Help desk
< November 11	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 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.

November 12

03:49, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Elliot Duff

Elliot Duff (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Roy H. Green (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi. I would like some help on creating this Biography.

Whilst I believe that I have addressed the issue of unsourced sections (I have added over a dozen new inline citations) I am not sure what I can do about the formatted to follow the manual of style. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style

The Manual of Style is a rather long document. Can anyone provide an examples of where I could make an improvement.

Thanks.

Elliot Duff (talk) 03:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elliot Duff: I find only a few minor formatting etc. issues which wouldn't be a reason to decline this, but since you ask, here they are:

Section headings should be in Sentence case, not Initial Caps.
The first use of the title term should be bolded, ie. the person's name at the start of the lead section.
Infobox: while 'Professor' may be an honorary title, this is unlikely, in which case please remove it from the prefix param.
Infobox: per WP:INFONAT, nationality should not be used; citizenship can be shown, but only if it is reliably sourced and when it would be otherwise unclear.
Wikilinks are used normally only once for each term; now eg. University of Cambridge is linked several times.

Perhaps others spot something I've missed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have made the corrections. Elliot Duff (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:18, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Ptfestlover

Ptfestlover (talk · contribs)
- Biography (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, my recent biography draft page was rejected and the reason is cited as lacking enough references. Most of the references I cited were in non-english language news articles, in the local language of the biography's subject. Natsagdorj "George" Tserendorj is a Mongolian person and most of his supporting articles are in Mongolian and I am wondering whether the person who reviewed my page tried to even google translate the articles I cited, because they are clearly addressing the subject. The scarcity of english news articles and references shouldn't be a reason for rejection correct? Ptfestlover (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ptfestlover: presumably you mean

Courtesy link: Draft:Natsagdorj "George" Tserendorj? This draft was only declined, meaning it can be resubmitted once the decline reasons have been addressed. That reason being, lack of evidence that the subject is notable in the Wikipedia sense of the word.

Reviewers routinely assess non-English sources using the various translation tools available, and there is no reason to assume this wasn't done here. And no, citing non-English sources is not a reason to decline; they are perfectly acceptable, as long as they otherwise meet our requirements for reliability, independence, etc. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:26, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:00, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Hello124Hell0

Hello124Hell0 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Hawkeye Pictures Inc. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I would like to create this page and someone else has already created a draft for it. This draft looks good to me but it shows that it was declined. The reason for being declined listed says that the sources need to be: in- depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements), reliable, secondary and strictly independent of the subject. However, upon checking all the sources, it seems to me that they do meet these qualifications. Could you let me know what I can do to make this draft publishable? Hello124Hell0 (talk) 11:00, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hello124Hell0: taking each of the sources in the order they appear:

Primary source, does not contribute towards notability per WP:NCORP
No mention of Hawkeye
No mention of Hawkeye; also, press release = not independent
No mention of Hawkeye
No mention of Hawkeye
No mention of Hawkeye; also, primary source
No mention of Hawkeye
Only passing mention of Hawkeye

In other words, not one of the sources meets the NCORP standard. Or am I missing something here? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And of the next seven sources, only the Yahoo one isn't simply a brief mention, and even that isn't really about Hawkeye Pictures, but routine business reporting. The other six are definitely just brief mentions. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:11, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Wikimostcar

Wikimostcar (talk · contribs)
- Ramkripalyadavg YouTuber (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indian Youtuber Wikimostcar (talk) 11:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wikimostcar, I have rejected the draft as there is no indication the person is WP:NOTABLE. qcne (talk) 12:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have not edited the draft sir Wikimostcar (talk) 13:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did, so not sure why you are saying you didn't. qcne (talk) 13:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:06, 12 November 2024 review of submission by LIUCstefano03

LIUCstefano03 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:QC Terme (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I tried to add some parameters in the infobox but are not displayed probably because are unknown. How can I make them known?

LIUCstefano03 (talk) 12:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LIUCstefano03: you're using the plain infobox template, which isn't actually a template, it's a base for creating more specific infobox templates from. You should instead use one of those specific ones, such as {{Infobox company}}. Also, note that not all params are available in all infobox templates, you need to check the guidance on the template page.

That said, an infobox isn't going to make any difference to whether this draft will be accepted; it's what you might call a 'nice-to-have', an optional extra. Focus rather on demonstrating notability per WP:NCORP, and writing in a purely neutral and factual, non-promotional manner. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:53, 12 November 2024 review of submission by 365scarlet

365scarlet (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Prue Bird Disappearance (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am very surprised that it was flagged for not worthy of a Wikipedia article when it's a very high profile case in Australia. My links prove that it was covered extensively in the Melbourne News. So I'm very surprised that was flagged. And considering I just reported on the murder of a teenage girl 30 years ago, I am surprised that it could be flagged as not neutral. A website that has long articles about silly memes for this to be flagged as not credible enough seems very surprising and hurtful. And I think I deserve a second chance before I change it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Prue_Bird_Disappearance 365scarlet (talk) 12:53, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @365scarlet.

Sorry you feel hurt by the decline - it's not a rejection which means it can still be submitted after improving. Do not take it personally.

The biggest issue I have with the draft is that it is written in an unencyclopedic way- in fact I wonder if you used AI to generate parts of the text? It has the hallmarks of being AI-written, with overly flowerly prose. I think it would need re-writing from scratch in order to be written in an acceptable way. Please carefully study Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch.

As for the notability: the criteria is at Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Criminal acts. I think there is probably enough sources to make this notable, just about, so your only real issue is the tone.

Let me know if you have any questions. qcne (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I have edited the article to make it sound as neutral as possible. 365scarlet (talk) 14:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed, check the draft for more info. qcne (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:36, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Morekiranwiki

Morekiranwiki (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Gamezop (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm a beginner in creating Wikipedia pages, and I’m finding it challenging to navigate the many guidelines. I’m currently working on a draft and have been struggling to get it approved. Despite my best efforts, I’ve resubmitted the article multiple times, but it still hasn’t passed due to the following issues:

1. Reliable sources 2. Secondary sources that are independent of the subject

I’m having difficulty identifying which references specifically don’t meet Wikipedia’s guidelines. Would anyone be able to help by reviewing my references and pointing out the ones that are problematic? Direct feedback or examples of which links to remove would be incredibly helpful so I can fix these issues before my next submission.

Thank you in advance for your guidance and support!

Best regards, Morekiranwiki (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Morekiranwiki Let me give you some generic help. There are no media outlets that are of themselves red flags. What you need to look for, and this takes a bit if a nice to sniff the out are words, even in relabel media, "Announces" or "Invests" and the present tense. This is good indication of PR and Press releases. Also, the same of a similar article in different outlets is likely to be churnalism.

Examine each of your current reference es and delete the questinable ones. If you can't replace them delete the facts they purport to verify.

Read WP:PRIMARY and WP:SELFPUB. They are a direct help in this area.

That's a lot to do. So remember, if you can't find useful references you won't get the draft accepted. Don;t justresubit and hope. You need to work hard first. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:19, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Surya9634

Surya9634 (talk · contribs)
- Suraj Sharma, Owner of Rudra the humanoid robot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I want to know why this article declined? Surya9634 (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Surya9634 The answer is on your user talk page. Please read it and come back here to ask, this time politely, if you do not understand what has been said there. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:27, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry if i said something wrong well here's the error

I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted Surya9634 (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:38, 12 November 2024 review of submission by Mahmoudali123

Mahmoudali123 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:The Insight Track with Luca Allam Show (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I received feedback that my Wikipedia draft was declined due to inadequate references. Could you please guide me on how to include in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent sources? Any specific advice would be appreciated.

Thank you, Mahmoudali123 (talk) 19:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahmoudali123: this draft was declined for lack of evidence of notability. It cites only one source, a website close to the subject. No subject can establish its own notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahmoudali123 No-one is that keen on editors using copyright violating pictures, either. But that is being handled elsewhere 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mahmoudali123, we had a long discussion on the Live Chat Help channel about these two drafts - I did tell you not to re-submit for review as I didn't think Luca or his podcast are notable. qcne (talk) 21:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined with advice not to resubmit unless and until the subject is verified to be notable 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]