Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 March 30

= March 30 =

00:25:00, 30 March 2016 review of submission by 124.191.102.207
I'm not exactly sure how this article needs to be worded so it doesn't sound like an advertisement. I have reviewed other posts about financial institutions and companies that are live on Wiki, and many of those read like advertisements and have very little in the way of legitimate references. 124.191.102.207 (talk) 00:25, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


 * If you are connected to this company, you will find virtually impossible not to write the article like an advert. That is why conflict of interest editing is so strongly discouraged here. As to your second point, yes, unfortunately there are many, many advertorials for non-notable businesses masquerading as encyclopedia articles on Wikipedia. That is no reason to add yet another. When we find them, we send them for deletion. Take a look at this page which lists dozens and dozens of articles currently nominated for deletion. But leaving aside the promotional way your draft is currently written, the most important reason why it will not be accepted is that it appears to comprehensively fail the inclusion criteria at Notability (organizations and companies. I suggest you read that page very carefully along with FAQ/Organizations. Voceditenore (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

04:29:39, 30 March 2016 review of submission by 184.5.103.124
184.5.103.124 (talk) 04:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC) could someone create a vixen val page?
 * This is not the place to request someone to create an article. Please use Requested articles for that. Voceditenore (talk) 13:03, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

10:55:00, 30 March 2016 review of submission by Jack Dunckley
Hello, I would like to submit the Jack Dunckley wikipedia page, currently in draft, for review please in hope that goes live. With many thanks. Jack Dunckley (talk) 10:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Jack. When you are ready to submit, edit the page, remove the  tags from    and click save. However, it is highly unlikely this will be accepted in its current state. It is an extremely promotional résumé with multiple internal links to your own websites/businesses, very few citations to independent reliable sources, and a whole swathe of autobiography in "Personal Life" with no independent source whatsoever.
 * The phrase "award winning" occurs 4 times in the article and twice in the lead alone. Remove all of them. The fact that you are "award-winning" is obvious from the "Honours and awards" section, but you must reference each individual award in that section with a citation to an independent published source. Relevant reading: Manual of Style/Words to watch.
 * Do not refer to the subject by his first name. After the first mention of his full name, use "Dunckley" or "he".
 * Do not use your Twitter account or as a source.
 * Remove the "Media" section (extremely promotional) and re-write this whole article as a chronological biographical narrative, not as an advertisement for your services. Take a look at Graham Stuart Thomas
 * Remove every single inline external link from the text, and in the "External links" section itself, remove all links except your official website. All the others are linked from it. Relevant reading: External links.
 * Find and use multiple independent published sources which have been written about you in depth—not sources you have written yourself.
 * Read the guidance at WP:Autobiography and WP:Conflict of interest very carefully before proceeding further. One of the reasons why editing with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia is because it is virtually impossible to write a neutral, non-promotional article under those circumstances or to even see the promotionalism which is blindingly obvious to a neutral observer.
 * Voceditenore (talk) 12:58, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

13:04:16, 30 March 2016 review of submission by Mark Duda
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mark_Duda/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Duda (talk • contribs) 13:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I thought I provided enough external links that mentioned person I'm creating page about. Is that still not enough? I read creation comments about biography of living person and tried my best to fit within rules. Please help.

Mark Duda (talk) 13:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

13:09:29, 30 March 2016 review of submission by TrueAether
Hello. Tell me, please, why did you decline my article? All material in article were submitted to the maximum neutral form. The article provides only historical facts. These historical facts has been completely confirmed by independent media sources: newspapers, magazines, etc. These sources are listed in References section. The Links section contains only two source materials: official website and more than 150 video footages. They completely support all the factual historical materials referred in this article. Thank you.

Elizabeth Kenny
--BB cooltanki (talk) 14:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)Elizabeth, Sister Kenny was born on 20, September, 1880 and died on 30, November, 1952.'''


 * BB cooltanki, there is already an article about Elizabeth Kenny. This noticeboard is for getting help and advice on draft articles. It is not a place to make test edits. It seems this is your very first edit to Wikipedia. If you want to practice editing, please create your own sandbox. See Help:My sandbox. Voceditenore (talk) 15:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

16:11:32, 30 March 2016 review of submission by Korpuskripsi
Korpuskripsi (talk) 16:11, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

This is the second time I've asked why my entry on Kiyanu Kim isn't being allowed. A source I cited in his bio is being used here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrecking_Ball_%28Miley_Cyrus_song%29?veaction=edit

How come this author can use it, and when I try it's deemed 'unreliable'?


 * Hi . You asked in your prior question, "Are there some rules I'm missing out on?" These are the things you need to know when choosing sources:
 * Core policies
 * Verifiability
 * Guidelines (best practices one should attempt to follow)
 * Identifying reliable sources
 * Citing sources
 * Discussions where reliability of specific sources in specific contexts is discussed
 * Reliable sources/Noticeboard (RSN)


 * You write "I come from an academic background", so you're probably comfortable with the types of sources that Wikipedia prefers: respected scholars writing in peer-reviewed journals or in books from academic publishers. You don't say which source cited by Wrecking Ball (Miley Cyrus song) you are not being allowed to use in Draft:Kiyanu Kim, so I'm going to have guess. Do you mean AllMusic?


 * Here is a list of all of the disussions at RSN about whether or not allmusic.com is a reliable source. The answer depends on the exact statement you want it to support, and even then may not be clear cut. AllMusic does not help establish notability because it attempts to cover all music. User reviews are not a reliable source because they are user-generated. Editorial reviews by AllMusic staff are reliable sources of that person's opinion, and may be cited to support statements like "So-and-so, writing for AllMusic, described the album as ..." For uncontrovertial factual details like track listings, credits, and releases - the sort of information that could be found on the packaging or liner notes of a recording - I would accept it as reliable. Some editors bristle because there is a mechanism for readers to submit requests for corrections, but AllMusic instructs users to "include the Information Source for the data you are providing so we can validate the accuracy of the correction" and does not appear to accept changes willy-nilly.


 * The draft's two most recent declines have been for failure to meet another guideline, Notability (music). The draft cites a publisher of Kim's music (not independent), a lyric, a track listing, a "no results" search page, a press release (not independent), a website design company (?), and a company "driving discovery, conversation and choices for passionate entertainment fans". These are a long way from academic or journalistic sources, and do nothing to establish notability. Contrast this with the sources cited by Wrecking Ball (Miley Cyrus song): Billboard, The Guardian, Time, BBC, ABC News, MTV News, Entertainment Weekly, etc.


 * If you can find the right sort of sources, then WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines outlines more best practices specifically for biographies of musicians. --Worldbruce (talk) 23:52, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

17:08:48, 30 March 2016 review of submission by 49.203.21.24
to do a presentation in college but can't find anything on the internet but in text its only says its a japanese concept 49.203.21.24 (talk) 17:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

19:16:43, 30 March 2016 review of submission by 74.15.172.146
Hi there, I have modified the submission several times considering the reviewers' comments. It has been two weeks since last submission. But, I have not received any feedback. Would you please help? Thank you, Aali 74.15.172.146 (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2016 (UTC)