• 115.85.94.2 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:STARTX DIGITAL (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

i dont understand why my talk is rejected again. which part that my page is contrarary with Wikipedia

115.85.94.2 (talk) 07:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@115.85.94.2: First, please choose one of two options:

1. translate the draft to english
2. contribute the article to Wikipedia in the language the draft is written in

If you choose option 1), please start of by grabbing reliable sources that show this company meets WP:NCORP. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I asked for this page to be deleted a few days ago, but my friend has said he would like to view the page again. I had copied and pasted the text into a Word document as a sort of archive, however I now realise I didn't push save. Now we both want to see the page but I can't access it now. I put it on this page as it is technically an article for creation. If I could either have a plain text version of the page (including hyperlinks), or access to the complete history of the page, I would be grateful. I do not think this discussion "represents the consensus" as the admin claims, as both people who made substantial edits to the page would like a plain text version of the page. 82.3.185.12 (talk) 08:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This was answered, with very specific instructions on how to go about it, in this thread at WP:REFUND. Possibly (talk) 08:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: The notability of this subject still hasn't changed. Why is this here again? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:51, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Daniellesmall247 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:No Bullsh*t Leadership (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there,

I had submitted an Article for Creation and received the comment below from Bilorv:

'Close to WP:NBOOK but I believe the Financial Times source is not a full-length review (though I can't access it) and the Evening Standard source is not really a review. A full-length review in a respected publication with editorial oversight might take it over to notability.'

Therefore, I removed the Financial Times source (as it was behind a submission wall) and added a review from Forbes Agency Council and details of relating podcast which launched since the first submission. I wanted to check on the progress of the submission but have seen that the page has been deleted. The first time round the feedback was helpful and I'm not sure if I can make a 'Requests for undeletion' without knowing what the problem with the submission was. On looking for the page the note I found was as below:

'21:24, 2 December 2020 Athaenara talk contribs deleted page Draft:No Bullsh*t Leadership (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page – If you wish to retrieve it, please see WP:REFUND) (thank)'

Any advice on what I should do next would be gratefully received.

Many thanks,

Daniellesmall247 (talk) 09:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daniellesmall247 (talk) 09:28, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniellesmall247: aparently you blanked the draft at some point, which the admins count as you having given up. If you want to continiue, simply ask at WP:REFUND. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Pontos92 (talk · contribs)
  • Pontian Eagles SC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi Wikipedia Community,

I have submitted a draft for a review and had it rejected due to what I understood was a concern with reliable sources.

I am enquiring as to what you might suggest my draft requires in order to be published?

I have referred to other pages that meet the same profile as my article and found my referencing outweighs those already published.

One source is a subsidiary to a credible news publisher in NewsCorp, while another a statement released by the official governing body of football in South Australia.

Thank you for your time, look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Pontos92 (talk) 09:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 92.50.195.50 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Bitrix24 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am requesting a re-review cause I believe I have complied with the requirements made in regards to my previous draft. All content that might be regarded as promotional has been removed and the article now contains just facts, which are easily verifiable. It's my first time writing a Wikipedia article so please don't be too harsh on me, I'm just learning=) 92.50.195.50 (talk) 09:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company; an article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Your sources seem to mostly be routine coverage that does not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Msmmsm1990 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Hassan Mohammadi Nevisi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please publish my prof page 💟

Msmmsm1990 (talk) 11:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Msmmsm1990 Please review the comments left by reviewers, as well as conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 11:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Msmmsm1990If you are writing about your professor, you have a conflict of interest as his student. Since you are submitting a draft, that is okay, but you do need to be familiar with the conflict of interest policy. If your professor is compensating you in any way for writing about him(not just money), you need to read about paid editing. Please read the comments left by reviewers of your draft, and also Your First Article. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone and their accomplishments; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about(in this case) a professor, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable academic figure. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what do you say. I just know prof Hassan Mohammadi Nevisi is a great professor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msmmsm1990 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Msmmsm1990 I am sorry that you don't understand, but I am unable to say anything else. I'm glad that you have a great professor, but that is not a good enough reason for a Wikipedia article. If you just want to tell the world about your professor, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Of course, he is also a global influential person. However, if possible, review, edit and publish this article yourself without conflict of interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msmmsm1990 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 95.67.63.194 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Maison d’Angelann (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

In this material, links are indicated exclusively to proven authoritative Ukrainian media resources 95.67.63.194 (talk) 13:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected as a blatant advertisement, and as such it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell the world about a business. 331dot (talk) 13:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Annalee7 (talk · contribs)

My article has been denied twice on the basis of insufficient secondary reliable sources. I don’t understand why because the sources I used are trusted newspaper organizations in Nigeria that reported on the NGO. Is it because the sources are not American that they are not reliable? I just want to know how to fix the issue so the article can get published. Annalee7 (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2020 (UTC) Courtesy link: Draft:Aids for Women, Adolescent and Children International Organization[reply]

• Annalee7 Your draft is sourced to press releases and other routine announcements. A Wikipedia article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Press releases and announcements of routine activities do not establish notability. Please review the links here for more information, as well as Your First Article.

If you are associated with this organization, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was given advice from the last editor who denied my article to go on google and search for sources. The sources that I used were what was available on the NGO. I simply used all the information that I could find on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annalee7 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Annalee7 If the only sources that are available do not establish that this organization meets Wikipedia's definition of a notable organization, then there is nothing else that you can do at this time. Perhaps in the future independent sources will take note of this organization and choose to give it significant coverage; then it would merit an article. That coverage does not exist at this time, it seems. 331dot (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Marija W Marinkovic (talk · contribs)
  • Telekom Srbija (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Telekom Srbija (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Robert McClenon, thank you for your feedback and professional comments and help

As I am not that familiar with the rules and constraints that apply to Wikipedia, i put up the last text version based on the examples of texts telecommunications companies from other countries published. Since Telekom Serbia is the largest telecommunications company in the Balkan region, I suppose that information about this company is worth attention. Telecom Serbia is a state-owned company. Because of this fact, I considered it logical, to put links to state sources of information as references - such as The Serbian Business Registers Agency, Serbian Post, REGULATORY AGENCY FORELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND POSTAL SERVICES.

I would like to ask for your help with a specific example of how the text should look, even an example of at least one sentence, which would be written according to the rules of Wikipedia. Additionally, I would be very grateful if you sent me an example of an independent reference. If it is possible I would beg you to send me this example even in the form of a link? I am just beginning to work with Wikipedia. Therefore, to you, my questions may look naive - but still I ask for your help because, at the moment, you are the administrator who looked through all the information in the most detailed way. When it comes to your comment in November on the conflict of interest, I immediately replied in Teahouse that I am not writing this article for commercial purposes and do not expect to receive any benefits from writing this text. Due to the fact that I am an initial user of the Wikipedia toolkit, perhaps my answer was mistakenly sent to another discussion thread. For this I am sorry. I look forward to hearing from you! Thank you in advace for your answers and your help.

Marija W Marinkovic (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2020 (UTC)Marija W Marinkovic[reply]

• 50.234.216.194 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Driftski15/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

50.234.216.194 (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any questions? SMB99thx my edits! 10:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Lalisekhon (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Lali Sekhon (1) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello: I have tried to make the page neutral and also factual and referenced. This is not a resume page or LinkedIn. If there are portions that need deletion/amendment please let me know. I have looked at colleagues pages on wikipedia for guidance. As a leading voice in Neurosurgery/Spine Surgery what edits does it need? Thank you so much for suggestions. Lali Sekhon Lalisekhon (talk) 18:22, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lalisekhon Wikipedia is not a place for you to tell the world about yourself and your accomplishments. Please review the autobiography policy. While not forbidden, it is strongly discouraged for Wikipedia users to write about themselves. This is because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and have difficulty writing exclusively based on the content of independent reliable sources and not their own knowledge of themselves. What you wrote reads as little more than a resume, even though you say it isn't one. 331dot (talk) 18:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Shamit24 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Rajit Singh Pal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I thought this will helps for approval for Wikipedia page not for promotion What should I do now?

Shamit24 (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shamit24 There is nothing that you can do, as no amount of editing can confer notability on a subject. 331dot (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]