Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 June 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< June 15 << May | June | Jul >> June 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.


June 16[edit]

01:58:00, 16 June 2022 review of submission by ChristianClarina[edit]

I have resubmitted the article with several new references and multiple photos of mine from Wikimedia commons BUT when I submitted, the immediate response that there were no references. Please explain why it's not findin my references, as I have inserted the tag? Thank you ChristianClarina (talk) 01:58, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ChristianClarina, putting aside the formatting of references (this guide may help), Your first reference is to a list where the subject is not mentioned. As for the Commons material, private materials that have not been published in reliable sources are not usable in Wikipedia articles. Nor are Wikipedia articles useable in other articles.
No idea if your other sources discuss the subject but if they do, please reply here with WP:THREE published reliable sources that discuss the subject so notability can be evaluated.Slywriter (talk) 02:21, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have formatted the references, and split the content into sections. I have not added any new content. It should be easier for review now. Jay (talk) 04:49, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Slywriter, thanks for your help. Here are three sources which I hope meet the requirements. Two are published books, the third is a London Times obituary:
Three best sources:
Humphries, 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
Price, G. Ward, The Story of the Salonica Army (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1918, 2nd Edition).
The Times (London, England), Tuesday, May 16, 1961; pg. 19; Issue 55082.  Category: Obituaries.
From Christian Clarina ChristianClarina (talk) 07:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:15:07, 16 June 2022 review of submission by ActressVenba[edit]


Could you please elaborate why this article has been declined. I mentioned all details correctly, Please kindly advise ActressVenba (talk) 03:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ActressVenba: have you actually read the reasons given for the decline and rejection? There is more information in those reasons than in the draft itself, and I don't see the point of repeating it all here. If you have read them, and still have a question, please put it specifically.
In a similar vein, although on a different point, have you also read the notice on your user talk page which explains why autobiographies really aren't a very good idea? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:22:37, 16 June 2022 review of submission by Boots small[edit]


Boots small (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Boots small — what is your question? It would appear you haven't made any edits, drafting or otherwise. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:31, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:04:28, 16 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Ego Progatem[edit]


Hi, I'm not sure why my article was declined this time around. Twice now it's been declined for a lack or reliable sources. Most of my information comes from a museum with an online exhibit of the plane that I've linked. After the first time it was declined, I found supporting evidence from two other places and as far as I'm aware, all three sources are reliable. I can't think of any way to improve the sources for the article at this time.

Ego Progatem (talk) 11:04, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ego Progatem You have sources which document the existence of the aircraft and its fate, but none that have significant coverage of the aircraft. One of your sources is more about the pilot and not the aircraft itself. 331dot (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What do you by "Significant coverage of the aircraft"? I have the history behind its creation, it's role in service, it's vital statistics, and it's fate. I'm not really sure what I could add about it. What more is there? Ego Progatem (talk) 11:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ego Progatem Well, as I suggested above, you only really have two sources because one of the three offered is more about the pilot than the aircraft. One or two more sources that discuss the importance or significance of the aircraft is needed. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Burgess Model K Article has been approved and is in mainspace now. TechnoTalk (talk) 20:07, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:59:36, 16 June 2022 review of submission by Editorialfeco[edit]


Good Day, My Name is charles Kay, an editorial associate for Feco Blog, As regards to this profile fpr Akin Fadeyi & Foundation which is been rejected, may I asked for help on who can assist me with the complete draft to ensure avoid rejection?

Editorialfeco (talk) 12:59, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Editorialfeco,
Your draft is insufficiently referenced, with many statements unsupported by citations. You must ensure that every material statement, as well as private personal details such as DOB, are clearly backed up by reliable sources. See WP:REFB and WP:BLP for guidance.
You also need to show that the subject is notable enough to warrant inclusion in a global encyclopaedia. Currently you cite two sources which don't even mention the person, and if they did, they still wouldn't count towards notability as they are primary. Per WP:GNG, we need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.
Dealing with these two issues should put your draft in a much better position. (If you need help on editing more generally, you can try the Teahouse, or for help writing the content, perhaps ask eg. at Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria?)
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Editorialfeco, need reliable independent sources. The foundation itself is not a reliable source to establish notability. Also, if you are being WP:PAID or otherwise connected to the subject (WP:COI), you must disclose on your userpage.

Request on 16:53:29, 16 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by AnAnonymous10[edit]


Hello I started a draft article but I waited a while to improve it. I did so here:

Is it deleted? No one has looked at it or approved it from the editors. Please let me know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rain_Magazine


AnAnonymous10 (talk) 16:53, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AnAnonymous10 you haven't submitted it for review yet, that's why nobody has reviewed it (that, and the fact that it seems to have been created all of two days ago). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I just learnt how to add the submit code to the top of the draft article haha. I'm so dumb. Thank you! AnAnonymous10 (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:00:07, 16 June 2022 review of submission by Abishekr1996[edit]


Regarding the issue of Sourcing: 1. The draft was very narritive-driven and seemed highly promotional. Promotional content has been cut out. Content restricted to news sources. 2. Some of its contents were not cited from reliable news sources. Citations added where neccessary. A couple of questionable news citations haven been cut. Regarding the issue of Notability: 3. The person concerned has become a person of importance in a province with population ~76 million in the worlds largest democratic state. Has a twitter following of 390,000. (https://twitter.com/annamalai_k) 4. A google search leads to wikipedia page of another political figure with a similar name from another political party. (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._Annamalai )

Abishekr1996 (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:32:27, 16 June 2022 review of submission by Barrios TIC[edit]


Barrios TIC (talk) 18:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter, Goodreads and YouTube are not reliable sources, the draft was rejected it won't be considered further. Theroadislong (talk) 18:34, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:58:05, 16 June 2022 review of submission by PaulTilstone[edit]


Hi - my initial entry was refused due to lack of independent references, so I added a further 5 independent references and it was rejected within minutes of my submission. I dont understand how it could have been rejected so quickly and it seems like the references have not been checked properly

PaulTilstone (talk) 18:58, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Purposeful Travel
@PaulTilstone: This is straight-up spam at worst and original research at best. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but you have an article in there from World travel Market, the biggest travel market globally, and Business Travel News, the most prominent business travel publication globally. To say it is "straight up Spam" is an insult. PaulTilstone (talk) 19:08, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm looking at the text, not the sources. It being sourced and it being spam are not mutually exclusive. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:52, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_June_16&oldid=1094468233"