Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 January 15
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < January 14 | << Dec | January | Feb >> | January 16 > |
| 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. |
January 15
[edit]01:33:39, 15 January 2022 review of submission by JoshFromLetsGameItOut
[edit]Why did you reject my article? It's true and you can't prove otherwise.
JoshFromLetsGameItOut (talk) 01:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- It isn't up to us to prove it, it is up to you to prove it with independent reliable sources. If you just want to fool around, do it elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 01:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hello , JoshFromLetsGameItOut. I assume that this is about the deleted Draft:The Hammeth, which was a hoax and a complete pile of crap. Persisting with stuff like this is disruptive editing. Change your way now or you will be blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 03:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
02:35:58, 15 January 2022 review of draft by AssumeGoodWraith
[edit]
Do you guys also think I should wait until this game is released?
– AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 02:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- @AssumeGoodWraith: Per WP:NOTPLOT, Wikipedia aims to treat video games in an encyclopedic manner, discussing their development, design, reception, significance, and influence in addition to giving concise summaries of them. That's almost never possible until the game has been released. Only occasionally does a creative work have enough independent sources published about it before release to justify an encyclopedia article (The Other Side of the Wind, for example, was notable long before it was finally released). Usually any pre-release information about a work originates with the makers of the work in the form of press releases, social media posts, interviews, etc., so it isn't independent and doesn't help establish notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
03:52:53, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Kaempff
[edit]Do I need to add more references? Or is the fact that this isn't an authorized album release the problem? Thanks! Kaempff (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)kaempff Kaempff (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
04:34:35, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel
[edit]
Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Himanshu Narendrabhai Patel You do not ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There already seems to be an article about the topic you wrote about. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
07:11:52, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Rumesh D
[edit]
Rumesh D (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Rumesh D You do not ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
11:08:21, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Daniel.halkin
[edit]hello freind about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:DirectDL I add references for the article. please confirm the article. Daniel.halkin (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Daniel.halkin The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. A Wikipedia article does not just tell of the existence of a topic and what it does; it summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Daniel.halkin Please do not copy your submission here, it is linked to above. As you have been told, it was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered any more. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- @331dot: daniel.halkin is an obvious sock of Special:Contributions/DirectDL.cc who was hardblocked (I opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DirectDL.cc before seeing this). Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
13:21:52, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Smithykit
[edit]
Smithykit (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Good afternoon! Can i ask how i move a page that i'm in the process of drafting, into the space where it won't be deleted if i don't amend it for a while? Smithykit (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
15:24:47, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Devansh.ds
[edit]- Devansh.ds (talk · contribs)
Devansh.ds (talk) 15:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
The draft I am working on, is my own great great grand father, he shaped the architecture of Bombay, my submission got rejected since I did not have enough primary or secondary references to support my article, well I have been collecting information from a long time and all that I could find since so many days were these, I thought to add it to Wikipedia so as to get it available to others as well. Please help me correct my references and also if you professionals do find any more references please do share so I can support my article in a better way.
- 79.73.41.202 (talk · contribs)
HI. PLease can you be clearly specific about why my piece is rejected ie: please point out the actual specific references for which back up proof is not provided in your view. As far as I can see I have provided references for everything that is written. Thank you Best wishes Melissa 79.73.41.202 (talk) 15:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
18:19:03, 15 January 2022 review of draft by Sherikoones
[edit]- Sherikoones (talk · contribs)
Sherikoones (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
My entry was rejected and I'm not sure why. I was very careful to do my research and verify all of the references. I am a journalist so I always try to be very objective and not impose my personal feelings into what I write. I write about construction and came upon Trey Trehan while doing some research for a recent book. I was so impressed with his credentials I thought I'd take a stab at entering him in Wikipedia. I have not gotten paid by him or his company and am doing this because I am so impressed with him as an architect. I research many architects - but he stands out as a top architect in the country. I called his company to try and get some of the information I used in the piece about him. They were helpful in supplying some of the dates and info I used - however I verified all of it on my own. I also studied many of the most successful architects that are on Wikipedia to try and meet the same standards as on those pages. I also read numerous pages on Wikipedia on acceptable writing. Please let me know if there is someone I can consult with to make this more in the style that meets Wikipedia standards. In full disclosure, I am a successful writer and I like to pride myself on objective and honest writing - so this is quite upsetting to me. I would appreciate any help I can get in making this acceptable.
18:42:20, 15 January 2022 review of submission by Sherikoones
[edit]- Sherikoones (talk · contribs)
My entry was rejected but I don't know why. There is minimal personal information and everything written about is verifiable. I have tried to stay with the facts as I was able to find them in the literature. I have checked all of the references and only added information that I was able to check. I have reviewed other major architects' pages and tried to stay within the confines of what was written about them. There is no conflict of interest here since I don't know the architect and just received some info from his company which I was careful to check. I removed the table of contents which I see is not acceptable. Please let me know how I can get professional help to complete this page. As a student of all things involved with construction/architecture - I feel strongly that Trehan should be listed in Wikipedia. Sherikoones (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your draft was declined not rejected, I have however tagged it for speedy deletion as a copyright violation, you cannot copy and paste vast chunks of text on Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
22:40:51, 15 January 2022 review of draft by JulietGrossman
[edit]
Hi, I reviewed the "notability guidelines" and I do think this author who has written a detective series of 8 books would meet the criteria. I got the idea to do a Wikipedia page when I was searching and saw that one of his books has a Wikipedia page but there's no page for the author himself. I got interested in how Wikipedia pages are created and thought I'd give it a try. The books have all been reviewed, given awards and it's a series that is in libraries, bookstores etc. I don't know what more would make an author notable? Anyway I think I may just let the submission die out, just curious about it. And no I was not paid to create this page (I don't think that's why this was rejected but somewhere in the notes saw that about "undisclosed payment." Nobody is paying me.
JulietGrossman (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- JulietGrossman Wikipedia has articles, not pages. This is a subtle but important distinction. What you describe might make the books notable, but not necessarily the author. There must be significant coverage in independent reliable sources of the author themselves, not their books, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional. 331dot (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for this info. I guess my issue is I use Wikipedia often for book series where I want to see the order and publication date of the books. One of my really common searches is "so and so author books in order" and often Wikipedia will come up. So this is kind of what I think would be useful on Wikipedia. But I do get what you are saying and maybe I will add more articles etc to show notoriety. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JulietGrossman (talk • contribs) 23:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)