Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 January 31

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< January 30 << Dec | January | Feb >> February 1 >
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.


January 31

edit

00:13:36, 31 January 2020 review of submission by Jelenaelek

edit


Hello. My article was denied because of 'not relevant enough' references. I edited the references since them, is that problem solved? The first two times my article got reviewed in 1 or 2 days, now it's taking months. Is something else an issue?

Jelenaelek (talk) 00:13, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jelenaelek: hi. Your draft was declined twice for failing to meet NCORP's criteria for notable companies; this means the two reviewers (one of which was myself) felt that your draft did not cite sufficient sources to meet NCORP's criteria. I recommend you read NCORP thoroughly and attempt to find more sources to add to your draft before resubmitting, as I am guessing it would be declined a third time. In addition, please note Wikipedia takes a strong stance against conflict of interest editing and as such you should read WP:COI and WP:PAID if you have a connection to the topic. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

02:28:31, 31 January 2020 review of submission by NickL1771

edit

I have seen other Wikipedia pages in the same industry cite sources from the below media (Anandtech and YouTube). Are the below coverage considered reliable sources independent of the subject? If not, why not? https://www.anandtech.com/show/13943/akasa-turing-passively-cooled-chassis-for-intel-bean-canyon-nuc https://www.anandtech.com/show/14259/he-asrock-a320tm-itx-motherboard-thin-itx-for-amd-apus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUUP8K3RqAo&t=18s NickL1771 (talk) 02:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:34:41, 31 January 2020 review of submission by Sugangopal

edit


The article i am currently writing or trying get publish is about the online news portal i.e NepalNews. It's not just the online news portal, it's the first one in Nepal and also in the South-asia. People here are unaware about this fact and this information should reach to all the people out there. There were many rumours about this company in the past. So, i would like to clarify all the people who are connected to the Nepalnews.

So, therefore, i am requesting a review for this article. Thank you.

Sugangopal (talk) 04:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sugangopal, The subject does not appear notable, and thus we cannot cover it. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Request on 06:59:21, 31 January 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sejelsinore

edit


I was left a message by a Wiki-reviewer that is non-constructively critical stating my original work is translated from a piece in another language. Im a professional writer with English as a first language. May I please have a review from another editor?


Sejelsinore (talk) 06:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sejelsinore, The reviewer has a point. The article isn't terrible, but it could use some cleanup. In 1925, Mr. Barkschat in partnership with Henry Cleveland Schultz and Abe Corlinsky founded the Clevelin Construction Corporation, funded by MarbeliteTM capital is not our usual writing style here; the italics are out of place, the TM is unnecessary. a municipality lantern construct what does that even mean? "Crown jewel" is distinctly un-encyclopedic. The larger problem is with the sources: please follow the advice of the inline templates which ask for complete citations, and ensure that every claim has a citation. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 18:59, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:31:49, 31 January 2020 review of draft by The Supermind

edit


I have modified my draft adding 3 sources as HELLKNOWZ mention. However I need the draft to review in-depth, the sources should be reviewed to determine whether they are qualify Wikipedia standards or must discarded from the draft. My draft has remained no reviewer for a month. I understand that the non-English Wikipedia may take longer time to review. But why? If the sole reason of taking longer duration is improper sourcing, I will remove unwanted sources okay. Secondly, Most users create articles by themselves and in instant manner. An example of this is "current ongoing events". They do not take up to four months or more. How do their create these articles by themselves without draft?

The Supermind (talk) 08:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think your article needs special treatment? Everyone here is a volunteer and there are 4000 pending drafts. Most drafts take many months to be reviewed, especially with borderline or non-English sourcing. As you were told at the Help desk, Wikipedia has no deadlines and draft process is incredibly backlogged. Your article was reviewed after you made a request here bypassing the queue. I did not see you add any new sources that satisfy WP:GNG. I personally do not want to reject the same article more than 3 times. Someone else will eventually review it for a second opinion. You can of course ask here to bypass the queue again, but it's completely up to the (other) reviewers whether they wish to do so.
And yes, you can now create an article yourself directly or move the draft. If the article fails GNG, it will just get deleted. Because users that create articles are normally knowledgeable about what constitutes acceptable sources for GNG. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 23:01, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:11:14, 31 January 2020 review of submission by SteinarFosbackB

edit

My article for the business where I work was rejected. I have followed the guidelines and stated that I have a conflict of interest to be as transparent as possible. The article does not promote the business, it only states public facts about the company. Can someone please give me concrete feedback on why this submission was rejected, and what changes I can do to get the article published?

Thank you so much for your time! SteinarFosbackB (talk) 09:11, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well for starters it is not written in English. But if you translate, it will need multiple in-depth sources which cover the company in detail. You also need to declare your conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 13:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:36:17, 31 January 2020 review of submission by Vishal dev (Director)

edit


Vishal dev (Director) (talk) 12:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vishal dev (Director), You seem to be writing about yourself, which we strongly discourage. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:12:38, 31 January 2020 review of submission by 113.170.45.196

14:12:38, 31 January 2020 review of submission by 113.170.45.196

edit


113.170.45.196 (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]



16:41:12, 31 January 2020 review of draft by Nishnik1114

edit


Hello, I am Nishnik1114. I am a new user on wikipedia. I have been working on an feature length film since last year and its finally completed. I need to create a wikipedia page about the movie, I have drafted and submitted the page for review but unfortunately wikicommons is not allowing me to use the movie poster as the picture. Can somebody advice or help me to be able to add the movie poster in the page I have submitted for review? Thanks

Nishnik1114 (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a venue for promoting your new film! Theroadislong (talk) 16:44, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:39:45, 31 January 2020 review of submission by Gusgolftour

edit


Added rich content by many experts demonstrating the significance of this professional's contribution, impact and legacy to the design profession.

Gusgolftour (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I resubmitted it for you, since there's a bunch of sources now and it would need a new re-review. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:39:50, 31 January 2020 review of draft by DougHill

edit


Regarding user:Apathetizer's submission: The reviewer states "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". Yet every claim on the page is referenced with an independent and reliable source. What are we missing? DougHill (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DougHill, The task here is complicated by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allen Estrin. If an article was previously deleted, recreating it can be quite hard. However, I would say the NYTimes article, combined with being PragerU's producer, might make him notable. @Bkissin: Your thoughts, as you were the last reviewer? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care CaptainEek. If you'd like to re-review it, you are more than welcome. (Apologies for the tone, I am completely sincere in that offer) I was basing that off the lack of SIGCOV of the subject, our own reliability issues with PragerU as a source in general, and the previous deletion discussion. Additionally, who is this "we" that the editor speaks of? Is there a COI or PAID going on here? Bkissin (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's just a general tendency to use "we" instead of "I" after a while on Wikipedia. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:14, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When a draft is rejected, the actual reasons should be posted. By User:Bkissin's admission, that was not done here. This reviewer has some objections to PragerU, but they are not at issue here. User:Apathetizer and I and other editors have made good faith edits and submissions, so that the draft deserves to be evaluated on its own merits. In particular, the article should be reevaluated by a different reviewer, who can do this.

I am not able to see the version that was deleted. To judge from earlier versions of the draft that I can see, I suspect that the earlier editors did not really know how to create an article or cite sources. Again, I request that the current draft be judged on its own merits by an impartial reviewer. If that is not possible, then the draft should not have been allowed, or it should have been flagged with a notice to this effect.

FYI, we had a discussion about the subject's notability at: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_December_11#22:05:14,_11_December_2019_review_of_submission_by_DougHill. Based on that discussion, the December draft seemed about halfway to establishing the subject's notability. Improvements to the article where made since then based on that discussion. Thanks to User:DESiegel for his helpful criticism and suggestions. I (and I'm sure the other editors) are open to further constructive criticism.

And for the record, "we" are the editors of the draft. I am not paid to edit, nor do I have a conflict. I cannot speak for any other editor. DougHill (talk) 19:41, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to leave a comment here saying that I'm basically in agreement with user:DougHill in regards to all of this, though if the article is reviewed again and rejected I'll have little issue with abandoning it as not being notable. In regards to user:Bkissin's concerns stated earlier on this page, I want to stress that PragerU isn't used as a source in the submitted draft and that the previous deletion discussion was done at a time when the article subject was less notable and had less coverage in media (for example, the NYT article was posted just this year). --Apathetizer (talk) 01:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:47, 31 January 2020 review of submission by John BG Johnson

edit

I put the requested references. I am new here. Is there anyone to help me finish this article? John BG Johnson (talk) 20:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John BG Johnson, Many of the claims do not have references. Every claim made in an article needs references. But before going any further: do you have a conflict of interest to declare? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See 1 and 2 for previous requests (that got replies). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 20:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:34:37, 31 January 2020 review of submission by Kartiki Malik

edit


Kartiki Malik (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kartiki Malik: You appear to have written an article about yourself, but you don't meet the notability requirements for biographies. Sorry but we won't be including an article about you. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_January_31&oldid=985274985"