Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< January 24 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 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.


January 25

[edit]

02:47, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Hani ali0

[edit]

Hello, I have provided secondary sources directly from league page but was declined. Can I please get clear directions and help to get this page published as soon as possible? Thank you so much. Hani ali0 (talk) 02:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I uploaded sources directly from the league page. I also added pictures relating to each team played with, deleting one extra one as told. If there is anything else I need to do to get this page published please let me know, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you so much. Hani ali0 (talk) 03:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hani ali0: firstly, please don't start a new thread with each comment, just add to your previous one.
Secondly, if you haven't yet done so, please read WP:AUTOBIO for the reasons why you should not be writing about yourself.
And lastly, you have resubmitted this draft and it is awaiting review. A reviewer will pick it up sooner or later, and either accept it or provide feedback as to why it cannot be accepted. Please be patient, we have over 1,000 drafts pending review, and Wikipedia is not edited to a deadline. (Is there a particular reason why you want it published ASAP?) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: We don't normally do on-demand reviews here at the help desk, but I took a quick look at your draft and declined it as there was barely any referencing and absolutely no evidence of notability of any kind. Unless you significantly improve it before resubmitting, I expect it may be rejected outright at the next review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:22, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Niklas.Andersson.95

[edit]

I am working again on this Theoria page, and I am wondering if it is possible to have the paragraphs that are unsupported by secondary sources hosted elsewhere, as in an archive. So if one wanted to read more about the journal, they could go there instead. Also, can someone help me clean up the texts on this page, as English is not my primary language. And is there a way to make the academic journal indexing automatically update for the page? Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 10:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Niklas.Andersson.95: if by "hosted elsewhere" you mean elsewhere on Wikipedia, then no; elsewhere on an external site – sure!
I'm a bit confused as to why the content cannot be supported by referencing. Surely all that information must have come from somewhere, so just cite the source(s). That said, I don't think there is actually all that much unreferenced content.
Our main concern here at AfC is notability. If you can show that this journal passes WP:NJOURNALS, it could probably be accepted, and just tagged for any remaining issues. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Yes, I meant hosted externally. Sorry for the confusion! Most of this work is produced through interviews that I had with members of Theoria, meaning first-person accounts, so there are no secondary sources to corroborate them. But the interviews are externally hosted, so they can be read elsewhere. I have linked them to the sources. And in regards to notability, I would argue that Theoria fulfills at least one of the stated criteria for notability, which then should be enough if I am reading the notability page correctly. Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 10:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Niklas.Andersson.95: ah, okay, got it. Personal interviews and recollections like that wouldn't be acceptable sources anyway, as sources must be published. In that case, my advice would be to remove such content, as you're implying by suggesting to host it elsewhere.
Which criterion of NJOURNALS does it fulfil, and what evidence is there to support that? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the sources are publicly accessible, but I think I understand that might not be enough. Regarding the notability, Theoria is listed on the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), which is what the notability page states is a requirement for fulfilling C1.
here is the link to the journal on SSCI: https://mjl.clarivate.com:/search-results?issn=0040-5817&hide_exact_match_fl=true&utm_source=mjl&utm_medium=share-by-link&utm_campaign=journal-profile-share-this-journal Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Niklas.Andersson.95: yep, that would indeed seem to satisfy C1.b of NJOURNALS; I'll make a note of that in the draft.
Once you've removed (or referenced) the unsupported content, you can either resubmit the draft, or ping me (or drop by my talk page) and I'll review it myself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thank you! How do I ping you? Sorry, I am still learning how to edit here on Wikipedia. Also, after I have removed the unsupported parts, which would be all the historical sections I would imagine, can I get some assistance with cleaning up the text as English is not my primary language? Niklas.Andersson.95 (talk) 12:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Niklas.Andersson.95: see {{Ping}}. (Note that just @'ing someone doesn't do the trick.)
I don't think there's anything wrong with the text (although who am I to comment, English isn't my first language either!), and in any case that can be left for future editors to edit, which they will do in any case. :)
-- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:41, 25 January 2024 review of submission by 20 Екатерина

[edit]

Здравствуйте! Подскажите, почему был отклонен черновик? Что необходимо изменить в статье? 20 Екатерина (talk) 10:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@20 Екатерина: this is the English-language Wikipedia; please communicate in English, thanks. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Can you tell me why the draft was rejected? What needs to be changed in the article? 20 Екатерина (talk) 10:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And if you mean this draft User:20 Екатерина/sandbox, then that was declined for the same reason, of not being in English. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the user has now (today) started editing in ru-wiki. --ColinFine (talk) 23:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:20, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Dishant Valmiki

[edit]

Because I have been declined twice Dishant Valmiki (talk) 13:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answered below. Qcne (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:22, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Dishant Valmiki

[edit]

Can you tell me what was missing in my article, so I can improve it, and publish it Dishant Valmiki (talk) 13:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the comment @Dishant Valmiki left by the reviewer? You cannot use Wikipedia as a source. Sources must be reliable, independent, and preferably seconary. Qcne (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:24, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Stef joosten

[edit]

I am curious to hear whether I have addressed the reviewer's comments adequately. Should I resubmit to find out, or should I ask this question here? Stef joosten (talk) 13:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stef joosten: please resubmit. For us here at the help desk to be able to comment on notability, we would have to review the article anyway, and that's not really what the help desk is for.
BTW, given that you appear (?) to be a (co-)author of many of the sources cited, what is your relationship with this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:25, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Mk6778

[edit]

My article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Federico_Bardazzi was rejected for the following reasons: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified." but I included 47 References in the article, which is also a simple translation of the article https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federico_Bardazzi properly online and approved. Which References do you think they refer to? Also since the Italian article is approved, why is the English article not? Sorry for my English Mk6778 (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mk6778, did you read the comment left by the reviewer?
For the same reason this was moved to draftspace. There is a lot of information in this draft that does not contain a source. You will need to either remove that information or add an WP:INCITE reference that verifies Qcne (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read a comment, but the information does not contain source, what is it? events in Biography? The italian article has the same references as the English one.
for examples: During the same year, he began collaborating with various ensembles, including the Toscanini Orchestra of Parma, the ORT - Orchestra della Toscana, the Abruzzo Symphonic Institution, and the orchestral groups of the Fiesole School of Music.
thanks for your answer Mk6778 (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Mk6778,
The Italian and English Wikipedias are separate project with very different referencing requirements. Every statement in your draft must have an in-line citation. Qcne (talk) 20:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So does this paragraph also need references?
During the same year, he began collaborating with various ensembles, including the Toscanini Orchestra of Parma, the ORT - Orchestra della Toscana, the Abruzzo Symphonic Institution, and the orchestral groups of the Fiesole School of Music. Mk6778 (talk) 08:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every statement needs referencing. Qcne (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:01, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Anuragkanttiwari

[edit]

What is the reason my article is not being published. Where as many sources has been provided. Kindly help. 

Anuragkanttiwari (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anuragkanttiwari: the reason is given in the decline notice and accompanying comments. Namely, the sources are insufficient for establishing notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:49, 25 January 2024 review of submission by EmeraldRange

[edit]

Reviewing this draft and while there are also issues with lacking inline citations, I believe a good portion of this was AI-generated- specifically the Production subsection. Is that grounds for copyvio? Not sure what the policy is. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 14:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EmeraldRange Even if its not AI generated its completely inappropriate for Wikipedia so I would decline it on tone grounds. AI work cannot yet be copyrighted so its not a copyvio. Qcne (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying and suggesting the tone reason! EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 15:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:22, 25 January 2024 review of submission by 138.246.3.242

[edit]

The submission is claimed to appear to "read more like an advertisement" and needs more sources. Is there a specific area that needs extra attention to avoid such issues? 138.246.3.242 (talk) 15:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not really any specific are. The whole draft reads like what the Institute wants the world to know about itself.
Wikipedia doesn't care what the Institute wants the world to know about it: what Wikipedia is interested in is what people unconnected with the Institute have chosen to publish about it. ColinFine (talk) 23:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:39, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Kalakpagh

[edit]

Per the secondary source, does it mean I should look for different websites, journals, etc that also talk about the subject? Kalakpagh (talk) 16:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Find some that meet the golden rule, and base your article on them. ColinFine (talk) 23:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Kalakpagh (talk) 17:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:43, 25 January 2024 review of submission by LunaSparks

[edit]

Would this page meet the reference requirement? LunaSparks (talk) 17:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:18, 25 January 2024 review of submission by Xcgolds

[edit]

Hello,

Can you provide information on how the arrangement should be made? Where do we make mistakes? Xcgolds (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xcgolds: what 'arrangement' would that be, then?
This draft has been rejected and is pending deletion.
BTW, what is your relationship with this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_January_25&oldid=1201183005"