Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 August 22

= August 22 =

02:28:02, 22 August 2014 review of submission by Amin El Ardi
Amin El Ardi (talk) 02:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * This submission has been declined, and the subject matter is not a suitable topic for an encyclopedia article. Sorry. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 09:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

06:54:17, 22 August 2014 review of submission by Dtrident
It looks very unclear and difficult to get approval for any newly written article. Is it because we need to pay anyway to those editors, that said they have privilege to edit as an "encyclopedia way"? (I'm honestly not very happy with that experience!) Please provide me a reasonable explanation. Thanks so much! Dtrident (talk) 06:54, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * No-one ever suggested that writing an article to a high standard was easy. You may be confusing the simplicity of creating an article with the complexity of making sure it passed WP:42, something your brief words with a single reference do not. You may waste your money by paying someone to write something, certainly, or you could actually do the small work required to find references yourself. WIkipedia has standards and those are inviolate. YOur article looks pretty much like a poor piece of promotion, not an article. Instead of complaining it would be far more useful to do the work.
 * Because of your complaint I perceive that you have a conflict of interest. It would be worth your reading about that.
 * Improve the article and resubmit it. Alternatively, "If at first you don't succeed, give up. No-one wants to fail twice." I think that was Homer Simpson among others. Fiddle   Faddle  08:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, the software described in this draft, appears to be a product of the company related to the draft below. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

08:15:22, 22 August 2014 review of submission by Garywfchan
It has been a month and more already. What's the review status now? Garywfchan (talk) 08:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The review status now is that I have just now declined this submission. I have provided a number of comments on the draft page providing reasons why I believe the draft is still unsuitable to be accepted as an article. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 08:57, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

16:20:12, 22 August 2014 review of submission by GerryHayes2
GerryHayes2 (talk) 16:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

If the review of my page is approved, Please post under name, Gerry Hayes. There is another Gerald Hayes and I don't want confusion. Thanks, ---Gerry Hayes
 * I left comments on your talk page. I think the subject (you) might meet WP:ARTIST. I'm concerned there aren't enough in-line citations since this is a biography about a living person. I'm not declining it but I don't think I can accept it. I encourage you to sign up at our list of LA Wikipedians so you can attend our edit-a-thons and get help from me and others in person. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * At this stage please do not worry about naming. We can handle renaming at any stage and are skilled in ensuring that similarly named folk are disambiguated. Your draft has been this time around and I have left a substantial comment on it. Autobiographies are troublesome to write and cause the author substantial pain and heartache. I hope you do not find you wish you had not embarked upon this quest, for ot is very hard to write an acceptable autobiography to our standards.  Fiddle   Faddle  16:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)