Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 February 1
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < January 31 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 2 > |
| 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. |
February 1
[edit]06:01:10, 1 February 2023 review of draft by AlbertSJTan
[edit]- AlbertSJTan (talk · contribs)
I would like to know why the reviewer has mentioned that a range of independent sources are needed and which specific ones he feels are not suitable. Most of the sources are trusted mainstream media companies in Singapore, Australia and Morocco. Also, what are the areas of improvement I can make to the formatting or the "peacock terms" he has identified.
More importantly, the reviewer has said he is on a break till March. Can this article be reassigned to a new reviewer?
AlbertSJTan (talk) 06:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
13:11:52, 1 February 2023 review of draft by De Facto Image Building
[edit]
Hi! I was wondering if you can be specific about the references that are not reliable. Could you tell me which ones so I can adjust accordingly?
Thank you
De Facto Image Building (talk) 13:11, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
18:24:49, 1 February 2023 review of submission by Al Amin Sabbir
[edit]
I'm working on Bangladeshi actor "Shahjahan Shamrat". I researched about him and found him. And I also interviewed him to learn about him. I got several links to popular newspapers and news portals writing him. So, I started writing about him. I completed short info about him, wrote a description, and then submitted it for review. I'm planning will complete the rest of the article after reviewing it. But I got rejected. I follow their instructions in the comments. But again, rejected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al Amin Sabbir (talk • contribs) 18:24, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Al Amin Sabbir The draft was declined, not rejected. "Rejected" has a specific meaning, that resubmission would not be possible. "Declined" means resubmission is possible, but you must review the comments left by reviewers and address their concerns, or it will eventually be rejected. 331dot (talk) 18:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Al Amin Sabbir In addition to the comments that are in the draft, I see "His role in the movie Chironjeeb Mujib is also worth mentioning". Why is it worth mentioning? The draft doesn't say. That could be worded better. David10244 (talk) 13:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Between November and December 2022, I made significant improvements to my draft article about the low budget science film, Dune Drifter. Can you advise me on what else I need to do to get my article accepted for publication on Wikipedia? From Patrick Lee, United Kingdom, 1 February 2023.
- Patrick21london Rejection typically means that a draft won't be considered further. If you added new information that the last reviewer did not have, you should first ask them to reconsider. It appears that the sources you used aren't appropriate for establishing notability; Eye for Film seem to post paid-for reviews, meaning it is not an independent source. 331dot (talk) 22:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
22:28:09, 1 February 2023 review of draft by Bostonfan1198
[edit]
Hello I got inspiration for writing this article for King County Medical Society after seeing the simple Washington State Medical Association Wiki page. Linked here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_State_Medical_Association. I am wondering if a page as simple as that one can be public, why can't mine? I believe that King County Medical society is associated with WSMA. Would it me helpful to mention that?
Bostonfan1198 (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Bostonfan1198. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes the significant coverage that reliable, independent sources devote to the topic. The group's own website is not independent. An article that mentions the group in passing is not significant coverage. Without providing references to such significant coverage, and summarizing them, it is simply not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 03:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
22:48:08, 1 February 2023 review of draft by 2001:718:1E02:9112:B100:C036:AD90:416B
[edit]
I have a question. You say official books and ecncyclopedias are not reliable sources in Wikipedia (for example, this article is denied for this issue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alexander_Gumilevsky), than what are reliable sources? What is the difference then between Wiki and street Yellow pages? I am just curious about it.
2001:718:1E02:9112:B100:C036:AD90:416B (talk) 22:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, IP editor. Some books are reliable sources and other books are completely unreliable drivel. Some encyclopedias are reliable, and others are unreliable. Each source needs to be evaluated separately. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 03:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- The issue doesn't seem to be that the sources are unreliable, but that some of the text has no citations. It would probably be accepted if a citation was at the end of each paragraph. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)