Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 July 5

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< July 4 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 6 >
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.


July 5

edit

01:16:22, 5 July 2019 review of submission by EagerBeaverPJ

edit

@CASSIOPEIA: Hi, so a few days back you told me to elaborate more on how the water crisis came about, and I have been working with another editor to add some more information that you wanted me to add. Do you think it's fine to be published as a real page now? I feel like other editors could help us elaborate more on the different sections once we publish it. EagerBeaverPJ (talk) 01:16, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EagerBeaverPJ Good day. Thank you for adding more info and sources. Reviewed and accepted - see 2019 Chennai water crisis. Please add more content as info is available - see 1998 Sydney water crisis for example. Thank you for your contribution and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:21:19, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Fulber

edit


Fulber (talk) 04:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

how do I quote or refer to published books and magazines that the artist has appeared in? thanks in advance.

Hi Fulber Welcome to AfC help desk. Pls see referencing for inline citation info and instruction. You also would use Template:Cite book template to cite books ; Template:Cite web template to cite sources from internet or Template:Cite journal for journal. Do use "horizontal template format". Since I am, do read WP:My First Article if you havent. Let us know if you need further assistance. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:46:57, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Rica Ethier

edit



Rica Ethier (talk) 05:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:03:16, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by NeilJudson

edit



NeilJudson (talk) 07:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilJudson: please see the message I've left you regarding undisclosed paid editing. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:26:03, 5 July 2019 review of submission by 194.243.213.83

edit


194.243.213.83 (talk) 07:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC) The draft article contains no references or sources. Dan arndt (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:04:02, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Ruby838

edit

The reason for the rejection last time, which was "not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia". I supposed that there was not enough reference, so I provide links where the content was collected. If there is any mistake in content which is not suitable or if I'm still in the wrong direction, please give me detailed advice, thank you.

Ruby838 (talk) 09:04, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 09:23:50, 5 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Medicalresearchindia2

edit



Medicalresearchindia2 (talk) 09:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:47:06, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Medicalresearchindia2

edit


Medicalresearchindia2 (talk) 09:47, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:46:56, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Ejvalerio

edit


Ejvalerio (talk) 10:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


11:15:21, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Bernat Paredes

edit


Bernat Paredes (talk) 11:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bernat Paredes: Draft:Lola Pirindola tales is not a subject suitable for a Wikipedia article. Please read WP:N. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:50:16, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Miityu

edit

I am trying to publish an information page for the brand "Healing Hotels of the World". I tried to rewrite it many times now, added several reliable sources and used quotations. I also didn't use promotional adjectives or similar to avoid a selling indication. But it gets rejected every time. I also checked similar pages to compare the style but nothing is different. Miityu (talk) 11:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Miityu: I have reviewed the draft and read the various references. Together there's not enough secondary, independent, in-depth coverage of the company to meet the WP:NCORP criteria for inclusion. Please also note the message on your user talk page about a possible conflict of interest, which you've not responded to. You must do so before editing further. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:34, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Raga vedha

edit

I have updated details in WP:NCOMPANY and Added References. Raga vedha (talk) 12:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Raga vedha: all you've done is add your LinkedIn page as a reference. Anything published by you or the company is not an independent source. Please re-read WP:NCORP. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:16:46, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Suhani Kanwar

edit


Suhani Kanwar (talk) 12:16, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I have added references wherever required, but still unsure why the page isn't getting published. I would like to know specifically what changes are required to be made so that the issue can be fixed quickly.

````

@Suhani Kanwar: There is no quick fix, because the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). There are plenty of search results for the name, but they're little more than mentions in the credits. They are not significant coverage. Examples of significant coverage of a TV screenwriter would be: [1] [2] and [3]. Contrast them with the draft's deepest source, [4]. She may become notable as her career progresses, but right now it is WP:TOOSOON. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:35:18, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Axsli

edit

I was wondering if the post could be re-reviewed as I have resolved any problems and then published, I would also appreciate if you told me anything I need to improve. Axsli (talk) 12:35, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Axsli: - the reject is still the reasonable judgement. Sources have to be independent - this means any website from a company he worked at can't help prove notability - it has a reason to be biased. The same applies to interviews. Sources need to be in-depth, secondary (newspapers, books etc), reliable and independent. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:39, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:58:38, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Shilpaga05

edit

Because I have added some references according to the Notability that you should see once.

Shilpaga05 (talk) 12:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


15:18:08, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Anandregunathan

edit


I have added further links of reliable sources of information. Also, have added a link to the organization's official Annual Report. The organization for which the wiki page is being made is an Not-For-Profit organization whose daily operations and facts may not always be reported to news agencies everyday as it cannot afford to spend its money on heavy marketing and news. Also a lot of news coverage has happened in Indian local language news media which may not be of help to quote here (as it is in languages such as Telugu, Kannada, Tamil, etc). Besides this, I have also quoted the English news coverage.

It is important to create a wikipedia page for this Not for Profit organization because it is now big enough in size that it is able to feed 200,000+ children with free nutritious breakfast, and wants to serve up to 1 million needy children in the near future.

In case you have any other advice/suggestions/edits for this page to be published, kindly let know.

It is of prime importance that as a wikipedia contributor i would like to ensure the best and most accurate information be published.

Anandregunathan (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Anandregunathan: - firstly, the biggest issue the article faces is its blatant advertorial tone. To give one example "Annapoorna has had a roller coast ride right since its inception. There has been no looking back from the start, and the number of children benefitted have grown exponentially. 20 Million+ Meals have been served so far !" is complete non neutral and not in an encyclopedic tone.
Sources in other languages are fine. However an annual report doesn't help prove anything more controversial than things like name & location. Wikipedia requires secondary sources that are independent and reliable. A company's report has strong reason to present a positive viewpoint.
As a smaller note, an article shouldn't "talk" to its readers. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:20:35, 5 July 2019 review of draft by MemeTrooper

edit


I was wondering if I could use the current logo I put for the article? It was removed when I saw the draft, but can i put it back? Also, what happens if i submit it for review and it is declined? MemeTrooper (talk) 15:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MemeTrooper: - fair use generally only authorises usage of a logo in an article. Its presence won't hinder a draft being accepted, and it can always be uploaded and added once it becomes an article again.
Most drafts that aren't accepted are declined. You get a summary explanation, possibly a longer explanation (you can always ask the reviewer to be more in-depth), and can fix it and resubmit. Obviously, given the delays atm, it's preferable to get it right first time.
I would suggest asking Onel5969 if they can clarify specific promotional points (I would just briefly say that it speaks constantly about the pluses and successes of the company)
A bigger issue is that the draft seems to only be sourced through sites linked to the company. Sources need to be in-depth, reliable, independent (sources with no reason not to be fully accurate. This also rules out most interviews), and they need to be secondary sources (newspapers, books, etc) Nosebagbear (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: - The logo's description apparently says non free content rather than free use, but i could have sworn it was put as free use when I first added it to the article. Also, am I just asking One if the article will be approved simply for listing the successes of the company? I didn't completely understand why your directing me to him. MemeTrooper (talk) 16:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)MemeTrooper (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MemeTrooper: - To clarify, I was saying that currently the draft only talks about the company's positive actions. They may (or may not) be accurate, but it would still give a one-sided viewpoint if neutral and even negative info wasn't included. However, it's some of the phrasing that is also potentially problematic. Ask Onel for some examples on what made the article (now draft) promotional,
How would you know the logo was free use - has the company declare it such? Nosebagbear (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nosebagbear: Probably not, my memory just may be wrong since I put the logo in the article months ago. I was given a notification that it is an orphaned non free image. I'm a bit confused on it. It says in the message that I can readd it if I think it is useful, but I thought that non free images can't be used Wikipedia and only fair use can. Am I able to add it back because I was told I can in that message?MemeTrooper (talk) 17:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MemeTrooper: - acceptable forms of photos for Wikipedia (not WikiCommons) are public domain (which is totally free use), a suitable license (functionally free use within Wikipedia) and fair-use - which means it hasn't had any license granted, but US copyright law permits certain usages.
I suggest asking for some help at the Teahouse - there you'll be able to get a photo expert, whereas I just know enough for my own usage.
As above, I would say that notability is the primary issue the draft faces atm Nosebagbear (talk) 09:59, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:43:25, 5 July 2019 review of submission by Nachlassprofi

18:43:25, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Nachlassprofi

edit


Entrümpelungsfirma Nachlassprofi (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


20:28:39, 5 July 2019 review of submission by 103.66.233.56

edit

COZ I AM VERY NEWER FRIST TIMER ON WIKIPEDIA SO IF POSSIBLE PLEASE HELP ME FOR THIS ARTICLE WHICH IS ABOUT ME IF I DESERVE OTHERVISE ITS MY LAST TRY THANKS YOU ALL....AND WKIPEDIA20:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)103.66.233.56 (talk)****** 103.66.233.56 (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not write in ALL CAPS. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 09:14, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:33:42, 5 July 2019 review of draft by Explicitmultimedia

edit


I JUST SUBMITTED A DRAFT AND IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED.. CAN I HAVE HELP OF KNOWING THE CORRECTIONS TO MAKE?

Explicitmultimedia (talk) 21:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicitmultimedia: Please do not write in all capitals, it is regarded as shouting. I've declined the draft for the reasons stated on it. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_July_5&oldid=984979940"