Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 October 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 24 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 26 >
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 25

[edit]

02:03, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Mandi News

[edit]

why is'nt my Article Altaf_Ahmad_Ranjha published for public as i cant find it while searching it on internet mediums. Mandi News (talk) 02:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandi News: Google caches its search results. Even assuming the page is indexed immediately it takes time for Google's crawlers to find it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 02:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mandi News There is an arbitrary delay to seek to avoid search engines indexing any article that has been published in error. Search engines to not choose to index every article anyway. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PLEASE TRY TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE SO IT CAN BE PUBLISHED WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT Mandi News (talk) 11:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is your hurry? This is an encyclopaedia for all time, not just for 2024. There is no deadline. ColinFine (talk) 14:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry for inconvienent take your time i just asked as i wasnt fimiliar with the method and was intriguied Mandi News (talk) 14:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:53, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Carl 1131

[edit]

My draft on sagique was declined and I would like to know some ways to improve it. Thank you Carl 1131 (talk) 05:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Carl 1131: Wikipedia articles should be based on what reliable sources that are independent and secondary have already said about it. Where did you find the information about sagique? There are no sources at all in the draft that mention the term or concept. The only two sources are dictionary entries with definitions of other words. The decline notice also contains important information. --bonadea contributions talk 06:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:37, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Syed hameed hussain.S

[edit]

Hello, I need help resolving an issue with my article draft that was declined due to insufficient independent and reliable sources. Could you assist me in improving the draft so it can meet Wikipedia's notability standards? Here is the link to my sandbox: Syed hameed hussain.S/sandbox. I appreciate any guidance you can provide to help get my article published. Thank you! Syed hameed hussain.S (talk) 06:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have given no indication that she meets the definition of a notable person. You say she is "known for her expertise" but have no sources to support that statement or even tell who claims she is known for that. The only other thing you do is describe her background and qualifications, nothing about how she is notable. One of the sources you give is an interview, which is just her speaking about herself, that's not an independent source. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:31, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Jacky2024

[edit]

Hello,

I’m seeking assistance on how to improve my draft for Draft:BankSathi , which was recently declined. The feedback mentioned issues regarding a promotional tone and insufficient independent sources.

I’ve already made some adjustments to address these concerns by:

Rewriting the content to adopt a more neutral, encyclopedic tone. Ensuring that I cite reliable, third-party sources to meet notability requirements. Could someone provide guidance on any additional changes that would make the article align better with Wikipedia's standards? Specifically, I’m looking for tips on sourcing and tone improvements that will satisfy notability and verifiability criteria.

Thank you for your help!

Best regards, Jacky2024 Jacky2024 (talk) 09:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacky2024 Are you associated with this company in any manner?
The draft reads like text that might appear on its website. Language like "BankSathi was established on January 15, 2020, with the goal of providing accessible financial solutions, particularly in Tier II and Tier III cities across India" is promotional(see WP:SOLUTIONS, "solutions" is just marketing puffery) and unclear(what is a "Tier II" city?). You just discuss the offerings and business activities of the bank; instead, you should be summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 331dot,
Thank you for your detailed feedback. I am not affiliated with BankSathi; my goal is to create an informative, objective entry. I see now that some of the language may come across as promotional, and I’ll revise it to be more neutral, removing terms like "solutions" and clarifying unfamiliar phrases such as "Tier II cities."
I'll also focus on restructuring the draft based on what reliable, independent sources have stated about BankSathi to better demonstrate its notability per Wikipedia guidelines. If you have specific suggestions on how I might further align the draft with Wikipedia's standards, I’d appreciate it. Thanks again for your help.
Best,
User:Jacky2024 Jacky2024 (talk) 09:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jacky2024: you say you're not affiliated with this business, but in response to the COI query on your talk page, you said "To address the concern, I’ll refrain from directly editing the Draft:BankSathi article. Instead, I’ll propose any suggested edits on the talk page and make sure to provide reliable, third-party sources to support them. I will also disclose my connection to the topic on the talk page as per Wikipedia’s guidelines to ensure transparency." Yet, no such disclosure has been made on the draft talk page. Can you clarify what's going on, please? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: Thank you for your message and for pointing this out. I understand the importance of maintaining transparency regarding any potential conflicts of interest. I want to clarify that while I am not directly affiliated with BankSathi, I realize that my previous response may have caused confusion regarding my intentions.
I appreciate the reminder about disclosing connections, and I will make sure to properly disclose any relevant information on the draft's talk page. My aim is to contribute constructively and to adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines. I apologize for any oversight on my part, and I will rectify this immediately.
If you have any further suggestions or specific aspects you think I should address in my disclosure, please let me know. Thank you for your understanding. Jacky2024 (talk) 10:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't pick this bank at random to edit about- your first edit to the draft had very difficult formatting, and you claim to be from the area where this bank is headquartered. If you are associated with this bank in any manner, now is the time to say so. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot Thank you for your message and for expressing your concerns. I want to clarify that while I am familiar with the region where BankSathi is headquartered, I do not have any formal affiliation with the company. My intention in editing the draft was purely to contribute to an informative entry based on the available information.
I understand the importance of transparency and the guidelines surrounding conflicts of interest. If my editing history or formatting has raised any doubts about my neutrality, I apologize for that. I will ensure to be more clear in my future contributions.
Please let me know if you have any specific questions or suggestions about the article, as I am committed to adhering to Wikipedia’s standards.
Thank you for your understanding. Jacky2024 (talk) 10:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jacky2024 This doesn't answer why you claimed to have a connection to the bank previously and now claim that you don't. You're also being very careful with your language- "formal affiliation", "not directly affiliated"; please tell now what the nature is of your connection with BankSathi, whatever it may be, no matter how small. 331dot (talk) 10:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jacky2024: are you using AI to generate your answers? If so, please don't. We want to hear what you, and not some algorithm, have to say.
Please describe in your own words your relationship with this business. When you registered your account recently, you added a bit of blurb on your user page, and as your 2nd edit dropped a fully-fledged draft on this bank. There's presumably a reason for that – what is it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:54, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Persianwine

[edit]

Hi dear. What is the reason for rejecting this article? Persianwine (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Persianwine: the draft is insufficiently referenced, with a single source cited twice, leaving most of the content unsupported. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:14, 25 October 2024 review of submission by 37.39.165.89

[edit]

Hello this is a company page and want to know what can i do to make it be published. Thank you 37.39.165.89 (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have "company pages" here, we have articles about companies that meet our criteria. Your draft has been deleted. If you work for this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:27, 25 October 2024 review of submission by 124.40.245.74

[edit]

Because there is nothing wrong i did. This biography is very important and people are searching Satvik C S

124.40.245.74 (talk) 11:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't ask a question, but just to say that this draft has been deleted as overtly promotional. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:31, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Combat marto

[edit]

How can the page be published? Combat marto (talk) 13:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Combat marto: it cannot, since it has been rejected; the draft presents no evidence of notability, or even any credible suggestion thereof. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:32, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Absolutiva

[edit]

I expanded some notable names about youngest fathers and mothers in this list, as a compliant with WP:BLPNAME, unless if there is a commentary. Both previous list articles deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of youngest birth mothers. Absolutiva (talk) 13:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And that AfD discussion tells you why this draft should not be accepted. I have blanked it, as it contained multiple WP:BLP violations. I have no idea what you mean by as a compliant with WP:BLPNAME, unless if there is a commentary. The list was most certainly not compliant with WP:BLPNAME. --bonadea contributions talk 13:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even List of oldest fathers and Pregnancy over age 50 as well? Absolutiva (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those articles are not under discussion here. --bonadea contributions talk 14:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bonadea: I'd nominated both for deletion. Absolutiva (talk) 14:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:45, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Goldprism22

[edit]

why is the edit denied what part of tos does it compromise? Goldprism22 (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Goldprism22: Take a look at What Wikipedia is not. --bonadea contributions talk 13:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:54, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Mandi News

[edit]

Why isnt article Chaudhry_Ikramullah_Ranjha been displayed on the main page as we search it through internet mediums as only user talk page is shown and not the offical article Mandi News (talk) 13:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandi News: this draft was only accepted a moment ago. It will become visible to search engines once it has been reviewed by New Page Patrol, or after 90 days have passed, whichever comes sooner. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mandi News Wikipedia has no control over how search engines index our articles. Please read Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing. Qcne (talk) 13:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mandi News: Please do not start another thread just because you don't like the answer you were given; I gave another explanation as to why search engines haven't indexed it above; that still applies alongside DoubleGrazing and Qcne's explanations. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mandi News: We don't do "official" articles. What is your connexion to Ranjha? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:23, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Sysdevuk

[edit]

It's unclear what's wrong with this article. I don't see any major difference from this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMDE Any practical help with will be appreciated. Thank you. Sysdevuk (talk) 14:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sysdevuk: this draft cites only close primary sources, plus one Reddit thread (= non-reliable source); in other words, zero indication of notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: You clearly have a conflict of interest (COI) in this subject, judging by your user name. I've posted a paid-editing query on your talk page, please read and respond to it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've clearly decrared COI before publishing this articale, however I've tried to be objective. I've added some additional sources for your reference (it is any better?) [btw: in case of Reddit it 'wiki-like' post, not a 'general discussion'; and it is not from an associated person].
May I know how 'paid edition' works? (last time I edited something for Wikipedia near 10 years ago) Sysdevuk (talk) 14:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sysdevuk: where and how did you disclose your COI? I couldn't find this anywhere, but perhaps I'm overlooking something. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:25, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Skibidiukuser

[edit]

hello I'm new to this and I'm writing for our large 20,000 discord community that experienced a raid. Do I need to include references for every fact I claim? What is the minimum I need to include to get this published, I have read articles but appreciate a more concise and direct advice. thank you Skibidiukuser (talk) 14:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Skibidiukuser The "United Kingdom Discord Raid 2024" does not merit an article in this encyclopaedia, and so this draft will not be considered further, sorry. Qcne (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
am I not able to edit my draft until it reaches the requirements? Skibidiukuser (talk) 14:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It won't ever reach the requirements, @Skibidiukuser, sorry. Qcne (talk) 14:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Skibidiukuser: this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Skibidiukuser: To answer the questions Qcne and DoubleGrazing skipped over, we would need third-party reliable sources that discuss this in depth for us to even consider having an article. Your draft is wholly unsourced, and the reason Qc and DG are both saying it won't be considered further is because it's highly unlikely tech news publications would cover what appears to be a routine sort of phishing, especially within 24h after it happened. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:36, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Magnusmuldoon

[edit]

I wanted to get a further detailed explanation of why my article was rejected. I revised and was still told that the references I used do not allow the article to qualify as a Wikipedia article. The sources I used prove that the fighters I listed who boxed with Rival gloves actually wore the Rival branded gloves in their fights. I also provided a source to verify the Rival background information. What else do I need to provide? Thank you. Magnusmuldoon (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnusmuldoon: your draft (not yet 'article') was declined (not 'rejected') because it is insufficiently referenced, and does not demonstrate notability, as detailed in the decline notice. Whether some fighters wore gloves from this brand has nothing to do with notability. You need to show that the subject satisfies the WP:GNG notability guideline, which it currently does not appear to. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:44, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Woller

[edit]

How can I transfer the article from Wikipedia in Germany (see: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Textbook_of_Hand_Surgery) to en.wikipedia? I just have to translate the leading text, anthing else is already in English. Can anyone help me? Woller (talk) 14:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Woller: the simple answer is, just copy & paste it (and remember to attribute the source).
The slightly more complex option is to request an WP:IMPORT. (Whether that's possible in this case, and how it works, I've no idea as I've never attempted that.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You'll also need to show the that citations are adequate to establish that the subject meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability, or the article will get deleted (or possibly moved to draft) once it is in English Wikipedia.
Since it looks to me as if almost all the citations are to the book itself, the answer to that question is a resounding No.
An acceptable article in English Wikipedia is a summary of reliable independent sources which give significant coverage to the subject, and writing an article for English Wikipedia begins with finding such sources. No independent sources, no article. ColinFine (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:15, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Fabdal

[edit]

Hi, what do i have to do to get a biographical page posted for Samer Bishay? Fabdal (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fabdal Please study HELP:YFA. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:29, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Dozertank

[edit]

Hi, i'd like some assistance in my article as i don't understand how my references (SVT, GAFFA etc) aren't reliable sources?

Kind Regards, Dozertank (talk) 16:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft fails WP:NSINGER and is not written in an encyclopaedic tone. Theroadislong (talk) 16:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dozertank: The SVT source is probably fine, but more sources of that quality are necessary (I can't access the GAFFA article, but even if that's good it still isn't quite sufficient). And although SVT is certainly a reliable source, it looks like the programme is at least partly an interview (I haven't watched the whole thing) and that means it isn't secondary. Importantly, all biographical information needs a source. And finally, the Spotify links can't be used as sources at all, I'm afraid. --bonadea contributions talk 16:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you or the help! I've added more sources now such as the booking agent Sustainable Punk, the individual venue pages for the tour etc.. Should i remove the spotify links completely?
Kind Regards, Dozertank (talk) 17:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Without looking at your draft I can say, yes, remove the Spotify links completely. I can also say that sources from the booking agent and the venues are not independent, and so can be used only to verify uncontroversial factual information such as dates, and cannot contribute to establishing Notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:51, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Fabdal

[edit]

Hi, how do I get a biographical page posted? there are literally thousands of these on wikipedia. Fabdal (talk) 17:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have biographical articles about people that meet our criteria, but we don't have promotional articles that merely document activities and qualifications. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Samer has been covered in the media and I've cited many articles in the page. I believe meets the criteria listed. Fabdal (talk) 18:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the draft lacked sources, in addition to what I said above. You wrote things like "His work with Ice Wireless and Iristel has been instrumental" but don't say how he was instrumental.
What are the three(and only three) best sources you have? 331dot (talk) 20:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[1]
[2]
[3] Fabdal (talk) 00:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "York University Alumni Profile". York University. Retrieved 2024-10-25.
  2. ^ "Connecting the unconnected". Canadian Immigrant. Retrieved 2024-10-25.
  3. ^ "Bringing Connectivity to Canada's North". Government of Canada. Retrieved 2024-10-25.

21:50, 25 October 2024 review of submission by Dorian Marian Neagu

[edit]

I need help to make this topic notable. check the information and data about the topic and then tell me what I need to change to make the article safe, notable and perfect for Wikipedia. Dorian Marian Neagu (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, the subject must be notable before there is an attempt to make an article for it. What would be the three best sources that establish the subject's notability? ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 07:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]