Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 October 25

= October 25 =

06:20:45, 25 October 2019 review of draft by 94.74.228.98
Hi, I will probably need help with understanding what is wrong with the sources... All claims made in the draft are supported by sources and the sources are external and independent.

Thank you in advance.

94.74.228.98 (talk) 06:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * For starters, remove the entire supported file section as thats not encyclopedic. In terms of sources: most of them are not indepedent. The Forbes article is a paid post. The Slator article is based solely off a press release. The CSA research doesn't even seem to mention the company. The EUTAC article is just the CEO talking about the company. A patent does not usually establish notability. No clue what the SaaS thing is, but thats not even a source. Nimidzi is not a reliable source. All in all, none of the sources seem to establish notability. What you really need is unpaid coverage in the media. If sources cannot be met to backup WP:42 (a summary on notability), then the subject is not notable and can't be included. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

07:12:31, 25 October 2019 review of draft by Toe Aung Lwin
My first article "Aung Khant" had been rejected for two times. Reasons for rejections are different from each time.

1) Article is dependent on the one source, teacircleoxfor.com (reviewed by Hughesdarren) 2) Sources written by the subject does not prove notability. Please add more independent, reliable resources that are about him and not his elections. (reviewed by Willsome)

Before I submit this article, I would like to seek assistance to guide me to correct the above errors in my article to void any rejections.

Toe Aung Lwin (talk) 07:12, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , Howdy hello! This article needs its sources cleaned up. Wikipedia cannot be used as a source. Anything written by the subject is generally not suitable. Tea Circle Oxford seems to possibly be a blog, which is not a reliable source. What is needed is media coverage of the subject that is independent of the subject and is reliable. Think articles in newspapers, magazines, that sort of thing.
 * The article also reads far too promotional, it uses a lot of superlatives and peacock words. Please clean up the tone as well to ensure that it is suitable. Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 07:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

10:32:32, 25 October 2019 review of submission by Kit Lewis Research
Hi I've been trying to publish this page on the Test of Mathematics for University Admission for some months. Two months ago, following advice from yourselves, I made a radical edit of my draft, removing much of the text which seemed to be making it unacceptable, shortening the entry and making it read more like an Encyclopaedia entry as suggested.

The page has not been published, neither have I had any further feedback. As this is the first page I am attempting to publish out, could I get a little more support please? Thanks Kit Lewis

Kit Lewis Research (talk) 10:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi . Rejection is meant to be final, to indicate that the topic has no hope, but Boothsift's answer to your April question suggests that they thought there was a possibility that the topic could be salvaged. Therefore I've re-submitted the draft on your behalf. The current backlog is 4-5 months, so you can expect another review by some time in March 2020. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

11:54:02, 25 October 2019 review of submission by Hobgoblin4ever
Hello, I managed to add my references in the text. Does this now prove that what I write about the plot and gameplay are taken from independent sources? We are a small company with only one new game and a small, but growing community of players. I do not have dozens of reviews and articles about our game in my disposal. I was looking at the list of reliable sources from wikipedia's article WP:VG/RS and most of them have PS or console games only. How many times can I try submitting my article and not risking being banned by your team or reviewers? Also, do I have to be asking a new question every time, or is there a way to have a communication with the same reviewer every time? Thank you for your time!

Hobgoblin4ever (talk) 11:54, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , you can contact any editor you wish to on their talk page, and discuss whatever you wish to, unless they specifically tell you to go away. So, you can check who reviewed your draft and ask them follow-ups. As long as the draft isn't rejected, but only declined, you can resubmit, provided you try and address the reason for the previous decline. If your resubmissions get unproductive, I'm sure someone will tell you that. We are a volunteer community interested in building an encyclopedia funded by donations alone, righting great wrongs doesn't feature into our scope, so if you can't find enough independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject, I'm afraid the best advice would be to just wait for that to eventually happen, there are other ways, I'm sure, to promote one's business. Regards!  Usedtobecool  TALK ✨ 14:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

12:07:17, 25 October 2019 review of submission by Ieshahogans
I am the Manager of Kyshawn "IamYoungHitta" Wyman

Ieshahogans (talk) 12:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi . Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. The best place to put that statement is on your user page.
 * Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Because no amount of editing can fix that problem, volunteers do not intend to review the draft again. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:56, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

12:35:12, 25 October 2019 review of submission by Kundabe
Hello, I submitted this draft for review and it was rejected twice. I read the reasons for the second rejection >> Here, but I don't understand. Someone please help explain or help edit. Thanks Kundabe (talk) 12:35, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , it means there is no way to improve the article to make it acceptable as the subject itself isn't notable enough for inclusion to the encyclopedia. The reviewer said they could find only one acceptable source. If you find two or three more, you could make a case that the subject is indeed notable. Only then, would it make sense to try and fix other issues with the draft.  Usedtobecool  TALK ✨ 14:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello  Usedtobecool , right before asking for help here, I had just added about four or more sources. How do I make make a case? Thanks Kundabe (talk) 14:22, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I was just passing by, and am not really sure. I guess you could try pinging the rejecting reviewer on the draft's talk page and listing the new sources for them to evaluate there. Help desk regulars might be able give you a certain answer. Wait for them, or try mine out, your call. Regards!  Usedtobecool  TALK ✨ 14:39, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi . The draft was declined once (allowing the possibility of improvement and resubmission), and then rejected (which doesn't give you the option of resubmitting).


 * The reviewer said none of the sources cited by the draft is reliable. They may be mistaken about New Vision. It's arguable whether that particular story is reliable for supporting the statement "He is mostly known for his flashy lifestyle", but it would be reliable for the statement "He is known for letting locals take selfies with a Lamborghini he parked on a street in Kampala". Regardless of reliability, its 84 words do not constitute significant coverage, so it doesn't help establish notability.


 * The remaining sources (Bigeye, ShowBiz Uganda, Red Pepper, Nairobi Wire, E-News Ug, Sqoop, How We Biz, and Blizz) should be removed unless you can establish a consensus that they are reliable. The place to discuss reliability is the Reliable sources/Noticeboard. As long as the draft cites any unreliable source, it is pointless to ask for reconsideration. If, after removing all the unreliable sources, you rewrite the draft using at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the topic, then you may ask here that the draft be re-evaluated. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:26, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

16:33:16, 25 October 2019 review of submission by 104.249.68.84
104.249.68.84 (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC) Is Battle for Dream Island just not notable enough to have its own article? --104.249.68.84 (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Only subjects that meet the notability requirements (see WP:42) can have an article. This article seems to have no reliable sources written about it, which is a requirement for notability. Alas, it seems this article is probably not notable. I know it feels bad to have an article you wrote and spent time on get rejected. If you can find sources, let me know and I'll reevaluate. If you have any other questions, leave a note on my talk lage. Smooth sailing, Captain Eek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

18:21:27, 25 October 2019 review of submission by Triple7PRasst
We work for Ivan Dudynsky's PR team and would love to get this page submitted for publication. What can we do to get the article approved? Triple7PRasst (talk) 18:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The draft has been rejected as the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. There is nothing further you can do until he is notable enough to pass notability guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 15:49, 26 October 2019 (UTC)