Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 July 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 27 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 29 >
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.


July 28[edit]

05:32:31, 28 July 2021 review of submission by 49.36.232.137[edit]

We believe the subject has sufficient notability for inclusion in Wikipedia as per WP:NACTOR criterion. The person already has a wiki page in local language : https://or.wikipedia.org/wiki/ଲିପ୍ସା_ମିଶ୍ର

The person has done significant roles in multiple notable television shows, films and other productions. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following for her roles in Odia television serials and movies.

49.36.232.137 (talk) 05:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The cult following aspect of the criteria is now depreciated and no longer part of the notability criteria. The draft was rejected, and will not be considered further, because you have not demonstrated notability- the sources you provided did not do this. 331dot (talk) 07:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

07:11:37, 28 July 2021 review of draft by JimPlamondon[edit]


JimPlamondon (talk) 07:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been the victim of WP:CITEKILL. Please list your three best sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:14:29, 28 July 2021 review of draft by Ozioma23[edit]


I submitted a draft https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Francisca_Oladipo for review, I was told that "This submission is not adequately supported by Reliable Sources". During the creation, I tried to put publicly available information. Please I need help with this issue. Thanks so much.

Ozioma23 (talk) 08:14, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ozioma23 I have left you a fuller comment on the draft itself. You need to examine the sources you have chosen and discard thise that add no value, seeking new ines that add value FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:16, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08:52:04, 28 July 2021 review of submission by 2409:4042:883:F973:0:0:234F:30A1[edit]


2409:4042:883:F973:0:0:234F:30A1 (talk) 08:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected drafts do not proceed further FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:08:13, 28 July 2021 review of submission by JeevanShetty07[edit]

I need help in creating a WIKIPEDIA page and everytime i try publishing it says its rejected due to some issues like its sounds like a CV and I GET THIS MESSAGE ALWAYS

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.


PLEASE HELP ME MAKE THIS PAGE FOR THIS PERSON. THANKS

JeevanShetty07 (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JeevanShetty07 If you keep doing the same thing and getting the same result then what needs tio change is what you are doing. Please confirm that you have read the full rationale in the big, pink decline boxes. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:11, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10:42:17, 28 July 2021 review of draft by Ttttt321[edit]


Hii I need help in creating my draft articleDraft:Chewdara beacuse my draft article has been declined many times, because of irrelevent sources and i removed all the irrelevent sources and added reliable sources, but TheBirdsShedTears told me that my draft article is still unsourced.why?

Ttttt321 (talk). 10:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12:32:04, 28 July 2021 review of draft by Mortal Buddha[edit]


My submission has been rejected telling the reason that 'it dosen't follow the minimum standards of inline citations and please add footnotes'. I have gone through the help page but i am unable to identify what i have done wrong. I have given many inline citations in the articles with footnotes. Please help me to find the issue with my submission. Thanks in advance Mortal Buddha (talk) 12:32, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mortal Buddha, I'm afraid the reviewer Ken Tony was mistaken, all the references are correctly in the form of inline citations. Apologies, such errors do unfortunately happen occasionally. I have accepted the draft. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:21:39, 28 July 2021 review of draft by Tnnssnn[edit]


Whoever you are and whoever you think you are, you are very sick people. You're probably doing this for money, but you won't get any. This isn't freedom, this is censorship. I don't care whether you publish this or not. It is the second wikipedia page I try to create in years and both times I get terrible treatment. I didn't care last time and I don't care now, bacause the information I am trying to publish for others is known to me and I don't lose, but you are hurting Wikipedia and your readers loose access to information they deserve to have. How is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc. and the countless other articles like that on Wikipedia not a clear advertisement? You are re-directing people to stock exchanges. I don't care about the price of Tesla stock. You are sick greedy people. Point the finger at yourselves. I call a spade a spade. You are advertising, I am providing people with useful information.Tnnssnn (talk) 14:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Care to take a mulligan on the topic area you're editing in, or perhaps disclosing your connexion here? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 14:27, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(And for the record, for all my 15 years of being here, my total compensation for editing Wikipedia comes out to $0.00. We're volunteers, not paid staff; paid staff do not edit or make editorial decisions except under exigent circumstances.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 14:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:38:29, 28 July 2021 review of submission by Whisperjanes[edit]

There are now four reviews and at least one other piece of independent, substantial coverage cited in the article. There is also a plot summary in this book. I think this now passes WP:GNG notability. - Whisperjanes (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify (in case I wasn't clear enough initially), I can't resubmit the AfC because it has been rejected, even though it now seems to pass notability. The only action I could take on the draft was the large button to "Ask for advice". - Whisperjanes (talk) 17:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 18:08:02, 28 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Atibrarian[edit]


I am requesting assistance with the creation of the article because I believe the subject might have met the notability test. Though objection was raised concerning my use of a published resume as a reference. I am not in any way related to the subject. The for it was conceived during my participation in an "edit-a-thon" initiated to improve and creates articles relating to Edo State (Nigeria) and its people.

If there is better way to rewrite the article to make it suitable for Wikkipedia i would be glad if an experienced editor help out in this regard.

Warm regards Atibrarian (talk) 18:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Atibrarian looking at the draft ity seems that you need to prove that he passes Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Google Scholar does not give men huge hope since his citation coin on his papers is low. Consulting an editor who specialises in examining academics such as DGG will give you a better idea. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:15:13, 28 July 2021 review of draft by Cjl2211[edit]


Cjl2211 (talk) 20:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I'm trying to get an article published on this poet, who is important in a certain circle, and I'm a bit confused about the bar for "reliable sources". Surely when discussing a poet, one who has been on the scene for years and been published by numerous journals and presses, poetry review journals are reliable sources? The world of independent publishing is certainly not one of celebrity with a huge budget, but Schwartz's work has been published by numerous literary presses and reviewed in literary journals, many of which are mainly in print and don't have much of an online presence (or if they do, their online presence is rather low budget. His radio program Cross cultural Poetics (http://writing.upenn.edu/pennsound/x/XCP.php) , has also been archived by the University of Pennsylvania, and contains conversations with many notable writers (Fanny Howe, Robert Creeley, Robin Blaser, Lydia Davis, etc. etc.) Thanks so much.Cjl2211 (talk) 20:15, 28 July 2021 (UTC)cjl2211[reply]

@Cjl2211 You present the dilemma found in many biographies, so let us look at the issue with logic. A respected journal is one subject to review by others. Its opinion (or rather the opinions that it holds) tend to be subject of discussion in other learned areas, rather in the similar manner that an academic paper is subject to review.
If you ask for help at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for poetry sources you will get further than asking here with specific sources.
You need to avoid any sites which sell the poet's works. Using those creates the feel of an advert FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:01, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:35:42, 28 July 2021 review of submission by Emon Albira[edit]


Emon Albira (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page deleted and user is blocked. Request is moot. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 22:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_July_28&oldid=1036847555"