Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 April 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< April 4 << Mar | April | May >> April 6 >
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.


April 5

[edit]

02:35:13, 5 April 2023 review of submission by Nikotesslai

[edit]


Inconsistent application of standards. eg. we have tons of other pages which are people/kids which much lesser notoriety and yet have wikipedia pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meet_Mukhi Nikotesslai (talk) 02:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikotesslai: do you have an actual question you wish to ask? In any case, this draft has been rejected and will not be considered further.
We don't evaluate article drafts by comparing to other articles, but instead with reference to guidelines and policies as they apply at the time. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikotesslai See WP:OSE for more info. David10244 (talk) 09:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:24:06, 5 April 2023 review of submission by 119.94.58.16

[edit]


you can accept or decline my draft ok 119.94.58.16 (talk) 05:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing thanks to review 119.94.58.16 (talk) 05:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is also discussed in the Teahouse, where editors think this is not needed as an article (and the comments in the draft agree). Or possibly at the Help desk. And how do we know the list is complete (at any given time)? David10244 (talk) 09:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:35:43, 5 April 2023 review of submission by Sabah pahair

[edit]


Sabah pahair (talk) 09:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sabah pahair: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:46:19, 5 April 2023 review of submission by 85.15.104.118

[edit]


85.15.104.118 (talk) 12:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yyou don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:47, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:34:10, 5 April 2023 review of submission by Johnsagent

[edit]


Johnsagent (talk) 14:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Yesterday, I submitted an article for submission entitled List of state scandals in the United States. To my amazement, it was accepted immediately and I was sent to: [[1]]

Which said; The article you submitted to Articles for creation has been created. Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Is that right? If it has been created, why can’t I find it? I note I forgot to put brackets on either end of the title. Should I resubmit it? Or has my article only been created for further review and I should wait another three months? A copy of my article is still located on my sandbox. Please advise.Johnsagent (talk) 14:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is here Draft:List of state political scandals in the United States you have not submitted it for review yet? Theroadislong (talk) 14:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First my submission of this article was tagged for deprecated sources none of which were listed at depricated sources and none of which were tagged on my sandbox. So I resubmitted.
A few references were then tagged for Template:Cite news which I fixed, and the article showed no problems. So I submitted it again.
Then 125 more references were tagged with Template:Cite news, when there seems to be nothing wrong with the previous references.  I checked [[Citing sources]] which states, “While you should try to write citations correctly, what matters most is that you provide enough information to identify the source. Others will improve the formatting if needed.”  Is that right?
I have rewritten all those 125 references and cleared my article of tags.  So I resubmitted it again.
And find there are another 95 new Template:Cite news tags.
I’ve rechecked for deprecated sources, I've fixed all the references that were tagged and wonder why new ones keep showing up, when every thing is fine when I resubmit. It seems like a Bot should catch all of them or none.  I think I’m being whack-a-moled. Am I? This is an article about politics. Or is there an Administrator I can appeal to?Johnsagent (talk) 16:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnsagent: looks to me like the only person to have edited Draft:List of state political scandals in the United States is you. Nobody has 'tagged' it, nobody has declined it; you alone edited it, and submitted it, and it's now awaiting review. And there's no record on your talk page of any other drafts having been declined, either. And given that nobody has declined, let alone rejected, anything, I'm not sure what you are wanting to 'appeal'. Or am I missing something here? (Wouldn't be the first time!) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:39, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it’s not me adding Template:Cite news tags randomly and without explanation.Johnsagent (talk) 04:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what is the source of some of this confusion - you've done a cut-and-paste move to that draft, rather than submitting the draft that is still in your user sandbox. I am really not sure why the bots are having this problem, but I would advise tagging the Draft as G7 (see WP:CSD for how) and just working on the version in your sandbox. this preserves the edit history and will make it easier for people to figure out what is going wrong. -- asilvering (talk) 05:04, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If that is indeed the case, that you have done a paste job, then please let that be the last time. It causes all sorts of problems, and extra work for others who have to deal with the mess. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what a 'paste job' is.Johnsagent (talk) 18:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's when you write an article somewhere else, then copy and paste the result into a new article. You've been working on the draft in multiple places, so it's hard for us to see what's going wrong. See WP:CWW for more info. -- asilvering (talk) 19:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So is it OK now? Should I resubmit it, or is it being reviewed somewhere for acceptance?Johnsagent (talk) 04:53, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You should probably request deletion of the draft version that is here: [2]. Then, you should move the version that is here: [3] to draftspace. But if you want my personal opinion... this is monstrously long, and only going to get longer. Consider splitting it into separate lists by state? -- asilvering (talk) 04:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:03:48, 5 April 2023 review of draft by Penroseabc

[edit]


I have been trying to create a page for the author Russell James, a past chairman of the Crime Writers Association and a writer with two dozen published books to his name. My last attept was declined because there were some links to Goodreads, Amazon and Barnes & Noble, which have now been removed. The page I have submitted lists some of his published work over the last thirty years and identifies significant biographical pages on Russell James in two respected published works, the books British Crime Writing and the Mammoth Encyclopedia of Modern Crime Fiction, as well as references to publishers, the Crime Writers Association and the Detection Club (to which he was privileged to be an invited and elected member). The proposed page as it now stands seems to me to be at least as detailed as those for a number of other writers' pages on Wikipedia, and has, I think, no unacceptable material. Is there any reason it should not now be accepted? Penroseabc (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC) Penroseabc (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It can't be accepted if you don't submit it! -- asilvering (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Having had a look at it, I think a reviewer might still decline this article. He's very obviously notable (Ian Rankin called him "The Godfather of British Noir"!), but the references don't really suggest this is the case. Can you add more newspaper coverage of him? You should also clarify your citations; there isn't really much of an indication that there are biographical pages on him in those two books. -- asilvering (talk) 15:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:40:57, 5 April 2023 review of draft by AndreHolly

[edit]


Hello, I'm writing with reference to the declined submission of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Olivari. This is a translation of an article already existing in Italian and French.

Since at the time, the English translation was not available on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ContentTranslation#draft, then I translated it manually by creating a new page on en.wikipedia.

Now the english draft has been declined, but I've tried to correct it to comply with all the rules (and I might be not that sensible as you are). Please could you be so kind to tell me exactly what should I modify to make it ok for publishing?

PostScriptum (if I can help improving wikipedia project): In general, as a user whose draft is being reviewed, I would find it very useful to have a clear indication on what to correct (e.g.: This specific sentence "abc" is incorrect because it is not complying with xyz). That would save a lot of time.

Thank you in advance,

AndreHolly (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AndreHolly: I'll probably have more comments shortly, but the first thing I want to say is that the references are difficult to check, because the citations haven't been constructed properly; there is a lot of information missing, such as publication name, author, etc., so you have to hover over each one individually to see what the actual source is.
Second thing: the 'Projects' and 'Collaborations' sections are irrelevant. In fact, they're worse than that, as they add to the promotional feel of the draft, and refbomb it with sources that don't add anything to notability. My suggestion would be to get rid of them.
Also worth noting that just because an article on this topic exists on it.wiki and fr.wiki, doesn't mean that it is automatically acceptable here on en.wiki. (I know you didn't quite say that in so many words, but the implication was sort of there.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoubleGrazing, thanks for the comments, I'll fix to make it work.
Just one point I would like to have your suggestion about: since the company is very famous in its field because of the big names of Architecture and Design they work with (similar to Alessi - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessi_(Italian_company) - which has a specific section about it), what and how would you recommend to insert this important trait of the company?
This is the reason for many references I inserted.
Thank you again for your precious help,
Andrea AndreHolly (talk) 09:40, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AndreHolly: being 'famous' or 'important' isn't really relevant here. If you can find a published statement from a genuinely independent expert/authority saying that this company is eg. "a leading Italian design house of the 20th century", then I suppose you could quote that (just make sure to cite it clearly). But that's about it – overdoing the promo blurb and peacock words is a sure way to get the draft declined and possibly deleted. Remember, your job isn't to 'sell' the company (whatever your COI with this subject may be) to the reader, but to describe it in a factual, neutral manner. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok understood. I was probably more looking at things like: "if I don't know anything about this company, what are the most relevant things one should know about it?", and the relevance in the architecture field was something definitely to mention in this case.
Thanks for your clarification, I'll work on it soon.
Andrea AndreHolly (talk) 10:12, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AndreHolly: the only two sources cited more than once are #1 and #3, the two books (?) by Stefano Casciani. I wonder how independent those are – looks like they were written in collaboration with Olivari, to mark the company's 100th anniversary? If I'm right in saying that, they almost certainly cannot be relied on to establish notability per WP:GNG. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoubleGrazing,
yes I can explain better: Stefano Casciani is an independent famous expert in Industrial Design and Architecture. Among the others, he has even received a Compasso d’Oro Award by ADI for the a TV program about Design and has been deputy director of "Domus" by Editoriale Domus SpA (https://www.domusweb.it/en.html - the reference magazine for the whole world of Architecture and Design) for several years.
He wrote 2 books about the company Olivari, as it is hystorical and well-known in the field (so was relevant for Architecture and Design), the second one was presented by him in occasion of the century of the company.
Hope this is enough to qualify the author's standing.
In your opinion, shall I need to state something more about the author on the descriptions of the books?
Thank you again,
Andrea AndreHolly (talk) 10:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, he may be famous and all that, but I'm still not convinced his work in this particular context is entirely independent of the company. However, I will leave that for future reviewers of this draft to form a view on. I've linked from the draft to this thread, so you don't need to repost any of that info there, unless you particularly wish to (in which case the talk page is available for that). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!
Andrea AndreHolly (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Both of his books have a bibliography section - you could try looking in those to see what you can use to expand and source the article? -- asilvering (talk) 15:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:32:09, 5 April 2023 review of submission by Elorm Lyrix

[edit]


Elorm Lyrix (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2023 (UTC) why was my article rejected?[reply]

23:34:36, 5 April 2023 review of submission by Elorm Lyrix

[edit]

why was my article "ZyGee" rejected? Elorm Lyrix (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Besides being blank, the history of new accounts coming and attempting to create a promotional article on this topic which does not satisfy our inclusion criteria. I would suggest you work on something else until you better understand the requirements of Wikipedia. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:45, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_April_5&oldid=1149267389"