Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 December 13

= December 13 =

02:45:22, 13 December 2017 review of submission by JoelJayakarOffl
Im looking out for some authors to create pages for me and my friends. Please get back to me.

JoelJayakarOffl (talk) 02:45, 13 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: Draft:CoIDb may be the draft the user referring to. Matthew_hk   t  c  02:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)


 * wikipedia is not a free webhost for you and yourself. Even your website or company is notable, it is not appropriate to create by you due to WP:COI. Matthew_hk   t  c  02:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

13:40:06, 13 December 2017 review of submission by Attakorahj
COuld someone help me understand why my page was rejected? Attakorahj (talk) 13:40, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi . The draft User:Attakorahj/sandbox was declined because is it a duplicate of Draft:The Blues Reincarnation Project, which is awaiting review. At first glance, it seems unlikely to be accepted because it does not appear to show that the band is notable. You may attempt to improve it while you wait for it to be reviewed, but it may be unrealistic to think that a band formed last year is a topic that belongs in an encyclopedia with the likes of The Beatles, Metallica, and The Sex Pistols. If you have a conflict of interest with the topic, declare it. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:39, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

18:12:43, 13 December 2017 review of submission by Schuff
Any advice most welcomed and appreciated. I've done helpful (I believe) edits of existing articles about figures in US financial history that were accepted by the community, but don't understand why my first ever original draft entry was rejected. It includes references to articles from Wall Street Journal and New York Times that are ABOUT, not just casual references to, my subject and his role in uncovering what was at the time (before Bernie Madoff) the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. I suppose I could add additional links to his interviews in Fortune magazine and with BBC World Service, but in those instances, he was really just commenting on the subject of the story and not featured, so not sure they add much (unless a preponderance of citations makes one "notable"). Would I be better off simply resubmitting the draft "as is" in hopes of getting it reviewed by an editor who is perhaps more open minded about the notability of financial history?? Schuff (talk) 18:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks, for your contribution. I think you received a bum review. You asked the reviewer about it yesterday, and they haven't replied, so I've accepted the draft. There's still plenty of room to improve and expand it, which I hope you'll do when you have time. While the topic is fresh in your mind, Foundation for New Era Philanthropy could use some help. It has no inline citations and has been tagged for cleanup for seven years without much having been done. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

19:46:04, 13 December 2017 review of submission by Primacyeditor
Can someone please help with making the draft article become live for MEEMIC INSURANCE COMPANY — Preceding unsigned comment added by Primacyeditor (talk • contribs) 19:48, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Primacyeditor. --Worldbruce (talk) 08:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your disclosure. See WP:BFAQ for the best way to proceed.


 * When describing the company for Requested articles, include any former names of the company. Has it always been Meemic, or did it used to be known as Michigan Educational Employees Mutual Insurance Co?


 * When listing references, use ones that cover the major events in the company's history - 1997: bought by Professionals Group; 1999: demutualized, converted to a stock insurance company, listed on NASDAQ as MEMH; 2000: expanded outside Michigan; 2003: merged with ProAssurance Corp; 2005: built new headquarters, sold to GMAC; 2009: purchased by Auto Club Insurance Association. Good sources would be A. M. Best, Best's Review, Detroit Free Press, The Detroit News, Michigan Chronicle, and Crain's Detroit Business. Access to their archives may require using databases such as GALE One File and ProQuest. A good research university library may be able to help.


 * If you take the optional step of reaching out to a WikiProject, WikiProject Finance would be your best bet. WikiProject Michigan is also quite active. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

21:17:55, 13 December 2017 review of draft by Msalt
I am trying to create a page for current magazine of popular classics named Eidolon. After creating the draft page, I saw the note that there is a redirect for "Eidolon_(magazine)" for a defunct magazine also named Eidolon that points not to a page but to a section of a page: "Warning: The page Eidolon (magazine) redirects to Eidolon Publications. 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."

What is the best way to resolve this conflict? Should I update the redirect page, or edit the new page title to something like "Eidolon_(classics magazine)" or "Eidolon_(journal)" (which is more accurate anyway)? If editing the page title is the right approach, how can I do that? When I edit the page I don't see the actual page name anywhere.

Thanks!Msalt (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

PS Here is the page that the redirect goes to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidolon_Publications#Eidolon_magazine

Msalt (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi . I see there are half a dozen periodicals by that name. If it's peer reviewed, you could disambiguate it as Eidolon (journal). Otherwise I think WP:USURPTITLE applies. I suggest creating a new redirect, Eidolon (Australian magazine), with the content . Work down the list Special:WhatLinksHere/Eidolon_(magazine), changing each link to Eidolon (magazine) to Eidolon (Australian magazine). Assuming the draft is eventually accepted or otherwise moved to mainspace, the accepting reviewer/mover can take care of the final steps to move it to Eidolon (magazine). If you want a second, and quite possibly better, opinion, and no one else chimes in here, ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Magazines or perhaps the more active WikiProject Academic Journals. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the trenchant advice. In its first mission statement, the magazine I refer to is careful to distinguish itself fom peer reviewed publications, saying for example that "In place of peer review, we encourage readers to engage with pieces on Eidolon using Medium’s ‘notes’ feature, which allows comments on a specific paragraph, sentence, or phrase." I will follow your redirect suggestions. Thanks! Msalt (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

21:38:11, 13 December 2017 review of submission by Cblack95
My article was declined due to the person not being notable enough. However, he is recognized quite often in the Quad Cities Area; a population of almost half a million. What sort of references would be needed to demonstrate his notability? Because he is a television personality, I am not quite sure what could be used to do so.

Cblack95 (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Cblack95 Cblack95 (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi . There are comprehensive guidelines at WP:N and related pages, but it's quite simply really: we need to see that Brouette has been the subject of multiple published works in reliable sources with no connection to him. In this case you'd probably be looking at newspapers and other news media (preferably national rather than local). This is a requirement of all articles in Wikipedia, regardless of who or what the subject is. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 13:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)