Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 February 6

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< February 5 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 7 >
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.


February 6

edit

03:20:19, 6 February 2020 review of submission by Gsr0812

edit


Hello, I would like for advice in how to properly submit this article so it is not rejected. I've read several wikipedia pages about how to properly send an article however I can't quite grasp on why it is not notable enough.

thanks,

Gsr0812 (talk) 03:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:55:22, 6 February 2020 review of submission by Slas2020

edit

The wikipedia written is based on facts and it is not an advertisement as it has no collections or products that is promotional based. it is just stating what the company is doing and the products that it does in a generic term. Similar to the local brand Aspial Coproration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspial_Corporation). The reference are also not from the company's source but from external sources, hence it should not be claimed as an advertisement. In additional , it also includes the parent company's information which is necessary to explain how it begin.

Slas2020 (talk) 08:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Slas2020:, hi there. Firstly, I wouldn't advise trying to support the existence of one article with another currently existing one - it may have come in before our modern vetting set-up, and not actually meet current standards. See "Other stuff exists" for a good explanation of this.
However, that notwithstanding, the draft is promotionally written, with content such as As the leading jeweller in Singapore, the Group continuously caters to the customers with intricate jewellery and meaningful mementoes which are made for different tastes and demographics through its two brands: SK Jewellery – the masstige jeweller with a belief that everyone can shine within attainable means and accessible locations, and Love & Co. – the premium bespoke bridal jeweller celebrates the different stages of a couple's love journey.. There are plenty of ways to be promotional without just taking content from the company own website, such as if the sources used aren't reliable/independent, or by general word phrasing, as the example above shows. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:57, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:11:40, 6 February 2020 review of submission by Rhubarbgin

edit

Thank you for the quick feedback on the review of this article. I have noted the comments, and taken on board the advice regarding the review extracts. However, I am rather confused about the subject not meeting notability requirements. This is a serious, well established and well-regarded and reviewed author. The citations show this as the reviews are from well-established, well-know sources (see the internal Wikipedia links - New York Times, Washington Post, Times Literary Supplement, London Review of Books, Harper's, The Atlantic, Prospect, etc) - very recognisable names in the literary and art world. The names of many of the reviewers are also well-know and have Wikipedia pages - eg Joan Brady who won the Whitbread prize. So I'm confused as to what more is required to prove that the subject is notable. I'd be very grateful for guidance on this and any other areas which need improvement. With thanks. Rhubarbgin (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Rhubarbgin, I don't have time for an in-depth look but I would suggest adding new or existing references to the lead that have significant coverage and are independent reliable sources. Going though the first few links: [1] Just shows they wrote a book; [2] Ditto; [3] A brief mention in a large list; [4] & [5] incorrect links to book listings; [6] and [7] do not even appear to mention subject; [8] name drop only; [9] and [10] book listings. The lead needs refs for the claims - 10 sources in and all I know is yes they are an author who has written things. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:17, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:00:51, 6 February 2020 review of submission by JadeDavies

edit


JadeDavies (talk) 12:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have been in the sports industry since i am 12 what do i need to do to have my articles published on wikipedia ? what am i ding wrong? thankyou

JadeDavies It appears you are attempting to write about yourself, this is highly discouraged on Wikipedia, please review the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves, as this is not social media. This is an encyclopedia, which summarizes what independent reliable sources say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a a notable person. In order for you to be successful in writing about yourself, you need to essentially forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on what independent sources say about you(like the news). If there are no independent sources about you(you offer none in your draft), them you would not merit an article at this time. If you do later merit one, you shouldn't be the one to write it. You are free to use social media to tell the world about yourself(as you seem to do already). 331dot (talk) 12:05, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:44:58, 6 February 2020 review of submission by December1233

edit

December1233 (talk) 13:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC) Please can I request a re review on this article. The comment left was that it is 'essentially promotional' however only no-biased language has been used to create this biography. If you feel this is not the case, please can I be given some advice as to where the faults are within the article. December1233 (talk) 13:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December1233 It's promotional because it does little more than tell about him, and is supported with sources that are mostly interviews with him or brief mentions; Wikipedia articles must do more than merely tell about the subject. They must summarize what independent reliable sources, sources completely unaffiliated with him, have chosen to significantly cover about him that show how he meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Independent reliable sources does not include interviews with him, press releases, routine announcements, brief mentions, or other primary sources. I would concur in the judgement of the reviewer. You may find it helpful to read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to get a better idea of what is being looked for in article content.
I am curious to know what motivated you to write about this person. 331dot (talk) 13:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:28:57, 6 February 2020 review of submission by Vikas9gupta

edit


Hello, there are many similar pages published on Wikipedia Category:Law_firms_of_India:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law_firms_of_India

Vikas9gupta (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vikas9gupta, firstly, please read wp:other stuff exists, a rather important essay. We aren't a common law system, and previous decisions aren't binding on future ones - our standards have become less lax as time as gone on.
For an article, you need to have recieved significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the topic. You currently haven't demonstrated this. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 17:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


14:47:33, 6 February 2020 review of draft by Kgeary007

edit


Kgeary007 (talk) 14:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not remotely clear how you pass the notability guidelines, most of us don't!. Theroadislong (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:11:49, 6 February 2020 review of submission by Mitchelltingey

edit


I would like to know why this was declined. The only purpose of including "press releases" was to corroborate claims made about Dr. Moshirfar, per Wikipedia requirements. The main point of the article is that Dr. Moshirfar is a pioneer and a respected researcher in the field of ophthalmology. I would like to know what changes need to be made in order to reflect this and be approved for publication.

Thank you Mitchelltingey (talk) 23:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchelltingey, Firstly, and most importantly, we are an encyclopedia. We don't care how great a person is, we care about if they have received enough coverage in reliable sources to create an article from.
Secondly, please read the notability criteria for academics. If your subject meets any of these criteria, please add it to the article, with references. People who meet these criteria are presumed to be notable enough.
Thirdly, the article is written in a tone that is too promotional. The point of an encyclopedia article is to educate on a subject, not to try to sell how much of a pioneer and respected researcher they are. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 11:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_February_6&oldid=985274796"