Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 November 2

= November 2 =

07:15:46, 2 November 2016 review of submission by 115.248.116.25
115.248.116.25 (talk) 07:15, 2 November 2016 (UTC) I need IS 3179 spec pdf
 * Hello, IP address. I'm unsure what you are asking here.  Perhaps you intended to ask your question at WP:Reference desk?    NewYorkActuary (talk) 11:38, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Request on 14:27:48, 2 November 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Ihamidraza
Hi! I created a wikipedia page but firstly it is rejected due to lack reference then I added references and resubmitted it 4 weeks ago. But I have not get a reply after that. And my article has not published yet. Please help. Ihamidraza (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey Ihamidraza. Unfortunately I have declined your submission because all of the references appeared to be to the official website of the company. In order to establish the notability of a subject, references need to be to reliable independent sources. Although the official website is acceptable for basic information, it does not contribute to notability for the purpose of creating a dedicated article. Timothy Joseph Wood  14:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Request on 19:35:43, 2 November 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Tshah23
I wrote a notable person article on Dr. Binay Shah based on the notability of his philanthropic work. Dr. Shah established a non-profit organization that started home hospice program in Nepal, established the first bone marrow transplant center in Nepal among other things. He received the spirit of medicine award from University of Illinois for his philanthropic work. His philanthropic works have been published in local newspapers, costco connection, the University of Illinois website and other online newspapers. I cited some of these sources where relevant but the article was rejected stating no independent notability. "He seems known among the group. It may be enough to simply mention him in the group. Does not qualify for professor." I am wondering which "group" the reviewer is referring to. Dr. Shah is not a professor and the article's reference to his research/publications and scientific lectures is only to mention the various scientific activities he is involved in not to prove that he is a professor. Please let me know what proof/verification I can provide for the notability?

Tshah23 (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Tshah23. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  The best source of information as to why your submission was declined is the reviewer who looked at it.  You'll find a button for that reviewer's Talk page at the top of your draft.  But I did take a look at the draft before posting here, and I believe that the reviewer was speaking of the Binaytara Foundation when referring to the "group".  Also, note that WP:PROF is a shorthand that we use to discuss the notability criteria for many lines of work, not just professors.  It can also refer to any academic, scholar or scientist.  I hope this was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:19, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

20:10:29, 2 November 2016 review of submission by IFyles
Hello. I recently had my article (Paper: Environmental Impacts, Controls and Industry Performance) refused by Wikipedia reviewers and would like to know how to fix it so it can be publishable. The comment I received was: "This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner."

In response to the above, I only used what I considered to be secondary and reliable sources - no original research or opinions were included. Occasionally it was necessary to use information put out by the the pulp and paper industry as they are the only ones to collect certain data. I assumed if Wikipedia readers took issue with anything that was written, they would provide information and sources that could rectify the problem. The current article on "Environmental Impacts of Paper" is out of date and incomplete so I thought I was improving the availability of information.

Also, I am not sure what the reviewer meant when he said this submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Maybe it is too long-winded?!

I would appreciate your comments.

IFyles (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, IFyles. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  The best source of information as to why your submission was declined is the reviewer who looked at it.  You'll find a button for that reviewer's Talk page at the top of your draft.  But I did take a look at the draft before posting here and found that I too would have declined your submission, but for a different reason.  The topics of your draft are already the subjects of two Wikipedia articles, Environmental impact of paper and Deforestation.  The material that you have drafted might find a home in one or the other of those articles.  You might also take a look at the summary section on environmental impact in the article on Paper.  I see from your note here that you are aware of the existence of at least one of those articles.  But the solution to improving an incomplete or out-of-date article is to improve that article, not to write a second one.  I hope this was helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)