Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 August 14

= August 14 =

09:20:13, 14 August 2014 review of submission by Therealmjcainglet
Therealmjcainglet (talk) 09:20, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Im Therealmjcainglet. Im requesting for assistance. I submitted an article about Justin Lee and someone declined it. Very disappointing. I have construe the details, educational background of that artist, his early career, awards, endorsements, and many more but why? I mean, why still its not acceptable?

What do I need to do? What else do I need to post?

Help me. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealmjcainglet (talk • contribs)


 * Hello Therealmjcainglet. Articles about people require references to significant coverage in independent reliable sources before they can be accepted. Sources like press conferences are not sufficient for this. You could also check if the person meets any of the requirements in MUSICBIO. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Draft duplicates
I encountered a project that has added nearly 100 new BLPs (see Category:Wikibomb2014). Some of the pages were created in Draft space, but then (I think) copy/pasted to the main space. I have no clue about AFC, so am alerting people here in case some cleanup is needed (like the duplicate drafts being deleted in due course). What I know about are: If I notice any more, should I list them here? Johnuniq (talk) 11:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC) Some more above. Johnuniq (talk) 11:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Draft:Stacey Emma Lynch + Stacey Lynch
 * Draft:Simone Warner + Simone Warner (this still has an AFC tag on it)
 * Draft:Colleen Nelson + Colleen Nelson
 * Draft:Professor Elizabeth (Liz) Dennis + Elizabeth Dennis
 * Draft:Robyn Owens + Robyn Owens


 * I find people are getting fed up with the backlog (and I can't really blame them) and taking their chances in mainspace. I tend to redirect the draft duplicate to mainspace, and then if the mainspace version needs to be speedied per A7, G10 or G11 ... well, that's what draft AfC reviews were designed to avoid! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:55, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Due to, basically, a day long collaboration on IRC, and the hard work of several admins, all of the duplicates should now be cleaned up. The people who were running this project advertised to people on Twitter that if an article came up as 'needing review' to notify them and then would put it live...yes, mainly by cut-pasting. (sigh) What still needs to be done with these is checking them for copyvios (which are rampant), lack of reliable sources, and things like external links in the body of the article, referring to the subject by their first name throughout, and puffery. I'm working my way through the list, and when needed am going to AfD with a suggestion to return to draftspace. This was not a well-planned project. I don't, however, think the backlog had anything to do with it, just a desire to see 'immediate results'. Revent talk 15:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Possibly in this case it was a "publish early, publish often" drive, but I have seen editors duplicate up material in draft and mainspace that is okay - The Beatles' rooftop concert for example. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)  15:41, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

18:29:57, 14 August 2014 review of submission by Sarahestone
Hello wondering how to add photos to my article once it has been approved? Thanks so much. Sarah Stone Sarahestone (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello Sarah. That rather depends on the photos. Who took them? Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

22:26:47, 14 August 2014 review of submission by Eventhorizon51
What is it about my sources that does not indicate the subject's notability? Are they not reliable enough, or do I not have enough of them? Right now, there are 3 sources in the draft that are independent of the subject, and I personally think they're pretty reliable. What can I do to show that the subject is notable?  Event horizon51  (talk) 22:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Eventhorizons51,
 * The Tubefilter reference is solid, but Know Your Meme isn't a reliable source and the Duke reference is one paragraph in alumni publication. I'm not familiar with  Outlook AUB, but I have a hard time considering it a reliable source given the content and the tone of the writing.  (Another reviewer might disagree.)  That said, I just did a more extensive search than I did when I first reviewed the article,  and if you do very specific keyword searches, you should be able to come up with the references needed to establish notability.  (I'll add what I've found as soon as I get some time.)   Hope that helps.   Julie JSFarman (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)