Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 June 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 26 << May | June | Jul >> June 28 >
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 27

[edit]

00:19:36, 27 June 2024 review of submission by MauriceAgerOfficial

[edit]
I represent Maurice Ager & we would like to update his wiki

MauriceAgerOfficial (talk) 00:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MauriceAgerOfficial: I think you've come to the wrong help desk, this is for new article drafts undergoing the AfC review process, which Maurice Ager (or for that matter, Sam Froling) isn't.
However, now that you're here, I need to tell you that you have a conflict of interest (COI), which must be disclosed before you do any further editing. I have posted a paid-editing query on your talk page, please read and respond to it. Note also that you are not allowed to edit directly articles to which your COI applies, you must instead make edit requests via the article talk page using the {{Edit COI}} template. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:09, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Livvin1

[edit]

This draft has been rejected several times. I made all necessary changes—there are quite literally no other sources I can use. He is a food influencer in which the only information I will get is from previous interviews and reliable sources (podcasts, The New York Times, Forbes etc.). All sources I've used are credible. I've seen all of these used in other wiki pages for celebs as well, so I'm not really sure why this is continually rejected. I'd really appreciate any specific help that will get this pushed through. Livvin1 (talk) 02:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Livvin1: firstly, this draft hasn't been rejected (which would mean the end of the road), only declined (which means you can resubmit, once you've addressed the decline reasons).
Secondly, what other articles may exist, and how they may be sourced, is not the point: we are assessing this draft, and that is done by reference to the currently applicable guidelines and policies, not by comparing to other articles. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
You say "interviews and reliable sources (podcasts, The New York Times, Forbes etc.)." Interviews are not independent (or usually reliable), as they are the subject talking. Podcasts aren't much better. Forbes may be reliable, but usually isn't; see WP:FORBESCON. It seems that there is something of a gap between what you consider to be an acceptable source for the purposes of establishing notability, and what three experienced reviewers (with 300,000+ edits under their collective belt) think. As it is, I'm minded to side with the latter, but note that I haven't done a proper source analysis.
If, as you say, there aren't better sources available, then it probably isn't possible to have this published. DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:41, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Virgilio lauro

[edit]

Hello, good evening. How are you? I want to thank you in advance for your time and advice.

The reason for my message is to ask about the article I am creating about the musical artist Michael Q. Trucks.

I have already made several modifications to the draft and removed all the self-references that you kindly pointed out to me. I also revised the US NAVY honors, as I suppose they have no place in a musician's profile. Additionally, I adjusted the tone of the article to be more neutral and used references from reliable sources to avoid a lack of credibility.

Could you please review if all the information and additions are correct?

I am very interested in following all the guidelines to comply with your standards.

Thank you very much once again.

Virgilio Virgilio lauro (talk) 04:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Virgilio lauro: we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk. However, having taken a quick look at your draft, the previous decline reasons are still there: it present no evidence that the subject is notable, and the whole thing is written in a promotional manner. Additionally, the referencing is wholly inadequate, eg. the entire 'Early life and education' section is unreferenced, and much of what is referenced is done so using unreliable sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes. I get it. Thank you very much for your comments. They really help me to include the necessary information to make it relevant for the platform. I appreciate your time and considerations.
Best, Virgilio Virgilio lauro (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:08, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Sumanrsb2

[edit]

This article which I have published is related to one of the popular Indian youtube and a contestor of popular OTT Show broadcasted on JIO Cinema named Bigg Boss. Allmost all the contestor have a Wikipedia page. kindly help in publishing it or help me in improving it. Allmost 100 relevant news article available on internet regarding this. Sumanrsb2 (talk) 07:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumanrsb2: Any reality show contestants - including and especially contestants on Big Brother and its variants (of which Bigg Boss is one) - need to be found notable independent of their reality show appearances due to them being designed to distort or exaggerate players' personality flaws for drama. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:15, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please define what notable means to you. having coverage in more than 50 relevant news article is not a criteria of notability ? Being contestor of a Popular OTT show is not a crtiteria for notability ? If you need I can cite all those news article related to this Sumanrsb2 (talk) 07:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sumanrsb2: the general notability guideline is given at WP:GNG, please study it carefully. That is the one that reviewers usually work to (unless there is a special guideline that applies instead).
And yes, "having coverage in more than 50 relevant news article" may prove notability, but it depends on more than just the number of sources; their quality matters just as much, as the GNG guideline makes clear. Besides, your draft does not cite 50 or 100 articles, it cites four sources (of varying quality) in total. Our job is not to go hunting for sources, that is entirely the responsibility of the draft authors and proponents; we merely review what is cited in the draft.
Having said which, please do not cite 50 or 100 articles, as that would be pure WP:REFBOMBING and as such counterproductive. Find the best 3-5 sources (per the GNG criteria), and summarise their coverage. That gives you both the appropriate content and the necessary proof of notability in one go. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:45, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done the same despite you guys nominated for deletion. Its worth for Wikipedia. Kindly approve Sumanrsb2 (talk) 09:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sumanrsb2: you're only making matters worse by creating multiple versions of this. The published article has been nominated for deletion, and rightly so. Your draft will not be approved while there is no evidence of notability, and certainly not if you don't actually submit it for review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:51, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sumanrsb2: Your only sources are a YouTube channel (no editorial oversight) and three news stories about his appearance on a Bigg Boss season. The sourcing on the version I looked at yesterday had seven Bigg Boss-focussed sources. As I said above, you need to show he is notable outside of the reality show. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being a popular Youtuber wh recently in news for Bigg Boss sensation why can't be treated as a notable personality ? There are thousand of Wiki article having no reliable coverage Sumanrsb2 (talk) 04:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't give you licence to make another one. As as I've explained before, the reason we need sources that discuss them outside of the context of the reality show is because reality television is designed to exaggerate and distort peoples' actual personalities and actions to stir up drama and create a narrative; the "reality show" version of a person is effectively no different from a character in a scripted drama and should not be considered representative of how that person is off-camera. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:16, 27 June 2024 review of submission by KBN College(Autonomous)

[edit]

I have given general information about college in vijayawada but you are saying it seems like advertising , i have been added courses they offer , infrastructure , land area etc... i think it is an information about the college

please guide if anything wrong in my page post KBN College(Autonomous) (talk) 07:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(User blocked, draft G11'd.) DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:21, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Caspal

[edit]

goodmorning, I've translated the dutch article form the Chassé Theater in Breda. the original had no references at all so when my translation was moved to draft I added different (dutch) references. now I also found some English. I have no idea what the criteria for wiki references are . the explanation in the draft description is 'to English' for me and I don't understand them. How can I summit the article about this theater to wiki. Caspal (talk) 07:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Caspal: WP:THREE gives a good rule of thumb. Note that we accept non-English sources, offline sources, and offline non-English sources, so where and in what language the source is written is irrelevant. What matters is that the sources are independent of the subject and its surrogates, discuss the subject at length, and have strong editorial oversight with competent fact-checking processes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Caspal: yes, I rather suspected it may have been a translation. You need to attribute the original article as the source, see WP:HOWTRANS.
For future reference, please bear in mind that the English-language Wikipedia has higher standards for referencing and notability than most if not all other language versions. It often happens that the sources cited in the original article are insufficient for publication here. For that reason, I would recommend that before even starting to translate, you check whether the sources meet our requirements, and if not, whether you can find more and better sources. If you cannot, then there is no point in proceeding further, as you are likely to be wasting your time and effort. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:49, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Roggenrol

[edit]

Can you review my draft, please? I don't get what's wrong with it exactly. Roggenrol (talk) 09:49, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Roggenrol: the draft was reviewed, and consequently declined, for lack of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to clarify the reason and get a more detailed answer. What do you mean exactly by lack of notability in my case? This article says too many things about this criteria. Roggenrol (talk) 09:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:17, 27 June 2024 review of submission by STContributor

[edit]

Hello,

I recently saw my submitted draft, Steptoe & Johnson, was declined and the Wikipedia article, "Steptoe LLP" was noted as the subject already existing. Steptoe & Johnson is a separate firm/entity from Steptoe LLP (even though part of their name is shared) which is why I thought the article would be helpful to distinguish the two law firms.

Can you let me know how I can make this more clear so that the article submission can be reconsidered for publication? STContributor (talk) 14:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. You can't. Because you are trying to create a duplicate of Steptoe LLP. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:21, 27 June 2024 review of submission by DhruvvMehra

[edit]

Dear Wikipedia Administrator,

I am writing to contest the speedy deletion tag placed on Draft Mindz. I believe the concerns raised under section G11 regarding promotional content can be addressed through necessary revisions to ensure compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines.

Specifically, I have edited the draft to focus on encyclopedic information about Designer Mindz, highlighting its history, services, and notable achievements in a neutral tone. The revisions aim to provide verifiable and sourced content that adheres to Wikipedia's standards.

I kindly request a review of the updated draft to reconsider its deletion. I am committed to ensuring that the page meets Wikipedia's policies on neutrality and notability.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, DhruvvMehra DhruvvMehra (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DhruvvMehra It's pure spam and will shortly be deleted. Qcne (talk) 14:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DhruvvMehra: you have been warned already against trying to use Wikipedia to promote your business. You're getting close to being blocked. You also haven't made the required paid-editing disclosure (that I can find, at least); please make that as your very next edit. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:36, 27 June 2024 review of submission by SandyTee

[edit]

what does "one of the sources is a 404" mean? SandyTee (talk) 16:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyTee: HTTP 404 = page/file not found. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:44, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Taevchoi

[edit]

Article was rejected, but I would like to argue that T-Money is notable enough for his own Wikipedia article and I urge you to reconsider. Looking at the discussion in the articles for deletion for the page that was live in 2016, I can tell that a huge concern was the absence of reliable sources. Furthermore, user Innisfree987 was trying to get in contact with the editor to help improve the page before it was deleted, but it seems they were not able to get in contact. I'd like to quote user Innisfree987, "Certainly if editor or others come back to work on it and can provide more sources, then great. Working with Dr. Dre and MTV on hiphop in the '80s is potentially a very important piece of music history; we just need the WP account of it to meet verifiability standards." I agree that the original Wikipedia article for T-Money was poorly written by a first time Wikipedia editor. As a first time editor myself, I initially thought all the article needed was more sources. Through the feedback of my peers, such as user Utopes and those at Teahouse, I realized the cadence and the integrity of the sources needed work as well. I also agree that T-Money's contribution to 80s hip-hop is rather significant to hip-hop history as a whole, especially since Original Concept was an early group signed to Def Jam. And outside of his group, he made a name for himself through hosting Yo! MTV Raps. I believe that T-Money qualifies for his own article because he meets numbers 1 and 10 of the guidelines. He is an important piece of Hip-Hop history, more specifically New York, which is the birthplace of hiphop. The sources I included in my draft are much stronger and more credible than the sources that were included in the 2016 draft. I am eager to hear your thoughts and consideration. Taevchoi (talk) 16:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, I have been working with the Teahouse members diligently for months regarding this draft, and no one ever voiced or had concerns that the draft would be rejected all together. More specifically, User Utopes was hopeful that my draft would be approved due to my improvements in the edits. The feedback I received was heavily about writing in an encyclopedic tone, which I am still learning to grasp. Thanks! Taevchoi (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Taevchoi: sorry to hear you feel (I think?) like you've been mislead. The Teahouse crowd were probably trying to encourage and guide you, but as they (many of them, at least) don't do the actual reviewing, they don't necessarily look at drafts with the same critical eye and go into the same detail as AfC reviewers do. Also, they can't foresee the future, and what a draft eventually turns into.
If you wish to appeal against the rejection, you need to approach the rejecting reviewer directly. Just be sure to build your case on policy-based arguments, pointing out clearly which notability criteria your draft meets, and what evidence supports that.
You do also have the option, given that your account is autoconfirmed, of moving the draft into the mainspace yourself, as the AfC process is in most cases voluntary. I wouldn't necessarily recommend that you do that, because there was no doubt a good reason why the draft was rejected, but it is technically an option nevertheless. Just be aware that if New Page Patrol sends the article back to drafts, or worse moves to delete it, this will make it that much more difficult to have an article on this subject accepted in the future. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, @DoubleGrazing! Appreciate your help! Taevchoi (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:02, 27 June 2024 review of submission by Seandavidfebre

[edit]

Wikipedia Support Team,

I am writing to seek guidance on publishing a new Wikipedia page for Sean Febre, an entrepreneur and podcaster known for co-founding Febre Frameworks and co-hosting the Happy Hour Holidaze podcast.

I have drafted the article and gathered reliable sources, but I want to ensure it meets Wikipedia's notability and content guidelines. Could you please provide advice on the best steps to take to get this page published?

Thank you for your assistance. Seandavidfebre (talk) 17:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Seandavidfebre: Aside from this being (almost certainly) an autobiography, anything the subject writes, says, films, commissions, semaphores, interpretive-dances, etc. is useless for notability and for biographical claims. Your "sources" are links to the homepages for his firm and his podcast. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gave 'm my incredibly helpful deletion notice. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:38, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:09, 27 June 2024 review of submission by SkibidiFarage

[edit]

why SkibidiFarage (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SkibidiFarage: Because we don't have articles on random one-off meme mutations unless they've been reported on by multiple other outlets. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok SkibidiFarage (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:25, 27 June 2024 review of submission by TheElectricEclectic

[edit]

This is a notable creative artist from The Netherlands in both music and digital communications. TheElectricEclectic (talk) 20:25, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheElectricEclectic: you don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and is awaiting deletion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:47, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_June_27&oldid=1232321687"