Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 August 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 6 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 8 >
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.


August 7[edit]

08:26:27, 7 August 2020 review of draft by Cicivasc[edit]


Hello, my draft article about Goldmund brand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Goldmund has been nominated for speedy deletion. The user informed it is because I used junk references. Before publishing the page, I have removed one reference that was on wikipedia blacklist. The other references were not flagged as being blacklisted. I've read the page shared by the reviewer on notability bomb: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_overkill#Notability_bomb But I don't have the impression this applies to our references or maybe I am not understanding it properly. I am new to wikipedia and I confess I am having a hard time finding my way around. Could anyone possibly advise what references should be removed and/or help me editing in order it is compliant with Wikipedia guidelines? Thank you in advance.

Cicivasc (talk) 08:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Teahouse Cicivasc. Your draft Draft:Goldmund has NOT been nominated for speedy deletion, what makes you think it has? Theroadislong (talk) 09:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Theroadislong, It seems likely that this refers to an old notice on their talk page that pre-dates this draft. The draft needs serious attention and a comment is there to that effect. I am about to push it back to the editor for further significant work Fiddle Faddle 09:15, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:52:49, 7 August 2020 review of submission by 1.186.181.40[edit]


1.186.181.40 (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, all articles need to have independent reliable sources to show that the subject is notable. This article doesn't have any sources and so the article won't be accepted. You will need to find independent sources (e.g. newspapers) that cover the subject.

Perhaps have a read of Help:Your_first_article which says some more about writing an article that can be accepted. Pi (Talk to me!) 17:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:59:31, 7 August 2020 review of submission by 93.126.213.221[edit]


93.126.213.221 (talk) 10:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tarekdaya why is my page rejected ???

Courtesy link User:Tarekdaya/sandbox/Aleph Printing Press. Theroadislong (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@93.126.213.221 and Tarekdaya: First of all, please ensure you are logged in. Editing while logged out isn't encoraged. I have identified the following problems:
  • The page was copied&pasted from http://www.aleph.com.lb/. Please never, ever copy stuff from other sources into Wikipedia unless they are under a free license allowing (non-)comercial reuse and derivate works or is in the public domain. @Theroadislong: for your notice.
  • the article lacks reliable independent sources. Instagram and other social media arent considered reliable because they are user-edited. This includes Wikipedia, even when Wikipedia isn't a social network.
  • It currently fails WP:NCORP
  • It is missing a lead section
  • Some of the terms used, e.g. "The sister company is equipped with the most advanced printing and binding machines available." don't comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view.
This attempt will probbably removed soon as WP:G12. You can find the full advice for your nex attempt at Template:7STEPS. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 19:11, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:43:09, 7 August 2020 review of submission by LloydforAmerica[edit]


LloydforAmerica (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I worked with the chat group and made edits as someone asked for and left on the page. I'd like to try to resubmit but don't seem to be able to. How can I do that?

Hi, your article has been submitted for another review. Someone will get to it but unfortunately there is a backlog here so it might take a while Pi (Talk to me!) 17:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
LloydforAmerica I have looked at each refernece on the draft, and left a comment there. I agree with the reviewer who declined it. None of this referencing is useful. Fiddle Faddle 08:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:00:44, 7 August 2020 review of draft by 2C0F:FC89:8071:7F49:C045:4159:38CA:7B96[edit]


2C0F:FC89:8071:7F49:C045:4159:38CA:7B96 (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it looks like your article hasn't been reviewed yet. Unfortunately there is a backlog of articles at the moment and it can take some time for it to be reviewed. Pi (Talk to me!) 17:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:13, 7 August 2020 review of submission by Kiraly17[edit]


HI. I had my first attempt (ever) rejected and have gone through and made changes. Although I think all the citations I had were verifiable, I deleted those that the editor may have found questionable. I also re-wrote sections so it does not seem like a resume. Before I re-submit could I have a 3rd person review ? I don't want to be rejected a second time and then removed entirely. Thank you so much !

Kiraly17 (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, one of the issues with the draft was that you had included a contents section, and instances of "Edit Source" in the headers. It looks like you copied and pasted from somewhere, which may have caused these

It seems like you removed a few references, but haven't added any new ones. I've not checked out the remaining sources, but if the reviewer thought that there was a lack of reliable sources, to improve it you would generally need to add more/better ones, not just remove the ones that are there already Pi (Talk to me!) 18:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:52:46, 7 August 2020 review of submission by Geekymutt[edit]


I work at a company specializing in installing Science on a Sphere, most of the installations were even done by this company. I created a page to get the name out there, it's creation was denied. Reason did not make sense. It's about a company with a government contract, not sure how much more credible you could get in this context.


Geekymutt (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geekymutt, one of the issues is that you are employed by the organisation. If you did not declare this at the time then this is WP:UPE and calls the draft into question. Declaring paid editing renders it appropriate in Draft: space
I'm afraid I have no idea what the draft was so have no way of determining the reason for removal Fiddle Faddle 19:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Timtrent, I did click the little box that discloses I was involved in the company. Its BWC visual technologies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:BWC_Visual_Technology

"BWC Visual Technology is a Maryland based display and presentation company. Specializing in the installation and set up of the Science on a Sphere system. [1]" with a link to our company site as a cited source.

In order to establish that this company is notable it needs to have been covered by independent reliable sources. As the company website is controlled by the company it is not independent. Please see Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) for the guidelines on what types of companies are considered notable for Wikipedia. Pi (Talk to me!) 20:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There really isn't a better source for what a company specializes in than the company itself. I do believe self citation is allowed anyway, am I not not doing it properly?

If its not then shouldn't IBM and any other page citing any portion of the topic of themselves or their history or projects have those citations and relevant portions of the posts removed or scrutinized? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekymutt (talk • contribs) 20:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article IBM has a lot, and I realy mean a lot of independent and reliable sources. This drat has none (the subjects homepage isn't independent). You may want to read WP:TOOSOON. I have performed a web search, and it looks indeed like this isn't notable yet. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 20:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Geekymutt: I concur with Victor Schmidt mobil, as I've said, separately on your talk page. Fiddle Faddle 20:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a role for primary sources in order to establish facts about the company, however notability must be established by independent sources. At the moment there are no sources that suggest that the company has sufficient notability to qualify for an article. To quote the policy from WP:NCORP that I recommend having a look at: "A primary test of notability is whether unrelated people with no vested interest in the subject have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it." Pi (Talk to me!) 22:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:02:45, 7 August 2020 review of submission by Belltown9[edit]

I just added a new reference from 1969. Belltown9 (talk) 23:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_August_7&oldid=985274216"