Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 September 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< September 23 << Aug | September | Oct >> September 25 >
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 24

[edit]

05:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Pypopus

[edit]

I'd like to get help with the issue of my article being declined by one of the wiki people who reviewed it. She mentioned that it wasn't cited independently. I would like to clarify the matter since the sources I provided were independent.

I really appreciate any help you can provide. Pypopus (talk) 05:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pypopus, your draft cannot possibly be accepted until you provide multiple references to indisputably reliable sources completely independent of Akilkhanov that devote significant coverage to Akilkhanov. That is mandatory. Also, why are you using the same photo twice? Cullen328 (talk) 05:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Currently, none of your sources are independent of Akilkhanov because they all parrot his words. One actually says "About me". Cullen328 (talk) 05:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Pypopus. One thing to remember is 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. The majority of sources must be indepedent in this way. ColinFine (talk) 09:11, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:45, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 103.166.59.62

[edit]

All information in this article is taken from IMDb. All the information is correct and there is no error. I don't know why it is not accepted. 103.166.59.62 (talk) 06:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because IMDb has no functional editorial oversight and is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So where does Wikipedia get its acceptable sources from? 103.166.59.62 (talk) 06:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:RS to learn more about what is considered a reliable source, but in short, sources that have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control/oversight are generally considered to be reliable. IMDB is user-editable and has no editors that review and fact check content before it is posted for accuracy. 331dot (talk) 07:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once you sign up, gain some experience, and have edited 500 times, a good place to start would be WP:Library--especially once you get well acquainted with this project's subset of the ProQuest database. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Matt.ruhstaller

[edit]

Can you help me understand more clearly how I am not meeting the bar, but a person who shares the same name as the person I am adding has far fewer notable achievements? John D. Shearer

The person I am adding took the poster photo for the largest grossing artist ever, on their largest grossing tour, among other newsworthy photos.

Many thanks M (talk) 07:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt.ruhstaller I fixed your link, the whole url is unnecessary. As the reviewer said, "None of the refs listed establish any notability and does not source any of the claims in the article. None of them are reliable sources and many of them are just links to the photos the subject took and have no substance related to the subject."
It's not enough to just say "he took a widely distributed photo" or "he took a photo of Taylor Swift"(something which thousands of people have done). We need independent sources with significant coverage of him that describe what makes him notable- if he's notable for his photography, you need sources that discuss and analyze his work and his particular influence. If he's important because he took Swift's photo and it was used as a poster for her tour, you need sources that discuss his selection and the reasons for it- was it selected due to his artistry? Because Swift/her managers noticed his work elsewhere? Stuff like that. 331dot (talk) 07:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness, characterizing the photo he took for the cover of her movie is nothing like claiming "he took a photo of Taylor Swift"(something which thousands of people have done). M (talk) 19:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get that he didn't just snap a photo, but my point was that the draft said little more than that at the time of my comment. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The John D. Shearer article is frankly similar to if not worse than your draft, and I will be tagging it as such. That article was created in 2006, long before current standards. Please see other stuff exists. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have been vetted by the community. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is helpful feedback, thank you. In response, I have added several additional citations to address the question of notability, is this sufficient? Happy to publish again, but I would like to minimize the back and forth and understand if I am getting closer to what you're looking for. M (talk) 12:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Matt.ruhstaller, I haven't looked at the references in-depth so I can't say for certain, but this looks much closer. -- asilvering (talk) 14:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to hear, thanks for the feedback. First time, learning a lot. M (talk) 18:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that the names of minor children should not be in the draft unless the children merit articles themselves. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added them only with permission, and they are also listed on his wife's page with this citation: https://www.romper.com/entertainment/clea-shearer-husband-kids#:~:text=Her%20husband%20John%20is%20a%20famous%20photographer.&text=His%20business%20is%20called%20John,Miranda%20Lambert%2C%20and%20many%20others M (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether permission is granted or not is not relevant, that's general practice(WP:NONAME). 331dot (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Are you for them to be removed? M (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"asking" somehow disappeared there, apologies. Take 2: Are you asking for them to be removed? M (talk) 19:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think they should be, yes. 331dot (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. M (talk) 21:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:06, 24 September 2024 review of submission by TheJubileeKaman

[edit]

Can Wikipedia sites be used for Referencing TheJubileeKaman (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source, see Wikipedia is not a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any discussion here is academic, as the draft was rejected. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can a Wikipedia page be used as a reference TheJubileeKaman (talk) 08:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No per WP:CIRCULAR, and neither can a Wordpress blog. Your draft has been rejected and thus is the end of the line, TheJubileeKaman. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TheJubileeKaman Please do not create a new thread with every post, just edit this existing section. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:36, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Mnorouzian

[edit]

This is her first-ever page on the Wiki, and there's a shortage of references for her biography. I collected the info of Mahsan Khodakarmi by contacting her and my search. Except for some links to Wiki and some Iranian pages, there's not any complete data on the net. The One (talk) 10:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, @Mnorouzian, but if there are no published sources there can be no article. Qcne (talk) 10:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added an IMDB in the field; I hope it helps The One (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does not, @Mnorouzian, Imdb cannot be used as a source. See WP:IMDB. Qcne (talk) 10:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:32, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Lego10318

[edit]

Hi, I would like to better understand what changes I can make to the page to make it fit for publication. Could you please suggest some improvements and tips for this?

Thank you Lego10318 (talk) 11:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lego10318, please see WP:NCORP for information about writing articles on companies. This is a pretty tough one I'm afraid, requiring really strong, in-depth sources. -- asilvering (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:38, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 178.114.134.52

[edit]

This is getting really tiresome, although it stands without question that this person exists and is already mentioned on other pages here, my draft always gets rejected because of a "lack of reliable sources" but no one cares to mention what a single reliable source would be and for which facts exactly. Just saying no and walking away is the easiest thing.I am just trying to contribute and help a friend. pls show some support, thank you. 178.114.134.52 (talk) 11:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that disciss him at length, are written by identifiable authors, and subject to fact-checking and other forms of editorial oversight. Merely existing is not enough to justify an article. On that note, let's look at your sources (refer to the "critiques" link in my signature):
None of the sources you have are any good. Do you have any reviews of his music? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:50, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Rishi Gandhi 7

[edit]

What should I do? Rishi Gandhi 7 (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, @Rishi Gandhi 7, the draft was rejected and then deleted. Qcne (talk) 13:31, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:38, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Suriend

[edit]

what should i do to make it approved Suriend (talk) 13:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Suriend. Wikipedia is not for things that you have made up. Maybe try one of the alternative history wikis? Qcne (talk) 13:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by AlexCollins4u

[edit]

I have been told to ask for advice by Safari Scribe. I created a page for an individual I felt should have a Wikipedia page based on the climate change-focused works he has done over the years considering the extreme climate effects that Nigeria is currently experiencing. The subject was a speaker at the recently concluded Energy Symposium in Abuja. He is a Dean who is currently being considered for a leadership position. He spoke on renewable energy, CO2 emissions and link to biotechnology. The draft was rejected despite being more informative with secondary sources than similar Wikipedia pages created for some Deans in Nigeria. Kindly reconsider and unreject it. I'm willing to revise the page further if required. Thanks. Best regards Alex AlexCollins4u (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. Other inappropriate articles existing does not mean that more should be created. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can, when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate content past us. We can only address what we know about. If you want to help us, please identify these other articles for possible action. That other articles exist does not mean they meet standards, unless they are classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:42, 24 September 2024 review of submission by TruthToPower2022

[edit]

I just want to ask what's wrong specifically or what can be done to improve this article? If some part needs to be removed, like the part where her companies are featured or the hyperlink to the website, please let me know as well. Just want specific feedback, so I can improve the article. TruthToPower2022 (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TruthToPower2022 A rejection usually means the draft cannot be re-submitted. You may ask the rejecting reviewer to reconsider if you have fundamentally changed the draft since rejection. Pinging in the rejecting reviewer, @Velella. However, I agree with their assessment there isn't an indication that Micha passes our notability criteria for people. Qcne (talk) 15:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got this. I will read the notability criteria again first and change the draft to meet these criteria, if possible, before asking the reviewer to re-consider. Thank you for your response. TruthToPower2022 (talk) 16:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TruthToPower2022, you might find it helpful to read No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:07, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Jooliah

[edit]

What can I do to get this page approved? Jooliah (talk) 16:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, it has been rejected. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can, however, disclose your connection to him, since you took his picture and he posed for you, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have connection with no one, like verdis and liberland, this territory is claimed by no one, and I have proofs being there and on no ones land I proclaimed micronation, i think its legal same as verdis and others. 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, wrong article i see 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:24, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7

[edit]

Hello, can I get some advice how my aticle can get place on wiki, should i add more photos and proofs or? 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With zero independent reliable sources discussing the topic, there is zero chance of it being accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this isn't the place to tell the world about your micronation. When others tell about it, like news reports, let us know. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps MicroWiki might be interested? (Might as well sign up and transfer it to here, remembering to acknowledge WP as the source.) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 08:32, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither existence nor legality is relevant: Wikipedia has articles about real and imaginary things, and about legal and illegal things. What is needed is independent writing about the subject, reliably published. If there isn't any, then there cannot be an article. ColinFine (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:37, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Morieux Th

[edit]

What should i change exactly in my page in order for you to accept it ? Because all the info i added come from a single website and also collected by asking people who work in there. Thank you in advance for your help. Morieux Th (talk) 19:37, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should almost certainly throw away what you have written, and start again. 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) 21:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:41, 24 September 2024 review of submission by AWGENIZATION

[edit]

What could I add to make this ok for Wikipedia? AWGENIZATION (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AWGENIZATION You would need to show that the company meets WP:GNG--that is, that the company (not its artists, nor their releases) has received substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AWGENIZATION, additional information can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_September_24&oldid=1248574015"