Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< February 24 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 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.


February 25

[edit]

06:52, 25 February 2024 review of submission by 2409:40F4:35:305C:60D2:30FF:FEA4:6866

[edit]

When will Vignesh Sivajayam page get live? 2409:40F4:35:305C:60D2:30FF:FEA4:6866 (talk) 06:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to say never, given that it has been rejected. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:13, 25 February 2024 review of submission by 46.13.230.117

[edit]

Hey,

Can you tell me which reliable source else needs to be presented, since I am referring to Newmann's page here on Wiki, which contains info about the novel as well as the classical heroes of the book? 46.13.230.117 (talk) 09:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refererring to a different article is insufficient- if you are copying over information, you need the sources used in that article too. You will also need to offer sources that discuss this book itself in order for it to merit a standalone article. See Referencing for beginners too. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:25, 25 February 2024 review of submission by UC 142

[edit]

I require assistance for where I need more references (or quality ones) UC 142 (talk) 09:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What assistance are you seeking? You will need at least references from independent professional reviewers that review the film. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the question but, by independent professional reviewers, from avid fans of like yaoi who have watched the film> UC 142 (talk) 09:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean professional film critics, people whose job it is to write reviews of films and do so without being prompted or asked- not reviews by fans. Rankings from movie review websites similar to Rotten Tomatoes can also be used. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see.. the drama is on its last episode next week, perhaps I wait then I'll look for reviews? No? And once I do, where do I source them in my article? UC 142 (talk) 10:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You place the sources with the content that they are supporting; see Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know I probably sound dumb, but is this the reason why my article keeps getting declined? UC 142 (talk) 10:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are happy to answer your good faith questions. Yes, the lack of proper sources is why the draft has been declined. User-generated websites and social media are not acceptable sources, and you don't have acceptable sources that establish that this is notable. 331dot (talk) 10:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Writing a new article is the most diffcult task to attempt on Wikipedia, if you haven't already, I would suggest reading Your First Article and using the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:34, 25 February 2024 review of submission by Spongy mysophyll productions

[edit]

How to edit and save a draft without publishing Spongy mysophyll productions (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spongy mysophyll productions: that's not possible (other than by working locally on your device using a text editor of some sort), because anything you save within Wikipedia, including in the User: and Draft: name spaces, becomes by definition publicly available. That's why "saving" a draft is referred to as "publishing"; it doesn't mean publishing into the main encyclopaedia, it just means creating a publicly-available draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:59, 25 February 2024 review of submission by PlaneCrashKing1264

[edit]

I dont know whats wrong PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 14:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PlaneCrashKing1264: are you referring to  Courtesy link: Draft:Good & The Beautiful?
It has been declined because there is absolutely no evidence of notability, which is a fundamental requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, i suck at understanding some words. What does notability mean, exactly? PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PlaneCrashKing1264, click the word 'notability' in DoubleGrazing's reply and you'll be taken to the page on notability - you'll find our definition and how to work out whether something will be seen as notable there.
If you have a look at the reviewer's notes (in the big box at the top of your draft) there are some links there as well that will show you what you need to know about writing an article. You might also be interested in clicking this link: Your First Article - some of the information you'll already have seen, but it's a good place to start for a thorough overview. StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so what's wrong? PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 13:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The only source you have provided is the curriculum itself. Any article about this must summarize what independent reliable sources say about it. 331dot (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can only find one, though. PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And i cant find anything about it. PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PlaneCrashKing1264, if you can't find reliable sources, then it isn't notable by Wikipedia standards and so an article won't be accepted.
We have already told you what's wrong, and pointed you towards the notability page so you can see what you need to do. Now it is your job to compare what the page lists to what you have. So, for example, the first piece of information on the notability page says "Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article." You are saying you can't find reliable, independent sources, so already you can see that it can't have a separate article. Maybe someone will write about it in the future, and then you can have another go at writing a draft. StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:52, 25 February 2024 review of submission by HCUPa

[edit]

I was trying to use taxobox for a draft article on the genus Zygopauropus, and I seem to have messed up the template for this genus (I think I deleted some necessary code) and don't know how to fix the problem. HCUPa (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HCUPa: a couple of the earlier revisions have working taxoboxes, can you not copy & paste from them? Eg. this seems at least superficially okay. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I managed to fix the taxobox template now. HCUPa (talk) 17:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HCUPa You might want to install the WP:Twinkle gadget which makes reverting edits easier along with several other tasks. Another option is to do a restore when multiple edits need to be reverted (click on the last good version from the edit history and use the "restore this verson" link at the top.) S0091 (talk) 18:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:39, 25 February 2024 review of submission by BDcelebwiki

[edit]

what sources should I use? and what can I do to make this article acceptable? BDcelebwiki (talk) 18:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used all the reliable sources available out there BDcelebwiki (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BDcelebwiki, if you have used all the reliable sources available, then it might simply be too soon for this article to exist. Often it takes time for people to become well-known and be written about in reliable sources. Until then, you just have to wait - you can keep improving the draft while you wait, of course, or you can try doing some little edits and getting to know how Wikipedia works. Once your subject has become notable by Wikipedia standards, you can submit a draft article about them again. StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:28, 25 February 2024 review of submission by Dishakabra12

[edit]

Dear friend,

I am curious why you say that the article is not noteworthy? Nan has been recognised by various organisations, people and has had a wide-ranging impact in the whale research and conservation field. Could you please advise on what makes a wikipedia page more meaningful and relevant?

Kind regards Disha Dishakabra12 (talk) 20:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are based on what reliable independent sources say about a subject, your draft had NONE of these. Theroadislong (talk) 20:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:41, 25 February 2024 review of submission by Nwachinazo1

[edit]

My draft continues to receive frequent rejections by reviewers despite my improvement on the references. To some extent, reasons given by these reviewers are contrary among themselves yet I continue to provide explanations on why their reviews were unfair and not thorough enough. Please I seek assistance on the draft above and why it should be accepted, given several reliable, third-party and independent sources that significantly support the subject. Part of Wikipedia's criterion says that a subject's notability does not necessarily need to be main topic of discussion but adequate treatment of the subject. This I have achieved. Nwachinazo1 (talk) 21:41, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rightfully declined and then instead of asking for assistance you then proceeded to continually just submit without any improvement not once but twice. This does nothing but waste more time and lead to rejections like this. I have reviewed the sources and they all seem to be quotes of the subject, mere mentions of the subject or press releases none which meet all of the criteria to satisfy WP:GNG. If you would like to review the links in the decline messages and work on the draft to actually improve it then you can reach out the the last reviewer and ask them to rescind the rejection. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 02:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:50, 25 February 2024 review of submission by PomPomLover96

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikiwriters,

I need some help for Dan Slepian's Wikipedia page for more independent sources to prove notability. Can someone kindly help?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Slepian PomPomLover96 (talk) 21:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PomPomLover96: in a word, no. We're happy to help answer questions about the AfC process, but the onus is entirely on the draft author to do the necessary research and editing. The way you should go about this is to find some sources which meet the relevant notability guideline, eg. WP:GNG, and summarise what they have said about the subject, citing each source against the information it has provided. If you cannot find sufficient sources to begin with, then you shouldn't even bother writing the draft, because it wouldn't be accepted without evidence of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:03, 25 February 2024 review of submission by Walter Tau

[edit]

I feel, that the draft is suitable for submission. It meet both Notability and Sufficiency of Disclosure criteria. It can be iproved by other editors once it is posted. Walter Tau (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what "Sufficiency of Disclosure" means, or why it might be relevant to evaluating the notability of a draft. Which of your references are in-depth discussions of the case or its outcome by people wholly unconnected with the parties or the case? That is the only kind of source which is relevant. ColinFine (talk) 13:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_February_25&oldid=1211341771"