Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 September 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< September 18 << Aug | September | Oct >> September 20 >
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 19

[edit]

01:50:06, 19 September 2022 review of submission by Tiana Shao

[edit]


AEWIN Technologies Co., Ltd. is a member of BSG (Business Solution Group) under BenQ Qisda group (https://www.qisda.com/en/about/executives/michael_lee). BSG covers smart office, smart medical & manufacturing, targeting to be Expert of AIoT. Based on the information above, AEWIN shall be notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please advise, thanks. Tiana Shao (talk) 01:50, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tiana Shao The draft was rejected, and will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company and what it does- an article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits an article, it depends on the sources. If you work for this company, the Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 06:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:42:36, 19 September 2022 review of draft by YuKuro

[edit]


Hi, this is the my first creation of article. So I have read of all of wikipedia submit rules and policies. I carefully quoted with many reliable publishing / articles regarding this person(Christian Bessy). Could you tell me concretely what is the points of problematics?

I would like to know what is the point must be re-considered.

YuKuro (talk) 04:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@YuKuro: the majority of the citations are to Bessy's own works, hence why the reviewer said this needs more non-primary sources. And far too much of the content is unsupported, with several paragraphs without a single citation. (TBH, I don't think those are the only problems with this draft, but they are why it was declined.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@YuKuro In the decline notice, at the top of the draft, the words in blue are clickable links. These give very detailed information. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:22, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:33:33, 19 September 2022 review of draft by 103.124.143.144

[edit]


Need help to get the sources verified that are in a regional language (Marathi). A non-regional language moderator may not be able to verify the facts cited in Marathi language, and hence the profile may get rejected. How do we tackle this. Thank you.

103.124.143.144 (talk) 10:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't really matter in what language the sources are, when so much of the content is unreferenced, and so many of the sources cited are not reliable (Blogspot, YouTube, Amazon). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:41:32, 19 September 2022 review of submission by Greenyonder

[edit]

Hello, the draft for the UK band "Emperors New Clothes was not accepted although this band released more that 2 LPs with the label "Acid Jazz records", but it happened before year 2000. I have issues locating trustworthy sources of info. At the time there were news papers' articles about this band. If these articles only exist on paper form, can I point to a scanned version, or does Wikipedia only accept references as web links to existing website plateforms? This is a general question about older events only referenced by journalists at their time of release. Your help would be welcome. All the best Greenyonder (talk) 11:41, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Greenyonder: this draft currently cites sources which are no considered independent and/or reliable for the purposes of establishing notability per WP:GNG. While the band may (?) be inherently notable by one or more criteria of WP:BAND, we still need to be able to verify the information, especially but not only that related to the criterion/-a by which their notability is asserted.
If you cannot find online/digitised versions of the papers you mention, you can cite OFFLINE sources also, but you need to provide sufficient details of each source, so that others can locate and verify the sources if needed. Scanning and uploading article copies is not necessary. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:33:04, 19 September 2022 review of submission by Pchowla

[edit]


I just wanted advice on how to clear this for creation when the editor said the material is not notable. The draft references articles in major Western news media (Guardian, Financial Times, Forbes) as well as non-Western sources (e.g. Premium Times in Nigeria). I can add references for many other media, but that would seem to be excessive referencing for the same factual information about the Panel. Below is a list of news sources referencing the Panel but not included in references. I would like some guidance about how many to include and where in the article to include them in order to have the subject of the article considered notable enough.

Bloomberg: UN Tax Convention Needed to Solve Global Problems, Panel Urges https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-tax-report/un-tax-convention-needed-to-solve-global-problems-panel-urges

Electrek: Why global finance reform is crucial for green energy and climate action https://electrek.co/2021/02/25/global-finance-reform-green-energy-climate-action/

EURACTIV: Global agreement on corporate tax rates needed, UN report states https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/global-agreement-on-corporate-tax-rates-needed-un-report-states/

US News:The Global Private Sector Must Foster Financial Integrity https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2021-03-10/the-global-private-sector-must-foster-financial-integrity

Le Monde « Quatorze recommandations techniquement réalisables et politiquement viables pour lutter contre les flux financiers illicites » https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2021/03/10/quatorze-recommandations-techniquement-realisables-et-politiquement-viables-pour-lutter-contre-les-flux-financiers-illicites_6072601_3232.html

Newsweek : Corruption and Tax Abuse Slow Action on Poverty and Climate Change https://www.newsweek.com/corruption-tax-abuse-slow-action-poverty-climate-change-opinion-1571802

OECD : Financial integrity for sustainable development https://oecd-development-matters.org/2021/03/02/financial-integrity-for-sustainable-development/

Project Syndicate: Tax Havens Are Sabotaging the SDGs https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sdgs-tax-havens-illicit-financial-flows-development-by-yu-yongding-2021-03

Deutsche Welle: Des stratégies pour financer la lutte contre la Covid-19 https://www.dw.com/fr/des-strat%C3%A9gies-pour-financer-la-lutte-contre-la-covid-19/a-56733614

CNBC Africa: UN FACTI Panel outlines action against systemic abuse https://www.cnbcafrica.com/2021/un-facti-panel-outlines-action-against-systemic-abuse/

CNN: Panel de la ONU pide a países frenar la corrupción para afrontar crisis por coronavirus - CNN Video https://www.cnn.com/videos/spanish/2021/02/26/corrupcion-onu-crisis-coronavirus-gobiernos-paraisos-fiscales-dusa-juan-carlos-lopez-sot-cnne.cnn

Efe: Expertos de la ONU proponen medidas contra el fraude y la ingeniería fiscal https://www.efe.com/efe/espana/economia/expertos-de-la-onu-proponen-medidas-contra-el-fraude-y-ingenieria-fiscal/10003-4473557

G1 - Globo.com: Ações contra corrupção podem ajudar combate a Covid-19, pobreza e crise climática, diz painel da ONU https://g1.globo.com/mundo/noticia/2021/02/25/acoes-contra-corrupcao-podem-ajudar-combate-a-covid-19-pobreza-e-crise-climatica-diz-painel-da-onu.ghtml

MSN Noticas SFP pide transparencia a centros financieros internacionales https://www.msn.com/es-mx/noticias/mexico/sfp-pide-transparencia-a-centros-financieros-internacionales/ar-BB1e1a0d

Clarín: Expertos de la ONU proponen medidas contra el fraude y la ingeniería fiscal https://www.clarin.com/agencias/efe-expertos-onu-proponen-medidas-fraude-ingenieria-fiscal_0_CKMdetWDm.html

Pagina 12 Cuánto se pierde por los paraísos fiscales https://www.pagina12.com.ar/326120-cuanto-se-pierde-por-los-paraisos-fiscales

Grupo La Provincia: Un panel de la ONU insta a recuperar recursos del fraude fiscal y el lavado de dinero https://www.grupolaprovincia.com/economia/un-panel-de-la-onu-insta-a-recuperar-recursos-del-fraude-fiscal-y-el-lavado-de-dinero-667606

Todo Noticia: Expertos de la ONU proponen medidas contra el fraude y la ingeniería fiscal https://www.todonoticia.cl/2021/02/25/expertos-de-la-onu-proponen-medidas-contra-el-fraude-y-la-ingenieria-fiscal-por-efe/

Interpress: Blanqueo y paraísos fiscales, el lado más oscuro del sistema financiero mundial http://www.ipsnoticias.net/2021/02/blanqueo-paraisos-fiscales-lado-mas-oscuro-del-sistema-financiero-mundial/

L’Orient : le Jour recommandations de l’ONU pour un nouvel ordre financier https://www.lorientlejour.com/article/1253453/les-recommandations-de-lonu-pour-un-nouvel-ordre-financier.html

Agence Ecofin: Le FACTI Panel propose une réponse globale face aux risques qui pèsent sur le financement du développement durable https://www.agenceecofin.com/actualites/2602-85607-facti-panel-propose-une-reponse-globale-face-aux-risques-qui-pesent-sur-le-financement-du-developpement-durable

AllAfrica.com UN Panel - Bankers, Lawyers, Accountants Enabling Financial Crimes 'Must Be Punished’ https://allafrica.com/stories/202102250599.html

Pchowla (talk) 14:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pchowla I recommend reaching out to the editor who rejected the draft and providing the three best sources that show in-depth coverage by reliable and independent sources about the subject. See WP:THREE and WP:42 for guidance. S0091 (talk) 18:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @S0091. I am tagging here @MaxnaCarta, the original editor. I thought the sources cited in the article - The Guardian, the Financial Times, and Forbes - were three of the best independent sources (including two different articles each in Forbes and in the Financial Times). Near as I can discern from the reliability guidelines, the news articles meet the guidelines. And they are independent journalism outlets. Would be happy to add more references if needed. Pchowla (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pchowla those sources largely regurgitate FACTI's reports and/or are largely what a FACTI representative states so are not independent. Also, one of the Forbes articles (Sarfo) is not a reliable source because it was it was written by a contributor rather than staff (see WP:FORBESCON). What is needed is in-depth coverage about FACTI, not what they have written or said. S0091 (talk) 18:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @S0091, I see now. I thought a news article about the Panel and its report were the standard for notability (ie. an independent news source finds this notable). I have seen a lot of Wikipedia content which would not meet this standard as applied here, but I'm happy to try to bring this draft up to a standard that works. Some follow-up questions:
(1) How about paywalled sources? On the Sarfo article you mention as not reliable: this is actually a reprint in Forbes from another source. Ms. Sarfo is an editor at a separate specialist technical publication (Tax Notes - https://www.taxnotes.com/) which has 100% paywalled content. Sometimes they republish their material at Forbes (which then turns her title from 'editor' into "contributing editor"). The original version is at taxnotes (published March 8 2021). I think this qualifies her as a subject-matter expert as per the linked guidelines - see her profile https://www.taxnotes.com/opinions/my-tax-path-spotlight-contributing-editor-nana-ama-sarfo/2020/08/25/2cw9k). I don't think it is better to reference the paywalled version at taxnotes, but I can change this?
(2) Are academic blogs considered reliable and independent? A Harvard-based academic runs a blog on anti-corruption policy. He did a two part post analysing the Panel and its recommendations. See: https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/2021/04/06/commentary-on-the-facti-panels-report-and-recommendations-part-1/, https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/2021/04/08/commentary-on-the-facti-panels-report-and-recommendations-part-2/. This is analysis, not just news, but I thought a blog would be not considered reliable.
(3) Would official references from resolutions of intergovernmental bodies be considered relevant for notability? The Panel and report has been referenced in a number of official resolutions from the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Economic and Social Council. I can add these if that is helpful.
Thank you for any relevant guidance. Pchowla (talk) 19:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pchowla can you please repost these sources on the draft's talk page? This is getting too in-depth for the help page, but yes, pay walled is fine. S0091 (talk) 19:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @S0091. I have added in the material on draft of the page and on the talk page. But I can't submit for re-review because of the past editorial decision. Pchowla (talk) 20:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pchowla Blogs are not OK, no matter who writes there (generally no independent fact-checking or corrections in a blog). 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:52, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:37:08, 19 September 2022 review of draft by 82.48.49.63

[edit]


Wikipedia is full of articles about authors whose references are pretty poor: I've come across several ones which, undeniably, are poorer than the one I submitted, without too much effort in finding such names. I can report examples if need be. Needless to say, deciding if an author is worth a Wikipedia article is a delicate matter, but it is subjective above all: there can be no comprehensive, absolute criteria. Just a tiny percentage of authors can have "top" credits, like Nobel Laureates, Poet Laureates, and winners of important prizes (e.g., the Pulitzer Prize). Over 90% of the authors covered by Wikipedia don't fall in such a league, nonetheless they have their article, because they are published authors, I mean, published in notable, respected journals, quite regularly, and have authored one or more "real" books. So, if an author has been widely published internationally and has authored several books with real publishers (not publishing services or subsidized publishers), for me they're worth a Wikipedia article (as what I said at the beginning proves). Moreover, literary magazines publications are more relevant than books themselves, in most cases: there's no "cheating" about that! World Literature Today, for instance, won't publish any author whose work has little or no value, and that certainly is a renowned, independent source! I just included three remarkable publications: World Literature Today, Quadrant and Acumen, because I thought that three are enough (Wikipedia is not a list of publications, websites, etc.), being top literary journals in their respective countries (and covered by Wikipedia itself). By the way, Zanelli has been published also in three of the most renowned South African literary journals: New Contrast (South African Literary Journal), New Coin and Carapace, a few times in each of them. All the sources I cited, to be honest, are actually independent from the subject: the Library of Congress, for example, would never store and list self-published or subsidized books, and that's another authoritative source (the most authoritative library in the English language, I'd say). As to actual "references", i.e. coverage in a variety of secondary, independent sources, again that's not the case for most literary authors: you can find news about them and their work in literary magazines and on literary websites, but hardly in general media, unless they have won the National Poetry Competition, or the T.S. Eliot Prize, or have sold tens of thousands of books (which happens, maybe, to one out of a thousand published poets, including most of those covered by Wikipedia). So, really, I'd like to understand better what kind of references would actually "work", seeing that, for instance, the one by The Poetry Society (the most important literary organization in Britain, along with the Royal Society of Literature) is not considered one of those! Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that if the article had been created by a credited Wikipedia editor, it would have been OK, but it has been submitted by a simple poetry reader with very little expertise in the creation of articles on Wikipedia, trying to do it in the best and most accurate way regardless. Anyhow, as I said, I'd be most grateful if someone could further explain why the references I've found are not good, or not enough. Where has a literary author to have been published and covered if not in some of the most prestigious literary journals (like World Literature Today) or by the most important literary organizations (like The poetry Society of the United Kingdom)? Thanks to anybody who will take the trouble to reply

82.48.49.63 (talk) 16:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, there is indeed inappropriate content on Wikipedia. This does not mean more should be added. If you would like to help us out, feel free to work to identify and address poorly sourced articles that do not meet notability guidelines.
Basic profiles and listings do not establish notability. Any article about him must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about him, showing how he meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IP, actually for an author my suggestion is first creating an article about their most notable work. If an author's work is not notable, then it is very likely the author is not notable. See the the notability guidelines for books. S0091 (talk) 16:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:04:15, 19 September 2022 review of draft by Cutekosto3

[edit]


Cutekosto3 (talk) 17:04, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have made all appropraite changes with citation. Can I please resubmit?

Thank you!

Hi @Cutekosto3, yes, you can resubmit by clicking the blue "Resubmit" button at the bottom of the draft's decline notice. S0091 (talk) 17:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cutekosto3: I had a look at Draft:Gorfotu_Village but declined it because none of the references supported what you'd written. Please check them again. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:25:03, 19 September 2022 review of submission by Waterbucket123

[edit]


Waterbucket123 (talk) 17:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Waterbucket123 do you have a question? I see your draft was rejected which means it will not be considered. S0091 (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:27:31, 19 September 2022 review of submission by Tanzim Arman

[edit]

I will write my own about why reject it Tanzim Arman (talk) 17:27, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tanzim Arman Wikipedia is not the place to promote yourself. See WP:NOTPROMO. S0091 (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:03:00, 19 September 2022 review of draft by MiadYUgce

[edit]


First of all i keep getting american wikipedians instead of european ones second of all i know my draft has source because i am actually a historian in macedonia i am 25 years old and i have alot of experience in history and i have sources from alot of books and alot of people like in youtube some guy called mario macedonian lessons. please submit my draft and thanks

MiadYUgce (talk) 21:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MiadYUgce There is no way to guarantee that a reviewer is of a particular nationality, nor any way to even know for certain what nationality people are. The nationality shouldn't matter in any event. The main problem with your draft is that it does not read as an encyclopedia article, it reads as an essay. It also seems to duplicate an existing article, Serbian Cyrillic alphabet. 331dot (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i do not know that article. And also i dont know how to make a encyclopedia article. Thats why i made it in a essay type MiadYUgce (talk) 12:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MiadYUgce: Demanding a user of a specific nationality look at your article is asking for trouble. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 21:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MiadYUgce Your article does not cite sources from a lot of books. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i got told i need 3 sources so i put all the sources i had MiadYUgce (talk) 12:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MiadYUgce In that case, you don't have sources from "alot of books". Quora is not a reliable source, since it is entirely user-generated (random people's opinions). Articles don't use the words "we" and "you" (and especially "u"). Question and answer format is not acceptable. You mention YouTube above, which is usually not reliable (with some exceptions). This draft needs a lot of work, but as 331dot says, WP already has an article on that subject. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:59, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know YouTube isn't reliable but I do know that he has sources of his history lesson's MiadYUgce (talk) 13:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:27:27, 19 September 2022 review of draft by Gpcontributor

[edit]


Hi, what more sources can I add to make this work? I have the show being talked about on Good Morning America here: https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/video/stock-tips-starters-81183969-- "The Hour" media outlet also covered the GMA appearance here:https://www.thehour.com/business/article/New-Investor-Show-Going-Public-Makes-a-Splash-16624993.php... Will that help? A friend of mine reviewed the article and also included the show on Forbes, how it is distributed on Entrepreneur.com, and more. What is the best way to share this information in the article? Gpcontributor (talk) 22:27, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gpcontributor I fear that you may be too close to your show to be able to write about it as Wikipedia requires- but the article needs to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notable web content. That usually means it should summarize in depth, unsolicited reviews of the series. I don't think the two source you provide here qualify; though I can't view the first link you provided, the second seems to be an interview with the host of the program, which is not an independent source. 331dot (talk) 06:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Wow, thank you so much for your generous and helpful response. It's difficult understanding all the requirements, but I'm learning. Okay, so what about these pieces that are covered by the news or source itself? There were many times the news wanted to interview our host, as obviously a show/organization can't speak for itself.
Fox 5 News
Cheddar News
IR Magazine
Business Insider
Also, since I am considered too close (I actually don't own the show, I just work with them) if I have several friends take a look at the page and make edits will it help? I want this to be an unbiased piece. I believe it would be good for it to be neutral. But want to know how to achieve that since Wikipedia guards against (understandably) people too close to the topic presenting these materials. Gpcontributor (talk) 19:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Asking a friend to write for you only transfers the conflict of interest to the friend.
These sources you provided are announcements of the release of the program based on interviews with people associated with the program. The best indicator of notability is when an independent editor on their own takes note of reliable sources that discuss the topic and writes about it. You can give it a shot by submitting a draft for review, but the odds are not good. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_September_19&oldid=1112162998"