• Saurav.webkul (talk · contribs)
  • User talk:Webkul (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)

I want to know why my submission has been declined. I made the changes in the content because of which it was declined previously.

Saurav.webkul (talk) 06:20, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't just been declined, it's been salted. This means that no-one can now create an article on "Webkul". It's time for you to abandon your attempt to abuse Wikipedia for promotional purposes. Maproom (talk) 10:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Gutchman (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Lutheran Indian Ministries (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Added:

Hello @Gutchman: the issue is that your draft is still basically just about "About Us!" page for LIM rather than an objective description. I see you've added some links, but they're just to other Lutheran Missionary organizations.

You're falling into a common error: you write what you know about a subject, then go back to try to add sources. What works far better is to do it the other way round: use what you know about the subject to gather a body of good sources, then clear your mind of what you know about the subject and write the draft as though all you had was said sources. I did some looking for sources and not finding a ton online, probably because it was part of Lutheran Association of Missionaries and Pilots from the 1970s until 2000. It may be that it is mentioned more in books and news articles found offline (which are okay to use, just cite them very clearly so someone could find them if needed).

I strongly suggest you take a look at WP:Independent sources; just adding cites to LAMP and church sites does not provide any independent perspective on LIM, so that's the big issue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gutchman: I notice that Lutheran Association of Missionaries and Pilots doesn't have any independent sourcing either. If you're having trouble substantiating facts about LIM, I suggest you could tackle improving LAMP, and then add a section at LAMP explaining that LIM split off from it in 2000, and create a Redirect so that searches for LAMP or LIM go to the same page. I notice a lot more substantiated facts about LAMP on GoogleBooks, so fixing up that article could be a good workaround. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• lampministry.org - Official site for Lutheran Association of Missionaries and Pilots (LAMP)
• - Official site for Lutheran Indian Ministries
• - Lutheran Church Missouri Synod Recognized Service Organizations listed as Lutheran Association of Missionaries and Pilots U.S., Inc. - DBA Lutheran Indian Ministries

Is this sufficient for establishing importance? Lutheran Indian Ministries (LIM) separated from Lutheran Association of Missionaries and Pilots (LAMP) 18 years ago. LAMP works only in Canada. They have a Wikipedia article. LIM works in both the US and Canada and is a Recognized Service Organization of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (the LCMS has a Wikipedia article) as is LAMP. Another RSO of the LCMS, the Lutheran Church Extension Fund have a Wikipedia article.

Thanks for any help you can give me. It's been a while since I published an article and I am rusty.

Gutchman (talk) 19:08, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gutchman,

There are guidelines that we use to determine notability (see here). This guideline states that a topic is presumed to be important enough to warrant its own article if it has received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". There are also secondary notability criteria for specific groups. Here the relevant one (WP:ORG) is similar but includes some protection to prevent companies from gaming the system.

I looked around and found that Lutherian Indian Ministries have been the subject of a documentary [1] as part of the PBS(?) series Visionaries. This is substantial coverage that is independent of the subject. Usually, human-interest reporting is known to play loose with the facts in order to illicit emotions in the reader/viewer and as such are not usually considered reliable. However, the team behind Visionaries seem to have significant background in documentary journalism that leads me to believe it to be reliable. For notability to be asserted, you would need another source is independent, reliable and that covers significantly the organization. In the best of cases, 2 more would solidify that claim, and make the point about the reliability of the source moot.

So, I am unsure about the notability of the organization, and that should be something that is addressed. If you can find more of these sources, you would be able to create an article.

Another avenue to consider is that you could, instead of creating an article, include a section about LIM in the LAMP article, as they were both the same organization at the start and do similar work. Acebulf (talk) 00:23, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Soc221 maseitz (talk · contribs)

Soc221 maseitz (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC) 19:51:16, 29 March 2018 review of submission by Soc221 maseitz[reply]

• Soc221 maseitz (talk · contribs)

I am requesting assistance because I am unsure why my article was declined to be published. I was hoping that I could get some tips or feedback on what I need to change in order to make it better. Thanks. Soc221 maseitz (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was rejected because, as it says in the rejection notice, it "reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article". This probably can't be fixed – it's just not a suitable topic for a Wikipedia article. Maproom (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 68.102.39.189 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:2018-19 NBA season by team (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can You Fix the western Conference Template please. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 21:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

68.102.39.189 (talk) 21:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

68.102.39.189 - I have fixed the title Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:09, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]