Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 May 4

Help desk
< May 3	<< Apr | May | Jun >>	May 5 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

May 4

02:14:56, 4 May 2017 review of submission by Annerpino

• Annerpino (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Pineal Gland Function Spawns Shadow Person Phenomenon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have submitted an article, and was unable to include relevant images. The image icon, dragging and dropping, and copy/pasting did not work. The image icon above, after where it says "Insert" added some code and text to the page, but I was unable to make additions around it. Thanks for your help and good work. Annerpino (talk) 02:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Help desk. - This is where editors will try to answer any question regarding how to use Wikipedia. Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for any help related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps! ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 11:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@Annerpino: Hello, Anne. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Adding images can be a complex process. You can begin to learn about it by reading WP:Uploading images and WP:Picture tutorial. But before doing that, I note that your efforts will be better placed by addressing the more basic problems that I see with your submission. First, your submission is entirely unsourced and, second, it fails to conform with even the most basic elements of our Manual of Style. Your efforts might be better placed by first working through our WP:Tutorial. But even if you fix all of these problems, there will still be the fact that Wikipedia already has an article on the pineal gland and that we do not need a separate article on one detailed aspect of that body part. I encourage you to start a discussion on the talk page of that article (Talk:Pineal gland), with an aim to seeing how much of your material might usefully find a home there. I hope this response has been helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:08, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

17:27:29, 4 May 2017 review of submission by 5.49.140.74

• 5.49.140.74 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Morgan Simon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, What is wrong with this page? Each line has reliable sources (Variety, Imdb, Cineuropa, Alternative Press). The main movie directed by the director has already a Wikipedia page. He was selected to Cannes, Cesar, Rotterdam. Thank you for your time. Kazak

5.49.140.74 (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP address. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. The issue does not appear to be the quality of the sources themselves (although you should note that the user-generated IMDB site is definitely not considered reliable here on Wikipedia). Instead, the issue is more likely a question of the quality of the information that is being sourced. For example, citing the fact that someone was born in 1987 or that they later studied filmmaking does not confer notability on the subject, and this is true even if those mundane facts are being supported by high-quality sources. In order to demonstrate "notability" (in the sense that Wikipedia uses that word), you will need to demonstrate that the subject of your draft meets at least one of the criteria set forth in WP:NCREATIVE. I don't see how the subject of your draft meets any of them. And I think it fair to point out that the only reason the "main movie" has a Wikipedia article is because you created it yourself just a few weeks ago. I'm not sure that the film's article would survive a deletion nomination and, based on the director's current level of achievement, I have the same opinion of your draft. But I expect that you will disagree and so too, perhaps, will another reviewer. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask. NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:20, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

In the rejection notice at the top of the draft, the words "reliable" and "independent" are in blue, indicating that they are links to what Wikipedia means by them. Please read the pages they link to. IMDB, for example, is neither reliable nor independent, as its entries are written by their subjects. Maproom (talk) 14:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)