Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 February 10

= February 10 =

02:18:27, 10 February 2019 review of submission by Goleuddydd Am Magh Fada
Goleuddydd Am Magh Fada (talk) 02:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC) why did you decline my article meany

05:32:29, 10 February 2019 review of draft by Sagarshah28
My article is marked as advertisement, I have written this article from a neutral point of view.

I understand as a human there are chances that I might have added few words that seems like adding personal thoughts on the subject. I request you to pin point the areas where I can improve and make this article completely neutral.

Please note that all the information (including the age and name of parents) are taken from the third-party media sources like forbes & Entrepreneur.com.

Sagar Shah 05:32, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Welcome to AfC help desk. There not only a few words here and there which makes the article read like and advertisement but you might want to rewrite the article - pls read this three links for more info  Wikipuffery, WP:PROMO and neural point of view. In addition, content claimed needs to be support by  independent, reliable sources (pls read WP:IS and WP:RS) where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth, personal thoughts of the subject have NO place in the draft article. Thank you.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:40, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

12:00:52, 10 February 2019 review of draft by Kakonone3
I do not understand what "Username Needed" means by "Needs things from multiple reliable sources about him personally, not his work."

- There are already included several prominent sources about this composer, including personal information and his work, see references with Ricordi.com and imdb.com among others.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp_Maintz & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Nemtsov -> where are more / better "things from multiple reliable sources about him personally, not his work." here in these accepted articles? I am not able to find a difference here.

- There already exists an accepted German Wikipedia entry about this composer for several years which is structured the same way and uses the same references / sources. How come that this article was accepted but not this draft here?

- Frankly, I do not know how to further improve on the already updated draft. I hope, that with these remarks the draft finally gets published.

Many thanks for your help.

Kakonone3 (talk) 12:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi.
 * IMDb is not a reliable source.
 * Ricordi is part of Universal, so it has a vested interest in promoting Wick, who has released on one of Universal's labels. It is not independent.
 * 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 "accepted". It is not a good excuse to create similar articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best.
 * Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the German Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Also, as above, the existence of an article doesn't necessarily mean it should exist, it could mean only that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet.
 * The sources that are arms length, reliable, and secondary do not contain much depth about Wick. If he meets any criteria of WP:MUSICBIO, ensure the draft makes clear which, and support that statement with the deepest independent, reliable, secondary sources you can find. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

14:56:38, 10 February 2019 review of submission by Aalimaslam
Aalimaslam (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

17:47:05, 10 February 2019 review of draft by Tapir-sc
I am aware, that the nes article should not be am orphan. However, I can not link from other pagers to "my" new page, as this ist not yet existant/published. This looks like a catch 22 to me. Of am I suppoes to link to the new page AFTER it is finally published? Thanks, Tapir-sc (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi . You are correct, link it after the draft is accepted. Being an orphan page is not a big or urgent problem. It will have no effect on how the draft is reviewed. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:06, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapir-sc (talk • contribs) 18:09, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

19:17:22, 10 February 2019 review of draft by 68.103.78.155
The 2019 Conference USA football article needs to be moved into article space because the schedule was released last month. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 19:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

68.103.78.155 (talk) 19:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Pls add independent, reliable sources to support those content claimed which have no sources. Note: home page, user generated sites, marketing and press releases, interviews and etc are considered NOT independent and / or reliable sources. Sources from major newspapers would considered good sources.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

22:07:38, 10 February 2019 review of submission by Jakewildrick
Jakewildrick (talk) 22:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC)