Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 October 27

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< October 26 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 28 >
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.


October 27

edit

00:02, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Iaroszler1

edit

Hello,

I am confused about the rejection I recieved. The Cohen, Boaz (1934) review of Kaplan's book as well as the Bard article, Terry R. Bard, "Julius Kaplan, Hyman Klein, and the Saboraic Element," talk about Kaplan in detail, not to mention the articles in Hebrew. How many more citations are required? If it is about biographical information, there is almost nothing about him besides his own description of himself from his dissertation. Iaroszler1 (talk) 00:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

00:12, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Zabezt

edit

My draft was rejected due to sourcing issues, do you know how I can fix it? I’m pretty sure all of the references I used are published, in depth, and reliable. Also, this draft will probably have to become an article eventually, so even if I can’t fix any issues, can’t other editors do it? Zabezt (talk) 00:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zabezt Nothing has to become an article here. Notable items which are verifiable tend to do so
I have no idea why you feel it necessary to decorate your draft with flags of all nations, it decreases readability. I suggest that ther removal will enhance the probability of a reviewer actually looking at it in detail.
I see that you have resubmitted it. A reviewer will be along in due course. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me for my confusion, I’m still a new user. I understand, I will remove them. Zabezt (talk) 13:10, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first two citations are to obviously non-independent sources, and the third one looks very much as if it is based on a press release, and so is also not independent. The Reuters piece might be independent, but it doesn't say much about AUSSOM.
You need to base your article almost 100% on sources which are all three of reliable, independent, and with significant coverage (see WP:42). (They do not have to be in English). If at least three such sources do not exist, then the mission probably does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and the article is not possible. ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any thoughts on the changes I made? Zabezt (talk) 23:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:00, 27 October 2024 review of submission by CSK1987

edit

Dear Wiki team, I would appreciate your guidance on which sections require improvement and the recommended number of additional references. Thank you for your assistance.

Thank You, CSK CSK1987 (talk) 08:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any discussion of that would be academic, as the draft was rejected(after numerous declines), meaning that it will not be considered further. Much of the draft is unsourced. The awards are meaningless towards notability as the awards themselves do not have articles(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award).
You must disclose your connection to this person(you took an image of them and they posed for you). Please see conflict of interest and paid editing. ("paid editing" includes employment in any capacity) 331dot (talk) 08:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While a moot issue since this has been rejected, if you write new articles in the future, there are certainly a few lessons you should draw from this. One, don't source things backwards; you appear to have been written the prose first and then tried to find the backing for it, which is the opposite of the best approach. Find the reliable, independent sources first and then only write what can be sourced. It's also important to listen to feedback as the reviewers are there to assist; you did not heed any of the critiques of the article in a meaningful way. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 08:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:56, 27 October 2024 review of submission by 115.70.155.108

edit

Hi, I understand that it isn’t enough proof and stuff but there is not enough to prove to you. I am being very honest and are not lying to you, please accept it, please. Hope you understand, Blessings. 115.70.155.108 (talk) 08:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one has said you are lying, please see the messages left on the draft. It appears you are writing about yourself, see WP:AUTO. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, hope you are having a good day

I just wanted to let you know that there aren’t many sources on the web about what he actually did, and wanted to ask for your mercy and let me put up my article. I am not lying to you, you might still think that I am but I promise I am not. Please help me out.

Hope you understand and accept, Blessings. 115.70.155.108 (talk) 09:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't start a new thread for every post, just edit this existing section. The information needs to be verifiable. We can't verify your promises. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not issue any form of religious blandishment when you sign your messages. Strewing whatever 'blessings' are around behind you may be considered by some to be offensive. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 10:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your references are not in-line, as is hard-required for biographical content. All of your sources are either Facebook (no editorial oversight) or statlines (too sparse); we want news articles that discuss him/his performance at length. And your "blessings" are wasted on me. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:57, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Tihanh

edit

Tell me what's wrong, please help me! Tihanh (talk) 09:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer left you a message as to what is wrong, you have too many references. A small number of high quality references is preferred to a large number of poor references. It's also not clear how the band passes WP:BAND. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:18, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Athletescv

edit

It takes too long to review the draft Athletescv (talk) 11:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Athletescv: you only submitted this five days ago.
What is your involvement with this draft; you didn't create it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:36, 27 October 2024 review of submission by UsamaSarwar

edit

I hope you're well. I wanted to reach out regarding the recent rejection of my Wikipedia article submission about Usama Sarwar and Project Connect. I understand that the submission was declined due to concerns around notability and perceived promotional content.

I've since made adjustments, focusing the article solely on Project Connect and included an independent source that provides significant coverage of the project. However, I’m seeking further guidance on how I might improve the draft to better align with Wikipedia's guidelines, particularly around addressing notability concerns without appearing promotional.

Could you provide some advice on the specific changes that would help the article meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion? I want to ensure that I follow the guidelines and produce content that is both neutral and informative.

Thank you for your time and feedback. UsamaSarwar (talk) 11:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UsamaSarwar: this draft has been rejected and is awaiting deletion.
Please read and understand WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoubleGrazing,
Thank you for your feedback. I now better understand the concerns around conflict of interest (COI) and autobiography (AUTOBIO). Moving forward, I’d like to seek advice on how best to proceed, ensuring neutrality and adherence to Wikipedia’s guidelines.
Would it be advisable to have an uninvolved third party contribute to the article to address the COI issue? Additionally, I’ve identified secondary sources that provide independent coverage of the project. Should I focus on ensuring that independent editors handle future submissions to avoid any promotional issues?
Thank you for your guidance. UsamaSarwar (talk) 12:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@UsamaSarwar: you say you better understand COI and AUTOBIO... and then you go ahead and create yet another draft about yourself. It seems your sole purpose here is to promote yourself, would that be a fair assessment? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the need for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. However, I believe that primary sources often provide an authentic representation of an individual's contributions, and some news media can sometimes be ambiguous. Could you please advise me on how to enhance my submission to meet the notability criteria? Additionally, if there are specific types of references or sources that would be most helpful in demonstrating Usama Sarwar's notability, I would greatly appreciate your guidance. Thank you for your support! UsamaSarwar (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@UsamaSarwar: with respect, it does not matter in the slightest if you "believe" that primary sources are the way to go. They're not.
I'll say it once more, bluntly: don't try to write about yourself. Even if you're notable, of which there's so far no evidence. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you solicit a third party to edit for you, they are no longer a third party and would need to disclose their relationship with you. 331dot (talk) 12:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, can you please provide me a template for Biography? I just saw that this Biography is missing and I believe it should be on Wikipedia because it is useful for the people to know about the contributions of Usama Sarwar to the society by developing the community apps that are free to use. UsamaSarwar (talk) 13:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:51, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Igreo

edit

hello i wanted to know what you think about this review: The comment the reviewer left was: Director of non notable films doesn't meet Do you think the project should be abandoned? Thanks Igreo (talk) 12:51, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot show that this person is notable, there is little point in further editing. If you think they may become notable later, you can revisit the draft then. Drafts will remain as long as they are edited once every six months; even if deleted, it can be restored. 331dot (talk) 12:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:00, 27 October 2024 review of submission by UsamaSarwar

edit

Hello, I recently submitted a draft for a biography on Usama Sarwar through Articles for Creation, but it was declined due to concerns about the notability and references. I understand the need for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. However, I believe that primary sources often provide an authentic representation of an individual's contributions, and some news media can sometimes be ambiguous. Could you please advise me on how to enhance my submission to meet the notability criteria? Additionally, if there are specific types of references or sources that would be most helpful in demonstrating Usama Sarwar's notability, I would greatly appreciate your guidance. Thank you for your support! UsamaSarwar (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't create a new thread for every post. And we know you're editing about yourself, so there is no need to speak about yourself in the third person. 331dot (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:17, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Baro Bromberger

edit

Hello, I'm requesting assistance because my draft got declined 2 times, even though my sources are reliable. Im bilingual and one of the sources is in Polish, and that source has most of the info from my draft. So could it be that it gets declined because the people that check the submissions dont take it as reliable? Thanks in advance Baro Bromberger (talk) 13:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Baro Bromberger: your draft has a number of issues. Firstly, it only cites one source. Yes, I know it lists a few more, but these aren't cited anywhere so they arguably don't support anything in the draft.
Secondly, with only a single citation, the vast majority of the information is unreferenced. How do we know it's true?
Thirdly, the sources are primary, so they don't establish notability per WP:GNG. It's also debatable how reliable and independent they are. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. Will try my best to solve the issues Baro Bromberger (talk) 13:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just fixed it, hope it gets accepted now Baro Bromberger (talk) 15:34, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:32, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Ahmad87861

edit

Why my wikipedia page Alamsher LLC has been deleted for violatoin of copyright meterial,these images has been taken by my self from Alamsher LLC, i have a orignal images and i am the owner of these, please how can i recreate my wikipedia page about Alamsher LLC? Ahmad87861 (talk) 13:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahmad87861: I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to. Alamsher LLC was deleted a couple of weeks ago, because it didn't demonstrate that the subject is notable. This draft Draft:Alamsher LLC is still there, as is your sandbox one User:Ahmad87861/sandbox. If images have been deleted, that may have happened on the Commons, which is a different project from the English Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
is a Google Knowledge Panel considered enough to establish notability for an artist on Wikipedia? If not, what kind of sources are typically required? Ahmad87861 (talk) 13:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. Please see WP:42. Ca talk to me! 14:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ahmad87861: Since the Knowledge Panel is known to cull information from Wikipedia and undergoes no editorial oversight, it's never going to be an acceptable source. We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that discuss the subject at length, are written by identifiable authors, and are subject to rigourous fact-checking and editorial oversight. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright thank you! 182.184.208.70 (talk) 16:38, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:15:41, 27 October 2024 review of submission by TNM202

edit

Hello. I have made a draft for this article on my alternative account(this one), as the main account was under a wikibreak. As it is a new account, it would require to be autoconfirmed to be allowed to directly create the article, however as my main account is an autoconfirmed account with 393 edits, I believe it would be directly able to create this page. Is it possible to somehow transfer the article from this account to the main one? Thank you. TNM202 (talk) 15:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TNM202: the technical answer is that it isn't possible to 'transfer' it from one account to another (not to my knowledge, at any rate); in fact, I'm not even sure what that means. However, your account which has the necessary permissions to publish it can do so, regardless of which account created it.
The non-technical answer, which you didn't ask for but get as a bonus (!), is that I'm not sure this is an appropriate topic, per WP:NOTNEWS. It may in time develop into one, if the scope of the event expands, or it shows lasting or wider impact. But so far it seems to be just a relatively ROTM news item. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TNM202: Articles are not tied to accounts what-so-ever.In fact, other than user pages no page on Wikipedia is tied to a user account what-so-ever. I would also very carefully read WP:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4#ARBPIA General Sanctions as there is a non-zero chance this ends up related to that, and if it is neither of you have met the necessary 500-edit + 30-day threshold. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:46, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to both of you for the valuable insights TNM101 (chat) 16:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:29, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Baro Bromberger

edit

Hello again, got declined again. I added more links, and changed the styling. Why do the revievers keep flagging the sources as unreliable? There are only about 4 pages that even mention this phone, so finding a better source is near impossible. The sites I mention are very reputable and definitely reliable. Could Someone please have another look at my draft? Thanks in advance Baro Bromberger (talk) 17:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Baro Bromberger: please don't start a new thread with each comment, just add to the existing one.
I don't think either of the two sources you're citing are particularly reliable, one is a small private 'museum' (of sorts), the other looks like an enthusiast site of some sort. When I say "not reliable", I'm not saying they are lying or anything, just that they don't look like sources that employ editorial oversight, have a reputation for fact-checking, etc.
In any case, these two sources aren't enough to establish notability per WP:GNG, so if the draft wasn't declined for sourcing, it could be declined for that. And if, as you say, better sources aren't available, then that almost certainly means this subject is not notable enough to justify an article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:42, 27 October 2024 review of submission by BrendaAbdelall

edit

I dont know why the topic is not sufficiently notable ?? BrendaAbdelall (talk) 17:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BrendaAbdelall: because after multiple reviews, you haven't produced any evidence that the subjet (ie. you?) is notable. The onus is very much on you to do that.
Also, this is very poorly referenced, and basically reads like a CV/resume.
Finally, are you aware that we very strongly discourage autobiographies (see WP:AUTOBIO)? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:52, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BrendaAbdelall: We have little tolerance for autobiographies. Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):
This looks like a case of chaff choking out the wheat. Also, as noted above by DoubleGrazing, this is written more like a resume, rather than an encyclopaedia article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:17, 27 October 2024 review of submission by AYGFS

edit

How do I delete this draft? AYGFS (talk) 20:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ive interpreted your question as a request, so I did so- even if you did nothing, it would be deleted in six months, or you can mark it for speedy deletion by putting {{db-user}} on the draft. 331dot (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:53, 27 October 2024 review of submission by M.krakovets

edit

Please explain why the Elen Smile page was rejected again after revision? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elen_Smile

I am thoroughly familiar with the guidelines and followed them carefully, double-checking all sources, which are reliable. What’s wrong? Please help. M.krakovets (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was declined NOT rejected, you have a large number of links to the songs (not required) and a large number of YouTube references (Not a reliable source). Theroadislong (talk) 21:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please clarify: is a YouTube link considered a reliable source if it comes from the official channels of TV networks or shows? You still haven't answered. M.krakovets (talk) 04:38, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@M.krakovets: if a YouTube clip is on the official channel of a reputable broadcaster and is featuring their own content, then yes, that can be a useful source; in that case it is not materially different from the same content being available on the broadcaster's original broadcast or streaming channels. The question then is, what is that content, and how useful is it for verifying something meaningful in a draft. In this case, the YouTube clips cited seem mainly to verify that the subject appeared in some TV shows. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that’s correct. The broadcast was on live television, and this is simply a recording of that broadcast. Here, it’s being used specifically to verify the singer’s participation in those television shows. M.krakovets (talk) 17:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:45, 27 October 2024 review of submission by AnnMitchell1964

edit

How is a picture placed on the page. AnnMitchell1964 (talk) 22:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With zero reliable indepndent sources, a picture is the very last thing you need to worry about. Theroadislong (talk) 22:47, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:53, 27 October 2024 review of submission by 183.109.33.200

edit

Hmm.. why? 183.109.33.200 (talk) 22:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are talking about Draft:2025 FIFA U-17 World Cup. It is too soon for the topic to have reliable, indepedent, and in-depth sources covering it. It serves little use to the readers since it contains minimal information. Ca talk to me! 01:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:19, 27 October 2024 review of submission by Jnc V

edit

I am currently writing a article about the school I graduated from not too long ago. I would like to know how I could improve the article, such as what to add, change, or cite within the document. There are not many reliable or up-to-date resources online, and any sources that could be used seem to not be enough for the article to be published. What should I do as a beginner? Jnc V (talk) 23:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sources do not necessarily have to be up-to-date, as long as the time period is mentioned (like through phrases like "As of 2023"). Timeliness of sources is also not relevant for matters that is unlikely to change with time, such as the history of the school.
Most of the sources in the draft only give basic facts like accreditation status that apply to majority of schools. Some are not independent from the school itself. Ca talk to me! 01:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The draft is being rejected for not fullfilling WP:NSCHOOL. What suggestions do you have to make it qualified for the main encyclopedia? Jnc V (talk) 02:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend reading WP:42, an essay. Ca talk to me! 05:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_October_27&oldid=1254872368"