• ZaxoteZ (talk · contribs)
  • Zee Keralam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Zee Keralam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

ZaxoteZ (talk) 05:59, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why has my created Zee Keralam page been declined? All information related to the page are given here with evidences. Currently, there are no page is exist on Wikipedia for Zee Keralam. That's why I have created this page. Kindly check it again & approve for general public, who depends on Wikipedia for collecting information. https://en.m.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Draft:Zee_Keralam

As I said on the draft "Comment: To get this page approved you need to go to WP:DRV and make your case why it should be restored or this draft approved because the title is create protected" Only an Admin can help you and DRV is the place to ask. I think they will say no. Legacypac (talk) 06:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{Lafc|username=Anthony Gilbert|ts=07:14:37, 14 March 2019|page= — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Gilbert (talk • contribs)

• Routerdude (talk · contribs)
  • User:Routerdude/sandbox/Teltonika (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Routerdude (talk) 07:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 49.128.62.182 (talk · contribs)
  • Vidfish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Vidfish (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, this is one of the biggest licensed video-streaming platforms in Southeast Asia, with the largest library for Chinese content. I think there should be no issue with notability. Besides, there are many articles and mentions in social media with regards to the Vidfish platform.

49.128.62.182 (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 86.134.62.128 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Darren Tassell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, The previous submission was rejected, but I had made changes that seem to have been lost. I have added more references now (again) haha

Please give me any advice to help this page to be approved.

Many Thanks.

86.134.62.128 (talk) 09:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dstassell: It is too soon for an encyclopedia article on the subject. Revisit the topic in a year or two to see how much more has been written in reliable sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Pequena Princesa (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Marisa McKaye (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am going in circles trying to find an acceptable photograph to use in an article about a singer. I agree that wikipedia articles should not normally use statements of subjects from their websites, as if the subject is giving self-serving evidence, but to say that a subject's website is not a reliable source for showing what the subject looks like is an illogical statement. Similarly, I understand that youtube content is not generally a reliable source because anyone can upload anything there. But when the subject is a singer and most articles about her in other independent sources like magazines, wikis, etc. are doing screenshots off her videos, even off America's Got Talent videos, for theirItalic text photographs, it becomes a circular argument. Should the position not be photographs taken directly from YouTube videos are not acceptable but if photographs/screenshots from videos are published in Bold textindependent, especially news-oriented sources then they can be "purged" by this publication and become acceptable? Let me see, you want totally free content, so there is no copyright problem, but that content must have been published by someone else first, so it is not original research. In the case of photographs, it's rather like eating the cake but still having it, isn't it? Pequena Princesa (talk) 13:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Pequena Princesa. Your rambling wall of text so thoroughly misunderstands what Wikipedia is, that it's hard to know where to start.

The presence or absence of images will have no effect on whether the draft is accepted, so don't waste your time with pictures. The draft cites unreliable sources such as the America's Got Talent Wiki, and fails to demonstrate that the subject is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Your focus should be on improving the sourcing, or perhaps more realistically, finding a different topic to write about. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• BBoucherrr (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Brads Theory of Everything (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

BBoucherrr (talk) 14:21, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bboucherrr: - as the one source doesn't even mention "Brad's theory of everything", this draft currently has a complete lack of sourcing. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:47, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Geoff Hill 123 (talk · contribs)

Hi folks. This page which I created on Global Knowledge has been rejected by your editor Robert McLenon as being too much like an advertisement and having low quality sources, by which I assume he means the external references, none of which are from Global Knowledge. I did declare that I was paid to create the page. What do I need to do to make it acceptable to Wikipedia? It doesn't seem hugely different to the page on Global Knowledge's main competitor, Pluralsight. Many thanks. Geoff Hill 123 (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geoff Hill 123. I don't think there's anything you can do to make the draft acceptable to Wikipedia. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY helpful. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:34, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Skornflakes (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Pedro Lopes (screenwriter) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, The article that i created is the translation of https://pt.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Pedro_Lopes_(argumentista)

i just wanted to insert an english translation of the portuguese version, the original version had only 3 references...

Skornflakes (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replying on the draft Legacypac (talk) 00:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Reeveskd (talk · contribs)

Hello! I authored a draft article on the largest zero-energy school in the United States and one of the largest certified zero-energy buildings in the world. It hosts contingents from around the world every year and has distinguished itself as an exemplar at major industry-standard conferences and such. This would seem to quality as "notable," if I understand the help article on the subject correctly. If that's the case, it seems that additional or different sources to document the reasons why this exists are in order, and as someone who has never authored an article before, I could use some help! I'd love to learn more about how to identify and properly cite Wikipedia-acceptable sources on this front. I'll continue to locate reliable, independent sources and update the draft as I do so, but I think more experienced and accomplished authors and editors in this platform could help shine some light on it. Thank you in advance, everyone! Reeveskd (talk) 14:47, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Generally elementry schools are not considered notable. You should go create a section about the school on the page for it's school district. School districts are notable per WP:GEOLAND Legacypac (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]