Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 May 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< May 19 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 21 >
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.


May 20

[edit]

00:53, 20 May 2024 review of submission by 202.152.137.58

[edit]

please help me to fix this article, thanks 202.152.137.58 (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your poorly referenced draft is more like a hagiography than a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Verifiability and the Neutral point of view are core content policies, and your draft violates both of them. Start over. Cullen328 (talk) 07:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:45, 20 May 2024 review of submission by NYSG65

[edit]

Hi, I have made several changes and edits accordingly to the Andy Gus wiki page but it was still declined. Can I get some assistance on why and what I need to do to get it published? Thanks! NYSG65 (talk) 01:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@NYSG65 the draft was not just declined, but rejected, meaning it will usually not be considered further. Like the reviewers said, most, if not all, of the sources are not independent. We cannot cite his own songs as sources, nor can we cite lyrics to the songs. The draft is also promotional in tone, with sentences such as A seasoned multi faceted entrepreneur with various business portfolios in wide array of products and services from a luxury lifestyle brand, creative agency and services, real estate and agriculture. What you "need" to do is a complete rewrite and adding multiple independent sources if you want to have it accepted. Wikipedia is not for promotion. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:07, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Karinvanderlaag

[edit]

How do i rename this draft as WP: NFILMAKER? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Karinvanderlaag. I am not sure what you mean. Why do you want to rename your draft? Qcne (talk) 11:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Karinvanderlaag: you don't; that would be completely inappropriate article name. In any case, you don't need to worry about renaming it (which is actually done by moving it), because it will be moved to its correct title anyway, if (and I do mean if) the draft is ever accepted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NFILMMAKER is the criteria that your draft needs to pass, (it currently doesn't) click on the link, paid editors are expected to know the very basics of editing here. Theroadislong (talk) 11:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the criteria and David Wicht absolutely qualifies. So why does the article keep getting turned down. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for answering Double Grazing. As you can tell I am new to this. Being insulted by the other editors is not helping. I thought that I had to re-write the article with a new submission template. I do not understand the notes given to me by Tim Trent but have now been banned from speaking to him ever again because I asked him for advice. I had no idea that this was such a hostile environment. I was asked to write these pages and knew that I would need help. All over the page it says "ask if you need help" but when one asks the help is cryptic and when one doesn't understand one gets insulted by editors like Theroadislong. I don't even know how to tag him or her on this comment, but I hope he sees it. I still do not quite understand what to do. My plan is to remove the filmography completely, cut the article down to the bare bones and keep most of my references. But, I understood that one of the main problems was that the title needed to be Film maker and not just a living person, hence my question? There are many South African producers who have done WAY less than David Wicht and many production companies who have done way less than Film Afrika who are already on Wikipedia, which is very confusing. I have not even started with my draft for Film Afrika, I was starting to get info into a kind of sandbox page with material from their website and was already threatened with deletion because it was "copied" from their website... I hadn't even published it yet!
Please can i get a clear answer as to what to do next for David Wicht's page.
I will deal the Theroadislong in my own time. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having read WP:NFILMMAKER i absolutely think DAVID WICHT qualifies. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Karinvanderlaag: with respect, it does not matter whether you think this subject is notable; it only matters what you can demonstrate through sources. (You, being a paid editor, would argue that he is notable, wouldn't you?)
Paid editing is accepted on Wikipedia, as long as it is appropriately disclosed and does not cross the border into spamming or advertising, but paid editors are largely left to their own devices. After all, why would volunteers, who give up their time freely, use their time for the benefit of those who are being paid for their contributions? I don't ask someone else to do my job for me, why would you?
As for what to do with this draft, it seems to me you've already received plenty of advice, whether you've chosen to take it or not. The main obstacle you need to over come is, you need to show that the subject meets one of our notability guidelines, either the general WP:GNG one, or the special WP:FILMMAKER one. And when I say "show", I don't mean you arguing that he does, I mean you producing acceptable evidence of that as required by these guidelines. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re: “There are many South African producers who have done WAY less than David Wicht and many production companies who have done way less than Film Afrika who are already on Wikipedia” see other stuff exists. Re: “starting to get info into a kind of sandbox page with material from their website” You cannot copy and paste content here. Re: “I will deal the Theroadislong in my own time” sounds like a threat, please read WP:NOPERSONALATTACKS.Theroadislong (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing I think Wicht will pass WP:NFILMMAKER, but not with the current draft, nor current referencing; the draft completely conceals any notability. WP:TNT is required, which is why I declined it earlier today. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:11, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Zerobrainer0

[edit]

Why can't my biography appear on search like anyone else Zerobrainer0 (talk) 11:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zerobrainer0 because Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself, it is an encyclopaedia of notable topics. You are not notable by our standards, and therefore do not merit an article at this time. Qcne (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zerobrainer0: I assume you mean this  Courtesy link: User:Zerobrainer0?
First and foremost, it hasn't been accepted for publication, so it will not show up in searches, or be indexed by third party search engines.
It is also your user page, which you shouldn't have submitted for publication in the first place. See WP:UP for what user pages are, and what you are and aren't allowed to have on them.
Note also that, per WP:AUTOBIO, we strongly discourage users from attempting to write about themselves, other than in line with the aforementioned user page guidelines. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:43, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Linexrecords

[edit]

Hi, I believe my article was correctly edited after so many reviews i corrected all the mistakes and made it perfect. Its notable. if you search the name on google its a notable person and all information was accredited by a news article. Linexrecords (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Linexrecords It has been rejected and will not proceed further. The picture is also a breach of copyright. Please read HELP:YFA 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok if you disregard the photo, everything else is correct. so allow me to re edit without the picture and publish Linexrecords (talk) 11:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. You need to start afresh 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Linexrecords no, it is not, that's why it was rejected: it doesn't meet WP:NMUSICIAN. And no, you did not 'correct all the mistakes' after 4 declines. For example, between the last decline and rejection, there were no improvements. Appearing in Google search results does not mean a topic is notable. And I did search; all that came up were websites published by himself, very little news coverage. A single source used twelve times does not establish notability. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
can you give me an example of a specific area which is not correct so i know for future Linexrecords (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, almost all of it. It's written in a very promotional tone, with sentences such as His lyrics convey messages of peace and positivity, aiming to inspire both his peers and younger listeners. If you really want this draft to be accepted, it would need a complete rewrite. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
but that comes from an article if you see nothing is elf written but taken from articles so that sentence is from the article. So would i still be wrong to include that? Linexrecords (talk) 11:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If multiple, reliable, independent sources do describe him like that, then sure. But right now, with only one source that doesn't say that, no, don't include anything like that. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This editor has been asked formally about possible paid editing on their talk page 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so is there any possibility to publish a wikepedia page about this indavidual with the current information online
i dont understand what you mean by this 'This editor has been asked formally about possible paid editing on their talk page' Linexrecords (talk) 12:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The answer is no, not right now, and likely not anytime soon. You have received 2 warnings on your talk page about paid editing. Please follow the instructions given. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a paid editor, I have started this motive to make wikepedia pages of notable people who need to be recognised on wikipedia. Linexrecords (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure... just a quick question, do the people you write about ask you to write about them? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am sourcing out people from news articles published etc. i have no conflict of interest or knowing personally of the person hence all infromation is taken from online sources such as the news article used. Linexrecords (talk) 12:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Linexrecords Please respond directly to the question on your talk page, responding here is not useful to you 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Linexrecords Read your user talk page, please. Your pattern of editing suggests that you may receive direct or indirect comp0ensation for your edits 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They've been templated to death, which isn't helpful. I've left you a note on your page explaining the issue. Our criteria for musicians is really strict. Secretlondon (talk) 12:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry i cant see the note where can i get this Linexrecords (talk) 12:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On your talk page. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:03, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Muluk muluk

[edit]

I am new here, and would appreciate help. I added a page for mathematician Steven Hurder, and it was rejected for, in particular, unclarity of notability. What are necessary and sufficient requirements for scientists to be notable enough for Wikipedia? I have read the generic notability criteria and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons but I did not find anything that discusses scientists, or other people whose works' notability can in some sense be measured. I am not aware of any publications _about_ Hurder as a person, but Hurder has publications in the top level mathematics journals including Annals and Inventiones. From looking at mathematicians currently on Wikipedia, it did not seem that the bar for accomplishments is this high, but perhaps I misunderstand the point, and notability is determined by something else. Muluk muluk (talk) 12:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To attempt to clarify, to save my time and the reviewers' time, I don't want to try to "fix" the page, before having a better understanding of whether in fact the person is actually likely to be notable with Wikipedia's definition. Muluk muluk (talk) 12:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Muluk muluk I believe the emeritus professorship is likley to pass WP:NPROF, but it requires more work to create text based upon references, and thus more references. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I did not find that page! This seems much more useful. I'll read the page later and revise if they seem to fit the criteria. Muluk muluk (talk) 12:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:25, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Hashemiteauthority

[edit]

Hi I submit this article of best my knowledge and source but still if you think this not please let me know what kind of citation i should provide and which part of the article wasn't reliable thank you Hashemiteauthority (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hashemiteauthority: The article as written tries to promote the sect/proselytise. We don't accept promotional content. ("It reads like an advertizement" is almost always a criticism of the writing; sources play very little role in that.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:28, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Factsofpolitics

[edit]

fixed all the issues Factsofpolitics (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Factsofpolitics. I have rejected the draft and it won't be considered further. Sorry, I do not see how she is notable. If you think you can prove notability under WP:NPEOPLE, let me know. Qcne (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the political landscape, Mahnoor Ahmad is a notable figure. As a first-time candidate, she broke new ground by running in a district that has historically been represented by white men, and she was the first to run as a true Democrat in this district. Her candidacy was not only groundbreaking but also historic, as she would have been the first American Pakistani to serve in Congress if elected. Ahmad plans to run again in 2026 and is poised to continue her impactful campaign. She was recognized as the most competitive challenger, not only in Illinois but also on a national scale. Factsofpolitics (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ahmad was the only candidate in her district to ever run a campaign that was 100% people-funded, without a dime from corporations or special interest groups. Ahmad's commitment to grassroots funding makes her the future of democracy, especially in light of Ro Khanna's proposed bill to ban congressional candidates from accepting money from corporations or special interest groups. Factsofpolitics (talk) 17:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Factsofpolitics: Cut the campaign speeches. What is your connexion to Ahmad's campaign? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Factsofpolitics that's a long pointless speal which does not prove notability. Notability is proved through significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Qcne (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(While WP:NPOL would potentially apply here, simply being a candidate for office doesn't help meet it.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:29, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Hcdmdigital

[edit]

Hi, a couple of years ago I tried to create a page for the asset management Kernow Asset Management (I work with them on their marketing).

It was rejected because it wasn't sufficiently notable - ie did not have enough independent news articles about the company, and also contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia - I think perhaps because I have an affiliation with the company. Now that a couple of years have passed the company has received more independent news coverage and I'm hoping to resubmit. I believe it has a place on Wikipedia, to fit among the asset management companies listed on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_asset_management_firms

If anyone could advise on the application and how I can best go about it to ensure I respect Wikipedia's rules and guidelines, I'd be very grateful. I'm not looking to submit any impartial information, just to have the company listed among its contemporaries (the firm is on the list of external fund managers backed by Norges Bank Investment Management).

Thanks so much in advance. Hcdmdigital (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that should be 'I'm not looking to submit any biased/non-impartial information'! Hcdmdigital (talk) 14:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Hcdmdigital. Thanks for making the paid editing declaration- that is the right thing to do. I would recommend closely reading our notability guidelines on organisations. Can you prove that Kernow Asset Mngmt meets the criteria there? If so, go ahead and create a new draft. I'd be happy to have a look at it before you submit it for review.
Some things to watch:
- do not rely on churnalism or re-gurgitated press releases, they are useless for establishing notability.
- we are not interested in what the company has to say about itself, but instead what other people independent of the company have to say about it.
- watch out for WP:PEACOCK words and have a look at WP:SOLUTIONS too.
- as a marketing professional you are going to have difficulty writing neutrally, as writing for Wikipedia is very different from writing for a company. The best advice is to only summarise/paraphrase what those existing reliable independent sources state about the company with absolutely no additions. Pretend it is an autopsy report.
Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 14:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne, thanks so much for your advice, that's really helpful. Will carefully read the notability guidelines and put up a draft using your notes - will definitely take you up on your offer to review before I submit. Thanks! Hcdmdigital (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just ping me on my Talk Page :) Qcne (talk) 15:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Hcdmdigital, just to add to Qcne's excellent advice - you've linked a list of asset management firms, and one thing that editors often get wrong is using a couple of random similar articles to base theirs on. This can be a terrible idea because in the older days of en-Wiki, just about any article was approved, and many of them have not been seriously looked at since, so they are not good examples to use. I think for your purposes, WikiProject Finance & Investment might be the most relevant WikiProject - have a look at some of their listed Featured Articles (FA; the highest quality on Wikipedia) or Good Articles (GA; a strong second-highest quality). A couple I found that might be useful for you as they seem to be similar companies: Apollo Global Management; Bridgewater Associates; International Finance Corporation (all GAs). The WikiProject may also have some resources for you, along with editors with an interest in this subject. Good luck and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @StartGrammarTime that's really helpful! Will take a look at those articles and the WikiProject as well. Hcdmdigital (talk) 08:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:36, 20 May 2024 review of submission by AlexandreMaximePatrick

[edit]

Hi,

please kindly send me why my article is declined? thank you AlexandreMaximePatrick (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the reasons stated in the big boxes at the top of the draft. It has not been demonstrated that he is notable. Along the other reasons of being a bad machine translation and highly promotional in tone. So much so I have tagged it for deletion. If you are going to write about this topic on the English Wikipedia please ensure your English skills are sufficient and read through Wikipedia:YFA. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:40, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Edenroberts4w

[edit]

how to add pictures to the article ? 

Edenroberts4w (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how to add pictures to the draft? Edenroberts4w (talk) 15:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Edenroberts4w. Pictures are not important in the draft stage. What is important is the policy of neutrality and the notability criteria for people.
As you can see your draft has been marked for speedy deletion as it has been written inappropriately. You also have no proper in-line citations. If you start again with the draft, please closely read the above two links and follow the referencing tutorial at WP:INTREFVE.
Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Edenroberts4w: You don't, and this is still promotional to the point I am tagging it for deletion. Your content is still not properly cited and still primarily on one event (the articles about SeedReaps are of zero help as anything they say about Karthik comes directly from his own mouth). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:23, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Dafea23

[edit]

I have had an article on a professional female footballer rejected. Despite adding numerous new sources as requested it was again rejected. My issue is that the footballer was then contacted directly on Instagram by a company who knew of the rejection and offered to help with it. This is highly suspicious behaviour, and possibly exploitation and extortion of the system. The company is Gloster media and I suspect they are connected with the reviewers of the wikipedia page. Dafea23 (talk) 16:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dafea23: I guarantee you they aren't. It's unfortunately very common for scammers to troll the AfC category for potential marks. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re-signing to ping. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:30, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Goodfellow12

[edit]

I am not able to understand, if my references are less or my citations are not done properly. because doctor who's wiki i'm writing is very famous in india and one of the top nephrologists in India's Capital. Goodfellow12 (talk) 16:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Goodfellow12 They prove that Verma exists. They do not show whether he passes WP:BIO, which you must prove.
For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
Please do not upload pictures you find online. They are copyright by someone else. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the detailed explanation :) Goodfellow12 (talk) 14:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:07, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Rcferdon

[edit]

I am being told that my topic does not have reliable sources, but this topic is referenced by the United States Coast Guard. How much more reliable and independent can you get than that?

Please let me know more about what I need to do to get an approval.

Thank you, RC Rcferdon (talk) 17:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rcferdon: The Coast Guard cannot help for notability (gov't document). The only usable cite you have is an incomplete one to a book, I wanna say? Use {{cite book}} (we need title, author, year of publication, publisher, page numbers being cited, and either the ISBN or OCLC#). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rcferdon I used to own and run a fishing charter boat. I see this as a WP:DICDEF. I'm not at all sure what one can write about it as an article. I'm happy if you succeed. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:12, 20 May 2024 review of submission by YakMeat

[edit]

First time trying to submit an article, need help clarifying review. The two notes left on the article are that it reads more like an advertisement, and that the references do not meet the criteria. I agree that the article was written with a non-neutral point of view at points, which I will correct soon, however the second point isn't clear to me. Would the organization in charge of maintaining a park be considered an independent source when reporting on the park? Particularly when reporting objective facts, such as the length of a trail or the number of species seen, would the organization be a fair source? YakMeat (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@YakMeat: No, it would not. We do not consider any entity with a significant connexion to the subject to be independent of them. The government sources also do not help for notability. Reference 3 is incomplete (page numbers). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, just trying to clarify because I am new to this, but would these sources then have to be removed entirely to qualify the article? Or would they just have to be backed up by further independent sources? I guess my question would be: Would the article be automatically ineligible as long as these sources are listed on the references in any capacity? YakMeat (talk) 18:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can certainly keep the sources you've already got to cite various bits of the article, but what we need is to prove that the park is notable. We do that by seeing significant coverage of the park in multiple (usually at least three) independent reliable published sources.
The only source that comes close to that is the Allendale Historical Society ones - though not sure how reliable they are. The rest of your sources are not independent of the park.
So: two or three sources, all independent, all reliable, all secondary that provide significant coverage. It could be travel magazines or websites giving a review, research articles documenting the flora/fauna, books discussing the history, etc. Qcne (talk) 18:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for clarifying! YakMeat (talk) 18:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps I think there's a good start to an article here. I'd be minded to cut down some of the content to make it a little more concise, sticking to the relevant facts. There isn't that much in the way of non-neutral language, but it might be worth reading WP:PEACOCK for words to avoid. Qcne (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I think there is enough out there for the article to be warranted, I just needed to know a little more about some of the specifics regarding sourcing but I will continue to work on it. YakMeat (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@YakMeat: To answer that, I'll ask you to read over my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques") before you read the following:
What we're looking for is in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly articles that discuss The Celery Farm at length, are written by identifiable authors, and subjected to rigourous fact-checking and editorial processes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, the critiques page is very helpful YakMeat (talk) 18:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:16, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Yusofsheikh

[edit]

Singham_Lottery_Sambad Yusofsheikh (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yusofsheikh: you haven't asked a question, but your draft is pending speedy deletion for being promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:43, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Anne Ekwueme

[edit]

Please I'd like to know why the page User: Anne Ekwueme was deleted and how to prevent that from happening again.

Thank you Anne Ekwueme (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Ekwueme: We don't allow promotional content, and your userpage isn't a place to promote yourself. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thank you. Anne Ekwueme (talk) 20:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:17, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Briannemartindale

[edit]

i need help i am translating pages from french spanish german and italian into english many of the pages have non english sources or dont have any at all i am working on history and biography on nobility and royalty i keep getting my translated pages rejected for no sources and need help https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautier_Ier_de_Brienne is the first page i translated into english and got rejected for only having 1 source that i took from the french page thanks Briannemartindale (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Briannemartindale: Different Wikipedia projects have different sourcing, notability, etc. standards, and the English-language Wikipedia is one of the stricter ones. Straight translations will often need additional or different sources in order to work in en.wp, doubly so if WP:Biographies of living persons is implicated. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i try to look on google for sources that are not genealogy sites and have a hard time many times Briannemartindale (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Briannemartindale: We accept offline sources, if those are available (and will also accept offline sources that aren't in English). You would just need to properly cite them with {{cite news}} or {{cite book}}. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 20:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i have found google scholar and added sources/ references to the page and re submited thanks Briannemartindale (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:26, 20 May 2024 review of submission by 37.99.126.19

[edit]

Dear participants, I have provided reliable sources. Please check my article carefully. 37.99.126.19 (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews are not performed on request. I see your draft has been rejected. It will not proceed further 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:35, 20 May 2024 review of submission by Juliepersonne2

[edit]

Hi! My draft has been rejected for being "Close but not quite enough independent, significant coverage." and a message has been left on my talk page to ask why here.
If it's a request to have more english-USA sources, it's about a korean content that wasn't really covered by US media even if it's highly viewed on Amazon Prime. I've seen that non-english sources can be added in such cases. I've been careful to only add sources considered as reliabled (there was a help page that listed them but I can't find it anymore) or at least weren't blacklisted by Wikipedia (that's the reason why I didn't covered the "developpement" section since I didn't have any ref to add).
As for coverage, BTS V being the most-viewed K-pop idol on Wikipedia since 2015, I think people can be interested by this article. The article includes filming, casting and promotion informations in a detached way as well as basic information about the show (summary, air date...). It is also related to other wikipedia pages about the same franchise (eg Youn's Kitchen) or other related programming (eg. The game carterers).

I hope all these informations help you see how I understood the note and why I don't understand the rejection.

Thank you for your time and assistance. Juliepersonne2 (talk) 20:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Juliepersonne2. It's totally okay to have Korean-language sources. What we need is sources that are totally independent from the cast/crew/production of the TV show. Not interviews, PR statements, etc. We also need significant coverage so not brief regular coverage, but in-depth reviews/analysis/discussion/commentary. Qcne (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick answer @Qcne. I think the sources of the draft respect what you said as they are mainly just press articles...? Could you show me an example of where I should have add another type of source? I took example of pages like NCIS: Sydney, NCIS (TV Series) and Youn's Kitchen to make sure it was alright. I think for the coverage page then it refers to "reception" section. It only seems to miss the ratings numbers but since it's in korean I have a hard time reading them^^. Do I still understand wrong? Juliepersonne2 (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again @Juliepersonne2. The indiatoday.in and koreatimes.co.kr articles are great. The pinkvilla.com source doesn't load for me anymore- do you have an alternative link? I think just one more source that is like indiatimes/koreatimes and I'd be able to accept. Qcne (talk) 08:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Qcne! I haven't found an alternative link in reliable english site sadly, so I have replaced it by a korean one. I also added complementary infos with english seemingly reliable sources such as hindustantimes. Hope it is enough to be approved so maybe other users (including anons) with additional infos could help. Thank you again for your time and help! Juliepersonne2 (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Juliepersonne2, I think that's acceptable now. Before I accept, could you find a source for the Promotion section? Qcne (talk) 17:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Qcne, I found a korean one; it's about content posted on YouTube so hard to find an english one. Juliepersonne2 (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accepted :) Qcne (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! I'll keep in my the infos you gave me for my next projects. Have a nice week! Juliepersonne2 (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_May_20&oldid=1225673234"