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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 6 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 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.


December 7[edit]

01:58:43, 7 December 2020 review of submission by GMLogar[edit]

I add a reference and make a game play narration, ı don't qualify the advertisement. All wiki also have gameplay narration.! GMLogar (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04:23:55, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Mapostolidis[edit]


Hello, I am trying to publish a wiki page for ClassicFlix which is a home video company that has released some important historic films and TV shows over the past years that other companies have avoided (link to my wiki page below).

It has been rejected despite me cleaning this up several times.

Several of articles I reference are in reputable publications and have significant reviews of the films they have released. However the articles are not about the company and therefore it appears to be getting rejected. Home video companies do not make news about themselves. They are publications because of the things they release. So I am, not sure what to do. I believe this company is worthy of a reference in wikipedia because of the great work that that do. Please let me know if you have any thoughts or questions. Thank you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ClassicFlix#cite_note-10


Mapostolidis (talk) 04:23, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:20:15, 7 December 2020 review of submission by 202.90.134.187[edit]


202.90.134.187 (talk) 06:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for Promotion (or "spreading the word"). Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06:40:34, 7 December 2020 review of submission by Ashutosh7039[edit]


Ashutosh7039 (talk) 06:40, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashutosh7039: Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Instagram is not a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:42:42, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Stuartwilks[edit]


This page is being declined submission, but I believe I have met all the criteria and more. The references include extensive secondary sources, such as independent directories, government announcements (not press releases as alleged) and newspaper articles such as those from the Racing Post and the Sunderland Echo. The subject has been awarded honours by HM Queen and chairs a government body. The subject is of far more significance than many other individuals with pages on Wikipedia and yet repeated declinations are being entered. Please can you advise how to address this?

Stuartwilks (talk) 08:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08:57:01, 7 December 2020 review of draft by MrEksh[edit]


MrEksh (talk) 08:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm asking about the Nader Sabry article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nader_Sabry

I don't understand why it was denied. I have many sources and references from neutral sites and books. Please update me on the matter

Toddles. MrEksh

Hi MrEksh. The only book cited is self-published and written by the subject, so neither reliable nor independent. Of the remaining 20 sources, only two are reliable, independent, and secondary: Time and Gulf News. Neither contains significant coverage of the subject. The draft fails to demonstrate that the subject is is notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). On top of that, the draft is written to praise the subject, like a hagiography, which is entirely inappropriate for Wikipedia. There appears to be little hope of the draft every being accepted for publication, no matter how much you edit it. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:12:01, 7 December 2020 review of submission by DBruton5[edit]


DBruton5 (talk) 09:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DBruton5 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, see the autobiography policy; in addition, it appears that you do not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable football player. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:26:32, 7 December 2020 review of submission by 37.203.94.144[edit]


37.203.94.144 (talk) 09:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:13:27, 7 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sehran hassan[edit]



Sehran hassan (talk) 10:13, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sehran hassan You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:33:33, 7 December 2020 review of submission by Transfest80[edit]

Have written the article in neutral view have removed unwanted references. Kindly review the article Transfest80 (talk) 11:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Transfest80 The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Transfest is a sockpuppet of AjKa180 / Vijayclicker93. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:47:31, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Gvrpkumar[edit]


Phanindra Kumar.GVR (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gvrpkumar: Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and other social media arent reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:11:00, 7 December 2020 review of submission by 2409:4071:2413:8D63:B9D6:A294:C68:A3C3[edit]


2409:4071:2413:8D63:B9D6:A294:C68:A3C3 (talk) 16:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:15:25, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Dodas19[edit]


Hello, My entry for Maestro Arts has been declined because it 'reads more like an advertisement'. I tried really hard for that not to happen so I would appreciate any help you can offer to take out those bits. Certainly, there are a few links to the company's website, so I can take out all of those. But nearly all the other links are to books and music periodicals and broadsheets. Once I've taken out all the links to the website, is there anything else I should edit? Are you able to give me this advice? Many thanks in advance, Ariane

Dodas19 (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:12:03, 7 December 2020 review of submission by Reema Hasan[edit]

i need my article reviewed because i am willing to share it for personal outcomes and publishing it will help me in my life so i would appreciate your revision as well as submission .. please help me reach good submission and edit .. thank you in advance. Reema Hasan (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reema Hasan Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company, and has no interest in aiding your career. If it is your company, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 17:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:41:26, 7 December 2020 review of submission by Marquis Newell[edit]

I believe that the person who has last reviewed was not thorough enough Marquis Newell (talk) 17:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marquis Newell You've had more than one review, and they all reached the same conclusion. Please heed the comments by the reviewers. 331dot (talk) 17:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:10:25, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Mmmm1362[edit]


Following your advice, I have removed unreliable sources now. Please help me to publish this article Mmmm1362 (talk) 18:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mmmm1362: You seem to be under the mistaken impression that all draft articles are approved eventually. This is incorrect. If you fail to demonstrate that the subject meets our notability criteria, the article will not pass. From what I can see, it's unclear why we would consider him notable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:37:03, 7 December 2020 review of submission by Tmreborn[edit]

Hello! Just wondering why exactly this the article i was trying to publish is not notable enough. This producer has produced/written music for some of this biggest names in the industry! Is there anything else i can do to help? thanks you!

Tmreborn (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tmreborn: Hi there, unfortunately, notability is not inherited from the people that a person works for or with. You would need to demonstrate that the subject meets one of our relevant notability guidelines, either WP:MUSICBIO or our General Notability Guideline which requires subjects to have received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Significant coverage = in-depth writing about the subject, not passing mentions, and not data found on content scraper websites or in databases like ASCAP. Reliable sources = mainstream news sites, mainstream magazines, books from mainstream publishers, etc. (see our reliable sourcing guidelines). Independent = does not involve the subject's participation. So interviews don't help, the subject's own website or self-published autobiography wouldn't count, etc. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the article is way too promotional to be acceptable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 22:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought "the tender age of 2" was a bit much... Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:24:36, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Bcesoccerus[edit]


I tried to write an article about BCE Premium TV but I'm not very professional in making it completely please help it guys.

Bcesoccerus (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:01:24, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Hickeygamez[edit]


My submission has been declined twice. I feel like I made the requested changes, and it is still being declined. It says I need more sources, but it has many. Please advise! Hickeygamez (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hickeygamez (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hickeygamez: The declines say that you need to demonstrate that the subject has received significant coverages from reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Significant coverage = in depth coverage, not passing mentions. Reliable sources = mainstream sources known for editorial oversight (see WP:RS). Independent = without the subject's participation. So for instance, many of the references in the article are cited to the journal you are writing about. So those would do nothing to demonstrate notability, as they are not independent of the subject. You should also see Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals), because it might be easier to demonstrate that the article has met one of the criteria there. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you for your response. I know a lot of the references are from the journal itself. I hope that someone will eventually join me in this project to help simplify it. However, some of the other references are significant, reliable, independent coverage. For example, reference #17: https://cfms.org/what-we-do/education/cmej Hickeygamez (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hickeygamez: No, that isn't independent at all. Its published on the subject's website, and as far as I can tell it is not a scan/scapped version of some newspaper article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? CFMS (https://cfms.org/) is not the same as CMEJ (www.cmej.ca). Thank-you for the follow ups! I really appreciate your help!Hickeygamez (talk) 18:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC) I wanted to follow up to say CFMS just posted that as a feature about CMEJ. They are otherwise completely independent. My second question, is this a good source? [1] Hickeygamez (talk) 18:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hickeygamez: I call bullshit on that. https://cfms.org/what-we-do/education/cmej is not an independent feature authored by CFMS. It's an advertisement in the voice of CMEJ ("For access to our latest issue ... visit our website [with links to CMEJ's website]"). That it has been published on CFMS's website doesn't make it independent. If you can't tell the difference, you won't get very far creating content here. Furthermore, the first and third parts of the ad are an exact copy of Draft:Canadian Medical Education Journal.
--Worldbruce (talk) 03:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://med.uottawa.ca/department-innovation/news/canadian-medical-education-journal

No BS intended! I find it odd that it is written in first-person as well, but I have no control over how they published it. They are completely independent organizations, but I know that CFMS offered to do a feature of CMEJ and used the wikipedia write-up for their ad (not vice versa). If this doesn't work as a reliable source, I will keep looking and appreciate guidance as to how to find it. For example, what about these: https://med.uottawa.ca/department-innovation/news/canadian-medical-education-journal https://publons.com/journal/47072/canadian-medical-education-journal/ https://www.cpass.umontreal.ca/tag/canadian-medical-education-journal/ https://mededconference.ca/about/why-ccme-right-you https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/journals/2774/ What about when specific universities feature CMEJ papers on their website? https://emergencymed.queensu.ca/about/announcements/dr-damon-dagnone-publishes-article-cmej-reclaiming-physician-identity-its-time

When I look at a similar wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Medical_Association_Journal, they only have 3 references that aren't CMAJ references. That's very similar to what I am trying to do with CMEJ. Hickeygamez (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:09:14, 7 December 2020 review of draft by Angel200489[edit]


Hello, my draft was rejected for not having reliable sources. The article is for a season of The Great Kenyan Bake Off. There are pages for each season of all the versions of this show. However, for this particular season, there are no articles written about it. All the information I've gathered from the show's website or from watching the episodes. Even if there are no articles to substantiate the information, that doesn't mean that the information is not true, it just means that the information comes from videos or from social platforms that I cannot submit as reference.

What can I do in this instance?

Angel200489 (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_December_7&oldid=993896548"