Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 October 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< October 8 << Sep | October | Nov >> October 10 >
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.


October 9[edit]

00:08, 9 October 2023 review of submission by Ellis408[edit]

I've spent a lot of time working on this page - and have revised it to conform to Wiki standards - but it's been tagged as not enclyclopedic. I believe the subject is notable for two reasons - her career itself was notable as a long-time executive in the music business - and being a woman executive in the music business was also notable , as described in the article - an industry dominated by men - so much so, that studies have been done about it - which is quoted in the article. She was profiled and interviewed in articles and books as a pioneer woman executive in the music business. I tried to keep the tone neutral - and I'm not sure how to edit it to make it more encyclopedic. Please help. Ellis408 (talk) Ellis408 (talk) 00:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews do not establish notability, as it is the person speaking about themselves. 331dot (talk) 07:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ellis408: please don't confuse notability, in the Wikipedia context, with attributes like noteworthiness, importance, fame, etc. Being "a woman in a male-dominated industry" is not a notability criterion. Notability is (in most cases) simply a question of whether sufficient independent and reliable secondary sources have covered the subject in extent and detail. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. I was putting forward that Ann Munday qualifies as notable for two main reasons, not just that she was a woman in the music biz, and not just because she was interviewed - but that publications and book authors sought her out to profile, as she had made a mark in the industry by signing major talent to Chrysalis, who became starts or songwriters who delivered hits. She ran a major music publishing company in the UK and in the US in the 1970s through the 1990s - Blondie, Huey Lewis, Billy Idol, and many more.
The significance of her being a rare woman senior executive in the music business was recognized by the trade magazines as well as books and consumer magazine (like Cosmopolitan), who sought her out to profile (not just interview) as it was so rare. She was a pioneer - and was acknowledge for it.
I just couldn't figure out how to describe her career and accomplishments, while sounding encyclopedic. and not hype. Thanks, Ellis408 (talk) 03:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

01:39, 9 October 2023 review of submission by 2601:3CB:781:6F50:11BC:AE5E:29E5:83F6[edit]

I am comparing what I have written for Sarah E. Rollens (Draft:Sarah E. Rollens) with Michael J Altman and with my own: Herbert Berg (scholar) and wondering why these are "notable" but hers is not. I thought the draft entry met the criteria for notable scholars. Thanks for any help. 2601:3CB:781:6F50:11BC:AE5E:29E5:83F6 (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't assess drafts by comparison to articles that may exist out there; we do it by reference to the currently applicable guidelines and policies. In this case, the sources cited are primary, and therefore unable to establish notability by the WP:GNG guideline. The other possibility is to see if the subject meets one or more of the criteria in the WP:NACADEMIC standard. If so, the onus is largely on you to make that clear, and ensure that the assertion is clearly supported by reliable source(s). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:14, 9 October 2023 review of submission by PriyankaSharma01[edit]

Hi, may i know why my article was rejected? PriyankaSharma01 (talk) 06:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PriyankaSharma01: quite simply, because this is not a viable draft for an encyclopaedia article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:54, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:45, 9 October 2023 review of submission by Dr. Ash Mosahebi[edit]

Hello, How are you? How can We do a proper Biography for Dr. Ash Mosahebi as he is a very well-known Doctor with lot of experience and saved many people by his reconstructive surgeries? We don't know how to get the references for his experience as we got it from him personally, how we should make all the steps in the right way to get our article accepted? Dr. Ash Mosahebi (talk) 11:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Ash Mosahebi: who is "we" in your question? Wikipedia user accounts are for use by a single individual only.
Also, whether you are the person in question, or have been instructed by them to write this article, please see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI. And if it's the latter case, please show them WP:BOSS. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: If you are not actually Dr Ash Mosahebi, then you should change your user name, as the current one may constitute impersonation. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:04, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Ash Mosahebi: answering your question more directly, you do not write what you want and/or what you have been told to write, and then try to find sources that support some of that. You instead find a few reliable and independent published sources that have written about the subject in significant extent, and you summarise (in your own words) what those sources have said. If you cannot find such sources, then it isn't possible to summarise them, and therefore isn't possible to have an article. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I got it. We means Dr. Ash Mosahebi Team. Dr. Ash Mosahebi (talk) 12:04, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:42, 9 October 2023 review of submission by Yoblyblob[edit]

Draft:Football at the 2023 Pacific Games – Women's tournament I am requesting a speedy review for these two articles as I feel they have had enough references added to them to be moved to main space. These are soon to be current events, and should be reviewed quickly to avoid missing coverage at main space. Yoblyblob (talk) 14:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoblyblob there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. We have over 3000 drafts to go through, so yours will get looked at in time. Qcne (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
People certainly won't be missing out on much. KingTheD (talk) 01:36, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:53, 9 October 2023 review of submission by 217.131.99.110[edit]

its a memem 217.131.99.110 (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah okay. Please leave it at that now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:50, 9 October 2023 review of submission by 2603:8001:4E00:C96B:7090:641F:AD73:315D[edit]

Hello, My original submission of this article was rejected due to COI. I added a COI template. I am the father of the subject. I did not write this to be bias, just to try to consolidate his multiple google searches into one article. Is there anything that I could say to get this article approved? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank, Rick Ylagan 2603:8001:4E00:C96B:7090:641F:AD73:315D (talk) 17:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would first suggest that you create an account so it's easier for you to declare a conflict of interest, see WP:COI. The draft was not rejected merely due to a conflict of interest.
Wikipedia has no interest in affecting search results, our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources say about a topic. Please read the message left by the reviewer carefully, as well as the links within it. 331dot (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_October_9&oldid=1180185322"