Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 February 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 22 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 24 >
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 23

[edit]

10:12:36, 23 February 2022 review of draft by 2404:C804:1905:7E00:8CFE:CAFA:8766:21AB

[edit]


Looking at the draft Tailscale article and the big pink box guidance about subject needing coverage seems met so I am not sure what this isn't set as a real article rather than a draft.

" significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject"

There is several references in the draft and I note:

significant coverage - the references have Tailscale as the whole subject; so it is not a passing mentiion at all

published - web articles but established/openly accessible webpages - so I think this is ok?

reliable / secondary - the websites have been around for a while (eg include TechCrunch.com) and obviously secondary - they have business outside of Tailscale and only reporting on Tailscale as part of their wider remit.

The article should be meeting the criteria? 2404:C804:1905:7E00:8CFE:CAFA:8766:21AB (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe re-read the criteria. Crunchbase- useless profile, Hanselman- Blog useless, github- useless, ethulhu- blog of a developer so useless. That leaves TechCrunch which is written by a writer who covers startups. Quite simply, needs more independent secondary sourcing.Slywriter (talk) 17:51, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:25, 23 February 2022 review of submission by Mehediabedin

[edit]

}}

I got a message in my account stating that my draft was rejected because it already exist. But I looked and I am sure that it is not exist in English Wikipedia. It states that Sutrapur Thana and Hrishikesh Das Road is same topic. But they are not. The first is a police station. Second topic is independent from Sutrapur Thana. There are many streets like Hrishikesh Das Road in Sutrapur area. So why telling me to write the topic on the page of Sutrapur Thana? It is not a street even! My draft has enough references. Most sources don't mention about Sutrapur, some are. The sources are independent and reliable too. You can check them. I just can't understand the reason behind the rejection.

Mehedi Abedin 10:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mehediabedin. The way to read the submission declined notice is not that the thana and the road are identical, but that it would be better to start by describing the road within the article about the thana. If the road is so significant that a stand alone encyclopedia article should be written about it (as you believe) then it is strange that there is no mention of the road in the article about the community where it is located, or in anywhere else on Wikipedia. Fifth Avenue, for example, comes up repeatedly in the article about New York City. Does that help you understand what the reviewer meant? There is much more to say about Fifth Avenue, over 10,000 words, than can reasonably fit in the article about the city. If, after describing Hrishikesh Das Road in Sutrapur Thana, you find that the same is true of the road, then you can discuss at Talk:Sutrapur Thana spinning out a separate article about the road. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Worldbruce Thanks for reply. Yes the road is significant. But in Sutrapur Thana the road is not mentioned because the article (Sutrapur Thana) is incomplete. For example, you said that it is strange is Hrishikesh Road is not mentioned in the article. But did you notice that no street of Sutrapur is not mentioned in the article. Why? Because the article is incomplete. Also it is a historic road. That's why I think it should have a seperate article. Putting the texts of the road in Sutrapur thana then starting a discussion about the seperate article, is there any alternative way? Because you see that the Sutrapur Thana article will be nothing but about "only a road" if I put my writings in the article. That would be unreasonable. (Note : Also I think that we should not compare the draft with Fifth Avenue. It is a major road of New York, like Airport Road is a major road of Dhaka. And you see my draft is about a road of a neighbourhood of Dhaka.) Mehedi Abedin 18:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mehediabedin, It is OK to expand an article by adding a lot about a particular aspect. If it begins to overwhelm the nominal topic it can be split later into a stand-alone article. This happens all the time and is a natural development process for complicated topics. It is also far easier to establish notability for inclusion in a notable topic than to establish notability on its own. Worldbruce has given you good advice. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:18:04, 23 February 2022 review of draft by ReneRam63

[edit]


I'm trying to create a page for an item in this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Economy_and_Finance_(Italy)#Unlisted_companies for Consap S.p.A. that is missing in the English version of Wikipedia but is present in the Italian Wikipedia at the following address https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consap

If the article is refused, could it be possible to know what exactly is wrong. All the information is correct and also from third party sourcesReneRam63 (talk) 12:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC) ReneRam63[reply]

ReneRam63 (talk) 12:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ReneRam63, Your sources are all WP:PRIMARY and mostly citations of law. Please review WP:GNG, WP:RS and WP:SECONDARY for a better understanding english wikipedia sourcing requirements. this guide may help as wellSlywriter (talk) 17:43, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:30:05, 23 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Klevack

[edit]



Klevack (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:30:05, 23 February 2022 review of submission by Klevack


I have revised the submission for law firm Singleton Urquhart Reynolds Vogel LLP so it's completely accurate and backed up factually, and no advertising as you suggested. Please could this be published now. Thank you.

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Klevack#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:38:53, 23 February 2022 review of submission by Junuzsalihi99

[edit]


I edited the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gazeta_e_pavarur. Please review and let me know if there is anything I need to revise. Thanks!

Junuzsalihi99 (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:43, 23 February 2022 review of draft by Alwayslp

[edit]


Alwayslp (talk) 21:34, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'm writing because I had requested deletion of this draft as its author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paulie_Gee

I wrote a new draft, labeling it with the same name but with a 2 at the end, and I submitted it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paulie_Gee_2

But it wasn't approved because the initial draft is still under review. Therefore, I requested deletion of the initial draft with the Db-g7 tag, but I'm not sure if I did so correctly? I don't know how long it takes to delete a draft? Thank you for your help.

Alwayslp (talk) 21:34, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alwayslp: Why would you request to delete an old draft then make a new version? Why not just fix the first one? I will request a history merge. I do caution you on requesting deletion of a draft and then start right into creating a draft on the exact same topic this is frowned upon and makes it look like you are trying to game the system for some reason. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:45, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at the last decline I see now why you did this. The history merge will keep the most recent version and allow for it to be resubmitted. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:48, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help in this matter. I saw the notice that you've placed on top of the original version of the draft, requesting that its history be merged into the 2nd (and new) draft. Is there anything else that I need to do besides resubmit the 2nd (new) draft version? Do I need to wait for anything before doing so, or may I resubmit it now? Alwayslp (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alwayslp: I would wait until the merge is complete and then resubmit at that point. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 22:29, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - Will do. Appreciate your help.

Alwayslp (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:19:19, 23 February 2022 review of draft by Jerrythemannet

[edit]
I am trying to make a page for my favorite band however my sources keep getting denied. I would love to know what I am doing wrong in my source selection or if there is anything else I need to fix.

Jerrythemannet (talk) 22:19, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jerrythemannet. See Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. The draft largely cites interviews, which are not sufficiently independent to demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in the encyclopedia). The first criterion for notability of musicians and ensembles specifically excludes "publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves". The draft also relies heavily on self-published sources, specifically podcasts hosted on YouTube or Spotify. Podcasts, like blogs, can be reliable if they're from otherwise reliable publishers (such as The Pitch newspaper's Streetwise podcast), but the majority of podcasts have no reputation for accuracy and fact-checking. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources is a list of sources Wikipedians have found useful when writing about music. You could try finding non-interview significant coverage of the band in those reliable sources. There's almost zero chance, however, that a band that released their first album last year will be notable. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_February_23&oldid=1074596410"