Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 October 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 9 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 11 >
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.


October 10

[edit]

08:27, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Cjenkinson75

[edit]

Hi there,

Can you help me with this page? It needs to be changed to Carrie Jenkinson and needs to be updated correctly. Someone was doing it for me but they have not bed. Successful in setting it up. And help would be much appreciated Cjenkinson75 (talk) 08:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cjenkinson75 I fixed your post to properly link to your draft(you need the "Draft:" portion). The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. The specific title of a draft is not particularly relevant, if accepted, it would have been placed at the proper title by the reviewer, but that's academic now. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves(either directly or via a representative), please see the autobiography policy. Your representative needs to formally disclose their relationship, they need to see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 08:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked your representative as they failed to respond to numerous inquiries. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto Draft:Carrie Jenkinson. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:08, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Wiki's Slash

[edit]

I am requesting assistance because i needed the outmost review for this article, as Mayor Carmelo "Pogi" Lazatin Jr. is currently running as Pampanga's First District Representative for the 2025 Midtern Election, and I wanted to see if it is possible to approve this to have a better information regarding Mayor Pogi Lazatin. Wiki's Slash (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki's Slash: we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk; also, Wikipedia has no interest in supporting someone's political or other career. I think you'll have to just wait until a reviewer comes along to assess this draft.
I will give you a piece of advice, though: you haven't exactly encouraged a quick review by WP:REFBOMBING this draft. For example the 'Lazatin and city's awards and citations' section (which arguably shouldn't be there at all) has 27 citations, most if not all of which are unnecessary. You might want to reconsider that, and your approach to referencing more generally. Most reviewers prefer to see a small number of solid sources which clearly establish notability, rather than dozens of flaky ones which may or may not do, and which take a lot of effort to sift through. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no way to ensure a speedy review; we have no deadlines here. Wikipedia is not a voter guide.
He doesn't seem to meet WP:NPOL. He is currently a mayor, but local office isn't sufficient unless there is significant press coverage of him, usually from outside his local area. You would need to show he meets WP:BIO more broadly. The awards are meaningless for notability as they lack articles themselves(like Nobel Peace Prize). 331dot (talk) 09:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:41, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Raghad Alhawali

[edit]

What should I do for my article to be accepted? Raghad Alhawali (talk) 09:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Raghad Alhawali: first, you need to disclose your relationship with this subject and/or the GUST university.
Then, you need to be able to write in a neutral, factual manner. Expressions like "his impactful tenure" and "Alameddine's academic credentials are extensive and diverse, underpinning his substantial contributions to higher education" are absolutely not appropriate for an encyclopaedia.
You also need to support the draft properly. Currently the vast majority of the content is unreferenced, which is wholly unacceptable in an article on a living person. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rejected typically means that there is nothing you can do. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. If, however, you can fundamentally change the draft to address the concerns, you may then appeal to the last reviewer. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I work as a web admin at GUST university, Prof. Bassam is our president. We need to create a website content for him since we're editing GUST content on Wikipedia. Thank you for your advice. Raghad Alhawali (talk) 11:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are required by the Terms of Use to make a formal disclosure of your employment, see WP:PAID for instructions. 331dot (talk) 12:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't edit the GUST article in the same manner as was done. All references were removed, promotional content was added, and the new article did not comply with our manual of style. I have already reverted those edits back to the last acceptable state.
Also, please note that due to your paid-editing status / conflict of interest, you should make edit requests via the article talk page, rather than editing it directly. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:10, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Raghad Alhawali

[edit]

Hoe to resubmit ? Raghad Alhawali (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Raghad Alhawali: please read the advice in your previous thread, above. (And please don't start a new thread each time.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:52, 10 October 2024 review of submission by 79.144.109.9

[edit]

Having difficulty understanding the feedback: Statements, starting with the date of birth, need to be sourced or removed. Why does data of birth need to be removed? Are there rules around posting the data of birth? could not find any. Also, I removed "noted authority" as that is probably not fully supported by the citations. But I am not aware of anything else that needs additional support or reference. 79.144.109.9 (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DOB specifically, and WP:BLP on articles on living people more generally. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:06, 10 October 2024 review of submission by 98.113.64.35

[edit]

can I have an explanation as to why this draft was declined? what can I do to make this draft better? the artist is of note with a comparable professional record to that of other contemporary artists who have published pages. Extensive exhibition history within reputable, top tier galleries and museums, primary articles/reviews and is collected within 3 public institutions that I can find. 98.113.64.35 (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. It could be- for many reasons- that these other articles you have seen are also inappropriate and just not yet dealt with by a volunteer. We can only address what we know about; that other inappropriate articles exist cannot justify the addition of more inappropriate articles. This is why each article or draft is judged on its own merits. If you want to help us, you can identify these other articles you have seen so action can be taken.
It looks like you have mostly cited press releases and announcements, not significant coverage of the artist, coverage that goes into detail about him. 331dot (talk) 14:36, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
mostly press releases? that is factually incorrect and whoever reviewed the draft didn't follow the citations. I made note of where the exhibitions took place and cited the locations because they have professional merit. I also cited a review in art in America, reviews from glasstire, which is the primary art writing publication in Texas, for the bulk of the text and listed a slew of other reviews/credits in further reading. I could point you to a number of other contemporary artist pages with equivalent professional records and similar citations. the collected coverage cited goes into extensive detail so I am not sure where that logic is coming from. 98.113.64.35 (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:10, 10 October 2024 review of submission by OriginalVoice

[edit]

Hello! This is my first wikipedia article submission, and I'm struggling to understand how I can make it read not like an essay? I really thought I nailed the initial submission when it came to neutrality and sounding like a wikipedia page, so I'm not sure what I can do to fix it. OriginalVoice (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article about a model developed by Branco et al needs to be based almost entirely on publications by people and institutions wholly unconnected with Branco et al. 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. ColinFine (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:15, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Sajjad Hossen Sifat

[edit]

Why my apply is decline again and again. If you help me by advice, I will so glard to you. Sajjad Hossen Sifat (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop recreating blatantly promotional drafts. Your draft likely met one of the speedy deletion criteria as blatant advertising, and was thus deleted. Wikipedia is not a place for advertisement, and such attempts will get the draft protected from being recreated again and also get you blocked from editing. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 01:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:27, 10 October 2024 review of submission by 176.236.197.59

[edit]

amazing infos 176.236.197.59 (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

tiktok and for most situations Youtube are not appropriate references. Wikipedia works off of what others say about the person.Naraht (talk) 03:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:01, 10 October 2024 review of submission by Yevrowl

[edit]

Greetings! The sources cited are leading ukrainian media outlets and some international ones. What other sources are needed? Yevrowl (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]