Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 19 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 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.


December 20

[edit]

06:21:52, 20 December 2022 review of draft by 197.22.179.23

[edit]



Hi,

Unfortunately, I doubt the credibility of Wikipedia pages, especially those who reject pages of media personalities or those known to raise some of Wikipedia's controls until you agree to publish a personal page.

Although there is a character who is not in line with Wikipedia, but they agree to her presence on the site. So, I found out about this when one of the Wikipedia administrators contacted me asking me to pay $700 to have my page published and (legally) on Wikipedia.

This is not the first time I have received an email with this subject. So where is the credibility of Wikipedia here? Please do not annul the opinion and respond to it with arguments that you provide it.

Best,

197.22.179.23 (talk) 06:21, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you received such an email from someone claiming to be a Wikipedia administrator, then the person who wrote that email is almost certainly lying to you, scamming you, and trying to steal your money. Any ethical administrator will always reveal their Wikipedia username in any conversation about Wikipedia. Any administrator engaging in the type of unethical behavior you describe will quickly lose their status as an administrator. So, please disclose the so-called administrator's username. I am an administrator who does some consulting and training off-Wikipedia and I am always 100% transparent about my identity, both in the real world and on Wikipedia. I never edit Wikipedia for any paying clients. Cullen328 (talk) 06:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What an extraordinary notion, thinking that you cannot trust Wikipedia, just because some scammer claims to be a Wikipedia administrator (which they almost certainly aren't, any more than I'm a Nigerian prince).
Besides, we don't publish "personal pages"; we publish encyclopaedia articles. If you wish to publish a personal page, you need to look elsewhere, such as LinkedIn. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one, whether paid or not, can guarantee that they can create an article that won't be deleted. You should not pay anyone to create an article (or to create and submit a draft) for you. David10244 (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:50:49, 20 December 2022 review of draft by 109.76.158.6

[edit]


Hi there! I'm inquiring as to what precisely is missing from this Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sololearn . While I know there is a "facebook" link cited, it goes to an official facebook company post, not a feed post. There are also a number of 3rd party links to other sources. I am unsure as to why it reads like an advertisement, as it appears to be an objective, informational article about the company. Please let me know if there is anything specific we can do to fix it!

109.76.158.6 (talk) 13:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To put it bluntly, this doesn't read like an encyclopaedia article, it reads like something written by the company's marketing department (which, for all I know, it perhaps was).
The sources are a mix of routine business reporting, churnalism, interviews, primary and non-reliable sources. On a quick glance, there isn't a single one that contributes towards notability per WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)\[reply]
At first glance, it reads very much like a press release. It's hard to quantify, but it's full of bite-size tidbits about the company and accolades of varying notability. You should also avoid having external links within the article itself. -- MacAddct1984 (talk | contribs) 14:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response! 109.76.158.6 (talk) 14:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have an association with this company? 331dot (talk) 14:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:27:07, 20 December 2022 review of submission by Suedeakin01

[edit]


 Courtesy link: User:Suedeakin01/sandbox

RE: High Water. How many references do you need? This film is yet to be released and therefore will be more articles etc in the future, which can be added to the citations. Suedeakin01 (talk) 16:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Suedeakin01: it's impossible to say, as there is no one right answer. Everything you state in the draft needs to be supported by reliable sources — or rather, the content of the draft/article should only ever be a summary of what reliable sources have said. So in that sense, you need however many references you need to make sure everything is appropriately referenced.
For the purposes of establishing notability by WP:GNG, you need "multiple" sources, which again isn't clearly defined anywhere (that I know of), but three is often mentioned as the minimum.
For a draft to be accepted, it must be sufficiently referenced with clearly established notability; anticipation of future sources, which may or may not materialise, isn't enough. This may mean having to postpone the review until such time as appropriate sources have become available. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unreleased films usually do not merit articles, see WP:NFF. 331dot (talk) 16:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:54:16, 20 December 2022 review of submission by Prof. Gard Jones

[edit]

The notable artists of the Pacific Northwest of the United States are a small collective. R. Allen Jensen received over 13 feature articles in the major Seattle, Washington newspapers and many others in small town news papers of Everett, Washington and Bellingham, Washington over the course of his career. Jensen was the recipient of a Ford Foundation purchase award and received public art commissions from the Washington State Percent for the Arts program. His artwork is in the permanent collection of the Tacoma Art Museum, the Henry Gallery Museum, and the Museum of Northwest Art. Retiring as Professor Emeritus from Western Washington University his legacy continues to be reflected in the careers of former students such as Harold Hollingsworth. Prof. Gard Jones (talk) 18:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Prof. Gard Jones do you have any affiliation with R. Allen Jensen? S0091 (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
R. A. Jensen was a faculty member at a college I was associated with in the late 1970s. Upon his passing in 2022 his family hunted me down through social media asking if I would consider exploring R. A. Jensen as a subject of the college courses that I teach in art theory and contemporary practice. The Wikipedia entry is a by-product of interviews with surviving family members, university peers, journalists, and former students. Prof. Gard Jones (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Prof. Gard Jones thanks for the transparency. You do have a conflict of interest, though likely slight, but it was brought up by other reviewers in their declines so wanted address it. In my review, what I see is largely local coverage about a local artist or routine coverage about exhibitions and the like. I did conduct my own research and found largely the same (searched Proquest, Newspapers.com and Gale). Also, usually if someone has made a notable impact, an obituary is published by a major newspaper written by a journalist which is not case here and is also bothersome from a notability perspective. Given my own research and the fact the draft had been already declined several times so had received the benefit of multiple reviewers' opinions, I rejected it as did not see how Jensen could meet the notability criteria. S0091 (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you S0091.
Out of curiosity I must inquire as to your view perhaps being different had the first three declined submission not occurred? Those first three were the result of my not having properly structured my submission as opposed to any other concern. The only other declination was a question of possible conflict of interest. Prof. Gard Jones (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Prof. Gard Jones Fair question. I would have declined rather than rejecting it. I also would have declined again with additional guidance had I thought it could meet the notability criteria, if not added sources myself to get it over the bar and accepted it. I do that sometimes too with drafts. S0091 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have been, by far, the most helpful reviewer.
Jensen's widow and children are working with Seattle Art Museum curators for retrospective. There are several well connected collectors of Jensen's work that are supporting this project. Would this exhibition move the needle?
Thank you again. Prof. Gard Jones (talk) 22:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Prof. Gard Jones I don't know, to be honest, but what rings alarm bells in my head is that collectors are involved....I mean talk about a COI. More PR equates to potentially more value as a collector. Even so, maybe that would help? Drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity so there is time and even if deleted due to inactivity can be easily restored upon request. Wikipedia runs on WP:NODEADLINE so keep that in mind. S0091 (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Prof. Gard Jones You said "The Wikipedia entry is a by-product of interviews", but articles need to be based on information that appears in reliable, published sources -- not including interviews. You say there is newspaper coverage, so that would be better... except S0091 says that particular coverage is not in-depth. Maybe more coverage will appear in the future.David10244 (talk) 14:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you David.
You are correct that the Wikipedia entry is a by-product, but of my research into R. A. Jensen's artwork themes. Interviews with others helped to fund this research. Once I had learned to edit my Wikipedia entry down to the proper tone and structure the resulting (last submission) is primarily the product of research in the Seattle Times News Paper, the Seattle Post Intelligencer News Paper, Seattle Magazine, writings of Tom Robbins, the New York Times obituary, as well as the research previously conducted by Dr. Sarah Clark-Langager.
The footnotes in my submission reference feature and in-depth reporting.
There exists additional in-depth essays on R. A. Jensen by Canadian authors, though I have Xerox copies of those essays I not been able to find proper citation to include them in my submission.
-Gard Jones Prof. Gard Jones (talk) 15:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:27, 20 December 2022 review of submission by Simiboom

[edit]

How to make the article good for wikipedia? The references is ok, the info is ok, then what I have to edit? Simiboom (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Simiboom: this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. There is nothing for you to edit. (And just FYI, the info is not 'ok', and neither are the references.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_December_20&oldid=1130116713"