Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 June 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 11 << May | June | Jul >> June 13 >
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.


June 12

[edit]

03:03, 12 June 2024 review of submission by 240D:1A:E34:2800:2562:914D:A94D:76EF

[edit]

日本語版にあるJFE商事エレクトロニクスの英語版の翻訳をWikipediaに掲載したいと思っているのですが現在私の編集しているランクだとできないようです。 出来れば、どなたか代わりにお願いしたいです。 または、私が掲載する場合どのような方法がありますか？ 240D:1A:E34:2800:2562:914D:A94D:76EF (talk) 03:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should note automated translation generally fails on Japanese text; please restate your request in English. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 03:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:56, 12 June 2024 review of submission by 81.14.182.130

[edit]

This article is about a german Track and Field athlet and Influencer. He has a big Fantasie on Social Media and is Part of the U14 National Track an Field team. I think He is very notable and should have a Wikipedia Page. 81.14.182.130 (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even back when WP:NSPORTS had "top-level appearance" criteria U## squads were never part of it for reasons which should be obvious, and we are generally hesitant to have articles about minors even today for much the same reasons. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also please don't hijack articles, like you did here. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:17, 12 June 2024 review of submission by 180.151.224.214

[edit]

I am not sure if I understand the reason for rejection. The subject is noteworthy with multiple new coverages in reliable independent sources. Can somebody help me with identifying and rectifying, please? 180.151.224.214 (talk) 06:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide a link to that draft? I don't see any in your contributions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:40, 12 June 2024 review of submission by Siva999498

[edit]

This is for our own organization details Siva999498 (talk) 09:40, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


advise me Siva999498 (talk) 09:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Siva999498: this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further.
Please do not start multiple threads.
And please respond to the conflict of interest query posted on your talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:06, 12 June 2024 review of submission by 27.34.66.172

[edit]


I am writing to seek your assistance regarding a Wikipedia article draft I have recently completed. Unfortunately, the article has been declined as it does not meet the qualifications for a Wikipedia article.

I have gathered additional information, like newspapers and magazines between 2000-2010 which are not posted online and that I believe will help in meeting the necessary criteria.I would appreciate your guidance on how to properly incorporate these references into my article.

I would be grateful for any advice on how to include these citations appropriately.

Additionally, I would like to know if it is permissible to reference the books authored by author himself within the article.

Thank you for your time and assistance. I look forward to your guidance on how to proceed. 

27.34.66.172 (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Newspapers and similar publications are cited using the {{cite news}} template.
Please see WP:OFFLINE for advice on citing offline sources. The main point to note is that you need to populate enough of the citation template's fields to provide sufficient bibliographical details of the source to enable it to be reliably identified for verification purposes. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:14, 12 June 2024 review of submission by Napoleone89

[edit]

I can't understand why you believe it's not correct.a page in italian already exists and this is the mere translation Napoleone89 (talk) 15:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Napoleone89: Straight translations from another Wikipedia project generally won't work due to the English Wikipedia having stricter and more-rigourously-enforced sourcing requirements, such as WP:Biographies of living persons. A biography with a list of sources lazily tacked onto the end will be declined every single time; inline sources at the end of claims are mandatory. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So what do you suggest? it's not strictly the same.
could it be possible that it has been disapproved cause the sources are all in Italian? Napoleone89 (talk) 15:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Napoleone89: no, we quite readily accept non-English sources, as long as they're otherwise of sufficient standard (reliability, etc.).
There isn't much to suggest, since the draft has now been deleted as promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
will i be able to recreate it? Napoleone89 (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Napoleone89: well, you can. Whether you should, is a different matter. You would need to find sources that demonstrate notability; then summarise those sources, in your own words but without putting any spin or embellishment on things. You didn't do that this time around – do you think you can do it when you recreate it?
BTW, what is your interest in this subject? Do you, for example, have some sort of real-life relationship with it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can probably create it once more. But please note what I said to another editor further up this page:
"Writing a draft without first finding several sources that each meet the triple criterion of reliability, independence, and significant coverage of the subject, is like building a house without first surveying the site or checking local building regulations. If you manage to build the house, it is likely to fall down, or to break laws so that you have to pull it down".
This analogy applies even if you are translating from a different Wikipedia: you are making a copy of a house you saw built on a different site, with different local building laws. ColinFine (talk) 16:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:13, 12 June 2024 review of submission by Bmusc bandar

[edit]

hello I am trying to submit my school's history and other info in the wikipedia page but sorry to say that is has been suspended... what's the problem.. kindly tell me. Bmusc bandar (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you are writing a draft in Bengali for English Wikipedia. Perhaps you would be better working in bn-wiki? Try asking at bn:উইকিপিডিয়া:সাহায্যকেন্দ্র. ColinFine (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:46, 12 June 2024 review of submission by VWellsMicro

[edit]

Our article was declined for what looks like lack of credible sources. We're unsure how to correct the issues, as our comparable subjects have very similar, if not the exact same resources- and fewer resources than we've provided. I have updated and added a few articles from a strong authority in SEO. Comparable articles include Bing Webmaster Tools, Google Search Console and Sitemaps. I'm not sure if we're having trouble because we have been categorized with Math and Science? We are not math and science and cannot figure out how to remove that categorization. We would like to add the category search engine webmaster tools but not sure how. Any guidance you can provide will be helpful. Thank you! VWellsMicro (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VWellsMicro I fixed the link to your draft, it lacked the "Draft:" portion. Note that only a single person should be operating your account(you say "we"). Computer science is a science, that's probably why it was categorized that way, but categorization doesn't affect editing the article. Please note that articles and drafts are judged on their own merits and not based on other articles that themselves may not be appropriate. See other stuff exists. It could be that these other articles are inappropriate and have just not been addressed yet. If you want to help us, please identify these other articles so we can take action. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have been checked by the community. 331dot (talk) 16:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for your response and correction to our draft. I am the only person editing this. It is owned by Microsoft, however I am the authorized editor of this page. IndexNow is an indexing tool for search engines, utilized primarily on Bing but also other smaller engines. Most major companies utilize IndexNow. I am really struggling with why my resources are not considered credible. SEO Journal is a highly respected journal in SEO as is Search Engine Land and SEO expert, Barry Schwartz. I have removed Microsoft authored resources due to previous reviewer comments that we could not use internal sources. In terms of similar pages, Google Search Console is a good example. Its references are all internal Google sources. Sitemaps is a Google developed similar tool to IndexNow and does not include extensive references. Could you suggest what more I can do to provide the proper references to get the page approved? Thank you very much VWellsMicro (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@VWellsMicro: We do not recognise "authorised editors", and notability-by-osmosis is not a good argument to make, not least because the articles you point to predate the drafting process in its entirety (GSC first edit 2007/04/15, Sitemaps first edit 2005/10/04). Sitemaps even has a maintenance tag on it, but both articles, frankly, are in dire need of people who can improve them, rather than the spammers and SEO hacks both have been getting as of late. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response...what can I do? Am I able to use Microsoft sources at all? We publish a lot of research and research papers that are used as references for a lot of topics. All references I have provided in the post are mostly all earned articles in the professional journals within our industry/niche (SEO). Search Engine Journal and Search Engine Land are the two most read by professionals in the industry. Thank you VWellsMicro (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:22, 12 June 2024 review of submission by TheCodaEdits

[edit]

I got declined because I do not have enough citations. The topic I am writing about is hard to find information about, so I can't get many references. TheCodaEdits (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheCodaEdits: this draft wasn't declined because it doesn't have enough citations, it was declined because the sources you're citing don't show that the subject is notable. Notability is a core requirement for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. If sources don't exist which would satisfy the main notability standard WP:GNG, then it won't be possible to have an article published on this subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:22, 12 June 2024 review of submission by 2409:40D1:8E:CC50:584C:48FF:FE2E:9BCD

[edit]

Alhamdulillah For Everything 2409:40D1:8E:CC50:584C:48FF:FE2E:9BCD (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Saddam 2409:40D1:8E:CC50:584C:48FF:FE2E:9BCD (talk) 20:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. Wikipedia is not for posting your resumé, nor is it a social media platform. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 00:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:10, 12 June 2024 review of submission by RJDiogenes

[edit]

Hello. My above submission was declined (probably not surprising since it was my first), but I was wondering if I could get more specific info. The reason given was "not adequately supported by reliable sources." Was this a specific reference to the Awards section? I had intended to contact Mr Mihm directly for more info about the ones that have no references, but I can as easily delete them for now. But I also want to be sure that I'm not missing something else-- I wouldn't want to get deleted. Thanks very much. RJDiogenes (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RJDiogenes: Every claim the article makes MUST be cited to a third-party, in-depth source. This is not negotiable. Anything Mihm himself tells you isn't going to be any good unless he has news articles that he can point you to that corroborate what he says. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the reply, Jéské. I understand that there are a couple of references in the Awards section that have no citations, and I've contacted Mr Mihm for assistance with that (if he has no links, I'll just delete them). But as far as the personal information on Mihm himself, everything seemed to me to be consistent with the "Using the subject as a self-published source" guidelines under the "Biographies of living persons" section of the manual, since it is not self serving and there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity. I just want to be clear if I'm correct about that, or if there is something else on the page that I'm missing. Thanks again for your help. RJDiogenes (talk) 14:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RJDiogenes You still need something to cite, like a social media posting, or a published autobiography, something that a reader could theoretically look up to confirm the information. We can't just take your word that Mr. Mihm said these things.
Since you intend to communicate with him about the content of the article you are writing about him, you should declare a conflict of interest. Typically, an article or draft is written without any involvement from, or even the knowledge of, the subject. 331dot (talk) 14:58, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply, 331dot. I do have the personal autobiography from his production company's website that I can cite more extensively. I didn't realize that communicating with him would constitute a conflict of interest-- in fact, I thought it was best to get his permission to create the page. I'm certainly not getting paid or anything like that. RJDiogenes (talk) 19:02, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RJDiogenes A potential article subject cannot grant or deny permission for there to be a Wikipedia article about them if they meet the notability criteria. Imagine Donald Trump denying permission for an article about him.
If you do anything beyond asking someone for an image to use, such as communicating with them about the content you are going to write, that's a conflict of interest. Editors (and readers) need to know about any potential of a subject influencing article content. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I was aware that I didn't technically need his permission, it just seemed like the courteous thing to do. RJDiogenes (talk) 14:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RJDiogenes: You would be surprised just how little that guideline actually covers content-wise. It's consistently been interpreted to mean only claims no reasonable person could actually challenge due to it being part of the subject's self-identification. Religion, nationality, sexuality, etc. A good rule of thumb is "If a reasonable person could possibly challenge the claim, it needs to be sourced." Where he lives and his wife are both challengeable facts, as is his birthdate (blame Hollywood). It isn't just his awards that need sourced, it's almost everything. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for the additional information, Jéské. I reviewed a few Wiki biography pages beforehand in hopes of being prepared. Does his birthdate really need a citation. I honestly never noticed that in any of the pages I reviewed. It seems like a pretty high bar, because I can't imagine what source I could cite for something like that, especially since it would seem to conflict with Wiki's other guidelines about personal privacy. RJDiogenes (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does. Again, blame Hollywood. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I already blame them for Dial of Destiny, so why not? RJDiogenes (talk) 09:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @RJDiogenes,
I've taken a shot at improving your draft on Christopher R. Mihm, which you can see here.
From my time editing articles, it's all about finding the reliable sources first, then seeing what you can build from there. I think you can go to a handful of local news articles such as this one from the Columbus Despatch, another from the Journal Sentinel , the Topeka Capital-Journal and a terrific piece I found in the Journal "American Road". I don't think you can use anything from SaintEuphoria at all; it's simply not a reliable source, so, brutally i have removed that material. IMDB you could probably use sparingly, if it's just to confirm a film's name. Anyway, I've made a start at improving it, if you keep going along these lines, you could have a short but substantial article. Good luck! MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, the advice you've received from @Jéské Couriano and @331dot is absolutely sound. Once you've done the introduction (sometimes called the lead, or even the lede) every single sentence will need at least one reliable source.
MatthewDalhousie (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fantastic, Matthew. Thank you very much. And great job finding more citable sources-- clearly my research skills are lacking. I appreciate all the effort. RJDiogenes (talk) 14:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll offer you one outstanding search resource that you can use through your wiki account: The Wikipedia Library. Always turns up something interesting and unexpected. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing. I'll definitely bookmark that, although I think it may be a while before I meet the criteria. But thank you again. RJDiogenes (talk) 20:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:22, 12 June 2024 review of submission by Canadachoral

[edit]

I have reasons to believe this draft shouldn't have been rejected. I would like advices on how improve the draft. Canadachoral (talk) 22:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Canadachoral: It was rejected because you ignored the advice given by three previous reviewers who declined the draft. Anything Vallee says, writes, films, records, dictates, commissions, semaphores, interpretive-dances, etc. is useless for both notability and biographical claims. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_June_12&oldid=1229974021"