Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 November 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< November 5 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 7 >
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 6

[edit]

03:23, 6 November 2024 review of submission by 47.237.131.47

[edit]

Sorry, can you please explain why applied cryptography topics such as provably fair and Bitzino are contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia? 47.237.131.47 (talk) 03:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How much of your sources are actually about Bitzino? Also, WP:GS/CRYPTO is still a thing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 03:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:59, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Zhiminy

[edit]

Thanks for your feedback.

I am wondering what types of materials are needed to be included in wikipedia since this character's PhD student - Foutse Khomh is also listed in wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foutse_Khomh. Thus, I think he might deserve a wikipedia page based on his contributions to software engineering in the last few decades, particularly he pioneered and recreated the domain of mining software repositories, as found in another wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_software_repositories. Zhiminy (talk) 05:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zhiminy: I would say there's a good likelihood this would be acceptable; please submit it for review. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, take that back – seems this has been reviewed several times already, and rejected. (Please don't remove AfC templates from earlier reviews.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok, but this is the recent conversation happening in the wikipedia-en-help. Someone mentions it is worth a wikipage and I have fixed the issues accordingly. Zhiminy (talk) 06:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think there is something missing? Zhiminy (talk) 06:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zhiminy: The draft has not changed since it was rejected yesterday except for the removal of one sentence ([1] current version compared to rejected version)), so the same objections still apply. Rejection means that the draft can no longer be resubmitted. Reviewers can only evaluate the draft as-is, not based on what someone may have said in a different help forum. If Hassan was the PhD supervisor of somebody who has since become notable, that has no bearing on Hassan's notability. --bonadea contributions talk 10:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know the background to this, so may well be poking something that shouldn't be poked, but: a Fellow of IEEE and ACM, recipient of the Mustafa Prize, with h-index of 101... if I came across this draft, I'd pretty much accept it without second thought. What am I missing? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: I had a similar reaction, so asked the rejecting reviewer on their talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 11:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing. This guy is obviously notable. -- asilvering (talk) 06:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:39, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Zhiminy

[edit]

Anything else that are needed from my side? Zhiminy (talk) 06:39, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zhiminy: Please don't start new threads about the same submission unless the previous thread has been archived. I have changed the heading for this section to combine it with your previous thread. --bonadea contributions talk 10:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:57, 6 November 2024 review of submission by MarsLbee

[edit]

Why exactly was my article declined? Is it too short or do I have to refer to more sources? I have tried making edits but it didn't work. I am open to suggestions to get the article published since I believe this person is becoming more and more important. He and his Company also appear in other Wikipedia pages. Can it help to refer to them too? MarsLbee (talk) 07:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft does little more than document this person's work. It doesn't summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how he is a notable person. You seem to be saying that he's notable because he makes guitars for notable people; notability is not inherited by association. If you have sources that describe why notable people choose to purchase his guitars, that would help.
That he is mentioned in other articles contributes nothing to notability. 331dot (talk) 10:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:24, 6 November 2024 review of submission by LL1ghtOfHeaveNN

[edit]

Hello, I had my submission rejected to have a page up about a game: MagicCraft I provided independent article that actually shows objective opinion on the game as it also highlights its weaknesses. What can I do to improve the article and be listed? thank you LL1ghtOfHeaveNN (talk) 10:24, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LL1ghtOfHeaveNN I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion when linking to it. Your draft does little more than say it is available on Steam and describing the game. It needs to summarize what multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the game, showing how it is notable. For games that usually involves reviews by professional reviewers. You say you have one, but I don't see it in the draft. One wouldn't be enough anyway. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:07, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Adityaksingh409

[edit]

I Created this Page for an indian musical artist named alfaaz and i want to be published this page as everyone contribute to this page for page betterment as this page deserves to published and some lime time for others to contribute to this page as a support to the artist Adityaksingh409 (talk) 11:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adityaksingh409: please see the responses you received about this draft, in your thread above (Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#16:03, 4 November 2024 review of submission by Adityaksingh409). ––bonadea contributions talk 11:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:45, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Kkkksuraj

[edit]

Why this article is not appearing in Google search? Kkkksuraj (talk) 13:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kkkksuraj: I've no idea. Whether and when search engines index our pages is up to them. All we can do is publish the page and allow indexing (which is the case here), they will then index it as and when. Given that this is a new article, it probably just takes a bit more time. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:36, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Charlieevo2001

[edit]

I'm looking for help here as I'm unsure what extra references we can add to make this more reliable.

Any advice Charlieevo2001 (talk) 14:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlieevo2001: the sources cited in this draft don't show that the subject is notable. We need to see multiple (3+) secondary sources that are reliable and independent, and provide significant coverage of the subject. None of the sources meets this standard. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Charlieevo2001. It's not a matter of making the draft more reliable. It's a matter of establishing that there is enough independent reliable sources available to base a Wikipedia article on - remembering that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
See also WP:AMOUNT. ColinFine (talk) 15:17, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:28, 6 November 2024 review of submission by Bolutemi

[edit]

Hello, I wrote an article about a Nigerian Politician which has a significant number of coverage which in most cases were negative and I wrote everything exactly as were reported on various blogs. It has been deemed not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia, how do I make the article improve to be notable for inclusion on Wikipedia? Bolutemi (talk) 15:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bolutemi: given that Mustapha Salihu is the version in the main article space, and has been taken to AfD for discussion to determine its future, that is the version you want to be editing if you wish to improve its prospects. The draft you're pointing to is effectively redundant now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for this. I wrote the Draft:Mustapha Salihu first which felt like it was never properly reviewed but was always declined almost immediately I submitted for review. Then went on to write the aticle Mustapha Salihu, which I have no idea how it's gotten to the main space, I never got to submit for review, the button to click "sumbit' wasn't provided when i was done writing. Then I return back to the draft that's always been declined to see if I could improve it. How are they getting to review the Mustapha Salihu article which I never had the chance to 'submit' for review at all after I was done writing? Bolutemi (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bolutemi: Draft:Mustapha Salihu was reviewed seven times, by six different reviewers – are you saying these reviews were never carried out "properly"? That's quite a claim; presumably you have solid evidence to back this up?
And Mustapha Salihu got into the main space because you created it directly there. I presume that was the final draw, which then caused the earlier draft to be rejected outright.
Anyway, this is no longer an AfC matter, since the article has been published and remains (for now) live. If you wish to take part in the AfD discussion, you can do so at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustapha Salihu. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm in no way saying the reviews were never carried out correctly. I apologize if the tone of my statement conveyed that claim. What I meant was that all my submissions were declined based on not being sufficiently notable, even after I provided more references to prove the subject's notability. I'm simply trying to understand what more I can provide to demonstrate the subject's significance. I included 17 references in the article, so I'm seeking insights into how I can further strengthen the case for notability. Bolutemi (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bolutemi: I'm baffled why you felt the need to recreate this in the main article space when you had been repeatedly told there was insufficient evidence of notability, but I guess you must do what you think is right.
Notability doesn't depend on the quantity of sources, but rather their quality; 17 flaky sources won't establish notability, but three solid ones will. If this person hasn't been elected to a national or state level legislative assembly, he won't qualify automatically under WP:NPOL. You therefore need to find three sources that clearly and indisputably satisfy the WP:GNG standard. Importantly, they must provide significant coverage of this person, whereas most of the sources in this article seem to deal with his suspension and related matters. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:11, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know i was creating the article in the mainspace. The draft i submitted for review was nominated for deletion at the time, prompting me to conduct further research. I discovered additional coverage from independent blogs that were not related to his suspension from office. I updated the draft with this new information, but it was subsequently deleted. I tried searching for the draft so i could re-edit but was unable to find it then I searched for the subject on Wikipedia. The search results indicated that no article existed for the topic. Wikipedia suggested that I create a new article about Mustapha Salihu. I clicked the name after Wikepedia suggested i write on what i searched for (mind you this was the same process on how i started the draft article so i didn't expect anything to be different), I wasn't expecting anything to be different, I expected to get the 'submit' button after i was done writing so it would be reviewed. As a new Wikipedia contributor, I may have made some mistakes during this process. I assure you that I did not intentionally publish the article in the mainspace Bolutemi (talk) 16:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. That's not the timeline I'm seeing, but never mind that. Going forward, if you wish to save the published article, you need to take part in the ongoing AfD discussion; no good will come of discussing it here now that it's out of our hands. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bolutemi you will wish to make a policy based argument to keep the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustapha Salihu. All the discussion above this is now in the past. We need to deal with the present. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:26, 6 November 2024 review of submission by PoetMsabid

[edit]

hi i am a writer and i want to create a page on Wikipedia i don't know why i rejected PoetMsabid (talk) 21:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PoetMsabid Wikipedia is not social media. WIth the greatest respect, it has no interest in the desire to publicise yourself. What you need is a web site, or a social media site. In a Wikipedia sense you lack notability. You cannot pass WP:NPOET, or you dd not show yourself to pass it. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I understand, and I already have a profile on Google and other platforms. I've been working in this field for 20 years, and many singers have performed my songs. I’m interested in creating a biography on Wikipedia—not as a form of social media, but to document my contributions and work in poetry and songwriting. PoetMsabid (talk) 21:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PoetMsabid, I think you are missing the point. You don't pass WP:NPOET, it seems, which explains why your draft was rejected. You can not use this platform to document your contributions; that's what a web hosting platform is for. Drmies (talk) 21:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy to revise the draft to ensure it includes reliable, independent sources that demonstrate my work's impact. If there are specific criteria or types of sources you would recommend focusing on, please let me know. Thank you for your guidance. PoetMsabid (talk) 21:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PoetMsabid Revise the draft with pleasure. I will talk to you about sources on your talk page 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your I’ll get started on revising the draft. I'll make sure to include any relevant sources that establish notability. I’ll look forward to discussing it with you further on my talk page. PoetMsabid (talk) 21:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_November_6&oldid=1256907396"