Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 April 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< April 15 << Mar | April | May >> April 17 >
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.


April 16[edit]

03:25:36, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Sammy.Muhammed[edit]

Why has it been rejected? Sammy.Muhammed (talk) 03:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC) This person is well accomplished and known in Nigeria people in his country deserve to know about him Sammy.Muhammed (talk) 04:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sammy.Muhammed:, we need to see that others have written about the subject in independent reliable sources. Wikipedia is about recording what is already notable, not to promote or make notable. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would also recommend reading WP:AUTOBIO and WP:YFA to help understand what is required to have an article accepted. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:29:42, 16 April 2021 review of submission by TarunNagar123[edit]


TarunNagar123 (talk) 07:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TarunNagar123 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you work for or represent Deb Technosys, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 07:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:30:32, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Sammy.Muhammed[edit]

I edited my page to your standers can it be posted now? Sammy.Muhammed (talk) 09:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sammy.Muhammed it has not been edited to our standards, you still do not have any properly cited information and the subject is not notable enough for Wikipedia. The draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. I would recommend you edit elsewhere on Wikipedia to get a feel for the policies and writing styles here before you attempt to make another article. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:27, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:34:17, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Kookieskat11[edit]

Hi! I was wondering if there was any way this article might possibly be considered again in future, once it complies with wikipedia rules? I'd appreciate some advice on this, too Thank you in advance! :) Kookieskat11 (talk) 09:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kookieskat11: it can certainly considered at some point in future. Until then, there is no point in trying to pursuade this further. If I am allowed to give you a recommendation, when its too soon now, another attempt isn't worth the candle until a few months, perhaps a year or two, maybe more, has passed. At that time, the draft (if its used as a base) probbably will need to be rewritten almost completely, at least from a reference standpoint. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:50:09, 16 April 2021 review of draft by Thefrankie88[edit]


There is already a Wikipedia for her in a different language https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miriam_Haley Thefrankie88 (talk) 09:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thefrankie88: The existence or absence of an article about sth./smbd. cannot be cited as an argument for the existence on the English Wikipedia, because each language is a seperate Project with (somtimes quite) seperate rules. See WP:OSE for more info. Goolge Searches are not reliable sources, because they are highely dynamic (Something which was listed on a Google search rigth now may already be gone in an hour). IMDB is not a reliable source because it is user-generated. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:43:36, 16 April 2021 review of draft by LordPeterII[edit]


Greetings,

I have submitted this Draft back in January, and am well aware that it might still take some time to get accepted/denied. However, I am sort of a WikiOgre and only occasionally have time to edit - right now being one of these times. Thus I am asking whether it would be possible to get some feedback on the article's state?

I'm especially interested in feedback since this is a tricky one, my first article about a company. Not an AfC volunteer's favourite category of articles I suppose, but in need for moderation to avoid promotion. Thus I had intentionally chosen AfC over bothering NPP.

Also, this article was requested by one of the company's representatives, but they respected all our rules and did not try to cheat their way to an article (I did all the writing, and I have no CoI). Thus I would find it nice to honour their honesty by showing them that their article has made some progress at least. Cheers! --LordPeterII (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:02:04, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Here I am using this website[edit]


I got the information from a reliable source which is Emporis

Here I am using this website (talk) 14:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Here I am using this website You had 3 possibilities to provide more than just one source like it was requested by the reviewers. Your draft was now finally rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


15:40:40, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Andyseanb1[edit]


Andyseanb1 (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andyseanb1 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:11:15, 16 April 2021 review of draft by JuwelNotts12[edit]


I have this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:DNA_Family_Secrets and I astill dont understand why it keeps getting rejected. The response from one of the helpers says'no independent sources, so no evidence of notability' but there are a number of links at the bottom of the page from independent sources. Sorry am I missing something? I was just trying to add an article and be helpful.

JuwelNotts12 (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JuwelNotts12 I honestly do not understand why you are telling us that your draft is getting rejected - it has been rejected once - 16 days ago - and is currently awaiting a new review. Please be patient, there are more than 5,000 articles currently waiting for being reviewed. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CommanderWaterford: Declined, not rejected - Declines are "Work on this some more and try again", rejects are "Stop wasting yours and our time on this." —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 21:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano Of course it was just a typo/mistake. A rejected draft can also not be in the Review Queue. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:33:23, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Dangelvoice[edit]


Thank you for your advice. I have re-written an article based on Deelee Dube and would like to know if the subject's official website can be added as an external link within the article? I would also be grateful if you could possibly review the article.

Please advise, many thanks.

I have been attempting to submit an article based on Deelee Dube, and unfortunately, it looks as though it has been declined or deleted by Justlettersandnumbers on 16 April 2021. I have also observed copyright notability issues. I would like to rewrite the article and resubmit it to be published. Would it be at all possible to do this?

Please advise, many thanks.

Dangelvoice (talk) 18:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dangelvoice. If you believe you can rewrite the page so that it doesn't infringe copyright, see the "Can you help resolve this issue?" section on the draft, and follow the instructions in the third point of that section. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18:51:26, 16 April 2021 review of submission by SKPatel7991[edit]


I added the approval for disclosure for compensation. Please review. Thank you. SKPatel7991 (talk) 18:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

SKPatel7991 (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Repeatedly submitting a draft for review without making a novel attempt to address the issues that led to it being declined is generally grounds for deletion, and as mentioned none of your sources are acceptable (CNN Money is basically a prose interview and all the rest are either native advertising or sources we would never consider to be third-party reliable sources to begin with). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 21:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:06, 16 April 2021 review of submission by Theodorat6[edit]


Hi, guys, would you be so kind to help me create this page properly cos, this person Branko Babic is very famous in our country, everyone knows about him, he is organizing all the time charity, donations, etc for our country and there must be the way to create this page on the way how wiki aks for. This is my first time writing this type of article and I'm apologizing for my mistakes. Thank you so much in advance

Theodorat6 (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fame is not notability, and unless/until you address the concerns that got it deleted you're not going to have any sort of luck. Also, we are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim made that could potentially be challenged by anyone for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to a strong third-party source that corroborates it or, if no such source(s) can be found, removed wholesale. This is a hard requirement when writing biographical content on Wikipedia and is not negotiable. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 21:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:25:05, 16 April 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Theodorat6[edit]


  Hi guys, would you be so kind to help me create this article because this person is extremely famous in Serbia and there is non-person who doesn't know about Branko, also he is organizing all the time charity, donations and doing as much as he can for Serbia and would be a shame to not exist in Wikipedia, also this is my first time writing articles like this one in Wikipedia and would be much appreciated if you can help me about it. Thank you in advice.


Theodorat6 (talk) 19:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Theodorat6 - Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Theodorat6 It's great that this person does good work, but Wikipedia is not for telling the world about good works. I would suggest social media or a personal website. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:48:04, 16 April 2021 review of submission by OfficialMarkets[edit]

I'm just curious as to why my article wasn't accepted? I didn't understand the message that was sent, could you break it down for me as to why it was declined?

OfficialMarkets (talk) 19:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For a start this paid for draft is stuffed with ridiculous name dropping promotional puffery. Wikipedia summarises what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, content needs to be written in a neutral tone. Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

22:03:48, 16 April 2021 review of submission by 2603:8000:C244:2300:8460:8723:3BDE:338F[edit]

I'm writing on behalf of my client, CarZing. CarZing’s mission is to make auto financing quick and easy while providing a modern, hassle free way of shopping for cars. The article was submitted back in December 2020, and a few people have made edits recently, but none have yet approved or rejected the draft. Google Search is currently showing outdated company info until this article can help update the SEO, which is causing customers to get confused. My client and I would greatly appreciate if someone could assist in reviewing the article draft. Thank you so much for your help.


2603:8000:C244:2300:8460:8723:3BDE:338F (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing search results, in aiding SEO efforts, or in aiding potential customers. If you are being paid for the expressed purpose of creating an article, I'd suggest you return the money. Please review WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Say, do you suppose there's a chance the company may be notable, regardless of this submission's blatant WP:PAID agenda? There are reference to sources that at least have the aesthetic of business news outlets, but I'm having a hard time parsing if they're truly secondary sources and not repackaged press releases/blurbs. The fact that some of the links redirect to the Yahoo news main page doesn't help... BlackholeWA (talk) 04:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_April_16&oldid=1019200285"