Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 December 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 27 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 29 >
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.


December 28

[edit]

02:09, 28 December 2023 review of submission by AbhishekFan12

[edit]

How can I create a Wikipedia Page for an actor? Please guide me AbhishekFan12 (talk) 02:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are having trouble creating an article, you can refer to the Help:Your first article page for information on how to create your first article. Unfortunately, the draft you mentioned has been rejected and won't be considered any further. I noticed your username and draft title match, suggesting you might be creating an article about yourself. Just keep in mind that writing autobiographies is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@AbhishekFan12: If you are not the same person and are a fan of Abhishek Kumar, please take a look at WP:COI before starting an article. – DreamRimmer (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:59, 28 December 2023 review of submission by MeyyarasanC

[edit]

I need to publish this article. It rejected as mentioned that its seems to be advertisement so I made it more neutral in a way. As I am part of the organization even though I am doing this to good without getting paid or any additional things, I couldn't publish this one. Kindly help me to publish this article. MeyyarasanC (talk) 04:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MeyyarasanC: why do you need to get this published? Although now that you finally admit you have a conflict of interest, I can sort of guess why.
This draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you work for Indian Technology, you are a paid editor, you do not need to be specifically paid to make edits. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:23, 28 December 2023 review of submission by BPB Online

[edit]

Not able to submit the request error is coming "An error occurred (TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'pages')). Please try again or refer to the help desk. 

BPB Online (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BPB Online: what is it you're trying to do, exactly? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want to create a page on wikipedia BPB Online (talk) 07:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BPB Online: no, I meant what are you trying to do, which throws the error message? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No technical errors occurred; your draft was successfully submitted for review. Unfortunately, I had to decline it because it was promotional. You promoted both a book-selling company and your article's subject. Additionally, FYI you are blocked because you were using a company’s name as your username, which is against Wikipedia’s username policy. If you want to continue editing, please follow the instructions provided in the block message on your talk page. – DreamRimmer (talk) 07:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:41, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Finneggington3451

[edit]

I created this article about this pretty well known person and people are saying it's rejected, I ha e backed up my points with newspaper articles, to prove she's notable, but it's getting rejected. I was wondering if you could look at it to see if it's the way it's written that making it be rejected. A lot of people on Wikipedia now don't have more than two newspaper articles so wondering if it's the way it's written. I hope you can help. Finneggington3451 (talk) 08:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Finneggington3451 Please see other stuff exists; it could be that these other articles you have seen are also inappropriate, and you would be unaware of this. That other inappropriate articles exist cannot mean that more should be added. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us, for many reasons. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help us, you can identify other inappropriate articles you see for possible action. We need the help. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those classified as good articles, which have been checked by the community.
The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Having a lot of views and followers on social media is not part of the notability criteria. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right okay i respect that but Adam b and mr beast are on wikipedia purley for their followers so if we cant add youtubers for being notable why are they on?
But i obviously respect this. if its not right for wikipedia then it's not, we'll have to wait till she is more notable Finneggington3451 (talk) 09:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Finneggington3451: the number of YT followers is not a notability metric. YT'ers need to meet pretty much the same notability criteria as anyone else. If you have found articles on other YT'ers who do not meet these criteria, then you're welcome to either improve those articles, or if this isn't possible, initiate deletion proceedings. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
will keep my eyes peeled thank you so much. One question though so in the terms og guidlines what meets the guidlines for articles or what allows a person to be notable enough to be on Wikipedia Finneggington3451 (talk) 09:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the notability guidelines at WP:BIO. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 09:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can easily change the article to make it not sound like we are not promoting her? But it now says stop does that mean we can't edit it anymore. Finneggington3451 (talk) 09:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't create a new thread for every post. Who is "we"? Rejection means that this is the end of the line for this draft, at least until something fundamentally changes, like notability being able to be established. In that situation, the first step is to appeal to the last reviewer. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
we as in me Finneggington3451 (talk) 09:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If a draft reads promotionally, it usually means that the writer has written the draft BACKWARDS, and the best advise is to nuke it and start from the beginning - which means finding the independent sources that the article needs to be based on. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 16:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ,

If I can edit it an try resubmitting it, because I can probably further edit it to not make it sound promotional Finneggington3451 (talk) 09:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Finneggington3451 Please do not create a new thread for every post, continue to edit this existing section. Promotional tone is not the only issue here- you have not demonstrated that Lydia is notable. This can't be fixed by simple editing. If you believe you can rewrite the draft, you may do so but will then need to appeal to the last reviewer. In essence, you would need to start over from scratch, first gathering sources that provide significant coverage of Lydia and what makes her important/significant/influential(and that can't be her number of followers or views), how she is notable. Writing a letter to the Prime Minister by itself doesn't do it- the Prime Minister gets thousands of letters and emails a day- did her communication with the PM influence an action he took? Is her discussion of the Royal Family recognized by others as particularly insightful or influential? Things like that. If you have sources that discuss that, you should summarize them. Any article about her should not merely list her activities, it should discuss what makes them important.
Is there a particular reason you seem strongly invested in this draft, the only subject you have edited about? 331dot (talk) 09:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am so sorry I thought replying is adding onto The draft. It's not really a problem if the draft gets deleted. I can't do anything more to it etc I have tried my best, I will just see what else I can write about or influence Wikipedia on. But yes she is pretty well known so I am surprised that she won't be getting a page. Anyone could probably improve it and it actually be really good. It needs people to be able to edit and attach the information about the impact of her letter to the prime minister etc because I don't have access to that, I only wrote it simply for people to add onto it. As a well known person with news articles I thought you could add people. It go rejected first time for not independent articles yet all articles submitted are about her? So don't really understand that rule. I obviously respect at this time maybe it can't be added die to lack of articles and I am sure in the next few months she'll get more because as I stared she is an upcoming person. But yes I get what your all saying and completely respect it of course. Finneggington3451 (talk) 10:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Finneggington3451: the only secondary sources cited in this draft are the Bucks Free Press and Bucks Herald. As it happens, I'm very familiar with both publications, and can categorically state that they do not establish sufficient notability for inclusion in a global encyclopaedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right? If those two are secondary sources then so are the News Mag, the Express and The Sun, which I could add, that she featured in surely? So technically it's not just local?
I understand though of course I respect that that's not on a global website, but if your again focusing on aricles I didn't realise they were the be all and end all of an article, of course people can improve an article, but some people on Wikipedia have two articles and that's it, so articles aren't seeming to be important on this website anymore. Finneggington3451 (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Finneggington3451: with respect, if you don't fully understand the concept of notability and how this is established, you probably shouldn't have jumped straight into article creation, which is just about the most challenging thing you can do on Wikipedia. No, articles aren't "the be all and end all", but secondary sources (newspapers, magazines, books, TV and radio programmes, etc.) are in almost all cases required to establish notability. Not only that, but those secondary sources must be reliable, which eg. the Express and Sun are not. Nor are (and this was my earlier point), hyperlocal publications that focus entirely on local-interest stories, readily accept churnalism content, and generally have a publication threshold so low that it is basically a depression in the floor. And regardless of the publication, the content must provide significant coverage directly of the subject, and must have been written/produced entirely of the publication's own volition without input from the subject (or their publicist or any other interested party). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have edited on Wikipedia before I just got a new computer and forgot my account name, so actually this isn't my first time editing a Wikipedia article. I have written tons on my last page. But regardless of that, I respect that this article wasn't of highest amount of reliability, but majority of newspapers do ask for input from the person, it's how they interest the Audience and allow a person to speak, that's got nothing to do with the article anyway so rejected it on boundaries of the articles are just some promotional thing is completely unfair and just damn right rude in my honest opinion. Wikipedia is and will always be the place for reliable articles that's all you had to say you didn't need to be rude about what articles I had chosen to put into my article, as just promotional stuff that I paid for. I have no relationship with the person at all and continue to not have. I just saw the incredible work and all the news and thought why not try. It didn't get accepted that's fine, maybe when she's super notable she'll be added, but none of you needed to start attacking my work, I tried my best and that's all that mattered. Onto The next contribution, which won't be making an article because all I get is attacked. Finneggington3451 (talk) 11:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Finneggington3451: I never said anything about you knowing the subject or being paid to write this; you brought those up yourself.
Nobody is attacking you or being rude, but it is our job to give honest feedback. This draft provides no evidence that the subject is notable, and you clearly have misconceptions regarding the concept of notability. You keep claiming that she is famous etc., but cannot provide anything to substantiate that. That's about the long and short of it, I'm afraid.
Now, about your previous account... you really cannot remember the name, or even part of it? You cannot remember any of the articles you've edited, so that you could look up your username in their edit histories? One would think that with "tons of" edits to your name, you'd recall something, at least, which would help us find your old account? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately not, no. Well apologies I thought you said you were. Does the draft get removed now or do you keep it up and if I add stuff to it alongside editing other things on Wikipedia? Finneggington3451 (talk) 12:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
to add onto that it was a VERY long time ago Finneggington3451 (talk) 12:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:51, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Anj2205

[edit]

how can i write for this institute Anj2205 (talk) 11:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeffed Qcne (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:49, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Zcaller

[edit]

No Zcaller (talk) 12:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a question, @Zcaller? Qcne (talk) 13:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:52, 28 December 2023 review of submission by 2A01:E0A:254:D6A0:25BB:59FF:1DC:35B5

[edit]

Hello, Mr. Siavouch Barmaki was my grandfather. Actually he had another wife in Tehran, Iran and had a son in Tehran by the name Amir Hooshang Barmaki. Please revise it. Thank you. Mehrnoush Barmaki 2A01:E0A:254:D6A0:25BB:59FF:1DC:35B5 (talk) 12:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mehrnoush. Wikipedia articles about people must pass the strict notability criteria. Your draft did not prove that your grandfather met this criteria. Qcne (talk) 13:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:03, 28 December 2023 review of submission by FECworld

[edit]

I am not full knowledge about wekipeFEC is a platform where all services can be accessed worldwide,

Example: - Shop / shopping, e-commerce, utility, food delivery, Ticket bookings, Drive, Ride, Tours & Travels, jobs, education, multi-vendor, marketplace, pay bills, banking services, finance services, business to customer, business to business, direct to costumers, Science, Technology and more goods, services. FECworld (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FECworld Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion of a business. That is prohibited. Qcne (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:46, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Discernmentfortruth

[edit]

Tried to create a new page Hello,

Long time reader, first time editor of Wikipedia. I am trying to create a page. I would like to contribute more to Wikipedia. Is there a step-by-step guide for beginners? I tried to create this page. What could I do to improve it? Discernmentfortruth (talk) 14:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Discernmentfortruth: Welcome to Wikipedia! You can find guidance on creating your first article at Help:Your first article. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see this. Apologies. I just posted below. Should I delete the subsequent one? Discernmentfortruth (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not create a new thread with every post, just edit this existing section. 331dot (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:09, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Susannebbeck102559

[edit]

Because the reviewer indicated that Lynn Darling was not a person of note, despite a very highly regarded career as journalist and author (Harvard Crimson editor to Washington Post reporter under Ben Bradlee, Editor at Esquire during its peak popularity, and subsequent author of two highly rated works of non-fiction. She was also married to Wikipedia entry, Lee A. Lescaze. What could I do to make the submission stronger? Susannebbeck102559 (talk) 19:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Susannebbeck102559. Your four sources are all book reviews, which is fine, but we'd need sources for her date of birth, location, family, education, employment history, affair etc. Do these pieces of information come from the book review sources? Or from her memoirs directly? I've had a glance at the sources and they don't seem to mention the facts stated above.
It looks like Lynn is an author, so you'd need to prove notability under our WP:NAUTHOR criteria.
Two more tips: please don't put external links in the body of the text, and please reference correctly using the guidance at WP:INTREFVE.
Let me know when you've made those changes and I can have another look. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am so sorry to be so helpless but I can't figure out how to make the changes you want. I have links to the Harvard alumni page and her yearbook from high school. How do I insert those? And the references to her works are book reviews but the links to her husband, their marriage and his death are all from the New York Times. Are those not acceptable or should I cite them differently than in footnotes? Thanks again for your help. You are being very patient! Susannebbeck102559 (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries @Susannebbeck102559. Wikipedia is really confusing for new comers.
We can only accept sources that are published. Yearbooks probably would not count under that?
I think what has happened is that you've confused external links for citations. I've gone ahead and fixed that in the Draft:Lynn_Darling for you.
I have added a couple of Citation needed tags. To fix these, Edit the draft, click on the tag, click the Add citation button, and then find a source (you can reuse source) and then add the source details.
Let me know if you need more help. Qcne (talk) 20:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:13, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Discernmentfortruth

[edit]

Hello,

I made several edits to creating this article. Do you know if there is any advice specifically you would have for improving this article? That is to say are there articles or citations that would be better to cite to.

This is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Irene_Burgers

I believe I have the tone written well - that is to meet the standards of Wikipedia. Discernmentfortruth (talk) 19:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Discernmentfortruth: you have to demonstrate that the subject is notable, either per WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC. You also need to ensure that every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details are clearly supported by inline citations to reliable published sources. These were the reasons why I declined your draft, as stated in the decline notice, ergo these are the specific aspects of it which you must improve before resubmitting. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:52, 28 December 2023 review of submission by Discernmentfortruth

[edit]

Could someone list the exact issues that are at problem here? :) I just am not sure how I can further edit this. Discernmentfortruth (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Discernmentfortruth: you were asked not to start a new thread with every comment you make. Please just add to your existing thread while it remains on this page. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_December_28&oldid=1193289658"