Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 October 8

= October 8 =

14:48:18, 8 October 2018 review of draft by DannyGurr
I need help with adding refs that does not trigger the stupid spam filter on Draft:Maria Laroco. DannyGurr (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

DannyGurr (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * You need to add reliable sources. The spam filter exists party to stop people using sources that are not reliable. Read WP:RS. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:58, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

I can't. They are reliable sources. Its blocked from adding refs. Could you help me? DannyGurr (talk) 15:05, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Tell me the sources here without url linking, use "www sitename com" without punctuation or other obfuscation. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

16:51:10, 8 October 2018 review of draft by GrowthApache
I need help to locate the promotional line(s), and adjust the tone in the article in order to sound like a Wikipedia article.

GrowthApache (talk) 16:51, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The reason you are having trouble identifying the promotional line(s) is because every line is promotional. The article needs a complete rewrite and entirely new sources. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:27, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * tagged for G11 deletion. Needs a while new approach IF it warrents a page. The company that created the software has a page. Expanding that might be a better path. Legacypac (talk) 06:14, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

17:38:57, 8 October 2018 review of draft by Valibrarian
This is my first wikipedia article. I am revising an outdated wikipedia article about virtual world libraries in Second Life. Most of the information in the article is old and outdated. Librarians use Second Life but also other virtual worlds. I would like suggestions on how to revise this page and am confused as to why the revision was declined. I believe all the citations are now correct. USER: Valibrarian

Valibrarian (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * It reads like an essay on virtual world libraries and not enough like a Wikipedia article which tends to have a strict format. The sources may be reliable, I can't tell. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:47, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

19:29:44, 8 October 2018 review of draft by Tom.obrien.painter
May I submit an article on a student feature film, Rainy Carolina? This film was written in ten days, filmed in 1 semester on 0 budget by a crew of students. It will premiere on 10 November 2018. Submission to film festivals, streamed on Amazon, a DVD created and sold, and a TV show are to follow. I have no desire to edit other Wiki pages. Tom.obrien.painter (talk) 19:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I can tell you with complete certainty that it will be rejected if you submit it as it is now. The article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article and have reliable references. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 19:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

23:19:48, 8 October 2018 review of submission by Bjjao
Hi. First time trying to publish on en.wiki so i need some explanation on the "No WP:INDEPENDENT" on the article in question.

There are references / links to information on https://europa.eu (Official webpage of the European Union), a research report by europarl.europa.eu (EU Parliament), and the "European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights", that all references ENIL and ENILs own reasearch. ENIL is a private member organisation, that are wholly independent of the European Union. There are also a link to the wikipedia article on "Independent_living", that explains how ENIL was founded.

Of the links under "References", 1 out of 9, are to the subjects homepage.

So i'm a little confused about the "No WP:INDEPENDENT"

Rgds Bjorn Tore/bjjao

Bjjao (talk) 23:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Greetings to you. Please note sources which would determine the organisation notability are those independent (secondary source), reliable which the sources talk about the subject "in length and in dept" and not only merely passing mentioned. Independent means the sources provided are independent from the subject. pls see below tables for info.

The sources your provided some of them are reliable and independent, but are either listing or no an in dept articles. If the article do provide info to backup the content but not the subject, it is also does not fall under source could be used to support subject's notability requirements. Also please removed attached PDF files in the body text and Wikipedia can not used to be the source.


 * (B) See below a simple summary of source types.
 * * note: Wikipedia can not be the source. Pls see WP:NOTRS - "Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy. Thus, Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose (except as sources on themselves per WP:SELFSOURCE)"


 * Thank you.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:41, 9 October 2018 (UTC)


 * (Not sure if i use these brackets/mentions correctly when i answer you:-) Thank you for the rapid reply :) I've updated the article with additional information and references, so there should be 6-7 secondary sources as defind in your answer. I would parhaps argue, that when an official EU report is written, that references research made by the subject in question 47 times, the official EU report is a secondary source on the subject ;-) But i do think the article got a bit better with the new information on Freedom Drive, and the references added;-)
 * Thanks for your help. I've resubmitted th article for review, so its just waiting and see what happens now;-)
 * Rgds bjjao/Bjorn Tore

Bjjao (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2018 (UTC)