Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 November 16

= November 16 =

02:13:39, 16 November 2016 review of submission by Imran CDC
Hi there, just wondering why my draft for CDC Malaysia was not approved? It look properly referenced and not written in a biased way. Can some kind person help me? Would really appreciate this! Cheers!

Imran CDC (talk) 02:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The draft is Draft:CDC Malaysia. You were given some useful advice by the reviewer, who said to read some other articles and to format your article in the same way as other articles on businesses.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:38, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Request on 18:33:38, 16 November 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Fluffyfloss1
Hello! I firmly believe the draft "draft:filthy frank should be an article. How is a youtuber with millions of subscribers not "notable enough", but for example football player dedi iman, with ONE reference page who no one's ever heard of, or Tord Johansson, who also has a single news article of his death as reference, who also NO ONE KNOWS, have articles when they are far, far less notable! Frank is a very influential youtuber, with tons of fans, and that alone makes him notable! wikipedia shouldn't be about how many "official-enough" references you have, but about creating pages with good, true information that people are interested in! the article on frank is not false information, it is not a stub, and lots of people will find it interesting WHEN it is made into a real article, thank you very much.v

Fluffyfloss1 (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * See Articles for deletion/Filthy Frank. If you disagree, you may appeal to deletion review.  In the case of footballers, or other professional sports people, there are notability guidelines that people who have played in particular professional sports leagues are considered notable (as are state legislators, generals, and people having certain other specific distinctions).  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:15, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

19:29:45, 16 November 2016 review of submission by Ohenry70
I'm am confused by the reviewer's statement that the references are "simply republished advertising" and are not "independent, reliable, published sources." The listed references were not written by the subject and were not written to promote the subject. Rather, they discuss the subject in connection with his accomplishments and current projects, just as any news article would. In fact, these and similar sources are currently listed in an existing published Wikipedia article about Mr. Gresta's partner, Dirk Ahlborn. The fact that Ahlborn had a page but not the equally notable Gresta is what led me to write about him.

The reviewer also states that the article is nothing more than a business listing. In reviewing existing biographical Wikipedia articles about notable individuals it is quite common to see the many names of businesses he or she has been involved in during the course of their career, especially when they relate to the notoriety of that individual. Again, I would bring to your attention the existing article on Dirk Ahlborn, which, while perhaps less detailed than my article, is almost entirely about Ahlborn's work with JumpStartFund and Hyperloop Transportation Technologies.

I have never met Mr. Gresta and I have no connection to his hyperloop project other than a passing interest in the futuristic element. Thus my point of view about the man himself is entirely neutral. After a more thorough re-read of my article I can see where I may have been influenced by the research to be a bit too "energetic" in my wording and will edit accordingly. And of course, as a new contributor I need and want to learn from my mistakes. However, I did my research before I wrote this article and I believe the references and overall style are consistent with many existing Wikipedia articles. Ohenry70 (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia Ohenry70! Thanks for your contributions.   There is a bit of a learning curve for new article creation, so everyone is always welcome to work in the Draft space to get up to speed.
 * Wikipedia is very diverse, and some reviewers have a "critical view" (to put it politely) of anything business related. They can be very unwelcoming to newcomers.  But even though they may be very vocal, rest assured they are in the minority and many of the claims they make are not supported by current consensus regarding business-related topics and notability.
 * The best thing now to do is to continue searching for independent, reliable sources that significantly discuss Gresta, as opposed to smaller mentions of Gresta from within reporting on Hyperloop Transportation Technologies.  If there are enough reliable sources, then start cleaning up the text and resubmit.  If there are not enough reliable sources to pass notability tests, then there is not much to do but move onto a new topic, and check back now-and-then if any new reporting about Gresta is published .  Cheers  --  1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 08:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)