mic_none

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 July 12 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_July_12

Help desk
< July 11 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 13 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an 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 12

[edit]

08:57:20, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Maria Sitkina

[edit]

I changed the text according to editors recommendations. Please, check it. Thank you. Maria Sitkina (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:22:15, 12 July 2019 review of draft by Klichnerska

[edit]

Hello. I need help editing this article. The term crowdshipping is now widely used by scholars and commercial enterprises. A collaboration between CIRREALT Interuniversity Research Center, Université Laval, and Canada Research Chair in Interconnected Business Engineering had created a research paper titled Crowdsourcing delivery. Also, crowdshipping is one of the main sub-topics, written by Alan McKinnon, professor of Logistics at Kuehne Logistics University. Such companies: Cargomatic, Jojo, Deliv have been in existence since 2012.

Klichnerska (talk) 09:22, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:32, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Cagatayd

[edit]

All the information is changed. Categories added. More References shared.

Cagatayd (talk) 11:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It reads just like an advert. Theroadislong (talk) 11:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:38:09, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Cagatayd

[edit]

More information gave about company and sector. 4 categories; Services, Interconnections, Events and References created. 8 new references added.

Cagatayd (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cagatayd: - the draft is extremely promotional, reading just as a company marketing pamphlet would. Additionally the sources provided aren't independent - they don't have reason to be content-neutral. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{SAFESUBST:#Daniel Unubi Ezekiel:H:i:s, j F Y}} review of submission by Daniel Unubi Ezekiel

[edit]

Daniel Unubi Ezekiel (talk) 12:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:03:03, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Hrdina Impéria

[edit]

Greetings. I have recently wanted to translate few articles in English to Slovak, as the topics seemed interesting and there wasnt any information in my language. Problem is that there is lack of sources in Slovak of said topic (for example, Gastraphetes). Is it acceptable to just straight up translate english article using the same sources (essentially copying them over) or should I just refrain from creating such new pages, for which I lack sources in relevant language? Hrdina Impéria (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hrdina Impéria: - so long as the various important facets of translating articles is followed (citing/linking back to where you got it from, ensuring you aren't machine-translating etc) then it's generally fine to use the same sources (I don't know Slovak editing requirements, but there's no issue on our side). Nosebagbear (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:32:07, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Ryozzo

[edit]

Please if someone could review the state of this article. It was rejected Apr 2019 but then submitted for review by the person that rejected it.

I'd like to make sure that it is in the queue to be reviewed.

It has been three months and I just want to make sure it is in the proper state to be reviewed and not marked as rejected.

Thanks Ryozzo (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ryozzo: I've took a look at the page and yes, it has been submitted correctly. However, the backlog is currently about 4 months, so you probably have to wait another month. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:32, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jannik Schwaß: Thanks so much.

21:05:49, 12 July 2019 review of submission by Vicgerami

[edit]


Vicgerami (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am pretty new to Wikipedia as the only completed profile I ever submitted was for trans activist, Ashlee Marie Preston. That process went pretty smoothly. Then I submitted a request for the most high-profile LGBTQ Civil Rights Attorney & Activist, Peter Perkowski. Last night I noticed from my phone that an editor with the username: Athaenara tagged my submission for deletion. I rushed home to respond from my laptop and wrote a note to them explaining why Peter's profile was worthy of a Wikipedia page. But my submission was deleted immediately with the reason that I was paid for creating the profile. This is not true and I explained that in my dispute post.

I am confused as why someone would and can make such a claim and it only takes a false accusation for my work to be deleted. Anyone who looks up Peter Perkowski will see the significance of his work as among other things, he is currently suing the Trump Administration in four class-action lawsuits on behalf of trans service-members.

I am not very good with Wikipedia's system and confused with all the steps. I don't know what I can do next in order to save Peter's profile. Please help as I appreciate it.

Thank you and kind regards, vic

Hi Vicgerami. You've also asked about Draft:Peter Perkowski at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard and Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests, and received solid advice there. Please don't raise a matter in multiple venues simultaneously. Slow down and study the information you've already been given, which is dense with links to further reading.
The draft was speedily deleted because an experienced reviewer and another administrator agreed that it was unambiguous advertising. A draft usually has to be egregiously promotional to be deleted that way. Perhaps the most common cause of promotional writing is some kind of conflict of interest. People writing about themselves, their family, their friends, their employer, or for pay, often have trouble being objective. Athaenara left a note on your talk page to make sure you are aware of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines around conflicts of interest. Simple inexperience with the detached, formal style of writing needed for an encyclopedia can also result in promotional text, particularly if one has an opinion about the subject.
On your talk page, the last sentence of the deletion nomination notice tells you what to do if you want to retrieve the deleted material, contact the deleting administrator on their talk page. If you're interested in writing about LGBTQ rights, an even better approach would be to check out Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies. Creating new articles from scratch is one of the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating tasks a new editor can undertake. The LGBT project has a cleanup list of 7,892 existing articles that are tagged for improvement. If you spend a few months improving existing articles, you will be better equipped to create new ones. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:31:17, 12 July 2019 review of draft by 2RBonisson

[edit]

Hello, It has been over a month since my re-submission and I am wondering if I need to do anything to get a response. I have made edits along the way. Do I need to stop editing in order to get a re_review. 2RBonisson (talk) 23:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@2RBonisson: The current backlog is about 4 months. Please be patient, the reviewers do this in their free time. To your draft, I suggest that you remove the bold syntax from section headers, since the Software behind Wikipedia is already highlighting them so they don't need to be bold. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 06:24, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]