Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 September 9
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < September 8 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 10 > |
| 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. |
September 9
edit08:45:05, 9 September 2019 review of submission by Timon Stathakis
edit
Dear
Pls could you let me know how many more references i require to upload the article ? thank you
Timon Stathakis (talk) 08:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Timon Stathakis: - I rejected this draft as no independent/reliable sources contained any info on him, and a look elsewhere didn't indicate that any other such sources existed. I don't believe any degree of editing can fix this - he just doesn't appear notable, by wiki standards (yet) Nosebagbear (talk) 10:18, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
08:48:11, 9 September 2019 review of submission by Timon Stathakis
edit
Dear Good day ,
pls could give me some advise in order to upload the article.
thank you
Timon Stathakis (talk) 08:48, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- Answered above Nosebagbear (talk) 10:18, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks you update some further info for this to be notable. Hopefully this will improve the article.
- @Timon Stathakis: - your sources are still all about the company (or written by the company), so tell us nothing about reliable/independent about the individual. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:58, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Dear i will to get some more reference reliable about the individual thanks for your feed back . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timon Stathakis (talk • contribs) 13:15, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
11:19:30, 9 September 2019 review of submission by CJLewis1990
edit- CJLewis1990 (talk · contribs)
Good Afternoon,
I understand & accept you have certain criteria for English football clubs however I would like to appeal for a re-review in this instance.
I am a senior volunteer for the club and everything about the way the club is set up and is being run is professional. There are some key personnel involved with Wakefield AFC which is owned by FBT Sports. As you will see from the references provided, former Manchester United player Chris Turner is currently the Coach & Director of Football. Having a Wikipedia page is seen by all involved as a key part of our plans going forward. The page I have set up initially may lack in depth information however this will be frequently updated as the club progresses.
If you could re-review this I would be highly appreciative.
CJLewis1990 (talk) 11:19, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that in Wikipedia terms the club is not notable and Wikipedia has no interest in your "plans going forward" it is not a venue for promotion of any kind. Theroadislong (talk) 12:22, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
15:54:18, 9 September 2019 review of submission by JamesRodir
edit- JamesRodir (talk · contribs)
Hello helpers, could you please describe why do you think the company is not notable enough or where the sources are weak and nonreliable? I have read WP:NCORP and I found that the sources I added are independent of the subject and the company has more than 1 million customers which I believe is a lot. They have been mentioned by the NY times, business insider, mastercard newsroom and a bunch of other press. They have a important partnership with Mastercard and even the Canada Revenue Agency allowed canadians to use Plastiq to pay taxes. And there is for example Cash App a mobile payment service with the same type of sources and I do not see how are they more notable. I appreciate your reply
JamesRodir (talk) 15:54, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- The sources need to cover the company in-depth as far as I can see you have a lot of passing mentions, press releases and blogs none of which are sufficient to establish notability. The fact that other stuff exists is irrelevant. Theroadislong (talk) 16:39, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong: I know its irrelevant but what I meant is that if they are live we as editors can use it as example. thats my logic there. Most of the articles are about plastiq and its services there are some that just mention the company but they help stablish notability I think. Take for example this one https://www.businessinsider.com/is-plastiq-app-worth-it-safe-2018-6 or https://www.pymnts.com/news/b2b-payments/2018/plastiq-commercial-cards-electronic/ aren't these reliable sources? I need a little more insight because I still do not get why wouldn't Plastiq be notable enough for the encyclopedia. Its a company with many clients, press, great partnerships, and there are more than 70 results of Plastiq in google news, this has to count for something. JamesRodir (talk) 21:31, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @JamesRodir: You write "if they are live we as editors can use it as example". It's natural to learn by example, but it is safer to reason from official policies and guidelines. The essay "Other stuff exists" may make it clear why. Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality content and low quality content. Many existing articles should be improved or deleted, but no one has gotten around to it yet. Don't expect an article patterned after them to be accepted - the existence of rotten articles is not a sound reason for creating more of them. With regard to the specific links you mention above, I'll reply on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:12, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
17:35:25, 9 September 2019 review of submission by Dancemaven
edit- Dancemaven (talk · contribs)
Hi there, I am requesting assistance because eight weeks have now passed since the Draft was submitted. Is there any way to expedite a review, or, at least to request that this draft receive some attention? Many thanks.
Dancemaven (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Dancemaven: - due to the major backlog, the oldest of our drafts have been in the queue for twice that length. Most reviewers don't specifically target requested drafts, so a degree of patience will be required.
- It's not required, but it might be worth seeing if you can get hyperlinks to the online versions of some of your more recent sources.
- Particularly focus (sources and content) on the individual himself - it's not a combained Hollander/company article, so while obviously it will include content on that, it doesn't need a detailed run through of the company/studio's actions Nosebagbear (talk) 18:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
18:26:01, 9 September 2019 review of submission by Bibliograf
edit- Bibliograf (talk · contribs)
Colleagues, good afternoon. As per your suggestions, I've added three solid references, and I hope this will now suffice. Thank you.
Bibliograf (talk) 18:26, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- I've submitted it for review again on your behalf as a good case has been made for notability now being possible to show. Nosebagbear (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
18:44:25, 9 September 2019 review of draft by Fitwithjan
edit- Fitwithjan (talk · contribs)
I just worked for 3 hours adding 27 references to Let It Be Art! new page and I pushed Publish these changes, but when I did, it disappeared on me. I wasn't thinking, I should have copied it. Where did it go, I am very upset, then when I tried to find out where it went, all I had was a blank page and of course you turned it down. Where did all my changes and original revisions and new references go to Let It Be Art! Why wasn't I given enough time to add all the references. I took three hours to do it, but I don't know where it is, PLEASE HELPPPP!!!Fitwithjan (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
- SKSVMACET19 (talk · contribs)
We have a non profit making Engg college in a remote village in India. Wanted to give a small article on this college.