Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 March 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 7 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 9 >
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 8

[edit]

02:38:00, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 45Boomer

[edit]
I've gotten all credible sources and shortened bio and still my wiki page isn't getting added.

45Boomer (talk) 02:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 45Boomer. Not everyone is a suitable subject for an encyclopedia article. In the Heavy.com piece, Boomer describes how he has never gotten "the call". Once he gets the call, and appears in at least one NFL regular season or post-season game, then a Wikipedia article will be justified, not before. See WP:NGRIDIRON for the nitty gritty details. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03:59:05, 8 March 2021 review of submission by AmberLovesEverything

[edit]

Hello There, I'm making an article for Internet animation, I want some editors to improve my article, Is there an way with editors improving and add details on my article, is it okay with that? AmberLovesEverything (talk) 03:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AmberLovesEverything, to create an article on Wikipedia it should be notable meaning it should pass WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Further more, it should have references (called reliable sources) present to verify the information provided in the article. If no reliable sources exist about the article, then it should not have an article on Wikipedia. I saw your draft was declined. It needs inline citations to verify the information. Please read WP:YFA and WP:REFB, if you haven't yet. –Kammill ⟨talk⟩ 04:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:29:21, 8 March 2021 review of draft by JudeJnr

[edit]


After getting everything right, draft still got declined. Reasons;-

  1. Firstly because it falls under WP:TOOSOON. So I checked the article and I was able to defend it wasn’t a case of WP:TOOSOON. Then I resubmitted after making edits.
  2. Secondly because of COI, all this because I was able to prove the editor wrong and I still made a declaration under Goodfaith.

Is this how Wikipedia operates 🤦🏽‍♂️, before I started editing. I read about wp:BITE, now I feel like I’m been bitten for writing a beautiful article and it unjust. JudeJnr (talk) 08:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JudeJnr, Sorry for your feelings but as the reviewers now told you three times your subject of the article is not notable (yet). CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CommanderWaterford, looking at articles like Tems (Nigerian singer) and Nonso Amadi, it sourced in the same manner and it was approved.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, in the live chat I had. I was told, interviews in reliable sources are seen as primary sources and can’t establish notability. How did subject like Tems (Nigerian singer), gain notability with interviews and Draft:Oxlade (singer) fails?.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JudeJnr Please see other stuff exists. That other articles that exist that may be inappropriate does not mean yours can exist too. This is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, as such it is possible for inappropriate content to go unaddressed. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, it unjust even my draft have more reliable source than Tems (Nigerian singer), this is reliable enough [1] to all source used in her article.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
JudeJnr If you would like to pitch in and help weed out other inappropriate articles, you may do so, we could use the help. As I said, you can't use the existence of other potentially inappropriate articles to justify the existence of yours. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits. Your draft has not yet been completely rejected, only declined, so there is at least a chance that this person will meet the notability guideline and have appropriate sources. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
331dot, yes it does. Following this guidelines, WP:Band, and WP:Anybio. He has been nominated, charted, and also performed in ART X Lagos.--JudeJnr (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If that's true, then the reviewers will see it. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:03:54, 8 March 2021 review of submission by MuttFriday

[edit]


She is one the foremost in the world of dog training and a President-awardee. Why is this post not qualified for publishing?

MuttFriday (talk) 09:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC) MuttFriday[reply]


MuttFriday (talk) 09:03, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is entirely promotional in tone and content, with zero reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:05:41, 8 March 2021 review of draft by Bartram83

[edit]


Bartram83 (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know which articles/references to remove for this page for it to be verified.

Many thanks.

Hi Bartram83. As far as sources to remove, the ones that jump out are: the-royals.fandom.com, There Ought To Be Clowns, and monstagigz.com. They contain user-generated or self-published content, so are not reliable sources. You may also need to add sources. Most of the entries in the lists of theater, film, and TV performances cite no sources. Sources for them may already appear in the lead, in which case you should be able to make reviewers happy by adding inline citations within the lists. See Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repeated citations for a clean way to cite the same source multiple times. If, after you've done that, there are still performances that cite no sources, you'll need to add sources or remove the unsourced content. Everything included in Wikipedia must be verifiable in a published reliable source. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04:15:20, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Joshua Gooden

[edit]

I am taking a re-review request for the article that I'm working on, "Tanner Rozankovic" because I believe this biography about Tanner is worth an article due to public interest, for this person and that according to wiki guides this person is suitable for an article. In summary here is why I believe Tanner Rozankovic fits the requirements for an article/biography. From years 2016-2021 the name Tanner Rozankovic has been searched on google over 15 thousand times per 3 months, according to Google ranking sites. Tanner Rozankovic has had a wide range of media coverage calculating to videos all together over 6 million views, with Tanner's games and Tanner being the sole interest and focus of these videos. With big YouTubers making playlists with multiple videos just about Tanner, and the biggest twitch steamer to exist "Shroud" even mentioning and playing Tanner's games on videos and live streams, with hundreds of thousands of viewers watching live.

Tanner can be found with sufficient coverage from many notable and respectable sources, from the Valve cooperation all the way to EA Sports and DICE Studios some of the biggest publishing and developing companies to ever exist.

Joshua Gooden (talk) 04:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC) Request moved from the draft itself. --Jack Frost (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Gooden The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It doesn't matter if he has five viewers or 5 billion, it seems that he does not have significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This was also copied to my talkpage as the last AFC reviewer. I have articulated my review of the sources on the talkpage. I remain of the view that this draft fails to meet the general notability guideline, and I have been entirely unable to find sources to indicate otherwise. Please feel free to ping me with any queries. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 09:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:18:02, 8 March 2021 review of submission by MrWanderer321

[edit]


I have updated the page with better sources.

MrWanderer321 (talk) 09:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MrWanderer321 The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:11:09, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Akash kumbhar 31

[edit]


Akash kumbhar 31 (talk) 10:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akash kumbhar 31 You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or post their resume, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Akash kumbhar 31 If you wish to ask a question, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:11:34, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 45Boomer

[edit]

I was just in the Super Bowl yet my bio has not been approved 45Boomer (talk) 17:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft Draft:Boomer Mays has not been re-submitted? Theroadislong (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:17:43, 8 March 2021 review of submission by Jupiter50

[edit]


Jupiter50 (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Plz sir accept the article

@Jupiter50:, the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:49, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:DA6:AC99:6577:F5EA

[edit]


Hello, again. I have added more references to check out.

2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:DA6:AC99:6577:F5EA (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further, and no amount of editing can change that. 331dot (talk) 09:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you even tried to read my draft before before reading this? You should've checked the new references. I will not accept like this. Unless if you want to make me to do a new article, with the same details and then submit. It clearly says to ask for advice, and none. Ha, Ha.2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:A81C:5E18:81C8:FC1D (talk) 16:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:32:15, 8 March 2021 review of submission by 190.195.107.55

[edit]


190.195.107.55 (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_March_8&oldid=1012011767"