Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 April 9

= April 9 =

Request on 02:43:40, 9 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by CharOster
My article had third party sources that are public, verifiable, secondary, and have a high level of integrity. I can't fully understand what sources would be better...no official biography of my subject has been published. He is certainly notable: international reputation for excellence, many demonstrations that he has been influential for good, even a national Twitter campaign by the cast of the Captain America movie to show support for a widely known and loved and very interesting person. I have recommended his books to people and several have said they were surprised not to find him on Wikipedia, since he has such an enormous body of respected work and has made so many contributions to contemporary journals, colleges, etc... I thought it would be obvious that he is notable, and easy to prove his biography from the published sources. I'm really not sure where to turn next on this.CharOster (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

CharOster (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply - One thing that could help in this case is for you to use "inline citations" in the style described here Inline_citation, rather than using hyperlinks to external sources as your citations. This will make it easier for reviewers to help you, as they can more easily review your sources and see whether or not they are acceptable. I would also review the policy NPOV as it will help you understand how to better write within the mandatory "neutral point of view" here on Wikipedia. Isingness (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

02:57:05, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Maria Grimana
Hello,

my article was declined twice. Initially I was also told that I had to put too many citations. I removed many of those, I think I left the number to a minimum in order to prove that whatever the article mentions is demonstrable (the sources are all notable: important magazines, newspapers, publishing houses and museums. Can someone tell me if my citations are acceptable?

Thank you very much!

Maria Grimana Maria Grimana (talk) 02:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Maria Grimana (talk) 02:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


 * NOTE: Draft has already been accepted for publication. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Request on 10:45:34, 9 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Derk van der Wal
Hello,

The openHAB page was for the first time written bij the openHAB architect. This page was written too close to his own sources and opinions. Now I try to rewrite a nuetral objective page. I've tried severela times and in the end everything has been rewritten. Now, for the fifth time I get " This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability." Can you help me some more in detail?

Derk van der Wal (talk) 10:45, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Dirk. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  We apologize for the delay in response.  I see that you have already received a response from the reviewer who declined your submission.  I agree with that reviewer in noting that your sources do not demonstrate "notability" as that word is used here on Wikipedia.  In this regard, you might want to take a look at the guidance offered at WP:NSOFTWARE.  I also agree that many of your sources are blogs that do not meet our notions of WP:Reliable sources.  And to all of this, I'll add that the submission continues to be written in a promotional tone.  I haven't looked at the original version, and I am willing to believe that your re-write has improved the draft.  But there's still more that needs to be done to create a truly neutrally-worded article.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

12:22:48, 9 April 2017 review of submission by 37.201.138.83
I think the coverage in prog rock sources is quite extensive, especially this compilation: http://www.progressrec.com/the_label/magic_col-reviews.html. I agree that those websites do not look as reputable as NYT, but this is the nature of prog rock itself being a relatively niche sub-genre. This kind of bands rarely get a front page in the Rolling Stone. This band has been touring for a long time with other (notable) bands, has multiple albums and there are articles in French and Norwegian WP. So why not having an article on them? The page history suggests that there have already been attempts to create this article, so I think this is not the final one. I'd rather make it a nice stub and leave it at that. --37.201.138.83 (talk) 12:22, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Reply - regardless of the field, you will still need to demonstrate that you have reliable sources that can support the content. For bands there is a specific notability protocol that you can find here: Band. This may help you in determining if the band has a case for notability here on Wikipedia. Isingness (talk) 16:09, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

13:04:20, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Maria Grimana
Hello,

my article was declined, I made changes but I am not sure if I have resubmitted it properly. I cannot see the waiting list for submission when I look for it. Can you please let me know if my articles was resubmitted correctly?

Thank you!

Maria GrimanaMaria Grimana (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Yes, the draft was resubmitted correctly. The oldest drafts awaiting review have been in that state for about four weeks, so that's the best estimate of when Draft:Maurizio Pellegrin will be reviewed. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:39, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ The draft has been accepted and is now located at Maurizio Pellegrin --TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:37, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

13:33:23, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Sprands
I accidentally resubmitted data. I would like to just ask that I do not recieve consequences for making a duplicate article. This article is pending review.

Sprands is here for you. (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey, no worries. The worst that will happen is your accidental submission being declined.  Programming Geek talk to me 14:27, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

15:32:10, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Nagsail
my article on Manju Latha Kalanidhi was declined, stating that submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. I have given sufficient sources and submitted it again. But I am not sure if I have resubmitted it properly. Can you please let me know if my articles was resubmitted correctly? The page is redirected to Rice Bucket Challenge, but the article is about the person who created the challenge. It is not the copy of the page Rice Bucket Challenge. Thank you all. Nagsail (talk) 15:32, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

✅ Pending deletion of mainspace redirect  Programming Geek talk to me 20:57, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Request on 16:52:53, 9 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Elena12leo11
Elena12leo11 (talk) 16:52, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Elena. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the delay in response.  Although you did not ask a question here, I assume you are looking for guidance on how to improve your draft.  I see that you have already received some feedback from one of the two reviewers who declined your submission, and I agree with that feedback.  Right now, your submission is essentially unsourced (a slide show posted to a user-generated site really doesn't count as a reliable source).  In order to have your submission accepted for publication, you will need to demonstrate that the topic has been covered in depth by reliable sources and, so far, you have not done this.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Request on 19:59:42, 9 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Mosaic Festival Mississauga
My request to launch our free Mississauga based art and culture festival is being declined again and again. It is a community festival in Mississauga that is touted as th largest free south As an multi disciplinary arts festival of north America. We have established many first with this community run event and somehow i feel that editors have not read the content at all.

Please kindly guide me to making this submission acceptable to your team. thanks Asma

Mosaic Festival Mississauga (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Asma. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the delay in response.  I don't know whether your festival meets our standards for encyclopedic notability.  What I do know is that you've done a poor job of making your case.  All of the references for your draft appear as bare URL's, with all of them placed in a single clump at the bottom of the page.  By doing this, you are effectively telling reviewers that they have to leave Wikipedia and go searching through all of those links if they want to see how much of your draft is actually supported by those references.  And so, the very first step in improving your draft will be to read through WP:Referencing for beginners, which will provide an introduction on how referencing should be done here at Wikipedia.  You might also want to learn how to use the cite web template, which provides an easy way to add essential bibliographic detail (such as who wrote an article and when/where it was published) and also automatically formats that information for you.  After you've done all that, reviewers here will be happy to take a closer look at your submission.  On a different note, I see that your user name is the same as the subject of the submission.  If you haven't already done so, you should read through our conflict-of-interest guidelines.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

21:33:29, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Lillycakes23
Lillycakes23 (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Is there any way to amend the title of the page I created?? From Jodi Barnes (figure skater) To Jodi Barnes

Already Done by the user  Programming Geek talk to me 21:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)