Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, List, Sorting, Feed		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply, By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
  • Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question
Please check back often for answers.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


September 18

[edit]

04:11, 18 September 2024 review of submission by 1972SUnite

[edit]

My article was declined due to unreliable resources. However, my resources, i.e. the news articles cited, are credible, but I believe the reason that they are being flagged is because the url to these articles require subscriptions to view. Because these are historic newspapers, from the 1970s, while they may not be easily accessible they can be located with a few extra steps.

In this situation, would I be better off not linking the articles to a url, and citing only the articles themselves? 1972SUnite (talk) 04:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the reviewer was more concerned about its sparse sourcing rather than reliability. Many of the claims present are not backed up with a inline citation, and contains unattributed opinions. Text like " The events of November 16, 1972, may have tested their endurance, but their unwavering commitment to the development of Black social consciousness remains and will continue to be an everlasting legacy." belongs in an argumentative essay, not in an encyclopedia. Note that ChatGPT and other text-generating AIs are poor in generating prose with dry prose, and you should edit them. Ca talk to me! 04:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, do you really own the copyrights to the historic pictures? Ca talk to me! 04:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:26, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Saddam19

[edit]

hi wikipedia

i want to this draft Madarsa_Rahmatul-Uloom_Naukatola to an artical post on wikipedia this a eduction centre in my city raxaul far from 4 km a small village naukatola and this madarsa is very popular in around the raxaul sub division . please help me .

thank you your user saddam19 Saddam19 (talk) 06:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Saddam19: your draft hasn't been reviewed because you haven't submitted it yet. That said, there is no point in submitting it as it stands, because it is only referenced with Facebook, which is not an acceptable source. See the notability guideline for organisations, WP:ORG, which tells you what sort of sources we need to see before this draft can be accepted for publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:29, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Top famous 2021

[edit]

edit this page Top famous 2021 (talk) 06:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Top famous 2021: this draft has been rejected, as you very well know. And please stop removing the AfC templates, this has been pointed out before. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:52, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Pratikshourabh1122

[edit]

can you help me what to do to get publish Pratikshourabh1122 (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pratikshourabh1122: I've posted advice on your talk page, which I presume you didn't read, because you came to ask on my talk page, which I answered, and you probably didn't read that either, as you're now here. This is not LinkedIn, where you tell the world about yourself and your software development etc. skills. This is an encyclopaedia. If your only objective here is self-promotion, you need to stop now and find a different outlet for that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I gave my highly useful and carefully thought out deletion notice -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:01, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Mellouis98337

[edit]

Can you assist me on how to get my draft submitted? Mellouis98337 (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mellouis98337: Wikipedia is not the place to promote your website, you need to find other marketing channels for that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:57, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Pratap singh112

[edit]

Please let me know who to write the article Pratap singh112 (talk) 11:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was deleted as blatant promotion. Promotional activities are not permitted here. If what I assume is your company(if you work for this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID) merits a Wikipedia article according to our definition of a notable company, someone independent of the company will eventually write one. I suggest you go on about the work of your company as if Wikipedia did not exist. 331dot (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:40, 18 September 2024 review of submission by 2A02:C7C:7720:7000:14FC:1CBA:85A9:3658

[edit]

Advice on declined submission Hi Please can I get some help with a draft submission that has been declined: Draft:Amy Bateman

This is the feedback: do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject

I've been through the guidelines but don't understand what is missing. Please could you help?

Thanks Natalie 2A02:C7C:7720:7000:14FC:1CBA:85A9:3658 (talk) 12:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your header, you had the words "advice on declined submission" where the draft title should go. The whole url is not needed so I removed that, too. Remember to log in when posting.
Most of the awards do not contribute towards notability as the awards lack articles themselves(like Academy Award or Nobel Peace Prize), though Lakeland Book of the Year has one. You have references, but they are not in line next to the information they support, see Referencing for beginners. You have desribed her curator work but not said what independent sources consider notable about it, how it was particularly important/significant/influential.
If you are the creator of the draft, your username suggests you are connected to this person, what is the connection? 331dot (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This refers to notability, which is a core requirement for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. You need to cite multiple (3+) sources that are secondary (mainly print or broadcast media covering the subject from an external perspective), and reliable (editorial oversight, fact-checking, etc.), and entirely independent of the subject and of each other, and that have provided significant coverage (not just passing mentions, brief 'profiles', etc.) of the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:54, 18 September 2024 review of submission by OrlandoX3

[edit]

Good morning OrlandoX3 (talk) 13:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OrlandoX3: that's not a question, but now that you're here, let me ask you one: which account(s) have you previously edited, or are currently editing, under? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing I'm thinking a RhodesAvenue sock - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RhodesAvenue KylieTastic (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@KylieTastic: yup, seems a pretty good match to me. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:56, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Rickmood

[edit]

I want to know why my page getting rejected? Rickmood (talk) 13:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rickmood I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion. Your draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft submission process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted(and you have done so). The reviewer will leave you feedback, as prior reviewers have. Do you have specific questions about that feedback?
You also seem to be associated with this film, as you claim that you personally created its movie poster. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rickmood: Draft:Hangama Dot Com hasn't been submitted.
When you say "my page", can you elaborate? Because the creator is not your Rickmood account, it is Hangama1 – do you also operate that account? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:02, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I saw Draft:Hangama Dot Com 2. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you seem to be talking about Draft:Hangama Dot Com 2?
Please still answer the question whether Hangama1 is your account. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:38, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Timixion

[edit]

I would need to expand the article, add sources and possibly edit the work that I added. I would appreciate any help. Timixion (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Timixion You need to be aware of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Is there a reason why you deploy the subjunctive: I would need to expand the article? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:37, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Rakin Mahmud

[edit]

I hope this message finds you well! I would appreciate your suggestions regarding the recent rejection of my article. Could you please explain why the article about Mridul Mahmud was rejected?

Mridul Mahmud is an entrepreneur currently generating a six-to-seven-figure (USD) income every month, making his online identity very important. He is the Founder and CEO of Affixin Media, and his role is highly relevant to the industry.

Could you advise me on what steps I should take to have the article about Mridul Mahmud approved?

I look forward to your reply and guidance. Best regards, Rakin 

Rakin Mahmud (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rakin Mahmud: we don't give a [fill in your favourite expletive here] how much money this person makes, it has nothing to do with, well, anything really. And if his "online identity" is important to him (how do you know, BTW?), he will have any number of ways of developing it; Wikipedia isn't one of them.
This draft has been rejected and is pending speedy deletion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rakin Mahmud You may not use Wikipedia to advertise, nor should you expect it to enhance your or anyone else's reputation. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Oh, and as this wasn't the first time this draft has been attempted, I would suggest leaving it there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:25, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Catwurst

[edit]

How do I edit the page/article title? When I click edit, it does not allow me to edit, "Draft: Catwurst". That's not the correct title of the draft page. Catwurst (talk) 17:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Catwurst on eventual acceptance, if accepted, the title will be set by the a accepting reviewer 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you put your username in place of the title you wanted. The specific title of a draft is not particularly relevant. Once it is accepted for placement in the encyclopedia, the reviewer will move it to the proper title.
I am wondering if you are associated with the law firm you are writing about. 331dot (talk) 17:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hello,

I recently submitted a draft article about the law firm, Steptoe & Johnson PLLC and it was declined, the reason was that there is another Wikipedia article about Steptoe LLP and was recommended to edit that entry. However, both are separate law firms from each other, and would think they warrant separate entries.

Are there recommendations on how to handle or navigate this situation? Both entities have very similar names but are independent from each other.

I'm not sure how to navigate the Catwurst (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't start a new thread with every comment, please edit this existing section. Are you associated with this lawfirm?
The only thing we are concerned with is if the firm meets our definition of a notable organization, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, in order to merit a separate article. 331dot (talk) 20:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:57, 18 September 2024 review of submission by ElizbethAftonFnafEdits

[edit]

why was it deleted ElizbethAftonFnafEdits (talk) 19:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your post to link to your draft. It wasn't deleted, it was rejected. It is a completely unsourced essay. 331dot (talk) 20:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:32, 18 September 2024 review of submission by Gemgemz88

[edit]

I am struggling to make this athletes profile publishable I have corrected all feedback given. And would like further support. Gemgemz88 (talk) 20:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gemgemz88 I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion. What support you are seeking? 331dot (talk) 20:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It might help you if you drop the idea that what you are writing is a "profile" - something you might find in a directory or a magazine. What you are trying to write is an encyclopaedia article which should in neutral and plain language summarise what reliable independent sources| have published about this person. ColinFine (talk) 09:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:55, 18 September 2024 review of submission by 79.184.255.204

[edit]

Hello,

I would be grateful for any guidance on how I might improve the sources to meet the necessary standards.

My page was declined with the comment: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources." However, I'm not sure whether the concern lies with specific sources I've used or if it pertains to all of them.

I have gone through the "Referencing for Beginners" and "Citing Sources" guidelines and ensured that every statement is backed by sources. Most of these are from small to medium-sized music blogs, zines, and portals. While they may not be on the scale of something like Metal Hammer, I made sure they aren’t from platforms with only 1-2k followers. In fact, I have also included a publication from Rock Hard Italy, which I believe is quite reputable. Importantly, I have avoided linking to our own site or socials, and I’ve been very careful not to use anything that could be viewed as manipulative or self-promotional.

Thank you so much for your time and assistance. 79.184.255.204 (talk) 20:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:13, 18 September 2024 review of submission by QbanMusician

[edit]

How can I add photos of the artist ?? QbanMusician (talk) 21:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photos are not relevant to the draft process, which only considers the text and sources. You don't need to worry about images until the draft is accepted. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QbanMusician See Help:images Ca talk to me! 15:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 19

[edit]

01:11, 19 September 2024 review of submission by Paulina Holzier

[edit]

I am creating a Wikipedia article for an actor who created a weird rabbit hole/ARG about himself twenty years ago and it was declined. As a Hitman (fan of James Holzier) I am disappointed that the draft was declined but I hope I can get some good assistance from this! Paulina Holzier (talk) 01:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:57, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 2001:8003:981B:100:E8D3:8175:D0D6:1891

[edit]

Good afternoon, can you please help me to understand the reason why my draft has been rejected? I am new and I do not understand what I have done wrong. 2001:8003:981B:100:E8D3:8175:D0D6:1891 (talk) 04:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you WisteriaxLloyd? If so, please remember to log in whenever editing.
This draft was declined because the reviewer felt that the subject wasn't notable. The notability guideline for books is WP:NBOOK; please study that, and consider what evidence you can provide that this book meets the guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for our help!
I still don't understand why my draft has been rejected. How can I prove the notability?
It is a translated page from the original Japanese wiki article regarding a Light novel title, it has decent popularity as it won the 1st place of the most important Light Novel Award in Japan last year. The English version of Comic has been licensed and Vol.1 has been published, Vol.2 will be out next Feb.
There is also Chinese wiki page of it even through there is no official Chinese translated work published yet.
If I add in the English Publisher information, will it help?
Sorry to be a pain!
Many thanks, WisteriaxLloyd (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WisteriaxLloyd: this draft was only declined, not rejected. Rejection means the end of the road; decline means you're allowed to resubmit once you've addressed the decline reasons.
Whether an article on this subject has been accepted into the Japanese or Chinese Wikipedia is not relevant here, as each language version is a completely separate project with their own rules and requirements. For publication on the English-language Wikipedia, the draft needs to meet our notability standards.
As I already mentioned, the relevant notability guideline for books is found at WP:NBOOK, please familiarise yourself with that, and demonstrate with evidence that this book meets it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick reply! Much appreciated!
I will try working on the English Publisher details in this case as this is the only thing regarding notability.
Once that is done I will re-submit.
Cheers, WisteriaxLloyd (talk) 15:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:20, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 2401:F40:1401:2:88D4:CE1B:7BFC:3099

[edit]

Why was my recent article rejected, and how can I improve it for approval? 2401:F40:1401:2:88D4:CE1B:7BFC:3099 (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please log in when posting. Perhaps your draft is in your sandbox? It doesn't exist at Draft:Sarah Bundy. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:05, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 39.60.214.241

[edit]

shooting totally complete. 39.60.214.241 (talk) 14:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't yet been released, though. WP:NFF states "films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." 331dot (talk) 14:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:10, 19 September 2024 review of submission by InnovArtist

[edit]

Hello,

I would like to know what is wrong with the sources of this article? I tried to mention only reliable websites or articles and catalogs. Can you help me? InnovArtist (talk) 15:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The bit that you are missing is that in order to contribute to establishing notability, sources must be independent. 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) 21:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:18, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 2405:201:6807:C8B6:5975:DE49:8519:4C6F

[edit]

Please advice Places where I should add some cite or link reference or which areas I should remove as this is my first work here I don't want to get removed. 2405:201:6807:C8B6:5975:DE49:8519:4C6F (talk) 15:18, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected due to failure to heed reviewers' critiques and will not be considered further. The reviewers keep pointing at WP:Articles for deletion/Neeru Yadav, which you seem to either be unaware of or have blithely ignored. Read that AfD debate thoroughly. If you can't or won't, then this is the end of the line for the draft. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, when you've been blocked, you're not allowed to edit from a different account or from an IP address. The block applies to you personally, not just to the blocked account. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:37, 19 September 2024 review of submission by Writing is easy

[edit]

I need someone to help me rewrite a new page I submitted on "Bedroom Ventilation," where I explain how crucial it is for health. Writing is easy (talk) 15:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Writing is easy: Unless you have sources about bedroom ventilation that satisfy the incredibly strict standards of WP:MEDRS, the answer is no. Editors here generally do not co-write drafts anyway. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:05, 19 September 2024 review of submission by PorterCreator

[edit]

Hi! I received the message that "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you." I used footnotes in this article so not sure why it was rejected. Perhaps it was that I was missing footnotes in a specific section? Any help would be appreciated! PorterCreator (talk) 18:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PorterCreator: You have unreferenced claims in the article, particularly around the founding and founders of Verified News Network. Any claim about a living person needs to get sourced or get out. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I did find some issues with the footnotes upon further checking and have updated them! PorterCreator (talk) 19:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:52, 19 September 2024 review of submission by SensFan8

[edit]

Hi, I'm really not sure why this submission does not qualify as a list or why it got declined, when it is basically identical in concept to many other accepted lists like it (Ex: List of Washington Capitals players, or List of Ottawa Senators players). In those pages, it has been years and the page is still manageable. I help manage them myself. If someone could please help me, or show how I can appeal this decision, I would really appreciate it. Thanks! SensFan8 (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could ask the reviewer to reconsider. Note that it's not usually a good idea to cite other articles as a reason for yours, as those too could be inappropriate, see other stuff exists. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits.
This submission process is (usually) voluntary; if you want to roll the dice that it would survive an Articles for Deletion discussion, you could move it into the encyclopedia yourself. 331dot (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response. Do you know how I could ask the reviewer to reconsider and how I would go about potentially moving it into the Encyclopedia myself? Thanks! SensFan8 (talk) 20:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SensFan8, you can ask the reviewer to reconsider by going to their talk page and starting a new section with your question. Or we can just ping @Timtrent in here. fwiw, I think he's correct to question the article, though I'd be tempted to let it through AfC and see what happens, myself. Fair warning that "what happens" might be "a deletion discussion". -- asilvering (talk) 04:11, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SensFan8 and Asilvering: I am unsure that I can do better than my rationale: "I am not persuaded that this qualifies under WP:NLIST. There are also only two years here so far. In a few years this will be unmanageable, and doubtless better handled by a category, and conceivably a navigation template for each year, with a link to the next and previous years"
I believe that this has a lower than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process if moved to mainspace. However, that is only my opinion. I will not object if this is moved to mainspace. I am very likely to voice the same opinion at any deletion discussion, and may decide to open one.
I do not "threaten deletion" because these discussions involve the community, and community consensus is greater than the opinion of a single reviewer. Thus there is no threat. I am sure that if moved to mainspace and kept after consensus that Wikipedia will be improved. I am equally sure that if it is deleted after consensus, that Wikipedia will be improved.
I'm aware that this has not answered your question in any direct manner. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should note that, if moved to Mainsapce, WP:DRAFTIFY has a term which will disallow redraftification. "Another editor has asserted that the page belongs in mainspace, e.g. it has previously been moved there, or there is a clear statement to that effect in the edit history or on the talk page" (the assertion implied im this thread is sufficient for me to trigger that condition) 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:26, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 2001:56A:70F6:CF00:1B4:F95A:E7F:EB52

[edit]

I rewrote this wikipedia page to better reflect the standards of what is expected. Would someone be able to review the edits and let me know if there are any other changes i should make before resubmitting? 2001:56A:70F6:CF00:1B4:F95A:E7F:EB52 (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do pre-reviews here. The established method for getting a review is to submit the draft for review. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:49, 19 September 2024 review of submission by 103.178.94.2

[edit]

Hello,

I am seeking further review assistance for the draft titled Draft:Md Zillul Karim. Although I am not the main author, I am involved in the draft’s development and would like to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

The draft has been resubmitted recently, and I would appreciate any additional guidance on improving its chances of approval. Specifically, I am looking for advice on addressing feedback from reviewers and any additional suggestions for enhancing the article.

Thank you for your assistance. 103.178.94.2 (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 20

[edit]

00:21, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Cole Massi1

[edit]

May I respectfully ask why the Wikipedia community does not find it acceptable for one editor to start an article and for others to continue it, especially after an explanation provision and an additional missing information template specifically querying others' assistance?

Thank you for your time and consideration. Cole Massi1 (talk) 00:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that's the issue with your draft? The main issue is that Wikipedia is not for dictionary definitions, that's what Wikitionary is for. That said, the draft submission process is (usually) voluntary. If you want to roll the dice that your article would survive an Articles for deletion discussion, you may move it into the encyclopedia yourself. I would highly advise you against it, though. 331dot (talk) 00:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:43, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Dentonslee

[edit]

I am not sure if the references are all up to standard. Can you please give me some guidance here? Dentonslee (talk) 01:43, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dentonslee: you have resubmitted the draft, and will get feedback when a reviewer has had a change to assess it.
Judging by your user name, you may have a conflict of interst in this subject, and need to disclose that. I have posted a message on your talk page with instructions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:26, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Wynnsantiy

[edit]

Wikipedia Please do not delete a Draft:Incursion Red River for Six months. Wynnsantiy (talk) 02:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wynnsantiy: that is, indeed, how the system normally works. However, this is a clear copyright violation (not to mention, purely promotional), and I have therefore requested its speedy deletion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:33, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Reshma27

[edit]

Please help me to post this article. Reshma27 (talk) 05:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reshma27: you need to demonstrate that this subject is notable according to the WP:GNG guideline. It would also be helpful if you could provide some context for the reader; I've read this twice, and I'm still not entirely sure what it's about. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:33, 20 September 2024 review of submission by 87.121.61.177

[edit]

Please review this article 87.121.61.177 (talk) 05:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This draft was rejected months ago, and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:45, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Ebni.hassan79

[edit]

I want move my draft page to main space Ebni.hassan79 (talk) 06:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ebni.hassan79: this draft has been rejected and is awaiting speedy deletion. So no. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:56, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:27, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Kingofports

[edit]

I need help with the review of this article.. the refences have been taken from notable sources as per Wikipedia policy. Please help to make this better Kingofports (talk) 09:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingofports: I don't know what "notable sources" means, but if you mean sources that are sufficient to demonstrate notability, then the reviewer(s) are very much saying that isn't the case. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are the mainline news, that fits under wiki guideline.. How do i now move the news as published. Its been pending since very long. Kindly help. Kingofports (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingofports: it isn't pending; it was declined in August, and hasn't been edited since. Before that, it was declined in July, by a different reviewer, and you just resubmitted it without any improvement. If you carry on like that, it will eventually get rejected outright, without the option to resubmit.
I'm not sure what exactly you're asking for. You've not made any improvements since the last decline (or rather, last two declines). I see no reason to overrule two reviewers' assessments, who both concluded that notability hasn't been established.
What is your interest in this subject? If you have an external relationship with the subject, you must disclose it. This has been queried on your talk page months ago, but so far you appear not to have responded to it. And if you have been hired to write this and related articles, you need to specifically make a paid-editing disclosure; I've just posted a message on your talk page with instructions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a paid editor ! Kingofports (talk) 10:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you, then? What is your relationship with this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir,
I would like to clarify that I do not have any personal relationship with the subject. My aim is to publish profiles of notable individuals from the business world who deserve recognition on Wikipedia. The subject in question is a well-known figure, and I believe there is a strong case for him to have a dedicated page.
Once this entry is published, I plan to pursue profiles of other prominent individuals who also merit a presence on this valuable platform. Kingofports (talk) 10:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingofports: you uploaded a photo of Adani as your own work. Either he posed for you, in which case we need to understand how that happened, given your assurances that you have no relationship with him; or you didn't actually take that photo yourself and have instead almost certainly violated someone else's copyright by releasing this image into the public domain. Would you care to clarify which it is? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have "profiles" here, we have articles. I can say that the awards are meaningless in terms of notability, as they lack articles themselves(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). 331dot (talk) 10:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:46, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Bewarethebull

[edit]

Can some one have a look at my draft and let me know what i need to complete or do, to make this a proper article... TIA Bewarethebull (talk) 12:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bewarethebull: That review will happen when you submit the draft, but I'll tell you immediately that everything, all the information, has to be attributed to a reliable source. There are currently no sources in the draft. Please read through the notices on your user talk page that discuss this, and follow the links to the information about sourcing. --bonadea contributions talk 13:18, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:15, 20 September 2024 review of submission by Avinycomm

[edit]

I have worked hard to compile a biography of an author, Abid Ali Mir, who has been featured in over 8 news media channels. However, the article was rejected without any in-depth research or consideration. I believe this deserves a closer review to ensure accuracy and fairness. Avinycomm (talk) 14:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: SPI filed: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abidalikashmiri. KylieTastic (talk) 14:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:20, 20 September 2024 review of submission by San1976Marino

[edit]

I have added several new citations (including a link to a birth certificate, and a newspaper article that establishes Mr. Mathews's life in Rockford, Ill.) and removed unsupported information. I would like to know if I now meet the requirements for acceptance. San1976Marino (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@San1976Marino: We don't cite gov't documents, including (and especially) birth certificates. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And actually looking at the draft, it's still woefully undersourced. Every single claim that could be challenged by a reasonable person must be cited to a third-party source that corroborates it or (failing that) removed wholesale. This is not negotiable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:33, 20 September 2024 review of submission by 2001:579:10A8:9C0:44C2:19AB:4664:B728

[edit]

Hi, Hope you having a great day. This is the 3rd time my submission was rejected , Source I used for this article all comes from national news agency from person home country. Please help me to fix this issue. 2001:579:10A8:9C0:44C2:19AB:4664:B728 (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The overwhelming majority of your sources are under role bylines (we're sceptical of these because they're used very frequently to launder PR as news). We don't cite iTunes/Apple Music (online storefront). https://dailyasianage.com/news/325032/?regenerate is the only source you have that is both legitimate news and credited to an identifiable author, and even then it's borderline due to its short length. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:09, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:05, 20 September 2024 review of submission by HagopP-Editor

[edit]

Greetings, it's been over a year since we first tried to get the simplest page on YellowfinBI published, with no end in sight to the rejections. Can someone provide some better guidance or steer us through the process? 

HagopP-Editor (talk) 18:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HagopP-Editor: The present incarnation of the draft has a single source, and that source is M&A news. Even if it were utterly flawless, one source by itself cannot support a Wikipedia article. What we're looking for is in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that discuss the subject at length, are written by identifiable authors, and subject to fact-checking and other forms of editorial oversight. Your sources up to this point, based on reviewer comments, don't meet that bar. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Jéské Couriano I have been given an extensive list of articles about Yellowfin that were used successively but were still rejected. If I were to provide a full list of the sources that were given, would someone be able to tell me which sources WOULD pass the bar? HagopP-Editor (talk) 18:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HagopP-Editor: I can go thru the history. Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):
Got any other sources? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:36, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BTW the only reason there is currently one source is because after trying to go through successive multiple sources, I just need one to get the page published. I used the best I could find. Maybe someone can help me identify 2-3 that would meet the requirements? HagopP-Editor (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would provide the full list of articles on the company. Just help me pick the right 2-3. HagopP-Editor (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Provide the list, minus what I already critiqued above. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Jéské Couriano here's all I have that I haven't used yet:
https://aimagazine.com/data-and-analytics/yellowfin-bi-business-benefits-predictive-analytics
https://bicorner.com/2019/03/28/how-yellowfin-brings-real-time-insight-to-business-analytics/
https://blog.ventanaresearch.com/enterprise-bi-from-yellowfin
https://davidmenninger.ventanaresearch.com/yellowfin-is-innovative-leader-in-mobile-and-collaborative-analytics
https://devops.com/yellowfin-receives-top-rankings-in-worlds-largest-business-intelligence-survey/
https://en.prnasia.com/releases/global/Yellowfin_Launches_the_Next_Generation_of_Analytics_for_Faster_Better_Insights-192622.shtml
https://influencing.com/pr/40730/yellowfin-7-analytics-software-to-deliver-deeper-insight-with-multi-chart-capability
https://itbrief.com.au/story/melbourne-analytics-solution-provider-named-idc-innovator
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/analysts-recognize-new-version-of-yellowfin-as-where-bi-should-be-headed-1002066049
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/gartner-again-positions-yellowfin-in-magic-quadrant-for-business-intelligence-and-analytics-platforms-1001776603
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-bi-named-a-strong-performer-in-enterprise-bi-platforms-by-major-independent-research-firm-1002360520
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-declared-champion-in-consecutive-info-tech-business-intelligence-vendor-landscapes-1001894532?miRedirects=1
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-introduces-the-bi-industry-s-first-automated-analysis-and-cross-vendor-storytelling-solutions-1027676365
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-launches-the-next-generation-of-analytics-for-faster-better-insights-1006312459
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-partners-with-global-technology-company-pitney-bowes-to-drive-deeper-customer-insights-1001814524
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-placed-top-in-nucleus-research-analytics-value-matrix-2018-1027806931?miRedirects=1
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-receives-top-rankings-in-world-s-largest-business-intelligence-survey-1027763874
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-receives-top-rankings-in-world-s-largest-business-intelligence-survey-1027764804
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-recognized-as-a-challenger-in-barc-s-2016-score-business-intelligence-report-1001896688
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-recognized-as-a-challenger-in-barc-s-2016-score-business-intelligence-report-1001896688
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-recognized-as-a-challenger-in-barc-s-2016-score-business-intelligence-report-1001898781
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/yellowfin-to-launch-7-3-analytics-platform-in-global-webinar-series-1001860938
https://martechseries.com/analytics/yellowfin-named-gartner-magic-quadrant-analytics-business-intelligence-platforms/
https://realbusiness.co.uk/the-changing-nature-of-business-intelligence-and-how-it-affects-smes
https://sdtimes.com/softwaredev/sd-times-news-digest-idera-acquires-yellowfin-fastly-launches-fastly-academy-jellyfish-raises-71-million-in-series-c/
https://solutionsreview.com/business-intelligence/yellowfin-bi-unveils-new-data-analytics-mobile-app/
https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/22/to-sell-or-not-to-sell-lessons-from-a-bootstrapped-ceo/?_guc_consent_skip=1678250324
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211203005015/en/Yellowfin-Launches-Guided-Natural-Language-Query-Making-True-Self-service-Analytics-Available-to-Everyone
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adrianbridgwater/2021/11/03/building-the-new-narrative-for-data-storytelling/?sh=42008f214496
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/10/16/nine-methods-for-keeping-your-tech-team-happy-and-engaged/?sh=76109fa250a4
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2019/07/23/will-ai-kill-the-dashboard/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/11/03/how-and-why-you-should-use-ai-and-machine-learning-to-enhance-business-intelligence/?sh=42b0c9df22a7
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/03/19/data-literacy-training-has-failed-heres-what-chief-data-officers-need-to-do-instead/?sh=28d0e97e34d3
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/09/15/what-kindergartners-can-teach-us-about-data-analytics/?sh=6b40adfc5cf3
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hvmacarthur/2020/06/10/why-data-is-king-during-times-of-uncertainty-and-how-to-use-it-to-inspire-commitment-from-others/?sh=22c057e04335
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2015/09/15/why-your-business-lacks-intelligence/?sh=34a036b87411
https://www.guru99.com/business-intelligence-tools.html
https://www.passionned.com/business-intelligence/tools/yellowfin/
https://www.performancemagazine.org/business-intelligence-glen-rabie-yellowfin/
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/yellowfin-named-leader-in-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-and-machine-learning-for-business-intelligence-300896991.html
https://www.techradar.com/news/internet/cloud-services/is-cloud-powered-business-intelligence-genuinely-useful-or-mere-hype-1309672
https://www.wdhn.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/683127170/yellowfin-bi-celebrates-20-years-of-embedded-analytics-innovation/
https://www.zdnet.com/article/idera-acquires-yellowfin-bi-adds-it-to-developer-tools-business/
https://www3.technologyevaluation.com/research/article/idera-acquires-yellowfin.html HagopP-Editor (talk) 18:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Courianokeeping my figers crossed here. HagopP-Editor (talk) 19:44, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a huge list and you appear to have not taken previous comments onboard. Notability is based on independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Just clicking on several they were all PR. KylieTastic (talk) 20:00, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 21

[edit]

00:55, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 2601:240:8400:4BF0:8057:A8C0:B35F:EAB9

[edit]

published article 2601:240:8400:4BF0:8057:A8C0:B35F:EAB9 (talk) 00:55, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 07:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This draft has been rejected due to failure to heed reviewers' critiques and will not be considered further. Your sources are all to social media (which cannot help for notability as Wikipedia defines it or support biographical claims), and are not inline. The entire article reads like an amateurish attempt at SEO via keyword spam, and I will be tagging it for deletion on that basis shortly. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:03, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Zeedigi

[edit]

I am submitting a draft article for Blink49 Studios and would appreciate guidance on ensuring the article meets Wikipedia's notability and sourcing standards. Additionally, I need help with formatting and making sure the article aligns with Wikipedia's content policies for new submissions. Zeedigi (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are associated with this studio, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID.
You have just summarized the routine activities of the company and its work. A Wikipedia article must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the studio, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. We aren't interested in just knowing what the company does.
You wrote that the company is involved in notable productions, but the productions you list don't have articles(unless you just didn't link to them)- and even if you did, merely being associated with a notable production would not merit the company an article, as notability is not inherited by association. The productions of a company can merit an article, and not the company itself. 331dot (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:47, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Kazamzam

[edit]

I've submitted a number of articles through AfC, created a number on my own, and am an active participant at the Unreferenced Articles project, so I'd like to say that my referencing is usually pretty robust. I disagree with the reviewer's determination that the sources are not reliable (the sources including NPR, NBC, and the NYTimes) and that the coverage has not been significant. More sources are available but I would agree that a lot of the coverage has been about the court case related to the subject's work...but the subject's work, and therefore the subject, are at the crux of the matter and should not, in my opinion, be considered as separate from the subject. I'm happy to continue working on this because I think Ms. Taken Alive's contributions to the Lakota language are noteworthy and deserve wider notice. I'm asking for a second opinion as I've seen AfC drafts get through with much less. Kazamzam (talk) 10:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you discussed this with the reviewer directly?
Alternatively, (if you have no COI or other requirement to use AFC) if you truly feel that the draft would survive an AFD discussion, you can move it into the encyclopedia yourself. This process is (usually) voluntary. 331dot (talk) 12:49, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re "I've seen other drafts get through with less"- see other stuff exists. Maybe those drafts shouldn't have gone through. It's difficult to know unless you'd care to show which of these you are referencing. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:04, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 103.58.154.234

[edit]

please edit what the correction you have 

103.58.154.234 (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article was declined the first time because it was completely unsourced. It was then resubmitted with no improvements made and this time, it was rejected. That means that it was deemed there was no chance that a properly sourced article could be created for this subject at this time. I looked to see if I could find reliable sources that could be used to write a compliant article for this songwriter and found nothing that was suitable, and certainly nothing that could independent support any fact presented in the article beyond Jadhav being a songwriter. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:43, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Aman Sandhu 12

[edit]

hi I got my draft rejected twice, first time i apparently made it sound like an advert, so I changed it up and even now they are saying the same thing pls I need your help ASAP because im struggling with it a lot Aman Sandhu 12 (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:00, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Gabriel601

[edit]

Can someone recheck this draft for a review. I just added about six reference from reliable source I feel passes WP:GNG. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] after a decline since June. Not always active in going back to decline draft reason its been months but I always do at my free time. "Two heads are better than one" so I use the afc more often than expecting an afd. Gabriel (……?) 17:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it and it is pending for review by a volunteer. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:15, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Myogonji Kitsune

[edit]


RE: Declining of Draft for "Ginko Mine" Thanks for taking the time to review my draft. I'd like to understand what the issue was for my page. If I understand correctly, I believe it may be because of reliable sourcing. However, I'd like to note that I simply translated the existing Japanese Wiki entry at this point and applied the same sources. Thanks again for your assistance, and look forward to the response. Myogonji Kitsune (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Myogonji Kitsune: ja.wp and en.wp are completely different beasts when it comes to policy, and en.wp is seen as far stricter when it comes to sourcing than most other Wikipediae. Straight translations thus generally do not work; you're going to need to find more or better sources that we at en.wp will accept. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:56, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Bluebox57

[edit]

I tried to submit the article twice, but I seem not to be able to fit the guidelines. Now, I have edited the article, hopefully to the criteria of the Wikipedia reviewers and I want to know if the article is better now, to actually be submitted. Bluebox57 (talk) 17:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do pre-review reviews here; the best way to get feedback is to submit it. 331dot (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:25, 21 September 2024 review of submission by 188.120.84.190

[edit]

Hi Wikipedia,

I am trying my first hand at writing a Wikipedia article ever since learning of the exploits of Steven Pruitt. As a first attempt, I have tried at the easy end of the spectrum by writing about a generic exchange program that my local university used to offer. I have gotten some declines by reviewers and most comments have been very reasonable. However, I feel a little at a loss at my most recent review. I am not really sure how to proceed from here. Because it is a relatively small exchange program, the number of secondary sources of information is limited to a few newspaper articles.

Can I get just some hints at what to change?

Thank you very much.

Best, Andreas 188.120.84.190 (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. If there is insufficient coverage in independent reliable sources, the topic would not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:37, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Vlachopouloss

[edit]

Why was my article rejected? Vlachopouloss (talk) 19:37, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You must disclose your connection to this company, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. You claim that you personally created and personally own the copyright to the company logo.
Your draft was rejected as a blatant advertisement. Advertising is not permitted here. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:52, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Azvierko

[edit]

remove draft: azvierko and name the page Tim Maxwell Azvierko (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The specific title of a draft is not relevant to the approval process, which only considers the text and sources. If accepted, the reviewer will place it at the proper title. Please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:50, 21 September 2024 review of submission by Celebrate Muru

[edit]

I have added a few more references on Chun Wah Kong. Also, where previously the references pointed to certain magazine citations, I have linked those to digital files from internet archive databases if available. I'm sure having access to read and review the articles would significantly enhance the credibility of the subject that was missing from the previous submission attempts. Your help on getting this creator of many retro games approved on Wikipedia would be greatly appreciated. Celebrate Muru (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't use Wikipedia to generate credibility, they must already be credible to merit an article. If you have fundamentally changed the draft to address the concerns of reviewers, you should first attempt to appeal to the rejecting reviewer. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. What I meant was, by presenting the source material as readable files, instead of just listing the names of the books/ magazines. It would allow the reviewer to make a more informed judgment on the notability of the subject, as this has been a common reason for rejection in the past. I have tried contacting the last reviewer who rejected the creation of the article over the months but no reply yet. I have tried again. Celebrate Muru (talk) 13:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Celebrate Muru I suggest you use their user talk page, and not yours- they may not be following your user talk page and may not be seeing your messages. Their contribution history indicates they are around. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 22

[edit]

02:43, 22 September 2024 review of submission by Thekingemperorofeastica

[edit]

Please undelete this draft. It was labeled as a hoax when it is simply a creative work not meant to be deceiving. It was stated multiple times within the draft that it was a fictional work and not a real country, but it was still taken down so i was wondering if someone could work with me here. Thank you! Thekingemperorofeastica (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thekingemperorofeastica: Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a general web host for fiction. If you want to publish fiction, there are more suitable outlets elsewhere. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 02:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thekingemperorofeastica, wikipedia is not the place for creative works. Please write that on a wiki that is designed for it, like the alt-history wiki or something similar. You'll find there are wiki communities where people are excited about that kind of thing and won't delete it. But here, we are an encyclopedia of facts. -- asilvering (talk) 02:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:56, 22 September 2024 review of submission by Tristanh422

[edit]

why does this page keeps getting rejected? Tristanh422 (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tristanh422 you have not proven how this person meets our strict notability requirements. Qcne (talk) 15:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
how do I prove that? He's a Youtuber with around 8.18M subs, how many does he needs to have a wikipedia page? Tristanh422 (talk) 22:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:NBIO. -- asilvering (talk) 04:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He might have 100M or 1: that makes no difference to Wikipedia.
What matters is whether people who are wholly unconnected with him have chosen to write about him and been published in reliable places. Since Wikipedia is basically not interested in what he or his associates say about him, and everything in an article must be verifiable from reliable published sources, it follows that if nobody unconnected with him has published anything substantial about him, there is literally nothing which can go into an article about him. ColinFine (talk) 10:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:47, 22 September 2024 review of submission by Andrewcliftonpayne

[edit]

I have provided two links to William Boleyn (archdeacon) from other Wikipedia articles but there has been no change in the status of the above as an orphan. Also I can provide two further links by editing the contents of info boxes but I cannot make a link inside a box or edit within a list or a table. Andrewcliftonpayne (talk) 14:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewcliftonpayne, the maintenance tags are removed manually once you have fixed the issue. I have removed the orphan tag for you. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:18, 22 September 2024 review of submission by The Anonymous Real

[edit]

It got declined, and I have a hard time figuring out why. Yes, I didn't put a lot of information on it, but I used the most generic information and even then spent around a hour and thirty minutes. I'm thinking it got declined because of that, or maybe because they think I was advertising it, for putting links to his stuff, but all I did was do that because that's *his information. It said "speedily deletion", but I doubt Unspeakable, the man himself would strike my page, a fellow fan. The Anonymous Real (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Anonymous Real You need the "Draft:" portion when linking to your draft, I provided it for you, but your draft was deleted as unambiguous promotion. You did not provide a single independent reliable source to support the content. Any article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 23

[edit]

01:23, 23 September 2024 review of submission by DeCraziest Music Empire

[edit]

Please what will be the title of my draft for submission? DeCraziest Music Empire (talk) 01:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DeCraziest Music Empire, I don't understand your question. But if it helps, your draft is here: Draft:GentleStar DC. -- asilvering (talk) 04:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:50, 23 September 2024 review of submission by G11slm

[edit]

Hi, I have created this article, but I get warning that, there are some promotional items in it. I do not promote anything in it. So, If there are any promotional items, can you help to remove them? G11slm (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The entire draft was promotional, and has now been deleted. If you are associated with this company, that must be disclosed, see conflict of interest and paid editing(note that "paid editing" includes employment in any capacity).
Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about a company and what it does- instead, you should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:19, 23 September 2024 review of submission by Dharam iibs

[edit]

Could you please me to get the article approved. We are the established business school in bangalore having the approved by the various govt. authority. Dharam iibs (talk) 10:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharam iibs: you need to show that the school meets our notability guideline for businesses and organisations, WP:ORG. The sources currently cited don't come even close.
First, though, you must disclose your conflict of interest, by placing the {{paid}} template on your user page User:Dharam iibs. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Please don't create multiple drafts on the same subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:55, 23 September 2024 review of submission by Yamb0x eth

[edit]

Hello,

I recently submitted my draft article on Yam Ben Adiva (Draft:Yam Ben Adiva), but it was declined. I believe the subject meets notability criteria due to coverage in reliable sources like Haaretz, Maxon, and Visual Atelier 8. Could you please clarify the specific reasons for the decline? Was it due to notability, tone, lack of citations, or another issue? Any guidance on improving the draft for approval would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you! Yamb0x eth (talk) 10:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamb0x eth: Read WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. The cited sources do not provide significant coverage of the subject, only passing mentions or quotes. Interviews or statements by the subject are WP:PRIMARY sources, which cannot establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 11:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yamb0x eth I fixed your links, they need "Draft:" at the beginning. 331dot (talk) 11:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:32, 23 September 2024 review of submission by Johnwin30

[edit]

Need to know why it is rejected and can not be submitted for review again. Johnwin30 (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is clearly stated: "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." Are you a professional content editor as well? Any particular reason you created your account six days after another account was blocked? 331dot (talk) 12:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, i am not editor or anything. just scene this article that why i ask this question. Lookalike i am related to this but just learning what not to do in Wikipedia. Johnwin30 (talk) 12:43, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is your relationship with this topic? 331dot (talk) 12:45, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Johnwin30, the draft is overtly promotional and utterly unacceptable for Wikipedia. You are editing Wikipedia and therefore you are a Wikipedia editor and need to follow Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines just like all other editors. Cullen328 (talk) 06:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:21, 23 September 2024 review of submission by VvS77qq

[edit]

Sorry to bother the community again. But copy-paste-answers like "at least a dozen paragraphs" just do not help me in improving the article. Why not giving at least one example where a reference is missing. Obviously not every sentence can or must be referenced. I double-checked the article and could not find any shortcomings in comparison with other articles and their references. So, I would be very thankful if anyone could give me some practical support on this issue. VvS77qq (talk) 14:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

VvS77qq I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" portion. Please see Other Stuff Exists; it could be that these other articles you have seen are also inappropriate and just not addressed yet by volunteers. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have been checked by the community.
The awards section should just be removed, as awards do not contribute to notability unless the awards themselves merit articles(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). The rest of the draft just summarizes the offerings of the company and its routine activities. An article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. This may be different from the German Wikipedia, a separate project with its own editors and policies. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would also ask you if you work for this company. 331dot (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first paragraph of the "History" section has no citations. The first citation, even if it were about a notable award, is a non-independent source recording an award to the people, not the company, and is therefore triply useless for establishing that the company is notable. The second and third citations are not about the company, and so are useless for establishing that the company is notable. The fourth citation might be useful, but it is not clear whether it is independent or based on press release. In any case, it has only a couple of paragraphs about the company. The fifth and sixth citations do not even mention Bokela, and so are not just useless for establishing notability, but serve absolutely no purpose in this article.
I didn't go any further. ColinFine (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:42, 23 September 2024 review of submission by 39.58.235.138

[edit]

Yrf film 39.58.235.138 (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what your question is, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. See WP:NFF, unreleased films rarely merit articles, and certainly not if principal photography has not commenced, or mere speculation of a possible film. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An unreferenced one sentence draft will never be accepted. Cullen328 (talk) 05:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:10, 23 September 2024 review of submission by Librariesforall

[edit]

Hi there! I'm new here and just submitted this draft for review. I think that's what I need to do as a new user for the article to be published? Or am I off base. Many thanks! Librariesforall (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have successfully submitted your draft to the pile for review. At some point (could be minutes, could be months) a reviewer will pick it up and review it, and do one of three things:
  • accept it and move it to mainspace,
  • decline it, and give you reasons why it is not acceptable in its current form
  • reject it, if they think that it cannot be made into an acceptable article (usually because the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, but sometimes for other reasons, eg it is purely promotional).
ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I took a *quick* look at it. It will entirely depend if she is Notable, and I don't really have a feeling for that type of notability. The wikicode is done pretty well.Naraht (talk) 22:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Declined due to WP:RS concerns. I don't think using Medium was allowed in that case. Correct me if I'm wrong here. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 03:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Librariesforall, most of your references are to articles authored by Dawn and are therefore useless for establishing her notability. Completely independent sources are required. Medium (website) contains user generated content and is not a reliable source for use on Wikipedia. She seems to be a mid-level civil servant and mid-level academic. Neither is a plausible claim of notability. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 24

[edit]

05:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Pypopus

[edit]

I'd like to get help with the issue of my article being declined by one of the wiki people who reviewed it. She mentioned that it wasn't cited independently. I would like to clarify the matter since the sources I provided were independent.

I really appreciate any help you can provide. Pypopus (talk) 05:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pypopus, your draft cannot possibly be accepted until you provide multiple references to indisputably reliable sources completely independent of Akilkhanov that devote significant coverage to Akilkhanov. That is mandatory. Also, why are you using the same photo twice? Cullen328 (talk) 05:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Currently, none of your sources are independent of Akilkhanov because they all parrot his words. One actually says "About me". Cullen328 (talk) 05:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Pypopus. One thing to remember is that 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. The majority of sources must be indepedent in this way. ColinFine (talk) 09:11, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:45, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 103.166.59.62

[edit]

All information in this article is taken from IMDb. All the information is correct and there is no error. I don't know why it is not accepted. 103.166.59.62 (talk) 06:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because IMDb has no functional editorial oversight and is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So where does Wikipedia get its acceptable sources from? 103.166.59.62 (talk) 06:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:RS to learn more about what is considered a reliable source, but in short, sources that have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control/oversight are generally considered to be reliable. IMDB is user-editable and has no editors that review and fact check content before it is posted for accuracy. 331dot (talk) 07:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once you sign up, gain some experience, and have edited 500 times, a good place to start would be WP:Library--especially once you get well acquainted with this project's subset of the ProQuest database. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Matt.ruhstaller

[edit]

Can you help me understand more clearly how I am not meeting the bar, but a person who shares the same name as the person I am adding has far fewer notable achievements? John D. Shearer

The person I am adding took the poster photo for the largest grossing artist ever, on their largest grossing tour, among other newsworthy photos.

Many thanks M (talk) 07:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matt.ruhstaller I fixed your link, the whole url is unnecessary. As the reviewer said, "None of the refs listed establish any notability and does not source any of the claims in the article. None of them are reliable sources and many of them are just links to the photos the subject took and have no substance related to the subject."
It's not enough to just say "he took a widely distributed photo" or "he took a photo of Taylor Swift"(something which thousands of people have done). We need independent sources with significant coverage of him that describe what makes him notable- if he's notable for his photography, you need sources that discuss and analyze his work and his particular influence. If he's important because he took Swift's photo and it was used as a poster for her tour, you need sources that discuss his selection and the reasons for it- was it selected due to his artistry? Because Swift/her managers noticed his work elsewhere? Stuff like that. 331dot (talk) 07:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness, characterizing the photo he took for the cover of her movie is nothing like claiming "he took a photo of Taylor Swift"(something which thousands of people have done). M (talk) 19:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get that he didn't just snap a photo, but my point was that the draft said little more than that at the time of my comment. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The John D. Shearer article is frankly similar to if not worse than your draft, and I will be tagging it as such. That article was created in 2006, long before current standards. Please see other stuff exists. If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have been vetted by the community. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is helpful feedback, thank you. In response, I have added several additional citations to address the question of notability, is this sufficient? Happy to publish again, but I would like to minimize the back and forth and understand if I am getting closer to what you're looking for. M (talk) 12:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:06, 24 September 2024 review of submission by TheJubileeKaman

[edit]

Can Wikipedia sites be used for Referencing TheJubileeKaman (talk) 08:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source, see Wikipedia is not a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any discussion here is academic, as the draft was rejected. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can a Wikipedia page be used as a reference TheJubileeKaman (talk) 08:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No per WP:CIRCULAR, and neither can a Wordpress blog. Your draft has been rejected and thus is the end of the line, TheJubileeKaman. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TheJubileeKaman Please do not create a new thread with every post, just edit this existing section. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10:36, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Mnorouzian

[edit]

This is her first-ever page on the Wiki, and there's a shortage of references for her biography. I collected the info of Mahsan Khodakarmi by contacting her and my search. Except for some links to Wiki and some Iranian pages, there's not any complete data on the net. The One (talk) 10:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, @Mnorouzian, but if there are no published sources there can be no article. Qcne (talk) 10:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added an IMDB in the field; I hope it helps The One (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does not, @Mnorouzian, Imdb cannot be used as a source. See WP:IMDB. Qcne (talk) 10:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:32, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Lego10318

[edit]

Hi, I would like to better understand what changes I can make to the page to make it fit for publication. Could you please suggest some improvements and tips for this?

Thank you Lego10318 (talk) 11:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:38, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 178.114.134.52

[edit]

This is getting really tiresome, although it stands without question that this person exists and is already mentioned on other pages here, my draft always gets rejected because of a "lack of reliable sources" but no one cares to mention what a single reliable source would be and for which facts exactly. Just saying no and walking away is the easiest thing.I am just trying to contribute and help a friend. pls show some support, thank you. 178.114.134.52 (talk) 11:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent-of-the-subject news/scholarly sources that disciss him at length, are written by identifiable authors, and subject to fact-checking and other forms of editorial oversight. Merely existing is not enough to justify an article. On that note, let's look at your sources (refer to the "critiques" link in my signature):
None of the sources you have are any good. Do you have any reviews of his music? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:50, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Rishi Gandhi 7

[edit]

What should I do? Rishi Gandhi 7 (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, @Rishi Gandhi 7, the draft was rejected and then deleted. Qcne (talk) 13:31, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:38, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Suriend

[edit]

what should i do to make it approved Suriend (talk) 13:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Suriend. Wikipedia is not for things that you have made up. Maybe try one of the alternative history wikis? Qcne (talk) 13:48, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:21, 24 September 2024 review of submission by AlexCollins4u

[edit]

I have been told to ask for advice by Safari Scribe. I created a page for an individual I felt should have a Wikipedia page based on the climate change-focused works he has done over the years considering the extreme climate effects that Nigeria is currently experiencing. The subject was a speaker at the recently concluded Energy Symposium in Abuja. He is a Dean who is currently being considered for a leadership position. He spoke on renewable energy, CO2 emissions and link to biotechnology. The draft was rejected despite being more informative with secondary sources than similar Wikipedia pages created for some Deans in Nigeria. Kindly reconsider and unreject it. I'm willing to revise the page further if required. Thanks. Best regards Alex AlexCollins4u (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see other stuff exists. Other inappropriate articles existing does not mean that more should be created. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can, when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate content past us. We can only address what we know about. If you want to help us, please identify these other articles for possible action. That other articles exist does not mean they meet standards, unless they are classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:42, 24 September 2024 review of submission by TruthToPower2022

[edit]

I just want to ask what's wrong specifically or what can be done to improve this article? If some part needs to be removed, like the part where her companies are featured or the hyperlink to the website, please let me know as well. Just want specific feedback, so I can improve the article. TruthToPower2022 (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TruthToPower2022 A rejection usually means the draft cannot be re-submitted. You may ask the rejecting reviewer to reconsider if you have fundamentally changed the draft since rejection. Pinging in the rejecting reviewer, @Velella. However, I agree with their assessment there isn't an indication that Micha passes our notability criteria for people. Qcne (talk) 15:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got this. I will read the notability criteria again first and change the draft to meet these criteria, if possible, before asking the reviewer to re-consider. Thank you for your response. TruthToPower2022 (talk) 16:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TruthToPower2022, you might find it helpful to read No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:07, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Jooliah

[edit]

What can I do to get this page approved? Jooliah (talk) 16:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing, it has been rejected. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can, however, disclose your connection to him, since you took his picture and he posed for you, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have connection with no one, like verdis and liberland, this territory is claimed by no one, and I have proofs being there and on no ones land I proclaimed micronation, i think its legal same as verdis and others. 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, wrong article i see 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:24, 24 September 2024 review of submission by 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7

[edit]

Hello, can I get some advice how my aticle can get place on wiki, should i add more photos and proofs or? 2A06:5B02:200:2700:41DC:4E8F:60:19D7 (talk) 18:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With zero independent reliable sources discussing the topic, there is zero chance of it being accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this isn't the place to tell the world about your micronation. When others tell about it, like news reports, let us know. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither existence nor legality is relevant: Wikipedia has articles about real and imaginary things, and about legal and illegal things. What is needed is independent writing about the subject, reliably published. If there isn't any, then there cannot be an article. ColinFine (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:37, 24 September 2024 review of submission by Morieux Th

[edit]

What should i change exactly in my page in order for you to accept it ? Because all the info i added come from a single website and also collected by asking people who work in there. Thank you in advance for your help. Morieux Th (talk) 19:37, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should almost certainly throw away what you have written, and start again. 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) 21:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:41, 24 September 2024 review of submission by AWGENIZATION

[edit]

What could I add to make this ok for Wikipedia? AWGENIZATION (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AWGENIZATION You would need to show that the company meets WP:GNG--that is, that the company (not its artists, nor their releases) has received substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AWGENIZATION, additional information can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 25

[edit]

01:29, 25 September 2024 review of submission by Lucas489

[edit]

I don't know what or how to fix what needs to be fixed can someone please let me know! Lucas489 (talk) 01:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas489: No sources, no article, no debate. We also frown upon writing about oneself. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 01:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lucas489, not only have you failed to present evidence that you are a notable music performer, but everything you have written indicates that it is far too early for you to have an encyclopedia article written about you. Come back when you have a smash hit record and a national tour. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While we're at it, we also frown on AI-written articles. -- asilvering (talk) 04:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:50, 25 September 2024 review of submission by Joao Pedro Jose

[edit]

Hello, I don't understand why the page has been declined. I read the articles Wikipedia sent me and still don't get it what is the issue of the page? The issue is the references I added? Those references are true sources on the internet well-established brands and the press. Please give me some guidance on where I need to improve. Thank you Joao Pedro Jose (talk) 08:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1247661521"