mic_none

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 July 18 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_July_18

Help desk
< July 17 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 19 >
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 18

[edit]

02:47:20, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Ruby838

[edit]

Hello, this is the second time I request a re-review, cause last time I didn't get any response or re-review. I supposed there was not enough reference the first time, so I provide some links where the content was collected. If there's any mistake in the content or I'm still in the wrong direction, please give me some advice, thank you. Ruby838 (talk) 02:47, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruby838: Please read WP:DECLINED. Specifically, sources that are routine announcements or based on press releases don't help to establish notability. WP:NCORP explains this further. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:06, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:09:04, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Anki 84

[edit]

Please explain the reason for rejection. This article is about a Tennis Academy in UAE which provides spanish methodology in tennis education. Anki 84 (talk) 06:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Anki 84: Please read WP:DECLINED. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:09:29, 18 July 2019 review of submission by QuantumBinary

[edit]

QuantumBinary (talk) 06:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


09:38:40, 18 July 2019 review of draft by Dsmith167

[edit]

I resubmitted my entry for F.J. Beerling more than 50 days ago. How long does it nornally take for a resubmitted entry to be re-reviewed please? Dsmith167 (talk) 09:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dsmith167: - a re-review on the grounds that the initial reviewer was wrong is usually done in a couple of days. A re-review because an error was highlighted and a fix has been attempted is roughly treated as a new submission (time-wise). As such, we have some drafts that have been waiting nearly 100 days. Apologies but the gray lining to lots of new content for Wikipedia is the few reviewers are stretched thin Nosebagbear (talk) 10:49, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dsmith167: Please remove all commercial links to purchase books they are not required and it is difficult to spot the reliable sources hidden amongst them.

09:46:45, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Namrata511

[edit]

Namrata511 (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has not been submitted for review, but it has no sources, it will not be accepted without them. Theroadislong (talk) 11:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:53:35, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Tdurotoye

[edit]

This article is still a work in progress and will be edited as time goes on and more information is available. The content of the present draft is verifiable and contains references that are notable in the industry. I believe this article deserves to be approved and moved to the article page since it satisfies every other requirement.

Tdurotoye (talk) 09:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tdurotoye: - I question the reliability of the sources. If nothing else, functionally all the content between the 1st and 2nd sources are shared - they're just duplicating the feature list, rather than actually creating significant coverage of their own. At best they'd count as a single source. The 3rd and 4th sources definitely aren't sufficiently detailed. I concur with the reviewers Nosebagbear (talk) 10:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You will need to remove all the external links from the body of the article, we don't use them. Then find independent reliable sources that discuss the topic in depth. It does not satisfy WP:GNG at the moment. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:56:26, 18 July 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Ashok sharma100

[edit]

Sir , What is the reason for declined my article.

Ashok sharma100 (talk) 11:56, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ashok sharma100: - the article was declined (and deleted) for being a copyright breach. Written content must be paraphrased, not duplicated. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:33:12, 18 July 2019 review of submission by RecoveryCOA

[edit]

Hello, I am trying to create a wikipedia entry for Recovery Centers of America, one of the largest addiction treatment providers in the United States, however based on the fact that the article I submitted was declined, it seems I may not have been as impartial as I would have liked. My intent was to make a very detailed article, not an advertisement. Can I please get some assistance with what needs to be changed or removed to get the article approved for Wikipedia use?

Thank you for your help.

RecoveryCOA (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:09:42, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Callum.Robertson1

[edit]

I have set up this article for NCPV. It has relevant links and references which show the information is correct. I would like to know how I can improve on them in order to get this page published. Please could you help me get it sorted. Callum.Robertson1 (talk) 15:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Callum.Robertson1: Do you mean by "I have set up this article for NCVP" that you receive or expect to receive money for writing that page? If that is indeed so, I would ask you to declare it, which is a Terms of use requirement. 85.199.71.122 (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, no. I would just like to understand why the draft keeps getting rejected. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callum.Robertson1 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, which involves not just money and extends to edits of European Collection of Authenticated Cell Cultures, National Collection of Pathogenic Fungi (NCPF), and National Collection of Type Cultures. See User talk:Callum.Robertson1#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:55:35, 18 July 2019 review of draft by Mercer5089

[edit]


I genuinely don't understand how you want me to use inline citations for this article. The resources used are a map. The article I used as a template, List of county trunk highways in Kenosha County, Wisconsin, has no inline citations and has only one reference. I'm not asking anyone to write this article for me, but I would like some more specific guidance here.

Mercer5089 (talk) 16:55, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bkissin: - I was looking over this, and reading WP:LISTVERIFY and WP:MINREF, I wouldn't say that inline sources are needed for this list, as none of the 4 categories are met. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nosebagbear, If you believe the article is good to submit, I'm happy to accept it. I didn't think the references section was properly formatted, and I don't know if WP views Google Maps as a RS for notability. Otherwise, it should be fine to accept.
@Bkissin and Mercer5089: - sorry missed your response (it won't ping without a signature). The RS side on the consideration of maps seems to have no great consensus. As to notability rules for lists of non-individually notable roads, there are several essays on the issue and some ambiguous bits in the guidelines. As such, assuming nothing else comes up in the review I'll accept it - and we'll see what happens from there. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:48, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:57:48, 18 July 2019 review of submission by 171.60.129.209

[edit]

I am not promoting anyone, Really I don't know, what is the issue with you guys, Why you keep rejecting this article, Darrel Wilson doing the fantasic job by teaching everyone for free, A lot of free tutorials available on the internet, you can research as well. Second he always ready to help anyone and I believe that what Wikipedia all about, we need a notable person. he helps many peoples like me which is the reason I believe he should be included in Wikipedia directory. I know many people are here who can create a page on Wikipedia by taking money. they are going to use the same page, same content, same links and they got accepted because they are the moderator of Wikipedia. So Please re-review it and do the correct thing.

171.60.129.209 (talk) 16:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@171.60.129.209: - while your comment here sounds a bit advertorial in itself, the article was actually rejected on notability (suitable/sufficient sourcing) grounds, not on being overly promotional.
There's only one source, which the independence of is slightly questionable, but more critically, definitely doesn't cover Wilson in enough detail. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:04:13, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Ashwanisharma118

[edit]

I am not promoting anyone, Really I don't know, what is the issue with you guys, Why you keep rejecting this article, Darrel Wilson doing the fantasic job by teaching everyone for free, A lot of free tutorials available on the internet, you can research as well. Second he always ready to help anyone and I believe that what Wikipedia all about, we need a notable person. he helps many peoples like me which is the reason I believe he should be included in Wikipedia directory. I know many people are here who can create a page on Wikipedia by taking money. they are going to use the same page, same content, same links and they got accepted because they are the moderator of Wikipedia. So Please re-review it and do the correct thing. Ashwanisharma118 (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


17:05:35, 18 July 2019 review of draft by Gigi298

[edit]
David Frei Draft Editing Help

I need help editing my page on David Frei! It needs to sound more like an encyclopedia and I think I have edited it too many times to see what's wrong. Also if anyone can find more secondary sources on him, I have a few.

Gigi298 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:58:45, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Breezekovy

[edit]

Breezekovy (talk) 17:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:16:00, 18 July 2019 review of submission by 183.83.78.82

[edit]

183.83.78.82 (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


18:52:59, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Darvac42069

[edit]

Delete this page Darvac42069 (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


19:19:54, 18 July 2019 review of submission by MA6DJ

[edit]

hi thanks for your fast review and you're attention. In my job and my country, so many DJs are trying to take a similar name like as my artistic name to get some higher rank in our music market I have music video and tracks that are available in our country market but because off some limited in our access, we can't take all of the major services and these DJs doesn't have the required quality and official tracks in its like Credit for my work and my website SEO www.djma6.ir and the other had i need an article for google knowledge , because it can help me in work twice faster Thank you for helping me DJMA6

MA6DJ (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MA6DJ: - none of that resolves the fact that you don't have sufficient reliable secondary sources to warrant a wikipedia article.
Even if that wasn't the case, your draft is really promotional, and reads as a pure advertisement for yourself. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:34, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:24:54, 18 July 2019 review of submission by Amhgo

[edit]

Please, let me know how to improve the article to be accepted, I am new on Wikipedia. Amhgo (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amhgo. Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that the organization is not notable, so you should halt, because no amount of editing can fix the problem. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:35:19, 18 July 2019 review of submission by BeatBro

[edit]

Hey there, Dan Arndt. I noticed that you rejected my page for "Fitness (band)," and I was wondering if you could give me some advice on how to get this page published. I would really like to publish it, and I could try to make it better if you could gave me any advice on how to do that. I also noticed that you said that my page for their EP "Aggroculture" would be deleted if I didn't have enough news sources/reliable for it. I know this band is not very popular, but I still think the articles for them are worth being on Wikepedia. Thanks for the feedback! -BeatBro

BeatBro (talk) 23:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Dan arndt for you. If you wish to address a specific reviewer you need to use some kind of notification template or write on their talk page. See Help:Talk pages. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]