Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2014 June 26

= June 26 =

04:07:49, 26 June 2014 review of submission by 70.111.22.70
I am confused as to whether the article that I submitted was received. Can someone please let me know if it was reviewed?

70.111.22.70 (talk) 04:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for posting! Both of those pages are being deleted. But yes, the article was reviewed. It was a copied from other websites and had no sources. The user page was obviously promotional and I'm not sure why that was attempted. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 04:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

11:54:28, 26 June 2014 review of submission by Riogirl
DEAR SIR, PLEASE SEE BELOW LINK HAS SHOW THE COMPANY https://www.google.com.br/maps/search/myth/@-22.6043713,-43.270332,9z/am=t/data=!3m1!4b1

Riogirl (talk) 11:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * We do not perform google searches to add references to your draft. We review your draft whenever you consider it is ready to submit. We require references from significant coverage about the entity, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please continue to draft the article, adding references tourself. If you are not sure what to do check out WP:Mentoring Fiddle   Faddle  16:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * More to the point, the draft article is pure advertising, and I have listed it for deletion as such.   If you have good 3rd party published sources that are not press releases,  and want to try again, avoid such phrases as "Client focused fast fashion operating model is centered for Myth London's business to ensure the highest standard quality and the most competitive affordable price with respect clients' preeminence of uniqueness and the myth of a social superiority" which have no place in an encyclopedia.  DGG ( talk ) 18:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

13:50:14, 26 June 2014 review of submission by Premaakadhal15
Premaakadhal15 (talk) 13:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * User:Premaakadhal15/sandbox is blank. What is your question please? Fiddle   Faddle  16:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

16:16:49, 26 June 2014 review of submission by Dmooneywiley
My latest submission was declined due to our references. Could the editorial team provide more insight into why these references were not deemed worthy? I listed several authoritative resources that verify all of the information contained in the wiki page. Is the problem that there wasn't enough resources, that they weren't viable, etc.? Any help or direction you can provide would be great.

Dmooneywiley (talk) 15:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I imagine you are talking about Draft:Peter Booth Wiley, where many iof the references fail the criteria as follows: For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every fact you assert requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS
 * Some are directory entries, I think at least one is an interview with the gentleman. Forgive me I was interrupted when about to draft this reply, so my memory is faulty. I would have provided you with a little more than the reviewer did had I reviewed the draft, but the review is technically correct. Look for material about Mr WIley and you will have it right. Ideally your article should be framed around the references, not have had the references forced into the boxes in the article. Fiddle   Faddle  16:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * As chairman of a NYSE company is usually notable, I simply removed the material about how he improved the company, which is exactly the sort of opinion material that needs to be given from a third party outside reliable source, and accepted the article. I think it will pass a discussion at afd, which is the criterion for acceptance, but it's hard to be certain. .  If you can indeed source what he specifically did for the company from a source like Fortune or WSJ, add it, with a sourced quotation. DGG ( talk ) 18:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

15:41:36, 26 June 2014 review of submission by 82.111.198.102
Dear Sir or Madam; I cannot remove a draft web site Clay Cross Town Football Ball, I keep putting in the new updated version Clay Ctoss Town FC but the first site is getting in the way. The reviewers keeps going back to it.

Chris 82.111.198.102 (talk) 15:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The duplicate will be deleted soon - I have tagged it for the attention of an admin who has the tools to delete it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Please state clearly which of the two drafts you want to have deleted. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

18:10:42, 26 June 2014 review of submission by NewYouShow
NewYouShow (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, My name is Samantha and I had recently created an article called the NewYou! Show but it was declined. I would like to know why it was declined and if I need to make certain adjustments to get it approved.

Thank you for your time.


 * The article is at Draft:NewYou! Show and has a concise reason for not acceptance at this stage. The most serious of these is the partial copyright issue. I can see that it appears that you may own the copyright, but life is more complex than that. The site states "© 2014 - 2020 by New You, INC. All Rights Reserved" and there are procedures for donating copyrights if that is what you wish. See Donating copyrighted materials. Be aware, through, that promotional text is always unwelcome on Wikipedia. It would be preferable to use all your own new words.  Fiddle   Faddle  18:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Expand: promotional text from a promotional username is unacceptable. Please consider changing your username before a block is sanctioned against you, it's truly in your best interest to do so.  Then, you'll want to tone down the promotional nature of the draft you have been working on so that it is neutral.  Good luck! — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 22:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)