Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 May 7

= May 7 =

Request on 03:42:55, 7 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Edit king2
I was trying to create a article about edit king but it says it was I was writing like I was writing on Facebook. What changes should I make?Peace out 03:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Edit king. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia.  Writing about yourself is very much discouraged here on Wikipedia.  You will have a much better chance of publishing an article if you choose a different topic.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

11:59:45, 7 May 2017 review of submission by PhalainaBelgium
Hello ! This is PhalainaBelgium better known as Phalaïna.

Just trying to set up our first page on Wikipedia, which is not easy !

Our first attempt was declined.

User:PhalainaBelgium

Phalaïna 11:59, 7 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhalainaBelgium (talk • contribs)
 * Hello, Phalaina. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia.  Writing about yourselves is very much discouraged here on Wikipedia.  Before writing this, I took a look at your submission and declined it for your failure to demonstrate satisfaction of any of the criteria set forth in WP:MUSICBIO.  I also left a comment about the potential copyright violation created by the re-use of material taken from an on-line page.  If an article about your band is going to be published here, you will first need to demonstrate that the band has been the subject of in-depth coverage by sources that are reliable and independent of the band.  And so far, you haven't done this.  On different notes, you might want to read our conflict-of-interest guidelines, which address our concerns with groups that are writing about their own businesses.  You should also read WP:ISU, which states our prohibition against choosing a user name that implies "shared use".  If you decide to change to another user name, you can do so over at WP:RENAME.  I hope this response has been helpful.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 14:52, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

20:13:39, 7 May 2017 review of submission by Kent Westlund
This draft was declined on April 28th on the basis that references do not adequately show the subject's notability, with the comment that "Except a few news publications, I can't find other reliable sources to support such an article." But it seems to me that the references included demonstrate that the subject firm is receiving significant coverage in reliable independent sources (The Boston Globe, CBS news, Pacific Standard, etc). Any suggestions on how these references could be improved? Kent Westlund (talk) 20:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Kent. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  I think you might be right -- the level of national news coverage accorded to the company might indeed be enough to justify an article.  However, I note that the most substantive coverage relates to the controversies generated by the company.  And although that aspect is given some mention in the draft, the weight that it receives doesn't reflect the weight that it receives in the national coverage.  Later today, I'll open up a discussion on the draft's Talk page so that we can discuss this in more detail.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 15:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)