Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 June 29

= June 29 =

10:03:01, 29 June 2019 review of submission by Pratiwicitra12
hello. I wrote my article as neutral as I can. I didn't write to promote that person.

Pratiwicitra12 (talk) 10:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

10:51:50, 29 June 2019 review of submission by XernonnE.L.
This article clearly meets the notability requirements in multiple places for both the Composer,songwriter..librettist as well as musician group. Please review the criteria for both with regards to the revised article:

Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition. Has written musical theatre of some sort (includes musicals, operas, etc.) that was performed in a notable theatre that had a reasonable run as such things are judged in their particular situation and time. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer or lyricist who meets the above criteria. Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter or lyricist that meets the above criteria. Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on his or her genre of music.

Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.

Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following: Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3] Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories. Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4] Has 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). Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.[note 5] This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.) Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition. Has 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). Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.

XernonnE.L. (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

13:54:39, 29 June 2019 review of submission by Keleperkins
I submitted a new article (on Patty Carreto) which was rejected on false grounds that I did not include any references. I did include a reference to a Los Angeles Times article from May 1987. The reviewer falsely claimed that no reference was included. Keleperkins (talk) 13:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * - hi there. The reviewer was indeed incorrect to say that it had no sources - and yours is a good one. Unlike many sports, swimming doesn't have a specific "if you did this, you're notable" set of guidelines, so we default to the BASIC/GNG requirements. In short, that requires a 2nd good source, which is not yet met. I had a look for another source myself, and couldn't find any with more than 2 lines. However if you can find one with a couple of paragraphs that would be enough to demonstrate notability. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The LA times article is available online. I took a quick glance from that article and already found the information. The reviewer not only incorrectly said there's no source, but also incorrectly failed it per WP:NSPORTS. The subject passes notability per WP:NOLYMPICS. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:41, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

15:49:43, 29 June 2019 review of submission by 213.205.241.131

 * Article has been reviewed and passed through. There's never any worry about articles being forgotten - they work their way up in our list as they age. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

17:02:41, 29 June 2019 review of draft by Bonniedust
I'm requesting help because I do not understand in what way the article violets wikipedia's standards for referencing, and even more so, how it "needs more secondary sources". Every statement in this article is backed up with a source that meets journalistic standards. It would be helpful if the reviewer could point out which parts specifically he or she deems insufficient. Thank you! Bonniedust (talk) 17:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Pinging - I would say that while a couple might have issues, there's relatively little content that would violate the bare minimum standards of inline citations and I think they are covered. Their comment however is probably more legitimate (in terms of content that meets all 4 requirements of secondary/significant coverage/independent/reliable). I was unsure about the clash however, so hopefully they can clarify.


 * For future note, the easiest route is to go to their talk page (see the linked username above the resubmit button) and ask there. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, the reason i declined the article was the fact that most of the articles only relatively focus on Dan Bodan's albums, rather than himself. It's a fairly good article, but if there were more secondary sources that focused on him and gave it significant coverage then I'd gladly accept it. Have a read of WP:THREE--Mjs1991 (talk) 04:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you . I added two more secondary sources with information on Bodan's life and activities that are not music-related. I would like to make sure that it now meets wikipedia's/your criteria?

17:38:53, 29 June 2019 review of draft by Nautiluscreed
Dear WikiProject Help Desk,

I would be very thankful, if you could give some pointers on speeding up the approval for the posting of this page. The image used for the profile was tagged as a potential copyright violation, however the owner of the image gave permission via OTRS. Could this be the reason for delays in approval?

Kind regards! Nautiluscreed (talk) 17:38, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi . The image has nothing to do with how long it takes to be reviewed. The draft has been in the pool to be reviewed for one week. The current backlog is four months. The best thing that you can do for the draft is to make it as good as possible, so that if it's approved (probably 80% of submissions never are), it's approved the first time it's reviewed. To do that, study Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and gain experience by editing existing articles. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:07, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

23:27:28, 29 June 2019 review of draft by Uipmonline2019
Uipmonline2019 (talk) 23:27, 29 June 2019 (UTC) ", her notability depends primarily on her published books. There is one substantial published book by U. Oklahoma Press, FireLight. There need to be added references to substantial 3rd party published reviews in reliable sources. She is apparently about to publish another book at the publisher, and the article would be much more likely to be acepted once it has been published and also gotten such substantial 3rd party reviews ( and do not use Amazon or book jacket tributes or anything from the publisher's site for such reviews--they aren ot independent)., I;d suggest withdrawing this now, and trying after that 2nd book has attractedsubstantial notice.  DGG ( talk ) 09:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC).