Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 October 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 10 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 12 >
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 11

[edit]

07:51, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Gopalpariwar

[edit]

Hello Team, I have submitted a Page but it is declined and Please help me in creating a New Wikipedia Page in Hindi Content Gopalpariwar (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia, not the Hindi Wikipedia; you need to go to the Hindi Wikipedia to create your draft article. Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. 331dot (talk) 08:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:11, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Experiential Events by Visual Architects

[edit]

My recent article got rejected, and this is the first time I tried creating a wikipidea article so I am sure it might have missed a few keey points even though I tried my best to follow the guidelines. I seek your help to understand how to averrt this and launch/publish the arrticle Experiential Events by Visual Architects (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Experiential Events
@Experiential Events by Visual Architects: your draft has been deleted as promotional. Promotion of any kind is not allowed on Wikipedia.
Your user name also implies some sort of connection with this subject. Could you let us know what it is? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:49, 11 October 2024 review of submission by 3DmicroPrintExpert

[edit]

My article got rejected and I don't know what to do

I’m reaching out to better understand the reason behind the decline of my article about the company Nanoscribe. In the rejection comment, it was mentioned, "Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established."

I previously revised the article based on similar feedback. I added several independent publications, removed press releases, clearly stated when information is from the company itself, and included additional sources demonstrating the company’s relevance in research.

I genuinely believed these revisions would bring the article in line with Wikipedia's neutrality and reliability standards, so I absolutely don't know what further adjustments might be needed.

Could anyone please provide more specific feedback on what remains problematic? 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 10:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3DmicroPrintExpert I fixed your post to provide a link to your draft as intended(you thought it was a section header, I think). You already asked the reviewer for advice, I'd suggest waiting to hear from them first, to avoid duplicating effort. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @331dot thanks, I got an answer and the answer is that one sentence in the draft is promotional. But I think the problem is that every time someone else reads it, there may be another sentence that is seen as problematic. So I'm trying to get the big picture and not just change one sentence, resubmit, and get rejected again for another sentence. That's why I asked the question here. 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 11:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is true that different reviewers will see different things, either because they have a different perspective, or because a reviewer doesn't want to front load all the problems at once as it's easier to deal with them one or a few at a time. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will tell you that the awards are meaningless towards establishing notability; an award only contributes to notability if the award itself merits an article(like Academy Award or Nobel Peace Prize). The Technology section has little discussion of the company and should just be removed. If you do both those things, that leaves little behind that summarizes what independent reliable sources see as notable about this company as Wikipedia defines it . 331dot (talk) 10:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok @331dot, thanks for the advice! I thought it was important to use the technology section because they were the first company to make 2PP available as a commercial tool and they invented the 2GL technology. Do you think it would be a better way to remove that and maybe add the first point to the history of 2PP/multiphoton lithography and write a second article about the 2GL technology where it's also well explained and defined? Maybe this would be a good start because I think it will be easier for me to write a technology article. I see I'm still learning the rules here. 3DmicroPrintExpert (talk) 11:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That the company invented and made available a technology would merit the technology an article, but not necessarily the company. For the company to merit an article there needs to be sources with significant discussion of the company itself, not its products and inventions. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:34, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Cuentaderevision

[edit]

Please, could you tell me what else can I do? The WP Three are ok. There are references from The Times, BBC, NYT, Financial Times, CCN, El País, Washington Post... Triana was awarded with the Grand Cross Royal Order Civil Merit (it is a international top recognition), Triana is in charge of the reconstruction of one of the biggest natural disasters of this century... Cuentaderevision (talk) 16:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:19, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Wikisickidiki

[edit]

where do I put my article to review? Wikisickidiki (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikisickidiki press the blue Sumit draft for review button at the bottom of the box, but your article will most likely be instantly declined in its current state — Karnataka 18:13, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read about notability and reliable sources before you do anything else. Unless you have at least three sources, each of which meets all three of the criteria in WP:42, your draft will not establish that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and you will be wasting your time in writing an article, and wasting somebody else's time in submitting it for review.
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:53, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Sayuru Athsara

[edit]

Hello, I have created a Wikipedia page for the accredited European School of Lille Métropole in Lille (Marcq-en-Baroeul) France. My request for submission was declined stating that I have not cited enough sources. My point is, the school only opened up in 2019 and is still in a gradual development schedule (to be completed in mid-2025). Therefore, evidently, the school lacks a vast amount of sources (especially in English) to be cited. I'd like to know what the procedure would be in such a specific circumstance. Furthermore, I'd like to state that the most important information about the school is already cited with reliable sources, including the website of the school itself; the Office of the Secretary-General of the European Schools (the over-seeing body of the school); reliable European Union document archives; regional newspaper La Voix du Nord; and as well the website of the Lille European Métropolis (Métropole Européenne de Lille). Rest assured, I'll try my best to find more sources to cite. In the meantime, I would be more than glad to know what I could do in such a specific instance. Thank You in advance. Sayuru Athsara (talk) 17:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sayuru Athsara: The school's own website is not considered a reliable source; government sources are not considered secondary. We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject secondary (news/scholarly/review) sources that discuss the subject at length and are subject to fact-checking and editorial oversight. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sayuru Athsara your sources do not have to be English, but they must fit the criteria listed in Wikipedia:GNG. The information found at Wikipedia:NSCHOOL will explain this further. — Karnataka 18:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:13, 11 October 2024 review of submission by Amman24

[edit]

Good day,

an ambassador is the highest official representative of a head of state in another country and can only be appointed with the approval of the head of state of the receiving country. In this case, there is a clear reference to the official website of the King of Jordan, receiving the person of this article as the new ambassador and highest diplomatic representative of his country/state. There is no higher authority than the head of state himself confirming the ambassador (other than God), so what reference is a minimum criteria for Wiki then? The appointment of the ambassador is also referenced and confirmed by 3 of the leading news agencies in the Kingdom of Jordan, also linked to this article. And there seems to be no difference between this ambassador and all the other ambassador’s of the Order of Malta on Wikipedia. Also, the references clearly link to official government websites. Taken bio information about a top-diplomat from the official website of an embassy is “biased” in Wiki’s opinion? Where else would you get information about an official’s personal bio, like the Secretary of State, other than from the CV he had written himself and being published on a website?

Thank you for your help. George Amman24 (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amman24: Ambassadors are not inherently notable as we define the term. You need to find third-party sources with editorial oversight that explicitly discuss him and his work in some depth. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I thought it was noteworthy since the ambassador is the youngest ever head of a diplomatic mission of the Order of Malta, which usually only appoints 60+ years billionaires. But you are probably right, Wiki is not the right place for this kind of information. I suggest you have the article deleted. Thank you for your time! Amman24 (talk) 18:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:30, 11 October 2024 review of submission by DMmmAM12345

[edit]

Submission shows declined for lack of sufficient citations, but citations are prevalent. DMmmAM12345 (talk) 18:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DMmmAM12345: Every claim that could potentially be challenged by a reasonable person MUST be cited to a strong third-party source that corroborates it or (failing that) removed. This is not negotiable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_October_11&oldid=1251624545"