Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 September 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< September 20 << Aug | September | Oct >> September 22 >
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.


September 21

[edit]

00:55, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 2601:240:8400:4BF0:8057:A8C0:B35F:EAB9

[edit]

published article 2601:240:8400:4BF0:8057:A8C0:B35F:EAB9 (talk) 00:55, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 07:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This draft has been rejected due to failure to heed reviewers' critiques and will not be considered further. Your sources are all to social media (which cannot help for notability as Wikipedia defines it or support biographical claims), and are not inline. The entire article reads like an amateurish attempt at SEO via keyword spam, and I will be tagging it for deletion on that basis shortly. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:03, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Zeedigi

[edit]

I am submitting a draft article for Blink49 Studios and would appreciate guidance on ensuring the article meets Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards. Additionally, I need help with formatting and making sure the article aligns with Wikipedia's content policies for new submissions. Zeedigi (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are associated with this studio, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID.
You have just summarized the routine activities of the company and its work. A Wikipedia article must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the studio, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. We aren't interested in just knowing what the company does.
You wrote that the company is involved in notable productions, but the productions you list don't have articles(unless you just didn't link to them)- and even if you did, merely being associated with a notable production would not merit the company an article, as notability is not inherited by association. The productions of a company can merit an article, and not the company itself. 331dot (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:47, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Kazamzam

[edit]

I've submitted a number of articles through AfC, created a number on my own, and am an active participant at the Unreferenced Articles project, so I'd like to say that my referencing is usually pretty robust. I disagree with the reviewer's determination that the sources are not reliable (the sources including NPR, NBC, and the NYTimes) and that the coverage has not been significant. More sources are available but I would agree that a lot of the coverage has been about the court case related to the subject's work...but the subject's work, and therefore the subject, are at the crux of the matter and should not, in my opinion, be considered as separate from the subject. I'm happy to continue working on this because I think Ms. Taken Alive's contributions to the Lakota language are noteworthy and deserve wider notice. I'm asking for a second opinion as I've seen AfC drafts get through with much less. Kazamzam (talk) 10:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you discussed this with the reviewer directly?
Alternatively, (if you have no COI or other requirement to use AFC) if you truly feel that the draft would survive an AFD discussion, you can move it into the encyclopedia yourself. This process is (usually) voluntary. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re "I've seen other drafts get through with less"- see other stuff exists. Maybe those drafts shouldn't have gone through. It's difficult to know unless you'd care to show which of these you are referencing. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:04, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 103.58.154.234

[edit]

please edit what the correction you have 

103.58.154.234 (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article was declined the first time because it was completely unsourced. It was then resubmitted with no improvements made and this time, it was rejected. That means that it was deemed there was no chance that a properly sourced article could be created for this subject at this time. I looked to see if I could find reliable sources that could be used to write a compliant article for this songwriter and found nothing that was suitable, and certainly nothing that could independent support any fact presented in the article beyond Jadhav being a songwriter. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:43, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Aman Sandhu 12

[edit]

hi I got my draft rejected twice, first time i apparently made it sound like an advert, so I changed it up and even now they are saying the same thing pls I need your help ASAP because im struggling with it a lot Aman Sandhu 12 (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:00, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Gabriel601

[edit]

Can someone recheck this draft for a review. I just added about six reference from reliable source I feel passes WP:GNG. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] after a decline since June. Not always active in going back to decline draft reason its been months but I always do at my free time. "Two heads are better than one" so I use the afc more often than expecting an afd. Gabriel (……?) 17:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it and it is pending for review by a volunteer. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:15, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Myogonji Kitsune

[edit]


RE: Declining of Draft for "Ginko Mine" Thanks for taking the time to review my draft. I'd like to understand what the issue was for my page. If I understand correctly, I believe it may be because of reliable sourcing. However, I'd like to note that I simply translated the existing Japanese Wiki entry at this point and applied the same sources. Thanks again for your assistance, and look forward to the response. Myogonji Kitsune (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Myogonji Kitsune: ja.wp and en.wp are completely different beasts when it comes to policy, and en.wp is seen as far stricter when it comes to sourcing than most other Wikipediae. Straight translations thus generally do not work; you're going to need to find more or better sources that we at en.wp will accept. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:56, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Bluebox57

[edit]

I tried to submit the article twice, but I seem not to be able to fit the guidelines. Now, I have edited the article, hopefully to the criteria of the Wikipedia reviewers and I want to know if the article is better now, to actually be submitted. Bluebox57 (talk) 17:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do pre-review reviews here; the best way to get feedback is to submit it. 331dot (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:25, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 188.120.84.190

[edit]

Hi Wikipedia,

I am trying my first hand at writing a Wikipedia article ever since learning of the exploits of Steven Pruitt. As a first attempt, I have tried at the easy end of the spectrum by writing about a generic exchange program that my local university used to offer. I have gotten some declines by reviewers and most comments have been very reasonable. However, I feel a little at a loss at my most recent review. I am not really sure how to proceed from here. Because it is a relatively small exchange program, the number of secondary sources of information is limited to a few newspaper articles.

Can I get just some hints at what to change?

Thank you very much.

Best, Andreas 188.120.84.190 (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. If there is insufficient coverage in independent reliable sources, the topic would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:37, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Vlachopouloss

[edit]

Why was my article rejected? Vlachopouloss (talk) 19:37, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You must disclose your connection to this company, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. You claim that you personally created and personally own the copyright to the company logo.
Your draft was rejected as a blatant advertisement. Advertising is not permitted here. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:52, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Azvierko

[edit]

remove draft: azvierko and name the page Tim Maxwell Azvierko (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The specific title of a draft is not relevant to the approval process, which only considers the text and sources. If accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. Please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:50, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Celebrate Muru

[edit]

I have added a few more references on Chun Wah Kong. Also, where previously the references pointed to certain magazine citations, I have linked those to digital files from internet archive databases if available. I'm sure having access to read and review the articles would significantly enhance the credibility of the subject that was missing from the previous submission attempts. Your help on getting this creator of many retro games approved on Wikipedia would be greatly appreciated. Celebrate Muru (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't use Wikipedia to generate credibility, they must already be credible to merit an article. If you have fundamentally changed the draft to address the concerns of reviewers, you should first attempt to appeal to the rejecting reviewer. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. What I meant was, by presenting the source material as readable files, instead of just listing the names of the books/ magazines. It would allow the reviewer to make a more informed judgment on the notability of the subject, as this has been a common reason for rejection in the past. I have tried contacting the last reviewer who rejected the creation of the article over the months but no reply yet. I have tried again. Celebrate Muru (talk) 13:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Celebrate Muru I suggest you use their user talk page, and not yours- they may not be following your user talk page and may not be seeing your messages. Their contribution history indicates they are around. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_September_21&oldid=1247998947"