Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 November 2

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< November 1 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 3 >
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.


November 2

edit

09:09, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Sleepytimecat

edit

My article didn't meet notability guidelines, I was looking for further advice on what areas it's specifically lacking in. Would be a huge help in me figuring out how to move forward with it :) Sleepytimecat (talk) 09:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sleepytimecat I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion.
You declared a conflict of interest, what is the general nature of it?
The awards do not contribute to notability as the awards lack articles themselves(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). You've summarized the work of the organization but not described its particular influence. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sleepytimecat: I only had a quick look at the sources, didn't analyse them in any depth, but it seems to me they're either primary, or where secondary then they don't provide significant coverage directly of this organisation. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot Cheers for the fix! I was a volunteer for the organisation in the past.
@DoubleGrazing Thanks, that's really helpful, I did wonder if that might be the case here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleepytimecat (talk • contribs) 09:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Sleepytimecat. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
Unless you can find several such sources, there is no point in spending further time on this draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:04, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:18, 2 November 2024 review of submission by HindutvaWarriors

edit

Can you please tell me improvements in reference and citing? HindutvaWarriors (talk) 09:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HindutvaWarriors Sure. Add and properly format reliable sources, write in a neutral tone, and avoid using AI. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:43, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Christian Ries

edit

Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Christian_Ries#Eddie_Ware_moved_to_draftspace

Hello, I wrote an article about the very little known blues pianist Eddie Ware and cited a book (that I own) with a specific reference to the page in the book (which I read), a website (which I read) and the worldwide largest music database discogs.com (which I looked up). Thus, my submission is adequately supported by reliable sources which can be verified. I doubt that Johannes Maximilian has read the book and owns a record of this blues pianist, which are in fact quite rare. So here I am, a scientist knowing how to correctly cite and write a Wikipedia article being blocked by someone ignoring the references I provided and declining my submission.

Why is Johannes Maximilian's position not being questioned? He ignores my references and accuses me of not providing enough references in the draft article.

Thank you in advance, Christian Ries (talk) 09:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you asked them directly?
The body of the draft is completely unsourced, sources need to be in line next to the text they are supporting. "Very little known" almost certainly means this musician does not meet the definition of a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A passing mention and a blog post are not sufficient to establish notability, Wikipedia requires significant coverage in reliable sources.
(edit conflict) @Christian Ries Discogs and blogs are not reliable sources, as they are both user-generated. A single mention in a book is not significant coverage. In addition, please assume good faith and avoid casting aspersions. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:49, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Christian Ries: this was absolutely correctly declined for insufficient referencing (could have additionally been declined for lack of evidence of notability), and any reviewer would have likely done the same; there is no need to personally attack the reviewer who happened to be the bearer of bad news (or rather, news you didn't like). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You say "Beside the website I mention there are no other on-line sources about this exceptional, but mostly unknown blues pianist." this is a VERY strong indication that we cannot have an article about him. Theroadislong (talk) 09:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:19:47, 2 November 2024 review of submission by ZiWinger

edit


ZiWinger (talk) 12:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC) Need help? On Draft:Countryball World.[reply]

We base articles on what reliable, independent sources say. Your draft has zero sources. Theroadislong (talk) 13:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:16, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Bock1234

edit

Hello, please help me I have been trying this for the pass one month but it unfortunately declined please help me out on this article. Bock1234 (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of your sources are reliable or independent. Theroadislong (talk) 13:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:33, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Ahmad87861

edit

Please help me to publish this biography, i few days ago some contributors ask me for notability, so here is the evidence of notability (https://samaa.tv/2087323388-peshawar-s-emerging-musician-chooses-authenticity-over-fame), and please understand Alamsher LLC as a musician not a company, please tell me whats the problem now ? Ahmad87861 (talk) 14:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A single source written by a computer science student at Huzaifa Aftab Shaheed Higher Secondary School, Peshawar is unlikely to be significant enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 14:40, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:02, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Andrewworley048

edit

Yes I created an article of Syria wildfires it was declined because of of it said was unreliable sources that is not true it was a reliable source tell me what was wrong with it because there is nothing wrong with it, please reconsider this. thanks. Andrewworley048 (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You offered one source. An article should summarize multiple independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have declined it and tagged it for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. Theroadislong (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:32, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Thanosb94

edit

Hello,

can I use the Youtube channels of major tv and radio platforms as reference to showcase that one is making frequent appearances in TV and radio shows as a commentator on politics?

If not, what else could I do?

I have tried to go the websites of these platforms, but they do not showcase concrete and concentrated results for those who are guests on their platforms. Only random results regarding (I guess) the way each website is built. 


Thanosb94 (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thanosb94: yes, you can use reliable and reputable media outlets' own official YouTube channels as sources; that's just about the only acceptable use there is of YouTube as referencing. That said, someone appearing on media as a commentator almost certainly doesn't help establish notability, because being interviewed or otherwise commenting on some matter is not about them, it's them talking about something else. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Thanosb94. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:42, 2 November 2024 review of submission by 2A02:A473:63DF:1:E028:9E5A:A95A:E927

edit

To whom it may concern,

I'm a former vice president of PSAG and a honourary member. I would like to complete the Wikipedia article about our association. I'm aware of the limited sources mentioning PSAG. However, there can not be a more reliable and stable source than a university. Of course there are different universities out there, but University of Groningen is world's top research academic institution.

Please, let me know how could we secure the validation of wiki page about PSAG without additional references.

Sincerely,

Maciej Gladys 2A02:A473:63DF:1:E028:9E5A:A95A:E927 (talk) 18:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:59, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:43, 2 November 2024 review of submission by Bakhos2010

edit

Hello, I worked on this draft article, adding sources i found on Google. Now, there are no more sources to find. Is it notable now? If not, I will still work on it sometimes, possibly not everyday. Bakhos2010 (talk) 18:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bakhos2010 Seems to be WP:BLP1E, and that event is being a publicity seeking celebrity wannabe. So no. Others may hold different views. Submit it for review if you disagree with me. I will not review it 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent I agree with you. I thought this draft article wasn't BLP1E, but it is, so i won't submit it until some reliable sources about Norme come. Bakhos2010 (talk) 19:11, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:55, 2 November 2024 review of submission by WikiPsychology

edit

And if I add more information and sources to my article, would there be a chance of it being accepted? WikiPsychology (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiPsychology However, as @I dream of horses said 'Most of this can be merged into adolescence, positive youth development, and young adult. ', which suggests that you may be on the wrong road. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:10, 2 November 2024 review of submission by 2601:14D:4881:CD00:C121:6513:2E62:D6A0

edit

Please Advice 2601:14D:4881:CD00:C121:6513:2E62:D6A0 (talk) 19:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have written an advertisement about yourself. It has been rejected, and will not proceed further. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:17, 2 November 2024 review of submission by CrimsonScarletBurgundyy

edit

Hello. I want to know if adding photos of living, real people violates the creative commons of wikipedia. By the way, I do not own the photos that I plan to add, nor are they of me (instead, they are of a singer). CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 22:17, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CrimsonScarletBurgundyy that absolutely violates copyright. Do not do that. Qcne (talk) 22:19, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How could I add the image of the singer? Is there a way or not? I'm just checking twice because I saw some pages that I believe that have photos of real people not owed by the uploader. Sorry CrimsonScarletBurgundyy (talk) 22:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CrimsonScarletBurgundyy Pictures are almost always handled on Wikimedia Commons. This is a different web site. Commons:Licensing will give you a good overview.
You may only upload pictures which you have the right to upload. Things you find on the internet are not yours to upload and will result in loss of editing privileges on Commons or here, depending upon where they transgression is. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @CrimsonScarletBurgundyy. The answer to your question is that adding such photos doesn't necessarily violate copyright, but in most real cases it does. Only if you could get the copyright holder (who is usually the photographer, not the subject) to release the image under a licence that will permit anybody the world to reuse or alter the image for any purpose, can it be uploaded to Commons. (See Donating copyright materials).
However, please note that adding photos to your draft will not make any difference at all to whether it is accepted by a reviewer. That would be like trying to get a badly-built house accepted by the building control authorities and saying, "Look, I've painted this window beautifully!".
Like most new editors who immediately try the very challenging task of creating an article, you have written your draft BACKWARDS. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 22:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:43, 2 November 2024 review of submission by WhyBlockIP

edit

I just can't get approved, what do I do? WhyBlockIP (talk) 22:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WhyBlockIP You read HELP:YFA and start again from scratch 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rejected means there is nothing you can do. 331dot (talk) 22:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That too! 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_November_2&oldid=1256086924"