Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 August 12
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < August 11 | << Jul | August | Sep >> | August 13 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
August 12
edit10:01:56, 12 August 2019 review of submission by Nitajk
editIt was mentioned that I should quote credible sources. I have done so. Most of the citations are of major newspapers in India (national) and also an Indian government site. I have cited "independent, reliable, published" sources. Therefore I do not understand the reason for the rejection. The article is neutral. I am not connected in any way with the PILF. I know that an article on the PILF was rejected the first time it was put up but I have neither read that article nor know whoever put it up. I came to Wikipedia to add an entry as a concerned Pune citizen and it was promptly deleted, much to my surprise. I am wondering why a literary festival of an important city like Pune is not represented in the wikipedia. I feel the review is unfair, considering the other literary festivals that had been mentioned. I want to know, does Wikipedia think of Pune as an unimportant city, is that why the article is rejected? Or is there a limit on the number of literary festivals from a particular state? Or do you consider that national newspapers of India are not reliable sources? If it is any or all of the above, then the rejection seems logical, but I need a reason. Please give me a specific reason. I think I am entitled to it.
Nitajk (talk) 10:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Nitajk. The draft was declined for not being written from a neutral point of view. From your question, it appears that you may have strong feelings about the topic, which could hamper your ability to write about it dispassionately.
- Newspapers can be reliable sources, but are not automatically so. The publication (The Times of India, Hindustan Times, etc.) is only one of three aspects to consider, the others being the writer and the article itself. The draft cites several sources ([1], [2], [3], and [4]) that are examples of churnalism , the publication of press releases masquerading as original journalism. Taking such independence-lacking sources at face value, believing that they are objective reporting of what is important about a topic, is a mistake that can lead to a non-neutral draft. The bulk of any article should be based on arms length sources, not the festival, its partners, or its press releases. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Okay, I get your point. But the truth is that there are other literary festivals which have similar sources. If a reputed newspaper publishes a press release it is authentic. To discount a press release in a national Indian newspaper as an unreliable source is very surprising. Also, I highly doubt that all of these citations were press releases. I do not know where you got this erroneous information from. It is very likely that a reporter was actually present. You cannot assume it is a press release. It is not too difficult to get a reporter to cover events inaugurated by world-famous people. Reporters flock to these type of events. And yes I feel strongly about this, otherwise, I would not have taken the trouble to write an article on the wikipedia about PILF. Pune is my city and wikipedia is being unfair. Anyone would feel bad if they are being targeted unjustly. I wrote that article in a neutral manner and wikipedia is being most unjust. I cannot fathom the reason, not yet. Nitajk (talk) 02:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- Press releases are not unreliable sources, press releases are not independent sources; they just repeat what the subject themselves announced or released for press to say. The articles above aren't true press releases (that is, they don't just copy paste the PR), but they might as well be. These sources do not talk about what the event is exactly, who attended, what happened there, what reaction were. They all talk in future tense about something they haven't actually visited yet. What are they basing their information on besides what the event's organizers said themselves? They are just repeating the announcements that the event will happen. Did any of these newspaper cover the event after it happened, because these are the in-depth sources we want, which require actual journalism. Can you cite the sources where "[..] reporter was actually present", because those would potentially establish notability. These are just Wikipedia's policies, there is nothing "unjust" because Wikipedia has never aimed to publish every topic. There are probably other articles that may or may not be notable that will eventually get fixed up or deleted, but this doesn't reflect on the current case. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 12:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
19:55:17, 12 August 2019 review of submission by Filmfannn13
edit- Filmfannn13 (talk · contribs)
I am wondering why it got rejected. Filmfannn13 (talk) 19:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
I have added notability/sources. If there needs to be more sources, I can find some. Filmfannn13 (talk) 20:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Filmfannn13: The article was rejected because it does not appear to meet Wikipedia's threshold for inclusion -- multiple independent in-depth sources. We don't accept related sources, such as author's YouTube channel. We cannot use IMDb. The Nola article is basically an interview and most of the content is by the subject, so it's not independent. You would have to provide more sources, but they will have to be in-depth to count towards the minimum needed for an article.
- Please also don't remove previous reviewer comments. This only makes reviewing more cumbersome for volunteers. Especially since the template contained all the general information about why a draft is declined. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)