Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 November 6

= November 6 =

Request on 06:39:10, 6 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Hlkegs
Could you make it somehow obvious that you are supposed to request creation for redirects elsewhere than this? The article wizard that you forced me through made no mention of it at all (it was more concerned in asking me whether I had a conflict of interest!), nor do I see anything on this page. Or pretty much anywhere...

In fact, I couldn't even figure out how to reach the edit screen. I manually edited the URL in my urlbar to the article title to bring up the 'wizard' which apparently is the only way to the editing screen. In the days of yore I just needed to 'search' for a non-existent article to get a 'red link' to create it.

By the way, it is very much not obvious that I need to click a button ('request review') to get the submission actually going anywhere either.

This is all seriously frustrating for someone just trying to improve Wikipedia a tiny bit.

Ah, why do I care. I finally racked up enough edits to gain article creation rights. --Hlkegs (talk) 06:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Hlkegs (talk) 06:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

This isn't the exact place for this, but I've posted this feedback on the talk page of the article wizard. Galobtter (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

07:52:19, 6 November 2017 review of submission by XeryusG
To whom this may concern,

How are you? I'm writing in regards to my own bio for my music page. I tried submitting and it got denied. I'm learning this language as I go and I need help please. I really want to get this published because it'll help my music career.

Feel free to contact me at 

Kind Regards,

Xeryus Gittens

{{Lafc|username=XeryusG|ts=07:52:19, 6 November 2017|link= User:XeryusG/sandbox/Xeryus Gittens

User:XeryusG/sandbox/Xeryus Gittens

Xeryus Gittens (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I have removed a copy of the draft (replaced with a link) and redacted an email address. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * {{replyto|XeryusG}} WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY is highly discouraged on Wikipedia especially so since your stated intent is WP:PROMOTIONAL. I encourage you to find a different subject to work on. ~Kvng (talk) 17:16, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

09:07:40, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Aarti Kardak
Hi. I was wondering if there is any way I can find out which references did not follow the guidelines of Wikipedia so I can edit my submission accordingly


 * in most cases, the reference you include is the most important consideration. You need multiple reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. In the case of Draft:BookMyCharters, you've been declined because the draft was deemed WP:PROMOTIONAL. Drafts like this covering companies are being given extra scrutiny by the Wikipedia community lately. If you are able to meet WP:CORPDEPTH with the sources you've found, to assure acceptance I'd recommend removing any uncited information and extra commentary. Basically reduce the draft to to a WP:STUB. The article can be built up again in a neutral way once it reaches mainspace. ~Kvng (talk) 17:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Request on 11:46:33, 6 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Sue.Paul.EA4A
I am the copyrighted author and owner of the article posted for review. My name is Sue Paul,, my website is sueea4a.wordpress.com. I am also the founder of EA4A (Esophageal Atresia for Adults) found at https://www.facebook.com/EA4A2016/?ref=bookmarks, I own rights to article posted and both websites. I am an advocate for Esophageal Atresia awareness and promote research to find modern treatment options for this birth defect. My husband died from this condition last year, and it is my goal to spread awareness and empower individuals with the latest information on options for treatment. I do this for non-profit and volunteer. Thank you for your reconsideration.

Sue.Paul.EA4A (talk) 11:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Reconsidered, and deleted as promotion, please also see WP:WORTHYCAUSE. While we do sympathise with your loss, Wikipedia may not be used in the way you intended. Your purpose would be better served by using social media sites such as Facebook. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:21, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

15:11:43, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Polycarp Igathe
Good evening,i wrote an article on Polycarp Igathe a notable figure in Kenya and i am yet to get it reviewed. Polycarp Igathe (talk) 15:11, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, please be patient when waiting for a review. There are 1900 submissions waiting alongside yours.  JTP (talk • contribs) 15:29, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Request on 15:14:59, 6 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Jaganlaw2k6
I have submitted many copies of this article with many changes to wikipedia after they commented that the article looked promotional. I have looked into other wikipedia pages and tried to make the tone of the article not to be promotional. So i am asking for your assistance so that the article can be modified to meet your criteria. If any way you can point out to how to modify these sentences, and not to look promotional i would be thankful.

Jaganlaw2k6 (talk) 15:14, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Jaganlaw2k6 (talk) 15:14, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * NOTE: Redacted copy of deleted article. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Jaganlaw. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  I've redacted the copy of the article posted here, because this is not the place to be hosting such material.  But I did take a look at it before redacting and I found that deleting the draft was appropriate.  The issue wasn't so much the particular sentences that you used (though there was a bit of puffery that could have been removed).  It was more the fact that the entire article itself served as little more than an advertisement for the organization.  Indeed, its only three "sources" were advertisements for seminars that were scheduled for 2015.  There was no evidence that your organization has achieved encyclopedic notability and, without that evidence, it is unlikely that your organization will have an article on Wikipedia.  If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

15:55:01, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Gemmacolon
My page was declined. Here is the reason why:

This submission appears to be taken from http://www.condenast.com/about/. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

I work at Condé Nast, and my team wrote the biography for Robert A. Sauerberg that appears on http://www.condenast.com/about/ and that is why the biography I wrote for him on Wikipedia is so similar. I switched some of the wording and sentence structure to be better suited for a Wikipedia page. How do I go about proving that I own the copyright material to this biography and getting this published? Thank you - Gemma.

Gemmacolon (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * See User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to copyvios - essentially unless you have given an appropriate free document licence (which allows me to copy your website text, print it, and sell it at a profit - not that I would, but I wouldn't be breaking any laws if I did) then the work cannot be used here. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

16:37:42, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Golden tamarin
Hi, I've updated the BlueVine and really focused in on a simple explanation of the company, a timeline of important events, and verified partnerships. All the information has third-party sources backing it up, and I believe I removed anything that could be considered a peacock term.


 * Thank you for improving and resubmitting your draft. Unfortunately there is currently a large backlog of unreviewed submissions but your draft is in the queue and a reviewer will have another look in due course. ~Kvng (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

20:06:56, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Memenade
on my page it was declined because of my music preference, buy why would it make my page be declined. its my personal page so why shouldn't my music preference be on my page, it about my life? Memenade (talk) 20:06, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Memenade. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  I see that you've already discussed your submission with the reviewer.  That reviewer gave you good advice and I encourage you to follow it.  If we can be of any further assistance, please let us know.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Request on 20:55:45, 6 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Cheryl Fullerton
I first submitted the article without citing my sources then resubmitted with sources and it was rejected again, I'm puzzled. I thought Billboard Magazine and AllMusic were reliable sources for music-related subjects. There were other citations, as well which I thought were reliable sources of the musician and the album. Please help me if you can.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)Cheryl

Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Cheryl. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  The best source of information as to why your submission was declined will be the reviewers who looked at it.  You can find their names and Talk page links in the "decline boxes" near the top of your submission.  I see that you've already reached out to the most recent reviewer and I trust that you'll get a response from them soon. Before posting here, I took a look at it myself and found that I too would have declined it, and for the same reason.  Although there is no question that Chaquico is notable in the realm of rock music, this does not mean that every one of his solo albums is notable.  And you haven't provided compelling evidence that this one album is an exception.  A link to iTunes and another to Chaquico's own web site don't provide any evidence of encyclopedic notability.  As for the UltimateClassicRock site, I didn't see the album mentioned at all in the page that you linked to.  And the AllMusic review is un-bylined, meaning that it was adopted from press-kit material supplied to AllMusic by Chaquico's agents or managers.  In all, I saw nothing in your submission that would indicate that this particular album has earned encyclopedic notability. I hope this response has been helpful.  If we can be of any further assistance, please let us know.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, very helpful! Thanks for taking the time!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Cheryl