Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 August 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 24 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 26 >
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.


August 25

[edit]

01:49, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Mudwater

[edit]

Hello, articles for creation reviewers! Draft:2024–25 NCAA football bowl games was submitted for review on May 22nd. Would it be possible for someone to review this article soon? (1) I did not create the draft, but I have just made a number of enhancements to the article. It's a lot more up to speed than it was yesterday, if I say so myself. (2) The college football season just started, and our readers will be eager to have this article on Wikipedia. Each year an article like this is created, but this year's was submitted using the AfC process. Thanks! — Mudwater (Talk) 01:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mudwater, I see the original draft creator was blocked for "content issues". I haven't looked into it any further than that, so I'm not sure what the problem is - as an editor more familiar with the topic area, can you give the draft a thorough check to make sure it's all okay? -- asilvering (talk) 04:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@asilvering: Hello! Yes, the draft is all okay, and "ready for prime time". When I found it yesterday, it was in need of some copy editing, and it was a bit light on references. Additionally, the list of games had been created before the final schedule was announced, so a lot of the dates were not filled in, and the games were not in chronological order. I fixed all that before posting here. (This is an annual sports article -- see for example 2023–24 NCAA football bowl games from last year.) — Mudwater (Talk) 11:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, it's all yours! -- asilvering (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! — Mudwater (Talk) 19:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:36, 25 August 2024 review of submission by 103.155.151.193

[edit]

Dear Sir, He seems to me to be a remarkable person. I've seen many people less notable than him even have promotional Wikipedia pages. And he is one of the young entrepreneurs of Bangladesh 103.155.151.193 (talk) 04:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, the draft has been rejected and will not be published. If you could point us towards other people who have promotional Wikipedia pages, that would be very helpful - we are all volunteers, and some articles do manage to get past us. We can only do something about those articles if someone notices them and alerts editors who can take action. StartGrammarTime (talk) 05:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note to others this is part of long-term abuse see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Md_Sunnat_Ali_Mollik/Archive. KylieTastic (talk) 09:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:54, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Anticipatoryplagiarism

[edit]

hi there. so i received the feedback re too many primary non-independent sources, or primary such as press releases. so i tried removing anything published by a museum or gallery (which i'm guessing is the issue?), and replaced where possible with refs to newspaper reviews and books etc. Is this the right direction or did i misunderstand the issue? Anticipatoryplagiarism (talk) 06:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted it for a review, the reviewer will leave you feedback. That said it's not clear to me how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional. 331dot (talk) 08:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the link, v useful! i confess i resubmitted before realising i could ask for help here. warm thanks Anticipatoryplagiarism (talk) 08:56, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anticipatoryplagiarism, I will comment about the lead section of your draft. You assert that He works with a wide range of techniques and materials including blown glass and the ashes of burnt books, to create paradoxical outcomes. That claim has two references, neither of which I can read online. Can you provide a couple of sentences from one or both of these sources that back up the "wide range of techniques and materials" wording and the "paradoxical outcomes" wording? Also, later in the lead, you assert that His work often relies on finding humorous juxtapositions, which is also followed by another reference that I cannot read online. Can you provide a sentence or two from the reference that verifies your "humorous juxtapositions" language? Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, plagiarism is forbidden on Wikipedia, so your username may lead some other editors to conclude that you are thumbing your nose at our policies instead of joking around. Take that into consideration. Cullen328 (talk) 09:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i'll find the quotes and add them here shortly. i take your point about my username but im not sure what to do about it now? it references a Oulipian concept i liked and about which i started this stub: Anticipatory plagiarism. Anticipatoryplagiarism (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:08, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Sohaila ahmed200

[edit]

Hello, I am currently working on a draft titled Dsquares, which has been tagged for speedy deletion under the G11 criterion for unambiguous advertising. I understand that the content may have appeared promotional, and I am committed to making the necessary changes to align it with Wikipedia’s guidelines. Could anyone provide feedback or guidance on how to improve the draft? Specifically, I would appreciate advice on: How to rewrite the content to ensure a neutral tone. What kind of reliable, third-party sources would help establish notability? Do you have any other suggestions to avoid the article being perceived as promotional? Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. Best regards, [Sohaila Ahmed] 

Sohaila ahmed200 (talk) 09:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has been speedily deleted four times as unambiguous advertising or promotion, by four different editors, and now the page has been protected by user:BusterD. I think you should take the hint. Meters (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sohaila ahmed200, your draft contains profoundly unacceptable language like Dsquares is a leading B2B loyalty and rewards provider specializing in end-to-end customer loyalty solutions. The company partners with Fortune 500 companies, multinational corporations, and industry leaders worldwide to create tailored loyalty programs designed to boost customer retention, drive sales growth, and eance brand loyalty. That bloated sentence is packed with marketing clichés, promotional bullshit and ad industry jargon. Not a single word of it tells the readers anything substantive about this company. It is all hot air. As Clara Peller asked decades ago, "Where's the beef?" Cullen328 (talk) 09:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:33, 25 August 2024 review of submission by 2603:8000:E101:811F:C456:5DF4:81E8:EBB8

[edit]

Why is the text I included in my first submission not showing, per the first rejection? I would life to correct what is wrong, but I believe I entered the text correctly. Where can I get tutorials to use your page correctly? Thank you for any and all help. 2603:8000:E101:811F:C456:5DF4:81E8:EBB8 (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have revealed the text for you, please read WP:YFA and WP:REFB for further help. Theroadislong (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:46, 25 August 2024 review of submission by YazarOo

[edit]

What should I do to improve my draft topic. YazarOo (talk) 09:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@YazarOo: I guess the simple answer is notability, given that that's why the draft was declined.
...except that it has now been rejected for the same reason, so arguably there's nothing more you should do, as this is the end of the road. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:06, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Ustc3092024

[edit]

I want to know why and the exact reasons for the deletion.

As I have seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Jungle this page is doing the same and their page didn't get deleted.

I have followed what they did.

Can you tell me the reasons?

Thank you. 

Ustc3092024 (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ustc3092024: this draft was declined as non-notable, and subsequently deleted as promotional. As you may have noticed on top of the Digital Jungle article, it has all sorts of problems, including lack of notability, which have been highlighted, so using that as the basis for creating your draft was not advisable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I have now started a deletion discussion on the Digital Jungle article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So in that case, so many wiki pages need to be deleted. Like Hostinger web host company page. and so on.
What are the notable sources that would be countable as a reference? Ustc3092024 (talk) 06:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap_Digital
Like this page doesn't have any reference to relay on. How did this page go live? Ustc3092024 (talk) 13:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ustc3092024: Simply put, it predates the drafting process entirely (first edit 2010/12/06). The creation of a formal drafting process is when our enforcement of standards started to get much stricter. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And even if that wasn't the case, the use of the draft process is usually voluntary, though highly recommended. Only IP users, new accounts, and people with certain editing restrictions are required to use it. As such, inappropriate articles can get past us. You're welcome to continue to point out inappropriate articles you see so action can be taken, we need the help. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, As i mentioned earlier. My draft article were enough resources. But one of the editor said that the resource were not enough though. So, can you tell me which kind of resource link I need to submit to live my wiki page again. Thank you. @Jéské Couriano@DoubleGrazing Ustc3092024 (talk) 08:51, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ustc3092024: as I said earlier, this draft was declined for lack of evidence of notability, not for "resource were not enough" (sic). The notability guideline for companies is laid out in WP:NCORP. TL;DNR = we need to see significant coverage of the subject, in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent (of the subject, and of each other). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:15, 25 August 2024 review of submission by 2601:985:A01:F7B0:9C5F:6689:3C7:7656

[edit]

This is True and it’s Estrella Karpouzis Biography as an article nothing wrong with this. If you go to Roosevelt hotel Wikipedia in Notable residents and guests. It shows also this information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_Roosevelt_Hotel 2601:985:A01:F7B0:9C5F:6689:3C7:7656 (talk) 13:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably the draft contains nothing that shows that she passes WP:BIO. It's interesting that a you compare her with a hotel. The two are not equivalent, though. No precedent is ever set by any article for any other. If it were we would have a brutally fast descent into idiocracy 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:18, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Carmenaugust2020: assuming you remain interested in this draft, I have reinstated the review history which shows that it was rejected by Drmies. Please do not forget to log in when editing here lest you reveal more about yourself than you wish with an IP address 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 15:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you I will. 2601:985:A01:F7B0:CCC7:92F0:EC43:DDD (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:53, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Kej Abrielle

[edit]

I need to create article about my self Kej Abrielle (talk) 13:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kej Abrielle Why? You do not appear to satisfy our criteria. If you have confused Wikipedia with social media, please take steps to remove that confusion. Your user page may contain relatively trivial information about you. WP:Userpage will assist you here. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 14:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent: I would not be surprised if the reason they want to create their Wikipedia article is for verification on social media. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano nor would I. And I am uninterested in that trivial reasin, as, I imagine, are you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent: I actually am interested - because the same social media websites will accept news articles about the person for verification as well, with lower standards than WP:RS demands. If you have the sources to create an article, then odds are you already would have been verified simply by presenting them to the social media network's CS representatives. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano I learn something new every day. Today this is the second thing. Thank you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:24, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s no true. 2601:985:A01:F7B0:CCC7:92F0:EC43:DDD (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:58, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Jeffreygerald5550

[edit]

I see the page I created for the filmmaker Andrew de Burgh got rejected:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrew_de_Burgh

I wanted to follow up on this as the references given were ample and mention the subject numerous times. Below are some of the links that were submitted as references:

Interview with Infamous Horror (big horror website - almost 2 million followers on Facebook): https://www.infamoushorror.com/interview-with-filmmaker-andrew-de-burgh/

Article on MovieMaker Magazine (a big filmmaking magazine running for over 30 years): https://www.moviemaker.com/only-a-flesh-wound-just-one-drink/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MovieMaker

Article on No Film School (one of the biggest websites in Hollywood): https://nofilmschool.com/micro-budget-feature-scored-fresh https://www.youtube.com/user/nofilmschool (124,000 subscribers)

Interview on Horror Facts (another highly viewed horror website): https://horrorfacts.com/beauty-hides-the-beast-the-twisted-transformation-behind-the-seductress-from-hell/

These all mention the subject numerous times and are published, reliable and secondary sources that are independent of the subject. I didn't include all the references but those also mention the subject numerous times and are published, reliable and secondary sources.

Please advise, thank you. Jeffreygerald5550 (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeffreygerald5550: Interviews and anything the subject writes are useless for notability. We can't cite YouTube unless the video was produced by an outlet that has editorial oversight (such as San Francisco Chronicle) and uploaded to that outlet's verified channel. And the reason you keep getting kicked off of IRC by the bot is because you're posting a massive amount of text all at once, which the bots see as spam and will kill you off the network for. You only really have three usable sources, all of which are borderline: https://www.cinema-crazed.com/blog/2016/02/25/just-one-drink-2016/ , https://battleroyalewithcheese.com/2019/09/the-bestowal-review/ , and https://www.starburstmagazine.com/reviews/the-bestowal/ . All the rest are either too sparse or have a connexion to de Burgh. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your post. I'm not sure how interviews on big horror sites like Horror Facts and Infamous Horror (which have nothing to do with the subject other than the fact he was featured on it) has a connection to de Burgh or are too sparse.
https://horrorfacts.com/beauty-hides-the-beast-the-twisted-transformation-behind-the-seductress-from-hell/
https://www.infamoushorror.com/interview-with-filmmaker-andrew-de-burgh/ Jeffreygerald5550 (talk) 16:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeffreygerald5550: Because it's an interview of de Burgh. If you cannot see how de Burgh answering questions about himself/his work is a connexion to de Burgh, then we have a more significant problem in re source assessment here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:15, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in this process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted if you can address the given concerns. Mere mentions are not what we are looking for, but sources with significant coverage of this person that, on their own, discuss what makes him a notable filmmaker as Wikipedia defines it. We don't just want documentation of his work. The awards mentioned are useless for establishing notability as the awards themselves do not have articles(like Academy Award). 331dot (talk) 16:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:25, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Rockywriter88

[edit]

In response to the previous rejection, significant updates have been made to the article, particularly in the "Museums & Library Collections" section. This section now includes references to Ruben van Schalm's work being included in prestigious institutions such as The Library of Congress, The Art Institute of Chicago, and The Getty Research Institute, among others. These additions provide strong evidence of van Schalm's notability and recognition in the field of photography. The article has been thoroughly revised to ensure that all claims are supported by reliable, independent sources, which meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please consider if the submission is now ready to proceed for publication with these updates in place. Rockywriter88 (talk) 18:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rockywriter88 It would help to know which draft you are referring to. You have "note to reviewer" where the title of your draft should go. 331dot (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it is Draft:Ruben van Schalm. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
this is correct that is the draft Rockywriter88 (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rockywriter, The draft was rejected after many reviewers went over the content and sources and declined the draft. I saw that you recently added a new section "Museum and Library Collections" - please take note that adding a long list of libraries where his (seemingly) self-published book is held does not contribute to notability. If he has works (not his books) in notable museums or national galleries, that might help. Also the sources are connected - meaning they are primary sources, not significant coverage in sources that are fully independent of the person. You may want to wait a few years while this photographer develops his career before resubmitting. Just a suggestion.... Netherzone (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is correct and waited to add many new notable museums and Library collections references to this draft on his book publication published by komma publishing [1] if you wish me to add more independent sources on fully the independent of the person I can do so on publication he did on works - [2] - [3] - [4] Rockywriter88 (talk) 20:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are misunderstanding, the essence of what I said is: His work is not included in any notable museums nor national galleries. And having a copy of his book in libraries does not contribute to notability. Netherzone (talk) 21:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
my apologies this is the Draft:Ruben van Schalm Rockywriter88 (talk) 20:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This I understood in the essence of notable museum I found that his work is in the collection here [5] maybe I can find more Rockywriter88 (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Reviewer,
In response to the previous feedback, I have made significant updates to the draft, particularly to enhance the notability of Ruben van Schalm's work. Below are the key changes:
  1. Museum Collections: I have provided detailed references showing that Ruben van Schalm's artwork, not just his book Paradise, is included in the permanent collections of notable museums. For example, his work is now part of the collection at The MA-g The Museum of Avant Garde, Switzerland, CH [6], which is a recognized institution in the art world. This inclusion contributes directly to establishing his notability.
  2. Secondary Sources: I have added secondary sources, including interviews and critical analyses, to provide independent coverage of his work. These sources are attached as PDFs in my comment above and have also been cited within the draft to support various claims about his career and impact in the field of photography.
  3. Inline Citations: All claims related to his museum collections, exhibitions, and other notable achievements have been backed by inline citations, allowing for easy verification of the information provided.
  4. Addressing Concerns: I have taken care to address the concerns raised in previous reviews, particularly regarding the use of primary sources and the importance of showcasing his artwork's inclusion in notable institutions.
Note: Additionally, I have included Authority Control databases in the draft to further enhance its credibility and verification. These databases provide standardized information and external validation of Ruben van Schalm's identity and works, contributing to the draft's overall reliability and notability.
I hope these updates meet the necessary notability and sourcing guidelines for the draft to be accepted. I would appreciate any further feedback or guidance you may have.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
Rockywriter88 Rockywriter88 (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:45, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Jimbo218

[edit]

I need help on updating this article for more sources. Jimbo218 (talk) 19:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been rejected as WP:TOOSOON. It likely will not be notable until it occurs, or until you have more sources with more significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 21:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:50, 25 August 2024 review of submission by Nicolas Nguyen1312

[edit]

I want to know how I can get my wiki page set up Nicolas Nguyen1312 (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't, Wikipedia is not social media where people tell about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 23:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_August_25&oldid=1243353355"