Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 May 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 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.


May 4[edit]

06:36:49, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Nemtudom88[edit]

1. It suits the requiremnts

if u have finished, click the "Publish changes" button or your request will not be posted!!!-->}}

@Nemtudom88: Very few youtubers are notable enough to have Wikipedia pages. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09:59:39, 4 May 2020 review of draft by Masato.harada[edit]


I am unclear why my film submission has been declined. The reason given is:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Has the submission been declined because: 1. The entire subject, that is this film, is not suitable? In which case, is the problem whether or not the film exists? My external links to independent sources demonstrate that there is such a film. Should I change the external links to make them references? Or

2. Is the problem that the two statements in my submission which are supported by references do not have sufficiently strong sources? In which case, should I delete the references and leave the submission unreferenced (which is the situation with many articles describing less well known films which have been accepted on Wikipedia)?

Masato.harada (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This reference [1] doesn’t mention the film and IMDb is not a reliable source, so you have in effect, zero reliable sources to support any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:30:39, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Nemtudom88[edit]

1. there are no Copyrights 2.it's not a fanpage 3. it's objective 4.it was written in English Nemtudom88 (talk) 11:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Noone Has talked about copyright violations
  2. If this refers to the first decline - It contained some WP:PUFFERY but nothing to serious. Note that the first reviewer was since indeff'd for violating WP:PAID (which is a Terms of Use requirement).
  3. We had this before
  4. Dont know how you came on this
The much more serius concern is that the Draft lacks sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. YouTube isn't considered a relieable source because it's user-generated. I failed to find other sources linked in your Draft's history. A quick Google search also doesn't brought up something relieable. Please read WP:AMOUNT and WP:42. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:05:20, 4 May 2020 review of draft by 2A02:8109:9D80:3124:8DB8:9044:F022:B53E[edit]



Dear Wiki community. Thanks for checking my submission so quickly. :D As I would like to become a more active member of the Wikipedia community, I am eager to learn why this article was rejected. Its a direct translation from German Wikipedia (should be pretty encyclopedic, I don't know who created it there), and the article has been requested in the English Wikipedia in at least two other articles (eg here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct_for_Syrian_Coexistence and here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bloc_(Syria) ). Sources like DW, FAZ, Die Welt, ZDF are highly established mainstream news platforms in Germany. And I basically chose this topic because I thought it was a quick way of getting my engagement here running and I am somewhat surprised by the rejection reasons. Hence, I would like to know better how to improve the draft or future contributions. Any feedback highly recommended. Thanks ;D

2A02:8109:9D80:3124:8DB8:9044:F022:B53E (talk) 13:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

13:17:29, 4 May 2020 review of draft by 56-k Maz[edit]


Hello,

I would like some help improving the submission I wrote about Alexander Boldachev. My submission is declined for 2 weeks because "This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter." Could you help me by specifying what I could improve or clarify so that the context is sufficient for everyone?

Many thanks for your help,

56-k Maz ==

56-k Maz (talk) 13:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 56-k Maz. The fundamental problem remains that your submission contains material copied from other websites in violation of copyright. As a consequence, the text portion of the draft has been hidden until the copyright problem is fixed. I've unhidden the first sentence, which does not violate copyright, but without any other text, the draft has insufficient context to be accepted.
There are instructions on your talk page and in the large "Investigation of potential copyright issue" box on the draft about how to resolve the issue. New editors who dive into the deep end of the pool by trying to write new articles (one of the most difficult tasks novice editors can attempt) instead of learning their way around in the shallows (by improving existing articles) tend to be left to sink or swim on their own. If you want assistance, you may find it easier to attract if you explain on User:56-k Maz what your connection to Boldachev is and why you are writing about him on Wikipedia, instead of improving the encyclopedia's millions of other articles. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Worldbruce.
Thanks for your quick feedback. I fully understood the principle of copyright infringement which was pointed out to me a few months ago. It has since been corrected. I thought the issue would be solved in this way.
I am a new editorial on the English Wikipedia but I have written some submissions in French. I have never seen this issue "This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter." and I wish I could correct it. --56-k Maz (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@56-k Maz: You are mistaken, the copyright problem has not been corrected. The paragraph beginning "Boldachev’s discography ..." is the most blatant example, but there is too-close paraphrasing in a number of other paragraphs. The only way to correct the insufficient context problem is to first fix the copyright problem. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:45, 4 May 2020 review of draft by DanWASB[edit]


Hello. My draft article was recently rejected for reading too much like an advertisement. I'm wondering if an editor can give me an example or two of the non-neutral language in the draft that was cause for rejection.

I could see making a few minor changes — such as replacing "represents" with "is a membership association representing" in the introduction — but these seem, well, minor.

Could an editor explain what I might need to add or remove to correct this issue? I've added a number of other sources in an earlier revision.

My username is DanWASB. I have disclosed my affiliation to the association about which the page is written.


DanWASB (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The text The WASB, based in Madison, Wisconsin, provides member services such as legislative advocacy, leadership development and legal and policy guidance. and the entire "Services" section are typical of promotional articles. I often see such wording in drafts about law firms and consulting and other service firms. I can't say what aspects RoySmith (a very experienced reviewer) had in mind, but those are my thoughts. I would also mention that the section "About School Boards in Wisconsin" seems to have very limited relevance to the topic of the WASB. More about the various actions that the WASB has taken over the years might be helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DanWASB, I noted a couple of phrases in particular:
  • "provides member services such as legislative advocacy, leadership development and legal and policy guidance."
  • "provides services intended to help board members be more effective and run their districts run more smoothly"
I hesitate to call those out in particular, however, because I don't want to leave the impression that if those two phrases were excised, what's left would be acceptable.
Dan, while I thank you for complying with our COI disclosure rules, I do need to draw your attention to WP:COI where it says, COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. ... Editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing. I'm sure you meant well, but your desire to promote the WASB comes through loud and clear in just about every sentence of this article. That's why we so strongly discourage people from writing about organizations they are connected to. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for your prompt reply. I can see how language like " … be more effective and run their districts more smoothly" would be seen as promotional. That sentence could just be deleted entirely.

That said, the sentence beginning "provides member services" does not seem promotional to me. I suppose it could be "The WASB's services include" or "Its services include" but these are, again, very minor changes.

It seems to me that a description of any nonprofit membership association would begin with a list of the services it provides to those members. If a plain language description of services provided is deemed to be promotional, I'm not sure how such an article could be written.

15:37:44, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Mateo1259[edit]

I have revised the content based on the feedback I received and I think it meets the standards wikipedia has set. Mateo1259 (talk) 15:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nope...just blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:35:54, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Exotic pop[edit]


Exotic pop (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

advice?

Hello Exotic pop The draft in your sandbak is pretty much pure advertising. There is no indication that the company is notable (see WP:NCORP) but even if it were notable, the draft is much too promotional for Wikipedia. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22:31:25, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Keaton lariver[edit]


Keaton lariver (talk) 22:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keaton lariver, Your professor wants to have you turn in all of your work like that? You may have misunderstood them, as Wikipedia drafts are not for schoolwork like that. The only thing we can approve from students is actual articles that would fit in our encyclopedia. All of the extra cruft has to go. If your professor really wants you to turn that in via Wikipedia, they are mistaken. Send it to them in a word doc or something. Also, your draft is nowhere near the standard of a Wikipedia article. That doesn't mean you've failed your class, it just means we can't publish it. It will need improvements if we could publish it. However the real issue is that the topic is unclear and unsuitable. You've essentially written a how to guide, not a formal encyclopedia article. I'm not sure what I'd even title your article if I were to accept it. What is it about? CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I need to submit a draft paper to my professor from Wikipedia with all my edits/enhancements. Can you please help me to do so? Thank you.

Your professor seems to have some pretty grand misconceptions about Wikipedia is for. I would advise you to tell them to go to: WP:ASSIGN Sulfurboy (talk) 23:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please do not going around attempting to add this info to existing articles. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23:12:55, 4 May 2020 review of submission by Brenchristo[edit]


I am requesting a review of my article because I have truthfully declared all information for my biography. If I have done something wrong please tell me, because I cannot understand why it has been turned down so many times. I really need some help to get through all of the red tape. I am not good at writing code and that is my problem. If I can be shown a sample of how I should rewrite it I will greatly appreciate it. My biography at World Nations Writers Union was updated by the authorities and I request that you have a look at it once again. Brenchristo (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brenchristo, The article has been rejected which means it will not be considered further at this time. Per the message already provided: "Page creator has continually ignored suggestions to improve page and just keeps resubmitting article. It's very likely the subject is not notable and even if they are the article would have to be wholly re-written to comply with Wikipedia notability guidelines and MOS. "
I would recommend in the future not attempting to write articles about yourself. If you actually are notable, someone will write about you eventually. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_May_4&oldid=985276039"