Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 February 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 1 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 3 >
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.


February 2

[edit]

04:29:38, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Garvincarter

[edit]

User:Wgullyn Issued a decline notice saying the article reads like an advertisement. I guess that is a fair enough conclusion, but does not specify in which part such an offense has taken place. Each statement is made with a specific citation from a published and reputable source not associated with the subject. I would appreciate how to state the facts in a way that minimizes what is perceived as advertising.

Then the declination states that citations need to be from materials not created by the subject. Out of the near 70 citations, only a couple point to sources that the subject may have access to and only then to materials they did not produce. The remaining citations and the statements made from them are from either established media groups, industry trade or government sources. If this reference is to the table of published materials by the subject, this can easily be removed. It seems strange that many wikipedia entries have lists and links to published materials by the subject of the entry.

I guess I would be looking for more guidance on why this entry would not meet Wikipedia's basic guidelines. No product was promoted. The facts about the subject's career and accomplishments are supported. If these accomplishments are considered advertising, then how is that different from an entry touting Academy Awards for an actor or director. Other than greater notoriety, the principle is the same - industry recognition and recitation in the entry. Please help me understand what needs to be adjusted to make this entry successful.

I apologize in advance for the lack of understanding. I have edited many entries on wikipedia in the past (different user accounts) but never attempted to launch a new topic. Very difficult process.

thank you

Garvin Carter (talk) 04:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC) Garvin Carter (talk) 04:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:23:14, 2 February 2022 review of submission by 2A03:C5C0:107E:545:91E1:629D:D9A4:136C

[edit]

Hello, I am working on a draft for David Moshe Lieberman and apparently the tone which I use in the article is too informal even though I made sure to use an informal, encyclopaedia like tone. Could someone help me with some tips? 2A03:C5C0:107E:545:91E1:629D:D9A4:136C (talk) 05:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only edit from your IP, what is the drafts name? If you use an account to edit, please log in. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:52, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:49:27, 2 February 2022 review of submission by ShreyK123

[edit]


Hello, my draft for the article titled Wilfrid Oswald Jose (link) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wilfrid_Oswald_Jose, was declined. I received a notification which stated that it contained copyrighted content. However, I created the original article which I believe is the cause of this result: https://www.stpeters.sa.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2019-Premiers-Anzac-School-Prize-Essay-Shreyas-Khanna.pdf How can I fix this? Is it possible to publish the Wikipedia article I created and remove the copyright claim?

ShreyK123 (talk) 05:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ShreyK123. There is a procedure for donating material to which you hold the copyright. Keep in mind that what makes a good school research project may not make a good encyclopedia article. Good research makes use of primary sources (passenger lists, newspaper reports, identity documents, photographs, letters, military documents, etc.) to draw new conclusions, whereas a good encyclopedia article summarizes what secondary sources say. There may not be enough independent, reliable, secondary sources about a 22-year-old Lieutenant killed in WWI to demonstrate their notability (suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia). If you decide to proceed with this topic, then in addition to taking steps to resolve the copyright matter, review Help:Your first article#And then what? for other tips on improving the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07:11:32, 2 February 2022 review of draft by Ruchikalra

[edit]


Ruchikalra (talk) 07:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to enquire about the Draft (Aayu and Pihu Show) I submitted. It has been more than two months since I submitted the draft, however, still there's no update on it. I want to understand the process of review and publishing and want to know what I can do to make the review and publishing of the article faster.

Please help me with it.

Ruchikalra The draft was declined today; please see the message left by the reviewer. There is no specific timeframe in which a submitted draft is reviewed, it is possible that it can take weeks or months. Reviews are conducted by volunteers. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:17:05, 2 February 2022 review of draft by Wk350

[edit]


hello, i have update the article to add more citation as was requested, and i am unsure how to trigger an need review

Wk350 (talk) 11:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wk350 You have successfully resubmitted the draft. 331dot (talk) 11:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:03:44, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Qazigundstreets

[edit]


Qazigundstreets (talk) 12:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:55:34, 2 February 2022 review of draft by An.xtrovert

[edit]


I have made an Article about an Individual which contains basic details of Childhood, Education, Family, Achievements. However the article has been declined by the reviewer stating that 'it seems like an advertisement, Hence I need some help in editing the article to get it published.

If I can have some brief points about working on the write up, it would be prove to be of great help. An.xtrovert (talk) 12:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An.xtrovert Please review the comment left by the reviewer below the templates. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone and their accomplishments. A Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Please read Your First Article.
If you have a connection to this person, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

15:44:45, 2 February 2022 review of draft by Tushar3011

[edit]


Hello, Can I submit this draft for afc please review this and tell me Tushar (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tushar3011. It is surprising that the draft doesn't cite a single source from Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force's list of reliable sources. Any reliable source may be cited, but perhaps the draft's sources aren't reliable. Almost all websites except for those published by traditional publishers (such as news media organizations), are self-published, and thus not reliable. The draft will stand a better chance if every statement in it is supported by a reliable source when you submit it. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:13:17, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Bballforever123

[edit]


I wrote a page for my favorite professional women's basketball player and you denied my page. This is very frusterating because ALL MALE Professional Basketball players get to have a page but because she's a women she's not important enough??! I need answers to this. Be better Wiki....

Bballforever123 (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bballforever123. No one "gets to have a page", thinking that way misunderstands the encyclopedia. A biography on Wikipedia is not a right or a reward for a player. They don't own it and have no control over it. I wouldn't wish a Wikipedia article on my worst enemy. With regard to bias, I very much doubt that there are biographies of "all male professional basketball players" on Wikipedia. For example, players in the British Basketball League (a men's professional basketball league) are not presumed notable (suitable for inclusion). --Worldbruce (talk) 19:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:22, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Maximilian775

[edit]


I'm not quite sure why my article got denied. If one looks at the page for a comparable American bishop, say, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Henry_Walsh or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Charron, there is very little difference in terms of the sources cited for those entries and the sources cited for mine.

Additionally, the same person has entries on German and Polish Wikipedia with even less citations from even fewer sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximilian775 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maximilian775 (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maximilian775. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article does not mean it should exist. It may only mean that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. So generally it isn't productive to compare a draft to other pages. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why.
Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the German Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. That the topic already has a German version and a Polish version will carry no weight in the question of whether it should have an English version.
When discussing whether a draft is acceptable for publication, it's safer to argue from policies and guidelines. News coverage from UCA News is generally reliable. I don't know if the same applies to their biographical database of bishops. Catholic-hierarchy is a generally unreliable source, according to WP:RSN. Source Bollettino is too inadequately specified to determine its reliability. Is it a newspaper, a parish newsletter, a press release? Publisher, author, title, and, if available, URL, would all help in evaluating it. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, (talk) - if i format this wrong, sorry, I'm still new to this. So, the main issue is not in the notability of the topic but rather in the reliability of the sources I cited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximilian775 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Maximilian775: Right. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. The reviewer concluded that the draft did not do so, so it failed to establish that the subject is notable. They also found that the draft included information about a living person either without identifying a source, or without citing a reliable one. This doesn't mean that the subject isn't notable, just that the cited sources are insufficient to prove that he is notable. P.S. See Help:talk pages for more information about how to use them. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:34:34, 2 February 2022 review of submission by 157.51.35.208

[edit]


157.51.35.208 (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing further to say, detailed comments left on rejected draft by reviewer.Slywriter (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

20:00:40, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Samsaiyan

[edit]


Samsaiyan (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my article declined.

@Samsaiyan: because it wasn't an article so much as a CV and Wikipedia is a social media site or a place to post your CV. An article about a person must be based on what others have written about the subject in reliable sources. They must also be shown to meet the requirements of WP:GNG which is not in this piece.McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:21, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:33:58, 2 February 2022 review of submission by Dcontu

[edit]


Hello Team,

I have just modified the Sandbox page in order to be according to the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Therefore I am requesting a re-review of this article.

Thank you,

D. Contu

Dcontu (talk) 22:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcontu. Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). The draft violates the first and second pillars of Wikipedia. No amount of editing can fix that problem. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:22, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_February_2&oldid=1070565624"