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

= September 18 =

15:05:17, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Mchargcenter
Is it possible to have multiple drafts going at once? I'd like to be working on my next article while my first is awaiting review... Mchargcenter (talk) 15:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC) Mchargcenter (talk) 15:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I moved your current sandbox to the draftspace so you can work on it there! Bkissin (talk) 18:24, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

15:45:02, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Ithorpe508
I am requesting help with an article I am writing about an up and coming Hip/pop musician. The artist doesn't have extensive information in one place but rather a variety of platforms including his own cite. One of the comments an editor left on my submission was that I didn't have musical notability and general notability but I looked into those and I don't know enough about it to fix the problem.

Ithorpe508 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi citations must be independent of the subject and the subjects promoters. Read WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC for more details. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:47, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

22:46:11, 18 September 2018 review of draft by Rontl
Rontl (talk) 22:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I made some edits and included information about the fact that large corporations such as "Best Buy, Cisco, Dell, FedEx, Google, GoTRG, Home Depot, HP, Intel, and Walmart" all pay good money every year to maintain their corporate memberships in the organization, and serve on the board. These companies would not pay for corporate memberships and have their busy staff participate in the organization if they were not getting value out of their participation in the organization.

Also, the organization has created a new product-identification barcode standard which has been approved by the MH10, the organization given jurisdiction over barcodes by ANSI. This new barcode standard has been chosen for use in bringing devices onto the Internet of Things by the Open Connectivity Foundation.

I can understand the requirement for profile articles about people, because other people like to read articles about famous or notable people, so many such articles are written every day. But I'm not convinced that's always the case about organizations. If the hard and fast rule is that you can't have a Wikipedia page until someone writes an article that is only about your organization, then I guess our next job is to get someone to write such an article. Although, I have looked at pages about other organizations where they don't have an article profiling the organization, just a mention in an article. It seems to me that such an article is only one proxy for the real question as to whether an organization is significant enough to merit a page.

Short of such an article, are there other ways that the significance of the organization can be demonstrated? As I drafted it, I was trying hard to stick to the admonitions for brevity in the instructions for creating pages. If there is anything else I could or should add, I would be happy to. Thanks Rontl (talk) 22:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi the requirement is only for significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Unless the company has a multi-billion dollar turnover then you do need to show it meets the requirements outlined in WP:ORGCRITE. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:43, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Rontl (talk) 23:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying, but I guess I still need some clarification of "significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources." My draft article contains four references to the organization in the Wall Street Journal, plus Forbes. I can't really think of a more significant place for a business entity to be mentioned than the WSJ and Forbes. I also list references in industry-focused magazines like the Supply Chain Management Review, plus citations of the organization's research in leading peer-reviewed academic research journals. If those are not enough, I guess I need more clarification of the standard, because to the lay person, the WSJ and Forbes and the rest seem like they would qualify as "significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources." Thanks.


 * Hi . The adjective "significant" modifies the word "coverage", not the word "source". Approximate synonyms for significant coverage would be in-depth coverage or considerable coverage. It's the breadth and depth of what has been written about the topic, not a reflection of who has written about it or where it has been published. A book on the topic would be significant coverage, as would a chapter, or a meaty article. Forbes and The Wall Street Journal each contain a single sentence that briefly mentions the organization in passing. That is trivial coverage, and does nothing to establish notability.


 * Notability is not a measure of importance or worthiness. The reason for the notability threshold is that Wikipedia articles are required to be summaries of what has been written in independent, reliable, secondary sources. To be able to write a whole encyclopedia article (something more than a few sentences), the sources being summarized must contain a fairly substantial amount of information about the topic. Many organizations doing fine and valuable work never attract substantial attention from the world at large. There shouldn't be Wikipedia articles about them. If someone creates one, it should be deleted. See WP:BFAQ. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

23:04:51, 18 September 2018 review of draft by WikiBPAN
Thank you for the feedback, I will work on your suggestions. I really think he should be in Wikipedia. He was behind the research that conducted to the establishment of Gullah Geechee Corridor. Can you Help me to understand why the cites are unreliable. There is more articles related to him and his work but I don't want to insert them without knowing what is consider unreliable. Thank you! WikiBPAN (talk) 23:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi You should study Identifying reliable sources. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:56, 19 September 2018 (UTC)