR. She has acquired a significant fanbase & media attention through her work as a vocal teacher moreso than as a performer, though she has had some Broadway and national tour credits and recorded a few cast albums & a studio album. She's worked internationally outside her base of New York City, has had a following in Italy for many years, and been featured by BBC News and 7NEWS Australia, which is notable for a US-based vocal teacher/vocal coach for musical theatre (she works as both a teacher and a coach, to be clear).

The sources have been tricky since a lot of it regurgitates stuff from her own website, or from interviews she's had, so finding secondary usable sources has proven a bit of a challenge. There are only a few really reliable sources that come from a neutral stance and aren't primary sources, but even that is difficult since they usually speak favorably or on the other end tend to have very very minimal information of substance besides her name included in a cast list. I've had issues with editors not liking these sources to be used. I will remove any and all inappropriate sources, but just want to let it be known that I have trouble recognizing them sometimes, being someone relatively new to the creation of articles on Wikipedia.

Setrakian has a fan following online partially thanks to her being Sierra Boggess's vocal teacher/coach/mentor (she was the one who gifted her "You are enough" mantra) and the two of them having a video series together. Her fans are a pretty dedicated community on various social media platforms who work with her virtually and in-person, connecting to her social media accounts and forming their own fan pages and groups around her (the "Setrakianators" can be found on Instagram and other places).

And I’ve mentioned this before in discussing this subject but I find it worth noting, and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding it as like I said I'm still pretty new to the Wikipedia internal ecosystem, that she has been Red linked on the articles for Sierra Boggess and Richard Bunger Evans, she’s also been included in these following lists of requested people on Wikipedia (here and here). And most recently a Wiki Education student user & student editor both chose this subject for the article they created in March 2021 in their Wiki Education course. Though you can see it got deleted, there was some significant peer review being done on the page. So from my understanding there seems to be some, if not very slight, demand for an article to be made for Mary Setrakian at the present moment, even if it must be pretty bare bones for now.

I know notability isn’t inherited, but it’s not often you see vocal coaches draw international news media attention like Setrakian has. She does have some pretty famous students, and I'm trying to limit the name-dropping on the article too though such names include Nicole Kidman, James Gandolfini, and Mary J. Blige, among many others. Also an editor I was talking to said there weren’t any living vocal coaches on Wikipedia, but I have to contest that. First of all, there are living acting coaches like Susan Batson, who works together with Mary Setrakian. And some examples of living vocal coaches I could find here on Wikipedia include Jean Holden, Artemis Gounaki, Mr. Zel, Lana Wolf, Gillian Attard, Yvie Burnett, among many others. Yes, Setrakian is mainly notable for her work as a vocal coach, but she has multiple Broadway & touring credits too (yes I know Playbill and IBDB aren't the best sources, I have other sources also listed in the article that can back this information up. Specifically many books that record New York theatre history), and that should make her at least a marginally notable performer/musician as well as an instructor.


Some things I’m wondering are the following:

1. Should I be using a different template to talk about theatre credits?

2. She does seem to have a bit of a discography, including a few cast albums, so would that be worth including as well?

3. Is it ok to mention her YouTube page? Many of her fans first found out about her through her YouTube videos with Sierra Boggess, and those YouTube vlogs, and specifically the videos with Setrakian are listed on the Wikipedia article for Boggess, so I wonder how to include that information here?

4. Since she was included internally on a list of requested Armenian-Americans on Wikipedia, should I disclose that she is Armenian-American in the article?

5. How can I find better sources besides the ones I have? I don't want to overlook anything potentially usable, and I'm afraid I've clogged the draft with mainly unusable sources thus far.


Thankfully this is just a draft. Nothing is set in stone forever and things are subject to change. I am open to any changes, big or small, needing to be made. If a full overhaul is needed, I welcome it.

Hopefully that explains things a little bit, and please feel free to ask more questions.

Maybe this will have to stay as a draft for longer. I've talked to a few other helpful editors on here and the consensus seems to be it's perhaps a bit too soon, but if you have any advice to make this article fit the guidelines better, or if I should wait it out and keep the sources and draft for now, as well as general editing advice for this draft/article, any and all feedback is welcome! I would really like for it to be published sooner rather than later, but I understand if that may not be possible. This is my first article and I really want to make sure I'm getting things right. I think this experience will help me become a better contributor on Wikipedia and I'm viewing it as a teachable moment, should I hope to stay active here longer than pursuing this one draft's publication and expand to working with other subjects (who I won't have any COI with! that's partially why I'm making this an AfC draft, I need more eyes on this and I really shouldn't be the person to write everything since I've met the subject before). I don't want to be run off the site just because I made a few rookie mistakes, if that makes sense. So again, feedback is welcome and appreciated, and I also understand that the longtime Wikipedians here can come off a bit jaded with new people joining the scene. I hope we can best approach this as diplomatically as possible. Thanks for hearing me out! ~ Menklife (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Menklife (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:21:06, 7 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by DavidJMoss

[edit]

no response to:  Articles for creation: Tobey C. Moss (Art Dealer) by DavidJMoss

I submitted this article for creation on Dec 28th, and got a quick response that it had problems. I spent several weeks back in February and March fixing the problems based on input I got from several editors. I resubmitted it into the black hole that says you have to wait like 5 months for any further response. I would at least to know if I have to do more things to it, or if it is seriously on its way to being created. I don't want to wait 5 months to be told that another fix is needed and then make the fix and then wait another 5 months. That does not seem fair. Please let me know if you even got my resubmission. DavidJMoss DavidJMoss (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DavidJMoss (talk) 21:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts are reviewed in no particular order, they can be reviewed within minutes or it can take MUCH longer, galleries are not often found to be notable. Theroadislong (talk) 21:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_June_7&oldid=1028295901"