Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 April 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< April 19 << Mar | April | May >> April 21 >
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.


April 20

[edit]

02:39:21, 20 April 2022 review of submission by Zuoyeshu

[edit]

Hello fellows, this article took too long for Review waiting, could someone help to improve it and review on it, really appreciated of you, thanks

There is no indication that they pass WP:NMUSICIAN, so I have declined it. Theroadislong (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hello, it was traslated from Chinese wikipedia, accroding to WP:NMUSICIAN he won the best Lyricist Award for Singing 2021 Chinese Music (reference on 3 and 4) ,so now how can i fix this problem? may need your help, thanks Zuoyeshu (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the " Lyricist Award" is notable that won't help. Theroadislong (talk) 06:58, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hi, Lyricist Award has been written in the article and put reference,so this article can be accepted? thanks again Zuoyeshu (talk) 07:09, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No WP:NMUSICIAN requires "Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award." The "Lyricist Award" is not notable so doesn't help. Theroadislong (talk) 07:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding "this article took too long for review waiting"; do you have a particular need for a speedy review? That cannot be guaranteed, we are all volunteers here. 331dot (talk) 07:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • please another reviewer can review this article, please review this draft again, because differnet languages site of wikipedia has accepted this musician, such as ,ES,KO,JA,MS,FR. thanks very much.WP:NMUSICIAN requires "Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award and etc." etc. means it contains another award except for Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.

03:07:43, 20 April 2022 review of submission by CK121119

[edit]
  I tried to enter a youtube link with a video that contains proof/citations and this isn't mainly a wiki issue but it linked the bing page that had my search for the video instead of the video. Does anyone know how I can get it to link the direct video and not the bing page? You can see this issue in my citation referring to Clark's siblings.

CK121119 (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additional question; How can I add a photo to the page without copyright issues? CK121119 (talk) 03:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CK121119,Considering none of your sources appear to establish notability and the tone of the article is all wrong, I wouldn't worry about the subject's siblings yet. The article is written from either a fan's POV or someone with a relationship to subject. If you have a connection, see WP:COI / WP:PAID. Every statement in a biography of a living person must be backed with an in-line source. For the subject to be notable, the sources need to be reliable sources which are independent and discuss the subject in-depth. Passing mentions are not useful. Also, photos won't help with draft approval and fair use does not apply to drafts, so another issue not to worry about right now.Slywriter (talk) 03:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:50:11, 20 April 2022 review of submission by Starling2022

[edit]

Please can you review the new draft submitted.(Starling2022 (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)) Starling2022 (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Starling2022 You would need to resubmit it for another review, but if you were to, I think that it would be rejected again. The sources seem to largely be announcements or press release type articles that say little about the person themselves. You claim that this person was "instrumental" in something but don't say how. Wikipedia is not for merely telling about a person and what they do- any article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely telling what the person does, it must go into detail and analysis about why it is important(which the article must then summarize). Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:54:58, 20 April 2022 review of submission by Bastiankenn

[edit]

Hey, I am trying to move my article from my user sandbox to Wikipedia (for review). I can't change the title of the article in the sandbox (it says something like bastiankenn/user sandbox), but when I try to submit and add the actual title it tells me "no draft with such a name exists" and I can't submit the article. Thank you for your help. Bastiankenn (talk) 07:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bastiankenn I would suggest that you use Articles for Creation to create drafts. I would say that your sandbox draft appears to be an essay of original research and not an encyclopedia article that summarizes what independent reliable sources say. I'm also wondering if you have considered editing what seems to be the existing articles on these topics, like platform economy that you link to. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Draft:Regulation of platform work in the European Union Not yet submitted for review. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:33:46, 20 April 2022 review of draft by Anandhkr

[edit]

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Draft was declined for Notability guidelines. It is unclear how a subject who won a prestigious State award in their field is not worthy of an article.

Anandhkr (talk) 13:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because WP:NACTOR says Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Theroadislong (talk) 17:34, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Anandhkr: You need more media coverage of the actress to demonstrate notability. See WP:GNG. The sources you have are mostly primary sources, with a listing of the awards without any context. If you can find more media coverage with biographical info, you can add the info and resubmit. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:43:45, 20 April 2022 review of submission by Shatbhisha6

[edit]

Have made changes and added many reliable sources for establishing notability of the subject. The account that declined the page is now suspended for sockpuppetry.

Shatbhisha6 (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shatbhisha6: There are many sources with a few titles I recognize that on the surface look interesting, but I'll have to dig in and do some translation to see if there's enough. The sock history of the reviewer is problematic, but is not automatically grounds for overturning a decline. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:40, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, my apologies, didnt mention sock history to overturn. Its just that I found it a bit odd for him to decline it twice. And now that he isnt available, I was wondering who would review it after changes made. Thanks again for taking interest in my article. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 08:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shatbhisha6: I did some cleanup and went through the sources. There are some sources that mention Giri, but most are about people visiting him, people calling him or events that he appeared at. Only #24 appears to be in any way biographical. Since WP:NPRIEST doesn't automatically make gurus notable, you'll need to show more media coverage of him to meet WP:GNG. I noticed that you have many sources about Modi calling him and telling him to close the Kumbh Mela because of Covid, but that's only deserving of one source. I also marked a few things that you added that are unsourced. If you can source everything that is there, that will help. If it can't be sourced, take it out. The article appears to have been resubmitted despite not (in my mind) being ready yet. You have some time to clean it up. Lastly, I linked a few confusing terms to make his role easier to understand. Most people reviewing articles here are not going to know what an Acharya Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhada sadhu is, so you'll want to try to explain things in English and link wherever you can. Good luck! TechnoTalk (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your contributions towards betterment of the article and investing your precious time. Also thank you for explaining in detail on how can make it better. I have made changes as suggested. Since the subject is a monk and follows the traditional way, there are not many public activities that may find mention or coverage in media. I have tried to put as many sources from mainstream independent media with respect to WP:GNG. Request you to suggest what more I can do if it still lacks required sources. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shatbhisha6: I took a fresh look, and still found some issues. I cleaned up a few, but you still have statements that are not substantiated with sources. If they can't be sourced, you must remove them. Also, if there are not enough sources about him, then he unfortunately doesn't meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. I don't know enough about Indian religious leaders to determine if there's enough now. TechnoTalk (talk) 00:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoTalk: thanks again for your precious efforts, the article now has links of media coverage from almost all the top mainstream media of India. Most of them have the subject in special mention or in the headline itself. I checked with WP:GNG, in my understanding, it now meets notability criteria. If it still lacks anything, i'll be immensely grateful if you could tell what and exactly how much more sources are needed. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 09:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shatbhisha6: I think we're close, but it would be great if there were more in-depth profiles of him. Almost everything is about a meeting he attended, or a speech he gave, with minimal biographical info about him. The Jerusalem Post piece mentions that he heads up thousands of ashrams, which should be a measure of his significance in Indian society. The fact that most of the religious terms are unfamiliar to the average reviewer hurts your chances. The fact that the sources are in Hindi, making this harder to review. Hopefully someone better versed with India religious organizations and personnel, and who doesn't mind using Google translate, can help give this a proper review. In the meantime, there's stray reference at the beginning of the early life section that you'll want to move. Lastly, you should only have the best sources at the end of a sentence, not 4-5 that all say the same thing. That kind of reference stuffing is called WP:OVERCITE, and it's not only a form of trying to influence the approval, but it makes the article harder to read. TechnoTalk (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shatbhisha6: Also be careful about using YouTube links as sources. They don't impart any notability on the subject, and usually just show that someone spoke or attended a certain event. It won't help the article get approved, and can actually clutter the sourcing up and make it harder for reviewers to find the reliable sources that do demonstrate notability. TechnoTalk (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoTalkHi, thank you so much for your guidance and efforts, it has helped me understand wikipedia editing a lot I have removed extra sources. Actually initially i hadnt put so many sources, but one editor dismissed almost all the sources as biased, so I didnt know which source is considered reliable and which isnt. The sources quoted here indicate the subjects notability by way of his mention in the headline or mention in the articles, about him attending/participating various meeting or religious events of national level or importance as an eminent personality. The Youtube links added are of credible and independent mainstream media. What more can be done. Thanks again. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:11:56, 20 April 2022 review of draft by DMLilli2020

[edit]


Hi. I tried to write a simple little article about a NJ attorney (he is a major figure here in NJ) who just had his first novel published. He asked me to do this so I did it - but it was not approved. I tried 4 times over a few days. Can you send me an example of a perfect or strong article - he is not famous but well known due to his profession and now his book! Thank you! Diane Lilli


DMLilli2020 (talk) 18:11, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DMLilli2020 The best articles to use as a model are those classified as good articles(click the link). A Wikipedia article is not for merely telling about someone and what they do. An article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. "Significant coverage" goes beyond merely telling what the person does, it goes in depth about the person describing how they are significant. Note that "famous" and "notability" are not the same thing. A person can be famous and not merit a Wikipedia article, and a person can merit an article without being famous. Please read Your First Article.
As you say Mr. Sangillo asked you to edit about him, you have a conflict of interest that you should declare on your user talk page. If you work for Mr. Sangillo or he is otherwise compensating you for your work, the Wikipedia Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing declaration(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 18:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 23:43:24, 20 April 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by EagEwee

[edit]


Hello, my recent submission for Process Technology, a company manufacturing heaters and power supplies, has been declined. Would the removal of the awards cited assist with an approval? Would I also need to remove the references to the awards from the body of the post? Any suggestions are appreciated. Thank you. EagEwee (talk) 23:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EagEwee Yes the awards should be removed; awards generally only merit inclusion if the award itself merits an article (like Academy Award or Grammy Award). The main problem is that you do not have enough sources. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. The vast majority of your draft is unsourced. We don't just want documentation of awards or company activities.
I see that you declared a COI. If you work for this company, you must make the stricter paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 00:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note, the company name makes it difficult to search for sources so reviewers will likely not spend much time looking outside of what you provide. Keep in mind that those you add to the draft will need to meet WP:ORGCRIT. Simply adding sources will not be enough. Wikipedia requires quality, not quantity. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:17, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_April_20&oldid=1086822420"