Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 July 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 4 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 6 >
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 5[edit]

03:20:53, 5 July 2022 review of draft by NeverTry4Me[edit]


Reviewer admitted that the draft passes WP:GEOLAND, even so, declined. As per Wiki policy, notabi9lity of WP:GEOLAND yet not said about any SIGCOV or other sources. Government census data is more logical than any third-party ref as third-party ref often mistakes with name and proper information.

I request a fresh review as I added a couple of "third party" citations.

- Signed by NeverTry4Me Talk 03:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving of Draft:Summoner Wars[edit]

I've moved Summoner Wars to the mainspace. I am not an AfC reviewer, so it displayed that the draft wasn't reviewed, but IMO the draft satisfies GNG. This article is probably the second part for here, but IMO it meets the first line: move the template because the article was moved into article space by a non-reviewer, but should be in article space (i.e. it is an acceptable page), so I removed the template. Please let me know if I have accidentally made a mistake, if I moved the article improperly, could you please ping me and move it back to the draftspace? Apologies for any potential inconvenience, many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 03:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:35:17, 5 July 2022 review of draft by ChristianClarina[edit]


Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Erin_Massey&oldid=1094335701 A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (June 2022) Submission declined on 13 April 2022 by Greenman (talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources I’m not quite sure what the issue is regarding reliable sources. There are two books: 1. b Humphies, Mark Osborne A Weary Road: Shell Shock in the Canadian Expeditionary Force, 1914-1918. University of Toronto Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442661400-007 2. Price, G. Ward, The Story of the Salonica Army (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1918, 2nd Edition) Three references from the London Times: 1. The Times (London, England), Court Circular, Saturday 3 August 1918, issue 41859 2. The Times (London, England), Tuesday, May 16, 1961; pg. 19; Issue 55082. Category: Obituaries 3. ^ The Times (London, England), 27 June 1929, p. 21 (Issue no. 45240) Three references from other newspapers: 1. ^ Newcastle Courant, 1st. August 1884 (Gale database) 2. ^ Exeter and Plymouth Gazette, 13 July 1906 3. ^ Western Times, 13 July 1906

A reference from The National Archive of the UK; Kew, Surrey, England; War Office and Air Ministry: Service Medal and Award Rolls, First World War. WO329; Ref: 2323, and one for: http://www.abitofhistory.net/html/rhw/c.htm, and: The British Hospital Formation under the Croix Rouge Francaise at Fort Mahon, Somme, and Chateau de Boismont, La Comté, pas de Calais. n.d.

I have already reported my conflict of interest, as she was my grandmother. I believe my article is written from a neutral point of view. ChristianClarina (talk) 03:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC) ChristianClarina[reply]

ChristianClarina (talk) 03:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianClarina you should read the COI declaration method. - Signed by NeverTry4Me Talk 06:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:43:00, 5 July 2022 review of draft by 0xDeadbeef[edit]


Hello, the reviewer for this draft suggested that the sources do not meet WP:ORGCRIT however I believe most of them can be counted towards WP:GNG. Can someone show me how they cannot be counted? Thanks. 0xDeadbeef 04:43, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

0xDeadbeef You should ask the reviewer directly to be certain, but from what I see the sources are little more than promotional pieces for the alliance, they don't have significant coverage which is required. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:28, 5 July 2022 review of draft by Nanavandijk[edit]


I've accidentally published this draft on the english wikipedia. Could you delete this draft? Or how can I delete it?

Nanavandijk (talk) 10:54, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done as an author request speedy delete. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:04:03, 5 July 2022 review of submission by Rowby[edit]


As you will see the Reviewer of this article correctly indicated that " Numerous unsourced statements throughout the article" I assume this was because in the initial paragraphs "Early Life" "Marriage" and "Acting Career" I did not cite specific sources for those items. After your review I will rewrite those sections and only include items where I have specific sources. (Actually I thought I did that, but clearly I did not.)

In the "Television Credits" and "Television Movies and Feature Films" I cite sources for many -- but not all -- of those items. I would appreciate if you would help me to confirm that my Sources that I DID include are okay in these two sessions.

Rowby (talk) 16:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rowby: They MUST be cited within the prose as well. Every claim that could potentially be challenged MUST be sourced. (If Burton is dead, the article does not make any sort of claim of that sort, and so we have to proceed as if he were still alive barring a source that confirms he is dead.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:14, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rowby: I should also note that IMDb is not an acceptable source under any circumstance (no editorial oversight), and TCM's website is also a useless source (too sparse). Lastly, we do not consider having appeared in a film or show to be something that requires a cite so long as the subject has been properly credited under their name (i.e. a source is required if they went uncredited or took an Alan Smithee-style credit). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jéské
Thanks for the clarifications.
I will make the fixes. BTW Mr. Robert Burton is alive. I will not use IMDb or TCM as sources.
I am looking at Alan Smithee listing.
It is my understanding that Burton's credits are all credited with his name on the screen. But I will double check.
My main question now is how do I "prove" that he is credited (rather than uncredited). These are old TV shows that were mainly referenced in newspapers, magazines and TV-type guides which are not available to link to. (For example I have a copy of a TV Guide type magazine about the popular Lassie TV series with Burton's photo on the cover. But I am not able to upload that because I cannot prove that the photo is in the public domain.)
So any clarification of how I can "prove" that Burton is indeed credited on the TV shows and films would be appreciated.
Thanks! Rowby (talk) 13:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:12:31, 5 July 2022 review of submission by Dofawi[edit]


Dofawi (talk) 16:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I am requesting a re-review of this article because the basis of the rejection is incorrect. The majority of references provided are not from the perspective of the company, AgAmerica Lending, but are company spotlights from third-party verified sources. The article also includes both pros and cons of the company and all information is directly from sources. All potentially biased verbiage has been removed so I am requesting either approval of this Wikipedia page or more specific and accurate reasoning as to why it has not been approved in order to make necessary revisions. Thank you!

  • I agree with the editor who rejected it - it lacks any independent reliable sources and it's WP:CORPSPAM. In addition, I'd encourage the creator to respond to the paid editing inquiry on their talk page. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:34, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:58:42, 5 July 2022 review of draft by 220.121.0.178[edit]


220.121.0.178 (talk) 16:58, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are some inline citations, but as Jeske says, there are many assertions (and whole paragraphs) that do not have inline citations. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:00, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I've put up 2 articles that have been both rejected. Both wanted more reliable sources, and I was wondering what the problem of the used sources would be. Would it be not reliable because it's in Korean? Or would it be because there are news articles?

Also, one of the article suggests that it should have a more neutral point of view. Could you be able to provide some examples from the article where it would not be neutral?

Thanks in advance.

We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every claim made about a living or recently-departed person that could potentially be challenged for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to an in-depth, non-routine, independent source written by an identifiable author and subjected to competent editorial processes that corroborates the claim or (if no such sources can be found) removed entirely. This is a hard requirement when writing about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is NOT NEGOTIABLE. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:12:17, 5 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Hyerisuh[edit]


Hello,

I have submitted two articles that have been rejected.

A common reason for rejection is that they do not provide reliable sources. Could you be able to specify on why the sources aren't reliable? Is it because: - The resources are in Korean? - They include news articles? - Not enough resources in the article?

Also, one of the feedback was that it was not written in a neutral point of view. Could you be able to provide an example from the article?

Lastly, I saw articles that I wrote published on wiki-ish pages. I have not submitted them on there, and Wikipedia is the only place I submitted. Would you know why the rejected articles are on those pages? They are wikitia and everybodywiki (Links have been blacklisted.

Thanks in advance.

Hyerisuh (talk) 17:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hyerisuh Sources are not required to be in English. There are many websites that copy or mirror Wikipedia, including drafts and deleted pages. This is fine as long as attribution is provided per Wikipedia's license. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected means resubmission is not possible. Declined means it is. 331dot (talk) 17:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hyerisuh I'm going to recommend that you not include any unsourced information. If you only include info that is sourced, it will be easier to accept the draft. Also, the long list of books is problematic. If you can find reviews of a few, and use them to source the book, the article will be better. Lastly, as pointed out above, you can use Korean sources, but we'll need to translate them to determine if they provide sufficient coverage. Can you post the link to the three best sources, so we can review? TechnoTalk (talk) 19:42, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article, and the one in the previous section -- are they about the same person? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:04:01, 5 July 2022 review of draft by DrDaveD[edit]


I changed a reference and added a few more. Is it OK now?

There are a few primary sources from the project, but the first 3 are in the software description box so it makes sense for them to be there, and the Techical Charter link is the only place where the new governance structure is really described so I don't think there's another good reference. I believe the other references are all secondary sources, and the Linux Foundation is certainly a reliable source with a very good reputation.

This is the continuation of a previously accepted page Singularity_(software). The community decided not to rename the existing page because of the existence of another project that shares the history, so we need a new page under the new name. The project is very widely used.

DrDaveD (talk) 19:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DrDaveD: I'm going to recommend that you add this as a section to Singularity_(software), while continuing to work on the draft. Also include a section about SingularityCE. The sourcing requirements are not as high to add info to existing articles. TechnoTalk (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion, and it is a possibility, but I'm afraid that it would be misleading because that's no longer any project's name. As it stands now the Singularity page is labeled as being about the project up until the name change, and that is a nice clean, neutral way to define it. I originally changed the Singularity page to point to both Apptainer and SingularityCE new pages, but people on the SingularityCE project said they wanted to wait a year before they created a page, that's why it now just refers to their own web page. DrDaveD (talk) 19:52, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:47:05, 5 July 2022 review of submission by Devorx[edit]


Devorx (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Devorx You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 23:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Devorx: You absolutely cannot just leave a laundry list of sources in the footer of biographies; you need to properly cite them. Fortunately for you, I have plenty of time and plenty of music, and so I will assess your sources to see if they're even worth citing to begin with:
So, that's all of your "unique" sources (for want of a better term) assessed, and fully half of them are the exact same press release plastered all over the internet ad nauseam with no editing done except to (usually) remove the disclaimer, with the other half being primarily search engine results that point to yet another one of these worthless press releases as the top result. This sourcing is both unacceptable and raises questions about your connexion to Kapoor. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_July_5&oldid=1097664633"