Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 May 11

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< May 10 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 12 >
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.


May 11

edit

01:44:49, 11 May 2020 review of submission by RaisingAHand

edit


Can you give recommendations on a Book's wiki page? I think it's normal to have a page talk about a book, why it's written, and who wrote it. Especially in a case where the book is raising money to help fight a children's disease, I think the more awareness there is the better.

RaisingAHand (talk) 01:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest to find out why this article is a bad fit for wikipedia. You should wait for someone else to naturally document your book/cause. If you hire or direct someone else to create this page, they will need to disclose it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#howtodisclose and of course include other https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research#Forms_of_researchsecondary sources to avoid a summary of primary sources constituting original research. --TZubiri (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:30:42, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 2400:1A00:BB10:7ECC:8C9C:A47B:F0F0:A463

edit


2400:1A00:BB10:7ECC:8C9C:A47B:F0F0:A463 (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

05:57:24, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Molee4real

edit

Hello, can I know why my article was rejected? because the reason is the information is not notable, while it is, I have provided even ref and I removed ref that are not needed as you asked, okay. so can you help what am supposed to do. Molee4real (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


06:38:38, 11 May 2020 review of submission by TZubiri

edit


TZubiri (talk) 06:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TZubiri, What do you mean you'll be publishing it soon? If you mean you're going to move it out of draftspace, I must caution that the article is likely to be deleted or returned to draft. If you mean you're going to submit it back to the AfC process, it will probably get declined. The issue is that the subject does not appear to be notable, i.e. he's just an average dude, and thus we have no special reason to write about him. Also, the sourcing is insufficient. His own blog/website should not be used as a source, as it is not independent of the subject. Unless you can find multiple reliable and independent sources that discuss him in more than just passing mention, we cannot write about him. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll focus on improving the article on his most notable work, Requests. Thanks for the response. --TZubiri (talk) 02:56, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm going to be publishing this article soon. If someone has specific criticisim, please let me know.

07:12:50, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 223.176.67.2

edit

Eumat114 please help me so that my article can be approved . 223.176.67.2 (talk) 07:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

07:24:34, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Romario mohanty

edit

Please help me so that my article can be approved Romario mohanty (talk) 07:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Romario mohanty I think you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not social media for people to tell the world about themselves. This is an encyclopedia, where articles about people must summarize what independent reliable sources like the news say with significant coverage say about people shown to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves. It appears that you do not meet that definition, and no amount of editing can confer notability on you. It depends on the sources. In addition, please review the autobiography policy as to why writing about yourself is strongly discouraged here. A Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable as well. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:09:16, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Ankit Krs Pandey

edit

Ankit Kumar Pandey is a inspiration for other player and a great personality through there biography i want to show the world to get inspired by his dedication. If there is any problem and error do let me know because i don't want delete this article and i can correct the error that are found by youAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 08:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of your 18 sources are reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ankit Krs Pandey Are you related to this person? If so, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare. Unfortunately, it seems that Mr. Pandey does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person, as the sources you provided are not independent reliable sources. If so, no amount of editing can change that. If you just want to tell the world about him and his good work, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

in this biography i had done something wrong like sources, codes or else please help meAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 09:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ankit Krs Pandey We can't help you provide sources that don't exist. Please review my comment above. If you have further comment, please edit this existing section instead of creating a new section. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sir, i have try so many time but then after giving my full potential and i am unable to submit it properly evrey time, i recorrect and checked the error but it doesn't seems working and declined again and again by wikipedia could you please suggest measures for these after opening tutorials i am unable to understand the matter within it so please help me out humble requestAnkit Krs Pandey (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ankit Krs Pandey, Your article had no proper references or inline citations. It also was informal and had [[WP:NPOV[[. The article has been rejected, which means that a fellow editor felt there is no chance that notability can be established. I would second this opinion. As such, your article will not be considered further.

08:42:58, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Missinfinite19

edit

I would like a re-review as I have improved my article and added multiple sources to my work Missinfinite19 (talk) 08:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no improvement, there are still zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:12:07, 11 May 2020 review of draft by SylviaatRSG

edit


I wonder if you would kindly look at the article for creation submission I wrote a few weeks ago. I have tried twice communicating with the editor that rejected the submission, and have gotten no response.

I believe a careful look at these three sources will demonstrate the notability of the subject:

https://www.michigandaily.com/section/soccer/michigan-alum-mission-popularize-soccer-states

https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2018/10/01/daniel-sillman-relevents-29-year-old-ceo-has-bold.html

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/en/Journal/Issues/2019/03/25/Forty%20Under%2040/Sillman.aspx

The Michigan Daily source is exclusively about Sillman. Yes, it has some quotes from him, but those quotes do not make up the majority of the source. The Bizjournals source is also entirely about Sillman, with just a small number of quotes from him, especially compared to the length of the entire source. The source also contains quotes from other people that know Sillman, but not that many directly from him. The Sports Business Daily is a reliable source. Although it is short, it is entirely about Sillman, and only quotes him at the end with two short statements.

When these three sources are taken together, I believe there is a good case to be made that they constitute significant coverage from reliable sources. Please take another look. I hope you will agree with me that Daniel Sillman should have an article on Wikipedia. SylviaatRSG (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SylviaatRSG, None of those sources are compelling. The first source is a student newspaper of a school that the subject is an alumni of. The second is bizjournals which has questionable reliability as many of their stories are sourced from press releases and in all likelihood it's paid for coverage. The third source I'm not familiar with, but a sports business publication has a very narrowly tailored audience and wouldn't do much in the way of demonstrating notability on a wider level. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:59, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Matejmitev13

edit


Hello,

I want to publish my first article and I have already made (what I think) is a good draft. The article is about Flavia Weedn, a famous US artist, illustrator, and poet. I am new to Wikipedia and many things are quite confusing for me in regard to the complicated processes.

I am writing here to ask for help on how I can improve my draft article? I would like some advice from experienced editors, I appreciate it!

Thank you. Matejmitev13 (talk) 10:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:07, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Bouhlechat

edit


Bouhlechat (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bouhlechat: You can resubmit drafts by clicking on the big blue button labeled submit. I see that you made substantial additions to the Draft.. I'm going to ping @Robert McClenon: as the last reviewer if he has something I missed, but from what I see now it looks acceptable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Bouhlechat, User:Victor Schmidt - I have not reviewed the draft in detail, but I see that it has numerous footnotes and that the external links have been dealt with properly, which were two of the issues that I identified, so that seems to be all right. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:49, 11 May 2020 review of submission by 93.42.65.231

edit
Burningwave Core
RepositoryBurningwave Core
Written inJava
TypeFramework for building frameworks
LicenseMIT License
Websitewww.burningwave.org

Burningwave Core is a fully indipendent, free and open source Java framework for building frameworks with functionality of:

  • criteria based classes search
  • scanning file system
  • generating classes during runtime
  • executing stringified code
  • facilitating the use of reflection

References

edit

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

References

  1. ^ Burningwave Core official source releases
  2. ^ Burningwave Core official binary releases
  3. ^ Burningwave official forum
  4. ^ Stoffer Khan: Generating "Classes at Runtime and Invoking Their Methods With and Without the Use of Reflection"
  5. ^ Pink Academy: "Java Masters Generate their Classes at Runtime"
  6. ^ Edvard Orsalian: "Burningwave Core: a Java frameworks building library with an original classpath scan engine"

93.42.65.231 (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This does not explain notability. Unbroken Chain (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joaquim Guttierrez: Websites dzone.com, medium.com, and quora.com contain user-generated content, so they are not reliable sources. The remaining three sources are not independent of Burningwave Core. There are no independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of the topic, so it is not notable, and Wikipedia should not have a stand alone article about it. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:57:07, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Hope samantha

edit

Added additional recent source from Fitch Ratings in the history section. https://www.fitchratings.com/research/insurance/fitch-affirms-cno-financial-group-ratings-outlook-stable-on-coronavirus-review-21-04-2020

Hope samantha (talk) 14:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hope samantha Your draft has been rejected after several declines, meaning that there is little to no chance it can be improved to meet Wikipedia standards. Please see the comments left by reviewers on the draft. Adding a Fitch Rating is not the significant coverage in reliable sources needed. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:39:17, 11 May 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Akaawase Teryima

edit


I need guidance on content creation on Wikipedia.

Bernard Akaawase (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bernard Akaawase: That draft was deleted as is was untouched for six months. the "Draft"-Namespace is not for the infinite hosting of material found unsiutable for the encyclopedia. I are no administrator and can't see what was in there, aparently you didn't submit it for review. You can submit draft's for review by adding {{subst:submit}} to it while they are still existing. The good news I have for you that pages that are deleted from the Wiki are not technically deleted from the harddrive of the Servers Wiikipedia is running on, they are only marked as deleted in the underlying datebase, and as such, can be undeleted. If you want to have this draft undeleted, go to WP:REFUND/G13 or simply ask here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:34:50, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Aayushmamu04

edit


Aayushmamu04 (talk) 16:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:12:00, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Nabila4535

edit


The article I submitted was declined. But I think the subject is notable and qualifies for a Wikipedia article. I went through the notability criteria and I would like to highlight that Alexey meets both the basic and additional criteria: Basic criteria: Alexey has been covered in the following secondary sources: Printed and online press (In Arabic): https://www.sana.sy/?p=806199 https://www.arabstoday.net/498/013347-أليكسي-أول-سوري-يحصل-على-منحة-رودز-للدراسة-في-أوكسفورد http://pen-sy.com/?p=25053 http://esyria.sy/sites/code/index.php?site=latakia&p=stories&category=ideas&filename=201810151235121&fbclid=IwAR0puBfwc-WQVeTG2wOCHJVW3-ajjPlg_VkEwmfJvmqBvMLT3sunRqRQGAk http://www.alwehdaonline.sy/index.php/since/19308-2017-11-26-16-23-51 http://www.alwehdaonline.sy/index.php/news-2/17449-2017-04-05-10-40-16

Primary sources TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DZ0XpQNW-4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATxh6xGe4ac&feature=youtu.be

Articles, weblinks: https://www.rhodeshouse.ox.ac.uk/scholars/rhodes-scholars-class-of-2018/alexey-youssef/ https://rhodesincubator.com/blog/2020/3/2/rhodes-incubator-entrepreneur-highlight-alexey-youssef-founder-of-keea-inc https://europeansting.com/tag/alexey-youssef/ https://international.weill.cornell.edu/alexey-youssef https://www.imtj.com/articles/lessons-front-line/


Additional criteria Alexey fulfills the first criteria in the additional criteria list: ("The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times.") 1. He is the first Syrian to be awarded the Rhodes Scholarship, which is considered the most prestigious scholarship globally with previous scholars like President Bill Clinton and secretary Condoleezza Rice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Scholarship) 2. He has been granted an Exceptional Talent in Digital Technolgy visa from the UK (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Points-based_immigration_system_(United_Kingdom)#Tier_1_(Exceptional_Talent))

I have added more references and made some edits before asking this question I have also checked other Wikipedia articles about biographies of living people. This article for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivarasa_Rasiah doesn't have references for every single statement

Can you please tell me what other things I can do to get the article published?

Nabila4535 (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Nabila4535:, it looks like your submission was declined for two reasons, the fact that it reads like an advertisement and a lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. In addition, the article's formatting does not quite meet Wikipedia standards. (I've gone ahead and fixed that part for you though.) Phrases like "Youssef was genuinely interested in building the capacity of the healthcare and medical education systems" and "Youssef has always been driven by innovations." make the article sound like an advertisement, or like you're trying to promote the article's subject instead of stating facts about them. I personally don't see a huge problem with the sources, although external links are not sources. You should find a way to integrate facts from those pages into your article and then use those pages as sources just like you did for the others. @Lapablo: is a much more experienced AfC reviewer than I, however, so there may be a problem I'm just not seeing. Hope this helps. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 20:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Squeeps10:, thanks for the valuable feedback and for fixing the formatting. I made the edits you suggested, so I hope the article is ready for re submission now? Nabila4535 (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it's mostly ready for publishing. There are a few small things that still need to be fixed, like formatting quirks, but go ahead and resubmit it. I'm going to refrain from reviewing it, and I can't guarantee whichever of my colleagues reviews it will accept it, but I think it has a good chance of being accepted. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 18:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Squeeps10:, thanks for replying. I'm not sure what quirks are. Can you please explain or give an example? Nabila4535 (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nabila4535:, A "quirk" is a small, insignificant trait or feature. In this case, I'm using the word to mean minor issues with formatting, although after going back through the article, I was only able to find two small issues, both of which I fixed. You can probably go ahead and resubmit your article now. It may be some time before it's reviewed again, due to a large backlog at the moment, but we'll get to it eventually. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Squeeps10: Great, I'll resubmit. Thank you so much!Nabila4535 (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome! If you have any other questions feel free to ask here or at my talk page. Cheers! Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 22:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:02:58, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Tejaskapoor22

edit


Tejaskapoor22 (talk) 21:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

help me

Hey @Tejaskapoor22:, what would you like help with? Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:38, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:15:38, 11 May 2020 review of draft by Evolarjun

edit


Hi, I'm trying to revise and revive the AMRFinderPlus page. Editor Sam-2727 marked it for deletion some time ago. One of the criticisms was a lack of notability, and since it is (in my opinion) more widely used than several of the database pages I'm trying to figure out what kinds of citations to indicate notability. Sam-2727 indicated that the excessive use of the word "Curated" reads like a sales pitch, but to my reading it is a verb indicating who manages the data in the database. I changed one instance of the verb "curated" with "was created by and is maintained by", but it seems a bit awkward.

I'm also struggling to improve readability to a non-technical audience. I linked to wikipedia articles about a bunch of the topics. Suggestions would be appreciated.

I'm a newbie at this, so apologies for what are likely dumb questions, but for scientific databases I'm not sure how to improve the article to make it approvable.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Evolarjun (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Evolarjun:, your sources don't seem too bad, though I'm far from an expert in microbiology. My primary issue with the page is the excessive amount of "technobabble", we don't need to know every little thing the database does/can do. But keep in mind that I can only understand roughly half the article, and the rest in incomprehensible to me. I'd suggest reading WP:RF. Hope this helps. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 21:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Evolarjun: issues such as this can often be resolved by asking for help from a relevant WikiProject, in this case WP:WikiProject Genetics or WP:WikiProject Medicine might be able to assist. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help @Squeeps10: and @Dodger67: I'll try a more dramatic rewrite and remove some of the more technical detail.
You're very welcome. Feel free to inquire here or at my talk page if you have any more questions. Squeeps10 Talk to meMy edits 18:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:46:34, 11 May 2020 review of submission by Smokethatskinwagon

edit


Smokethatskinwagon (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I feel the moderator Surfboy, is being overwhelmingly difficult, rude, short and not seriously considering the articles real story. A ACM or CMA nomination of any kind is hard to achieve, let alone win. This is part of country music and country radio history, and is deserving of a Wikipedia article, highlighting a notable person. This individual has verified accounts on Facebook, Twitter, google and tiktok as well, which shows he is of high public visibility and notability.

Smokethatskinwagon (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smokethatskinwagon. The four major Academy of Country Music Awards: Entertainer of the Year, Male Vocalist of the Year, Female Vocalist of the Year, and Song of the Year, are significant enough music awards that winning one is a good indication that the winner may be notable. People who win them invariably have been the subject of multiple, independent, in depth, reliable, secondary sources.
You overestimate the significance, however, of the Academy of Country Music Radio Awards. Even winning "On-Air Personality of the Year - National" would be unlikely, alone, to convincingly demonstrate notability. Being nominated for "On-Air Personality of the Year - Small" (i.e. not in the top 100 markets) doesn't come close to making the nominee notable. And having verified social media accounts has nothing whatsoever to do with notability.
Sulfurboy is correct (as are the four previous reviewers) that your topic is not suitable for a stand alone encyclopedia article. You way wish to consider alternative outlets for your writing, ones that have different inclusion criteria. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_May_11&oldid=985275919"