Help desk
< September 9	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 11 >

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.

September 10

07:21:17, 10 September 2022 review of submission by Mat baba

Mat baba (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mpiima Music (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Mat baba (talk) 07:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mat baba Did you take that picture with your own camera? It looks like a professional portrait. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was my Canon camera. Mat baba (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Help me and work on my Article, it's ever been rejected, And to whom tagged it with a stop, kindly release my Draft Article I am still working on it.

Regards

"Rejected" means that the draft will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can that stop tag be deleted off from it, I wish to Edit and resubmit new added content. Can you kindly help me and remove it.

@Kylie tastic Mat baba (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mat baba Apparently you don't understand. "Rejected" means that the draft will not be considered further. Let us know if this is not clear to you. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the meaning of "Rejected"!! So quote me clearly, what I meant was how can I appeal or what should I do such that my Draft Article @Mpiima musicTagged with ''STOP" by @Kylie tastics be removed, Remember it that I can nolonger submit edited content on my Draft Article even when I try to add Requested information, References.!!! Please understand me very well family, Otherwise am soon quiting this game if no one can help me. Nice time 🤦‍🚶🚶🚶 Mat baba (talk) 11:23, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mat baba: this draft will not be published, so the answer to your question 'how can you appeal or what should you do' is — nothing. Wikipedia is a global encyclopaedia, not a social media or blogging platform, and certainly not a marketing channel. There is no automatic entitlement to inclusion, and only topics with demonstrable notability will be published. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:36, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mat baba If you can find a notable subject, and write a draft that demonstrates that notability with your references, then Wikipedia will be glad to publish that draft. This one doesn't demonstrate notability. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:29, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:46:26, 10 September 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Curran919

Curran919 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Color Vision Standards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The new article was declined because a section already existed in Color blindness covering the same topic. However, that section has had a Split tag on it for 3 months. The new article is supposed to be the split. Did I do things in the wrong order? I didn't follow split step 4 and close the discussion, but because there was no one else participating in discussion, so I guess that makes it a bold split. The edit summary was also not word for word what is recommended, but its definitely clear its a split... ("Split from color blindness")

Curran919 (talk) 09:46, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Curran919: I'm guessing it wasn't clear to the reviewer that this was intended as a split. I also don't think this needs to go through AfC.

FYI, here's the procedure for splitting, in case you haven't found it: WP:CORRECTSPLIT.

Just to say also that the new split has to stand up on its own in terms of referencing and notability etc., whereas I noticed that your draft has quite a lot of unreferenced content. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know what you mean by I also don't think this needs to go through AfC.; Is this not simply a place to ask questions about article creation? The split content is inheriting the lack of references from the parent content, but I can spend some more time on that. Thanks. Curran919 (talk) 10:03, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Curran919 Generally questions here should pertain to the Articles for Creation process, not article creation in general. The general Help Desk is for any topic area, and the Teahouse is an area for new users to ask questions about any topic area. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I just followed the advice written on my talk page: If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. Otherwise Articles for Creation process, not article creation in general is - I'm afraid - not a clear distinction, especially because my questions seems to be in line with almost every other question on this page. Curran919 (talk) 16:00, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Curran919 You attempted to submit a draft through AFC and are now asking about it, so you are in the right place. I was simply responding to your question. 331dot (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:01:48, 10 September 2022 review of submission by TaiyoHoneyMoon

TaiyoHoneyMoon (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Wizzard In Vinyl (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

wizard in vinyl is a Japanese power pop and guitar pop label. Mainly crunchy powerpop and crystal guitar pop. RADIO DAYS, who released Rave On! all over the world simultaneously in May, performed their best live ever at Firenze Rocks with Green Day and Weezer. In addition, BUZZ CLICK and BRUCE MOODY belonging to WiV are artists who are highly popular and attracting attention from enthusiastic power pop fans around the world. In addition, HAWAII MUD BOMBERS and Suzy Los Quattro, who were artists at the beginning of the launch, are also very popular in Japan. In addition, Mr. Kambe Daisuke has about 2,400 followers on his Facebook page and is a friend of many celebrities. TaiyoHoneyMoon (talk) 12:01, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TaiyoHoneyMoon Facebook followers and association with celebrities is not relevant. What matters is significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how this person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. The last reviewer must have though this unlikely to occur, as they rejected the draft, meaning it won't be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:02:49, 10 September 2022 review of draft by TexasEditor1

TexasEditor1 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mark Addison (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there,

I've submitted my first article for review and have continued editing; I understand it takes time, but it's been a couple of months I'm wondering what I can do to get a review or further feedback to enhance review prospects. Everyone who has looked at it has helped so much already, but most seem to indicate the content is very solid and have made just a few technical changes. I don't want to write more until I'm secure that I'm on the right track by getting this one accepted. I did an exhaustive amount of work — too much, actually, considering what I wound up taking out — so I want to continue honing my technique while expanding my knowledge of how to make solid entries. If there is anyone who might offer further advice or instruction, or an actual review, I'd very much appreciate it. Meanwhile, I will continue to edit my way through Wikipedia when I see something I think I can fix.

Thanks!

TexasEditor1 (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TexasEditor1: for starters, REFBOMBING the draft with 70+ sources certainly doesn't help. Can you tell us the THREE strongest ones, in terms of establishing GNG? Having said which, the current waiting time for a review is c. 4 months, so your 2 months isn't extraordinary. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was trying to be diligent; Wikipedia repeatedly instructs that every fact must be verified by reliable sources, so I endeavored to do that as thoroughly as possible. Observing your response to user JujuKP, in which not enough citations was mentioned as a concern, I have to say this is the first time anyone suggested I use less references, or that notability would still be in question at this stage. Consultations through the teahouse, as well as combing every instruction I could find regarding establishing and proving notability, not to mention my daily consultation of Wikipedia pages about musicians and countless other subjects, led me to believe that notability is well-established, and once I crossed all the I's and dotted all the T's (including creating archive copies of references to assure permanent link accessibility), that I would be in good shape. But according to that page about musician notability, this subject meets the guidelines in several ways.

I'm shocked that I'm just now seeing the pages you've directed me to regarding refbombing, etc. I've tried to be very, very careful in that department, as well as every other one. One thing I've learned through this experience is that there's a bottomless well of information regarding contributing to Wikipedia, but unfortunately, some of it is not easy to discover, and that there are always more layers — some of which conflict with one another.

I also understand the wait time can be up to four months, but oddly, every time I call up my page and see that mentioned in the box that appears, the number of articles cited as waiting in the cue never changes. I figured it couldn't hurt to see if any input might be available in the meantime, or if there might be a chance that I could interest someone in an actual review.

Are you asking me to mention a few top references here, in correspondence, to confirm legitimacy? In my opinion, Mark Addison's legitimacy doesn't hinge on one or two pieces of information; it's cumulative. But here is his list of over 400 Allmusic.com credits, which confirms he's written songs recorded by Cher, Joan Baez, Italian star Zucchero and Kiss member Gene Simmons, and has credits from writer to producer on albums by Maia Sharp, Hanson, Mundy, etc. He is the subject of entries in several books and is covered in several feature articles involving various facets of his career, etc., so I'm not even sure which ones would be more convincing than others. His connection to the film "Light of Day" and to Springsteen's song "Born in the U.S.A." is rather convoluted, but very interesting; his band, the Generators, was the model for Paul Schrader's film, originally titled "Born in the U.S.A." from a line in a song by that band. Springsteen had a copy of the script and lifted the title for his song (by his admission). He wrote a different song for the film, in which Addison appears; he also recruited the band he performs with in the film. That band includes a young Trent Reznor, later of Nine Inch Nails. Varying versions of this story are told in different accounts I referenced on the page.

If you're wondering what connection I have to the artist, we happen know each other because we both live in Austin, where he makes music and I write about music. I just think his story is interesting and his credits are impressive. Someone already asked if I accepted money to write this page. I know Wikipedia's guidelines and distaste for that activity; I'm not interested in violating the rules — though I have checked pages I know to be written by people who do that, and in fact, edited at least one entry that, if I were an approving editor, I would likely have nixed. I'm trying to adhere to every Wiki conduct and composition code I can, which is why I reached out in the first place; I want to keep going.

I can't thank you enough for your time and for directing me to those pages. They offer more food for thought. But here's a question regarding my sourcing for fact confirmation. Addison's credits include working with Zuccero, who's virtually unknown in some parts of the world and huge in others. I cite a 2020 Sydney Morning Herald story headlined, "Zucchero is a living legend, selling 60 million albums, yet many say 'who'?" It doesn't mention page subject Addison, yet it validates claims that Zucchero is a very popular artist. I also included a much older, but more even more informative article about Zucchero and his renown, and verify, via ASCAP, Addison's credit on a song Zucchero recorded, So which would I do away with if my goal is to support statements in the entry and validate facts? TexasEditor1 (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TexasEditor1 That was WAY too long to read. See wp:walloftext 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]