Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 March 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< March 20 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 22 >
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.


March 21

[edit]

03:46, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Mitsubishi2

[edit]

Please assist on EBC Financial Group Draft page, I have added some sources into the article Mitsubishi2 (talk) 03:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mitsubishi2: this draft has been deleted as promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:37, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Wallaby5312

[edit]

I am a new Wikipedia contributor and want to have this Article published for a living person. I keep running into obstacles. It is not clear exactly what is needed. Can you please assist with getting this Article published. Thank you! Wallaby5312 (talk) 04:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wallaby5312: the decline notice gives the reasons why this was not accepted, and they are the things you need to focus on rectifying; namely:
  1. You have to demonstrate that the subject is notable, either by the general WP:GNG guideline or one of the special ones such as WP:ENTERTAINER; and
  2. The information must be supported by inline citations throughout.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:04, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Farlandodiengdoh

[edit]

There are many colleges and universities that are approved for page creation with just similar number of reference as provided for this same one Farlando Diengdoh (talk) 07:04, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Farlandodiengdoh: never mind what other articles may exist; we don't assess new drafts by comparing them to existing articles, but rather by referring to the applicable policies and guidelines. For any sort of organisation, we need to see significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. Your draft cites no such source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you'll just reject because there is no secondary source? Farlando Diengdoh (talk) 07:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Farlandodiengdoh: this hasn't been rejected, so far at least, only declined. But yes, secondary sources are required in most cases to establish notability, which is a core requirement for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. And Wikipedia articles by and large are written by summarising what reliable and independent secondary sources have previously said, from which it follows that if no such sources are available, it isn't possible to summarise them, and therefore isn't possible to have a Wikipedia article published. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many articles exist that likely should not. That an article exists does not mean that it was approved by anyone. Specifically regarding colleges, early in Wikipedia history the mere existence of a college was sufficient to merit it an article, but that is no longer the case, they are treated like any other topic. 331dot (talk) 12:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:05, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Rrgilko

[edit]

I'm publishing my content for my college (RR Group of Institutions), and after submitting it gets rejected every time. Please help me publish my content for college. Rrgilko (talk) 08:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rrgilko: promotion is not allowed on Wikipedia, and your draft has been twice declined and deleted as promotional. You are probably getting close to being blocked for spamming. I notice that you have also not responded to the conflict of interest query posted on your talk page 24 hrs ago; please do so as your very next edit. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:27, 21 March 2024 review of submission by 103.134.3.118

[edit]

How to improve submission so that it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines? 103.134.3.118 (talk) 09:27, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't, rejection means that resubmission is not possible at this time. If you are the editor of the draft, remember to log in when posting.
You have claimed the logo of the company as your own personal work(if you are the editor). If you work for the company, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, see WP:PAID(as well as your user talk page). You have made the logo available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution- something your company may not want to do. Logos are typically uploaded to this Wikipedia locallly under "fair use" rules. This does carry some restrictions(such as being unable to be used in a draft) but would permit a logo to be in an actual article. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:23, 21 March 2024 review of submission by 2A02:A31E:401E:B600:5410:B723:5FEF:BBEA

[edit]

I though interviews with Tarlachan would be enough of a reliable source for the article. I did a lot of research looking for shows he played, Youtube videos of him playing, interviews, mentions and I don't really understand why the sources I put in the article are not enough. 2A02:A31E:401E:B600:5410:B723:5FEF:BBEA (talk) 10:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews are a primary source and do not establish notability(they can be used for other purposes, but not that). You must have sources that discuss this person in depth on their own and not based on an interview, showing how they meet either the narrow definition of a notable musician or the broader definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:32, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Ascenzio C. Mangi

[edit]

Hello, my submission was declined, but i don't know when i didn't use a formal tone, i think i used a formal tone and a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Could I have more specific words? Thanks Ascenzio C. Mangi (talk) 11:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EG “Passionate about author's music, he has undertaken a very particular journey since 1995” “Passionate about dialectology and lexicography” doesn’t sound very neutral and encyclopaedic. Theroadislong (talk) 12:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:57, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Momo.Cnm

[edit]

Hello,

thanks for your feedback. I already edited the requested points and insert the correct quotes for the two sections. Do I need to do something else that the article can be published?

All the best Moritz Momo.Cnm (talk) 11:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would note that you claim that the logo of the Foundation as your own personal work; if that's so, fine. If you didn't personally create it, you will need to go to Commons and adjust the copyright to indicate that the Foundation has released the logo for use by anyone for any purpose with attribution.
If you feel you have addressed the concerns of reviewers, you may resubmit the draft; we don't do pre-review reviews. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not seeing any independent sources at all? We have zero interest in what their own website says. Theroadislong (talk) 12:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:37, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Rrgilko

[edit]

please help me to approve my content Rrgilko (talk) 12:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was rejected, it is blatant advertising not an encyclopaedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 12:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article Declination

[edit]

I am Writing an article of any particular subject with reliable sources but further it gets decline, Can anyone tell me whats the main reason of these decline, and also is their any minimum Requirement for cite source or any minimum article length... Please check and tell me here Thanks Kashmirian-21th (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that this editor has been blocked as a sock. StartGrammarTime (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:03, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Jacobogbona

[edit]

i wrote an article about Princess Joy Osifo and i have gotten 2 rejections. please i need help, have been trying since January. HELP!!! Jacobogbona (talk) 13:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:11, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Jeanvaljeanjacket

[edit]

I would like some help understanding how to prove Betsy's notability in her field, and how to balance her national recognition in various news outlets with the risk of sounding like a vanity project. Thank you so much! Jeanvaljeanjacket (talk) 13:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the replies to your message yesterday(please keep further replies in this section). What is your connection to her? You took her picture and she posed for you. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am passionate about the climate world and chose to write this about a leader in the field. She sent me the photo of herself when I asked. You said I have too many sources – what is the typically accepted number? Do you have advice for any specific sections I should remove? (Thanks for replying here – i forgot to scroll up to read your earlier reply, sorry.) Jeanvaljeanjacket (talk) 13:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you didn't take the image, you cannot claim it as your own work. The easiest way to include this image would be for you to request the deletion of the copy you uploaded and ask her, if she owns the copyright(typically the photographer does) to upload it herself or ask the photographer to.
Images are not relevant to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. Images can wait until the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia.
The reviewer left you a very good comment on the draft as to what is being looked for- independent reliable sources that give her significant coverage and tell what they see as important/significant/influential about her. You have just documented her work and accomplishments. 331dot (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rejection typically means the draft will not be considered further; if something fundamentally changes about the draft, like a total rewrite with acceptable sources, you will need to appeal to the last reviewer. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:09, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Phenomenon 10

[edit]

Clarity on types of acceptable references Phenomenon 10 (talk) 15:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Phenomenon 10: as it says in the decline notice, we need to see "significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject", and we need multiple (3+) such sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
Thank you for that reply DoubleGrazing. Here's my question in detail:
I wrote an article on an expert internationally acclaimed in his field of work. I understand why the article was rejected. Before I resubmit, please help me solve this quandary. While I can source additional published materials (significant and independent), the bulk of the expert sources affirming his professional reputation are formal letters of commendation from the government agencies he trains. These are letters submitted to the subject personally. They are available for view on his website, but, to source them, would be to source a non-independent source (his website). How might I source these letters of commendation so that they may be included in the wikipedia article as sufficiently reliable, secondary, independent sources? For example, if my article claims the subject directly trains top-tier western government military forces, and the training of those forces is proof of a professional biography worthy of inclusion within the wikipedia universe, and those same agencies write letters of commendation to the subject, but the letters are privately sent, and then featured on the subject's website, what is the way to utilize this information so that it is considered "significant coverage"?
Thanks! :) Phenomenon 10 (talk) 15:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Phenomenon 10: sources must be published, which these letters aren't, by the sound of it. As such, they do not establish notability, or even contribute to it. Notability has a very specific definition in the Wikipedia context, it basically means that the subject has been covered in reliable and independent secondary sources, hence why such sources are required for acceptance into Wikipedia. Notability does not mean being famous, or important, or the first to do X, or the best at Y, or anything of that ilk; or, indeed, "professional reputation" or "train[ing] top-tier western government military forces". HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. Now I understand. Thank you, again. :) Phenomenon 10 (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have another question: What is the general opinion on the suitability of podcast interview, where the article subject is the main guest, as appropriate, published, notability-establishing contribution to an article as a citation source? Thank you. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Phenomenon 10: interviews (in any format) are considered primary sources. Furthermore, many publishes/broadcasters don't apply their usual fact-checking and editorial oversight measures to them, making interviews potentially non-reliable, also. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you DoubleGrazing. Phenomenon 10 (talk) 11:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:08, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Noble banji

[edit]

I was told that the article is not recognized but the camp is known all over the country, what can I do to make it recognized? Noble banji (talk) 16:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Noble banji: this draft has been rejected for lack of notability, and will therefore not be considered further. There is nothing you can do to conjure up notability where it does not exist. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:25, 21 March 2024 review of submission by Academic9217

[edit]

First, the article is not a promo, could you explain why it is flagged as such? I have edited other notable biographies no Wikipedia, and I am just confused about the promo flag.

Second, notability. There is no shortage of notable references for this individual. I have read and familiar with Wikipedia notability criteria. What gets flagged here as insufficient references for notability? I deleted most of Haruvy's references from my previous submission, and replaced with outside references that highly recognized. I am just confused.

Thanks!!!! Academic9217 (talk) 17:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You say he was cited in court cases, but that means little in terms of notability unless you have independent reliable sources that discuss his influence or importance which led to his being cited. It was considered promotional because it does little more than tell of his activities and accompishments, without coverage that discusses what is important/significant/influential about him. 331dot (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_March_21&oldid=1215778600"