Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 December 12

= December 12 =

04:51:06, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Chrisanna Jolly
I would like to re-submit this article because this person is very well known in Telecom (VAS- Value Added Service) in Myanmar. He has a lot of operator experiences and he has many friends/colleagues in Telecom field. Even not in Myanmar Country, he is also famous among foreign Telecom countries. Some of the journalist/reporter offer to interview him but he rejected. According to his nature, he don't want rose to fame among people. So, I want to do this article about him, aim that the other people can search easily about Zat's information. If other foreign Telecom company that want to invest in Myanmar can know/search about his information, it may become good effective on both side.

Chrisanna Jolly (talk) 04:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello . None of the sources now cited in the drat comes anywhere close to demonstrating the notability of Zay Yar Phyo. The reviewer, did a "rejection" not a mere "decline" meanign that the reviewer does not think any amount of editing would demonstrae notability of this person, and you should not waste your time or that of future reviewers. What would be needed to demonstrate notability is multiple independent  published reliable sources, at least three of them, each of which discusses Zay Yar Phyo in some detail. See our guideline on notability for people. How many friends Zay Yar Phyo has, or what he has accomplished. Nor is Wikipedia interested in helping publicize him to potential investors or business associates. An ordinary web page would serve that function.  Nor do interviews, even if he were to do them, help much. Interviews show what he says about himself. Wikipedia needs to know what other people, people who are not friends, family, or close associates, have already published about Zay Yar Phyo in reliable sources. Unless there is enough of that to base an article on, this will not go forward. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In fact the current cited soiurces are his linked-in page, his email, and a document from his employer, if I mam reading it correctly. None of these are independent, and the first two would not even belong in any Wkipedia article about him as supporting sources, even if good reliable sources were found. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed the ping. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but "fixing" a ping doesn't work. One must re-ping in a separately signed comment as I am now doing for . Sorry to have messed up the initial ping. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I realized after I posted but was way too lazy to fix (I signed so it pings, but totally zoned out that it needs to be an addition). I've literally told other about this before too. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

11:30:52, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Nguyễn Việt Tùng
I know this one is not attraction in wikipedia at all, but it is no meaningful to my son as well as my family. My wife is about to divorce me and I only have my son left (you could see him in the picture I uploaded), he is my whole world. So could you please kindly give us an exceptional option for our page could be approved?

Me and my family thank you so much!!! Nguyễn Việt Tùng (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is based on reliable sources and we do not make exceptions for personal pages. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

11:38:45, 12 December 2019 review of submission by John19993
John19993 (talk) 11:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

i am requesting a review on this article becuase i believe in it's Notability. The article contains facks and is worthy of it's own page, i also believe as time goes by people will only add to this article. Please consider a re-review.

Thank you

Kind regards John
 * I'm afraid the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 12:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

15:30:02, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Chamith01
Chamith01 (talk) 15:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

16:06:06, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Texas Black Walnut
Texas Black Walnut (talk) 16:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC) How do you link external sources to your article?


 * Did you read the Help:Referencing for beginners page linked at your draft? — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to cite sources. (All sources are external, since Wikipedia, being user-generated, is not a reliable source). Sources need not be online. When referencing a source, there should always be a bibliographic description of it, but there may or may not be a URL link to it.


 * A related but different concept is an external link. Like references, they are external, but they are always online and are generally not sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Request on 16:59:56, 12 December 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by AlliePippy
I have tried twice to get an article for a band, that I'm a big fan of, published. I added more references the second time, as that's what I translated the reason for the first rejection to be. The second rejection says it doesn't meet the criteria. However, when I read the criteria, the band does meet it.

The list Criteria for musicians and ensembles has 12 points that the band must meet at least one of. The band, I am trying to create the article for, meets several. I thought I had gotten this across in my article, but perhaps I haven't?

Could use some clear direction, and layman's terms preferred, as I find the responses that Wikipedia sends back a bit like trying to decipher legal jargon. I appreciate any time and help you can give to help me get this article published, as I feel this band deserves some notoriety.

Kind Regards, Allie

AlliePippy (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You haven't made clear which of the criteria at WP:NMUSIC this band meets? You only have one source which looks reliable to me which is Facebook, Spotify and their own website do not contribute to notability. Theroadislong (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The criteria you mention at WP:NBAND are not strict rules. Firstly, WP:GNG is the "king" for determining presumed notability. The band criteria simply help narrow and slightly expand these based on years of consensus and experience with other articles. The key introductory sentence says that the subject "may be notable" not that it definitely will be. If you don't have multiple reliable independent sources, then it mostly doesn't matter what additional criteria are met from supplementary notability guidelines for specific subject areas, because we can't write enough content using proper source. From those in the draft,  looks okayish, but short and focused on one event, while half the content is by the band themselves. May be  could be suitable if you can show that author's credentials as an established reliable reviewer. All the rest of the sources fail one of more criteria from WP:GNG. Also, can you specify exactly which NBAND criteria does this pass in your opinion? —  HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. More questions...

--They produced 2 albums with Linus Entertainment. My understanding is that Linus is a more important indie label.
 * 1) 5Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).

-- Here is a list of where their music has been featured and used very prominently. The links to articles I included, talk about many of these. Outer Limits (television) Smallville (television) EA MLS Soccer (video game) Triple Play MLB (video game) SSX Tricky (video game) WWE Day of Reckoning (video game) Molson Canadian (national ad) Ford Canada (national ad) Vancouver Canucks (game play) Minnesota Wild (game play) Vancouver Giants (entrance theme) Jet Boy (motion picture) A Bug and a Bag of Weed (motion picture) CBC Hockey Night in Canada CFL Football TSN TSN Hockey Theme Musique Plus Intro Fox Sports
 * 1) 10Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).

--Their music was on major radio stations in the past. Their new song is now being played on The Bear.
 * 1) 11Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.

Why are the interview/articles I provided links to, not eligible? Aren't Allmusic.com with Artist Biography by Jason MacNeil, last.fm/music/shocore/+wik, Piquenewsmagazine.com, all credible?

[User:AlliePippy|AlliePippy]] (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi . You may be able to make an argument that Linus Entertainment is a more important indie label. It wouldn't have counted as one when it released ShoCore's first album, because the label had just been formed that year, but now nine of the first ten artists they list on their roster are notable.


 * If ShoCore's albums are what make them notable, then you're burying the lead. The first two sentences of the draft do a good job of establishing context: what, where, who. But they should also explain why the topic is notable, e.g. "... known for releasing two albums on label Linus Entertainment."


 * The draft's independent sources don't support their music being in rotation on a major network or performed for a work of media that is notable. With better sources you might be able to make a case for these criteria or others.


 * Last.fm, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. The allmusic biography is independent and reliable, but at under 100 words, it's really short. Pique is reliable. Whether it is independent depends on how strictly one interprets the exclusion "except for the following: ... publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves". Some reviewers may also discount it because it's a small town outlet with a limited audience. An article in the Vancouver Sun or The Globe and Mail would carry more weight. See WikiProject Albums/Sources for a list of sources Wikipedians have found useful in writing about albums and musicians. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

18:25:08, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Codeauth
Hello, we are attempting to create a page for a national startup accelerator event named CodeLaunch. CodeLaunch is a non-profit organization that hosts an annual competition among startup organizations from all over the world where applicants pitch their idea to a review panel, an audience, and a handful of qualified judges. There is no application fee or surrendered equity for applying. CodeLaunch is now entering its 8th year and we are attempting to restore the Wikipedia page, which cites that all references are from within its own organization - giving the impression that this page is self-promoting. There are numerous local and national publications that have shared articles about CodeLaunch. Would including these references make a stronger case for the page to be approved? Any additional tips for approval would be greatly appreciated.

Codeauth (talk) 18:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Who is "we"? Wikipedia accounts are for single person use only. The draft is just blatant advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 18:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

18:58:52, 12 December 2019 review of draft by Andy Halper
{{SAFESUBST:Void|

FIRST TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING HELP ON THE LINE BELOW THIS LINE. Take as many lines as you need. -->}

I want to confirm that I have properly submitted my article for review and where I should look to see if it has been published. I know this will take time. Thanks.

Andy Halper (talk) 18:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Two comments, first please follow the recommendations for referencing given, secondly if it is published, the draft page will be redirected to the published page and I that should also put a note on your talk page.Naraht (talk) 19:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

19:26:08, 12 December 2019 review of submission by Andy Halper
Andy Halper (talk) 19:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I've made some changes - placed references under reference title and added before and after each reference but I'm really not sure what else I need to do. Thanks.
 * Creating a new article is one of the most difficult tasks on Wikipedia, you really need to read WP:REFB for help with formatting sources and you also need to ascertain whether your subject is actually notable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)