• Gabriela Angie Kenyatta (talk · contribs)
  • User talk:Gabriela Angie Kenyatta (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Wikipedia,

I hereby declare that I am not being paid to create this page. I am personally inspired by this person and since I know him personally and professionally, I am gladly helping him create his own page.

Thank you so much for your understanding.

Regards, Angie

Gabriela Angie Kenyatta (talk) 02:08, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Eelrod937 (talk · contribs)
  • WJWS-LP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I don't understand how our radio station is "not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia" but we show up in 4 other articles when searching our call letters. Not only that, but countless other stations just like us have pages too.

Eelrod937 (talk) 03:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eelrod937: You have not cited any professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically and primarily about the station but not dependent upon nor affiliated with the station nor anyone connected to it. I'll leave a detailed set of instructions (only 8 steps) on your user talk page.

Other articles do not justify new articles: notability is not inherited and old mistakes do not justify new mistakes.

No station has a page, we have pages about them. Articles are owned by the Wikipedia community, not the subjects of the articles.

Ian.thomson (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what else I need to include. WJWS-LP is referenced 4 other times when the call letters are searched, and there are countless other radio stations just like this one that have wiki pages. I've included lots of references, some from the Federal Communications Commission database. Just looking for more advice or direction.

Eelrod937 (talk) 03:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eelrod937: The FCC database (or any other directory) would be a primary source, which doesn't prove notability (just existence). As for the rest of your post, see my previous response. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Generally radio stations are presumed notable. See WP:BROADCAST however this is a student station. I'd follow the excellent advice given on the draft Legacypac (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 85.239.207.10 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mohammad Ghorbanpour (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

85.239.207.10 (talk) 06:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Aksharma74 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gajjala Yoganand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have diligently followed all the guidelines and made sure I included all references. I agree that the content needs to be in past tense now, since some of the details mentioned happened a few days after I edited this draft. How can one just reject it without even giving me the chance to edit it and make it relevant to the current date?

Aksharma74 (talk) 08:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging FR30799386 ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 09:36, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aksharma74, I sympathize with your frustration of having your draft rejected. However, the hard truth is that the politician is not worthy of inclusion on wikipedia i.e. there are not enough reliable third party sources who are covering the politician in detail. I have looked over the draft and checked for sources but could not find any that were reliable and independent except for the www.thehindubusinessline.com which isn't enough. I would suggest that you copy the contents of the draft offline and give it one more try once the politician has won the election ( most of the time the coverage of the win is enough for the person to become worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia). In the mean time, there are 5,772,657 more articles on wikipedia....surely there must be atleast one which you can improve...  — fr ^❄ 11:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Dora's ice lolly (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Cottontails (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello

I hope you get this message. I have tried to reply to your concerns three times without success! Thank you for your comments, which I have considered. However before submitting my article I researched similar articles for similar organisations. Please see links below to articles for the US House Rabbit Society and the UK British Rabbit Council.

https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/House_Rabbit_Society https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/British_Rabbit_Council

The article about Cottontails is very similar to these articles, it includes references to articles in national newspapers and independent publications. Cottontails was the first organisation (and I believe still the only one) to keep rabbits in completely cage-free environments, in the same way as you would keep a cat or a dog free-range. They are campaigning for a change in the law with UK parliament. They are a registered charitable organisation.

You may not be aware that rabbits are the most popular pets after cats and dogs, there are about 1.6 million in the UK alone so this article would interest a lot of people who might need the free information on their website.

I would also be able to upload a couple of pictures to better illustrate the article. Thank you.

Best wishes,

Dora's ice lolly (talk) 10:29, 30 December 2018 (UTC){{SAFESUBST:Void FINALLY, MAKE SURE TO CLICK THE "Save page" BUTTON BELOW OR YOUR REQUEST WILL BE LOST!!!-->}}[reply]

@Dora's ice lolly: - Hi there. Charities can of course be wikipedia pages. However, this draft fails on a couple of extremely key grounds.

All the sources either are written by (or someone associated with) Cottontails itself, so fail on independence grounds or don't actually cover Cottintails itself.

Somewhat linked to that, the article purely talks about how it judges itself and its goals. This gives it a non-neutral slant - it comes across as rather advertorial, which is also prohibited on Wikipedia.

You need to find reliable secondary sources (newspapers, books, journals etc) and use them. As an organisation, the article has significantly stricter notability requirements than most other articles, so you will need several high quality sources. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:08, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Carole Basinger (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Carole Basinger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Zuzuroo (talk) 20:18, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I submitted an article from my Sandbox into Draft Review, but I am being told my submission is "blank." How do I correct this? Thank you!Zuzuroo (talk)

• Carole Basinger (talk · contribs)
  • Brian Rosenworcel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am trying to get it from my Sandbox into Draft Review. I am told my submission is "blank." Thank you! Zuzuroo (talk)

Zuzuroo (talk) 20:21, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Carole Basinger: - so it's now in a draft, so you've made it most of the way to putting it into AfC. I'm happy to send it the remainder for you, if you'd like, but I suspect that a reviewer may have issues with your referencing as it currently stands. By using "manual" numbers, it is currently impossible for anyone to add formal referencing without either having clashing numbers or re-doing every reference.

You've already gathered all the information, so that isn't too difficult. I've written the first ref as an example and left it next the manual "[1]" for ease of finding.

Let me know if you'd like me to upload it. Alternately, you can do it by copying " {{subst:submit}} " (no inverted commas) onto the top of the editing page. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please upload it, if you will, Nosebagbear. I have read that you shouldn't re-edit your uploaded articles? Many thanks for your help! Zuzuroo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Carole Basinger: - I've uploaded it. I couldn't remember how to make it think you were the uploader I'm afraid, so I will endeavour to ping you if someone makes a comment to the "submitter".

CRITICALLY - you are absolutely encouraged to keep editing re-submitted drafts, and once a draft becomes an article! Nosebagbear (talk) 13:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Meganariel12 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Troya Bishop (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have submitted a Bio a couple times, and am having some issues figuring out the Notability rule. Troya Bishop is a known activist in ATL and has worked on a couple high profile wrongful conviction cases.To presume her more "notable" would including an article mentioning her name help? She did a lot of behind the scenes work, not necessarily in the spotlight. I guess I'm just not sure what else I can include to deem her notable. I have included several references and that doesn't seem to be the issue.

Meganariel12 (talk) 21:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Then please read WP:NBIO thoroughly (if you don't know what this means, click here) ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 08:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]