Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 December 1

= December 1 =

02:03:06, 1 December 2016 review of submission by 59.101.141.193
need help making these articles Draft:Mark Mercedes, Draft:Veda Scott and Draft:What Culture Pro Wrestling 59.101.141.193 (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, IP address. A good place for you to get assistance on improving drafts about wrestling would be WP:WikiProject Professional wrestling.  A request on the Talk page of that project might generate some responses from people who specialise in wrestling articles.  You also might want to take a look at some of the top-quality articles that have been produced by the project.  Doing this will give you an idea of the scope of items that are typically included, as well as the tone of the language that is used to present the information.  Some examples are Bobby Eaton, Shelton Benjamin and Turning Point (2008 wrestling).  I hope this was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

03:41:03, 1 December 2016 review of draft by 174.115.100.169
How do you verify that a page is not a copy. For example "The page Jeunesse redirects to Youth (1934 film). Please verify that it is not a copy of this submission and that this page does not need to be moved to a different title."

174.115.100.169 (talk) 03:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, IP address. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Your draft title needed to be changed to specify that the subject is not the same-named film.  I've done that.  The new title is Draft:Jeunesse (radio personality).  NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

09:08:34, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Victor5497
Would like to know if I continue to add to this page, will it eventually be accepted. Thank you.

Victor5497 (talk) 09:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Victor. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia.  I assume you are speaking of Draft:GamePigeon.  If so, your draft is unlikely to be accepted in its current form.  Even if expanded, it is unlikely to be accepted if it consists solely of a description of the games that are supported by the app.  You might want to take a look at WP:Notability (software) to get an idea about what software topics are acceptable for Wikipedia.  I hope this response was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

12:17:52, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Raptorsquad
My article was declined by Gbawden regarding notability. I get what that is, but don't get why the press the company has is not sufficient. They were selected Startup of the Month in Silicon India magazine months after their official launch; based on client results they were selected Top 5 Most Promising Social Media companies 8 months later, and a yer later Top 20 Most Valuable Consulting Companies by Insight Success Magazine. They'll also been mention in other magazines in reference to projects they've worked on, such as in BFIRST regarding the Craveller media launch they managed.

So my question is whether the declined on notability was in reference to there not being enough articles, or the magazines not being given credit a reliable, or both?

Raptorsquad (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Raptorsquad. As we noted a few days ago, the best source of information on why your submission was declined is the reviewer who looked at it.  You'll find a button for that person's Talk page at the top of your draft.  Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Request on 17:11:45, 1 December 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by OrangeMouse
Hello, The referenced article was recently submitted and denied due to lack of notability. After much research, we've found accepted submissions of those who do not appear to be as notable as our declined submission. Needless to say, we are seeking any guidance anyone can offer to help us get the article published in Wikipedia. Thanks very much! OrangeMouse (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

OrangeMouse (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, OrangeMouse. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  I'll leave some comments on the Talk page of your draft later today.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:29, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

19:05:41, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Pacolesa
Pacolesa (talk) 19:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I have tried to publish the article about Dr. Francisco "Paco" Guerrero. I have cited the copyright requested on one of his books he published. It was accepted long time ago. Then, I made some changes, and now it´s been declined... Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacolesa (talk • contribs) 19:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Paco. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  I assume you are asking about the draft that currently appears in your Sandbox.  If so, you neglected to resubmit it for review after it was decline in August.  If you do re-submit that draft, it will be looked at in due course by one of our reviewers.  However, that draft contains no references and is unlikely to be accepted in its current form.  I hope this response was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

19:30:36, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Wednesday 0008
Wednesday 0008 (talk) 19:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I was informed today that the article I submitted entitled Draft: Linda Lloyd Jones was not accepted. It appears the footnotes are inadequate. This article is the fifth I have submitted to Wikipedia. I have never before been declined. Would you please elaborate on the reviewer's comments so I can improve the page accordingly. Thank you.
 * Response given below. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Request on 19:45:50, 1 December 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Michaeltsantini
I will find the proper citation for my statement that "progressive creationism is not pseudoscience." Please give me a few days to validate my source. Expect a citation by December 15, 2016. Thank you!!

Michaeltsantini (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Michael. Thanks again for your contribution to Wikipedia.  But this is not the place to discuss edits being made to an existing article.  You really need to talk to the editors on the Talk page of the article in question.  Happy editing!  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

19:56:43, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Radicaldreamer29
Hello, I submitted an article about a month and a half ago, and it was initially declined. After making the suggested changes, I resubmitted the article, keeping it as neutral as possible, but have yet to hear back on the status. Is there any one that can help me out with this? What else do I need to do to get this article approved? Thanks for your assistance.

Radicaldreamer29 (talk) 19:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Radicaldreamer. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  We are extremely backlogged and, unfortunately, most submissions do take more than two or three weeks to be looked at by a reviewer.  I'll leave some comments on the Talk page of your draft later today.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

23:04:16, 1 December 2016 review of submission by Wednesday 0008
Draft:Linda Lloyd Jones

I wish to improve the article Draft:Linda Lloyd Jones to meet Wikipedia's qualifications. I would like clarification on the reviewer's comments. For example, am I being asked to change the format of the footnotes? If so, would you please give me an example to follow.

Thank you.Wednesday 0008 (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Wednesday. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  The best source of information as to why your submission was declined is the reviewer who looked at it.  You'll find that person's name and Talk page button at the top of your draft.  Before posting here, I took a look at your draft and found that the many references are cited only to a publication (e.g. Wall Street Journal), with none of the bibliographic information called for under WP:CITE.  In each case, the reader is left to wonder ... What is the title of the referenced article?  Who wrote it?  When was it published?  Your citation style essentially tells the reader that they have to click through to the on-line source if they want to learn these things, and this practice runs afoul of WP:CITE.  (It's also relevant to note that the option of clicking through is not available to anyone who is reading a PDF download of an article or who, for whatever reason, will want to read an off-line copy of the referenced article.)  Formatting your references can be simplified if you use the cite web template.  I hope this response was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)