Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 November 18

= November 18 =

01:28:38, 18 November 2018 review of draft by Kitb
I am grateful that my draft has been reviewed. I have read the review, and need help with the following aspects, please:

1) I am struggling with the comments that it: 'reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopaedia entry', and '...should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed.' I have quoted, among several other references, the three most authoritative multi-authored textbooks written in the the overall topic in question (the overall topic being geriatric medicine, of which 'comprehensive geriatric assessment' [CGA] is a (or possibly the) key element. Indeed, CGA (or 'multidimensional geriatric assessment') has chapters devoted to it all three of them and two of them have two chapters referring to it. I have quoted no materials which I have produced.


 * Q a) Could someone show me an example of what would be accepted as an '...independent, reliable published source.' that would be preferable to these?

2) I also need guidance as to why my draft '...reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article' and how I should change it to be '...from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.' Since there is no disagreement about how effective CGA is, and it is used pretty much universally in clinical practice, I cannot see how to make it 'more neutral'. I have read the style guides, but cannot work out from there where I am going wrong.


 * Q a) Could someone give me some guidance as to how this might be made more neutral, please?
 * b) Could someone show how to make it more encyclopaedic, rather than 'like an essay', please?

Many thanks!

Kitb (talk) 01:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


 * PS, Re Q 1) a, above: FWIW I have added two more fairly major text book chapter references to the draft! Kitb (talk) 22:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . If you haven't received an answer here by Sunday, I suggest resubmitting the draft with the improvements you've made since the most recent decline, and simultaneously starting a thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine, asking for their input on whether the draft is acceptable and how it could be improved. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:45, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi  - really appreciate you taking the time to offer this helpful advice. I'll do just as you say! Kitb (talk) 11:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

07:44:37, 18 November 2018 review of draft by Bangruchika
Bangruchika (talk) 07:44, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

13:43:04, 18 November 2018 review of submission by Basper82
We've updated the writing the references to highlight notable factors in this article and subject. We've removed promotional reference links and added information about cases that were of public notoriety over just promotional material for the lawyer highlighted.

Basper82 (talk) 13:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi . Please clarify what you mean by "we". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello, . I miswrote earlier--I just meant myself. This is my account, and no one else has access to it. Thank you.

14:02:01, 18 November 2018 review of draft by Prob2prob
My submission has been declined by an account that has since been discredited and banned. Shouldn't this be reversed?

Prob2prob (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi ,


 * The issue of Frayae's AfC's accepts and declines has (and continues to be) discussed. In the meantime we are both reviewing a number of the reviews and handling any ad hoc requests that arise like this one.


 * In an immediate sense if I formally reviewed your article I would say that it had insufficient sourcing to demonstrate its notability - neither satisfies the various requirements within independent, reliable, secondary sources. I'd suggest resolving this then re-submitting. There is something to be said for the formal decline grounds offered, but I don't think it is a clear-cut essay usage, so notability is a key first step to resolve. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

21:24:13, 18 November 2018 review of submission by Jenna Berry
Jenna Berry (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC) Hi my name is Jenna Berry and i was wondering why my article can't be posted

, Hi, your draft was declined for being an Essays which is against policy (as you can tell by clicking that link). If you want to know how to write an article in a policy complying way, see WP:YFA for more then with that advice in mind you can go to work on your draft/article. Good luck. JC7V (talk) 21:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

21:57:44, 18 November 2018 review of submission by PMitrano
I created a page /article a few weeks ago and it got accepted! I would now like to edit it and add an image, but I can't figure it out. Do I click on "edit source"?

PMitrano (talk) 21:57, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


 * - normally an article says "edit source" if it is protected, but I don't believe this is the case. Are you unable to make any edits to the article?


 * Regarding an image, are you intending to add a picture that is already in wikicommons or upload one (and if so, what are you hoping to upload?) Nosebagbear (talk) 22:07, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

I figured it out! I initially did not see the edit button. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PMitrano (talk • contribs) 22:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)