Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 September 12

= September 12 =

06:34:24, 12 September 2018 review of submission by Xaviertherapper
Xaviertherapper (talk) 06:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure why this was rejected again. Xavier is a signed artist under a major label and is currently on tour in Europe. We made this page for his fans to look more into his past once he's left their city. If you look though the reference links you'll see tour dates etc. Xavier was also mentioned on Billboard, SlugMag and Complex News/Media. Before I submitted the last article I browsed over other artist in his range with way less notifiable features and and noticed they have Wikipedia pages. This is very unfortunate, I've written articles for way less notable people then Xavier with no trouble. Seems like this young African American artist from Utah still can't catch a break even if his life depended on it. Thanks anyways, Morris Plaza - Artist Manager


 * pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Xaviertherapper. You write that you've written articles for other people too, evidently not under your account. The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account", so you need to disclose all other accounts you've used, and any conflicts of interest you have with topics edited with those accounts. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

09:05:15, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Bestow123
How do I resubmit article for review?

Bestow123 (talk) 09:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . There is a blue "Resubmit" button in the big pink box at the top of the draft. The depth of coverage in the sources is insufficient to demonstrate notability, so there isn't much point in resubmitting unless you can find more substantial sources that are also independent and reliable. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

10:02:23, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Ninjamukesh
Ninjamukesh (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

10:42:02, 12 September 2018 review of submission by Shankaruppusamy
I have submitted the page earlier and it was rejected for the lack of structure and references. I have edited the page again. Please review and let me know if this qualifies or to be improved further. Shankaruppusamy (talk) 10:42, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . The draft fails to demonstrate that the subject is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Also, Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

11:16:20, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Fuchs ufficiale
There is a Wikipedia article titled Delta del Po which is in Italian, Veneto, and French (among a few other languages) and I think it should exist in English, too. I tried to start a translation of the page, but I was informed that there is a subsection of another page (Po(River)) that already covers the Po River Delta. I am glad that there is information on the Po River Delta online but I think the page of Delta del Po should be available in English as well.

Thank you for your assistance!

Fuchs ufficiale (talk) 11:16, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . To justify a separate article, you need more than the one paragraph in User:Fuchs ufficiale/sandbox/Po Delta. The best approach would be to start by expanding Po (river). If and when that section becomes long enough to stand on its own, and too large to continue as part of the river article, it can be spun out into a new article Po Delta. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:39, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

12:25:07, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Adrian Dern
Hello,

i created an article about the "Adolf-Wuerth-Center for the History of Psychology" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adolf-Wuerth-Center_for_the_History_of_Psychology), which has been classified as a draft. There is actually already a german version of that institution and I only wanted to translate and create an "international"/english version of it. Unfortunately I am not able to post the article to the normal Wikipedia-Site and it says that I have to wait for a review that can take more than two months. I actually don't think that there's any necessity to review the article, because of enough sources etc. I would be glad, if you could help me to move the article.

Sincerely A.

Adrian Dern (talk) 12:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

16:59:18, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Mythbusterbuilding1
Mythbusterbuilding1 (talk) 16:59, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

How can I add links on the image section?

17:05:44, 12 September 2018 review of submission by Navysaylorgirl
I

I apologize for perhaps seeming difficult with this. Regarding Worldbruce's exercise in removing the non-neutral data, I understand why some of the citations are considered non-neutral, but I'm having a hard time understanding why a citation from the SEC isn't considered neutral. Also, why is a website showing that Proman is a Board member considered non-neutral, when the "fact" in question is whether he is a Board member or not? I'm confused as to the issue of using NAPW and PDN sources, since those are the companies he founded / worked for, and furthermore, those are acceptable sources in other cases (the NAPW site) to which a search of "Matthew Proman" on Wiki currently links to. Finally, why is Proman suddenly considered not notable, when there was a "Matthew Proman" Wiki page for well over two years, using some of the same citations as the page I'm attempting to put up, and using language that was certainly less neutral? I was attempting to produce a much fairer page, than what originally existed. So why is my attempt so problematic?

Also, I haven't figured out how to respond to the original editor to ask them directly, so I'm not trying to circumvent them. If someone could tell me how to do that, I would -- gladly. TYNavysaylorgirl (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Navysaylorgirl (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * For an explanation of Wikipedia's quaint communication mechanism, see Help:Talk pages.


 * Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article does not mean it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or that it has been in any way "approved". It may simply mean that no one has gotten around to deleting it, or perhaps even reading it yet. Proman was never notable. The biography of him that once existed did not follow Wikipedia's rules, and is not an excuse to create an article about him now. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why.


 * Securities and Exchange Commission filings are not produced by the SEC, but by the company that is the subject of the filing. In this case, the report is produced by a company merging with Proman's company, so it is not an arms-length source.


 * It's important to distinguish between independence and reliability. An organization's website is a reliable source for Proman being a board member, but is not an independent source. They print about him whatever he tells them to print about him. The same goes for NAPW and PDN. Reliable non-independent sources may be used, but the bulk of any article must come from independent sources. Moreover, only independent sources can establish notability. Absent reliable, independent sources that contain signficant coverage of Proman, he is not a suitable subject for an encyclopedia article, which renders moot the question of whether a particular source is reliable for a particular fact - Wikipedia should not have an article about him. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, so then The Daily News, HuffPo and NYT would be acceptable independent sources to establish notability? (I'm hoping I did this right.) Navysaylorgirl (talk) 15:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This HuffPost page is not independent, it's Proman's author profile, written by Proman. This NY Daily News article is independent, but is not significant coverage, it's a one-sentence trivial mention. This New York Times article, which mentions him as a defendant in a sexual harassment lawsuit, is independent, but is also trivial coverage. It's reliable, and would no doubt end up in his biography if one existed, but neither it nor the other two do anything to establish notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

21:02:03, 12 September 2018 review of draft by Tomas Ingram
Tomas Ingram (talk) 21:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC) I don't understand why this article was rejected. The person in question was a silent film actor, and I included a reference citation from Variety, and also findagrave.com, which shows his tombstone. Is he not important enough for a Wikipedia article? or do I have to prove he existed? Please advise.
 * Tomás, You need to provide varied sources, preferably reliable, independent ones suhc as in media and/or academia. He certainly seems somewhat notable as per the number of films we have articles for that he's listed as being in the cast of in the filmography section I have added. FindAGrave simply shows he existed. imdb can be editted by anyone and as a result doesn't cut it as a primary source. He doesn't appear to be very well known in 2018 but there does seem to be alot of wirrten material about him from his era which is where you should ty searching. Google Books and Archive.org, I suggest might be good places to look. If you require help with adding the sources I am happy to help. UaMaol (talk) 02:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC)