Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 September 30

= September 30 =

05:04:58, 30 September 2019 review of draft by Money12122
Money12122 (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I’m trying to fix up the page So Fresh: The Hits of Summer 2017 + Best of 2016, so please check out how it’s going now. By the way, do you mind if you help me with the page?

08:02:30, 30 September 2019 review of submission by 180.151.75.66
Updated content. This is not for advertising. Now it has been edited, please review.

180.151.75.66 (talk) 08:02, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

08:52:38, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Iamatulbhuriya
Iamatulbhuriya (talk) 08:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Not all business's are sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 09:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

09:29:07, 30 September 2019 review of draft by BulbousBow56
I have published now already two times a description about a German shipping company twice in my sandbox whereas both time my draft got rejected. The remarks made were (1) sources don't seem sufficient resp. neutral enough and (2) the article may read like an advertisemen.

However, in my second draft I included various well-konown newspaper (FT, industry newspaper Tradewinds) articles about the company. Still, it got rejected. Furthermore, as I like to describe the company abolsutely neutral but still give most important facts (e.g. fleet size, services provided, etc.), I'm not sure what the actual problem ist - after comparing my drat with different published wiki's on other corporations, I don't see any difference.

Your kind help and advice will be very much appreciated!!

BulbousBow56 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:BulbousBow56. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:27, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

09:59:00, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Iamatulbhuriya
Iamatulbhuriya (talk) 09:59, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Already answered above. Theroadislong (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Request on 10:07:00, 30 September 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Leuce
The article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cafetran_Espresso was rejected and the reason given is that too many references are from blogs. But I don't see any blogs in the references (perhaps what qualifies as a "blog" has changed). Could anyone please tell me which of those references are "blogs"? User Theroadislong also commented that the YouTube references should be removed -- why is that? -- leuce (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

leuce (talk) 10:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Well there is this one http://cafetran4mac.blogspot.com/ which has a clue in the address and is also a primary source, Wikipedia requires reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

10:58:21, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Serenelife
Dear esteemed Wikipedia admin, I do believe this draft should be reviewed properly again to be included in Wikipedia. The references has been updated with maximum number of corrections. Every link has been thoroughly checked with corrections being made. The draft was seen with maximum times for improvements based on the feedback given for the previous page that is unfortunately deleted. Every occupation presented in this draft  has been found proof to support the draft keeping in mind of the deleted article for improvisation. Do guide if any mistakes with this one. Every help that Wikipedia stated has been followed very carefully. Kindly do the amendments required and pleading to help in this submission as lots of hardwork been put. There is no partiality done for anyone nor spamming with this article. This draft was created as I noticed the page was removed previously due to reason that was very challenging. I took up my utmost time to find those references. Do guide for a proper article and giving this draft a considerable chance to be included in Wikipedia. Hereby, submitted with a new improved correction with my humblest and pure request to accept this. Thank you very much and every help will deeply appreciated. Do guide in this page correction to enable producing better articles in future.

Million thanks & do reconsider this draft for resubmission into an article Serenelife (talk) 10:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The draft was rejected yesterday and there has been no improvement since then. Theroadislong (talk) 11:12, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I need help regarding my Sandbox article
Hello everyone

this is my draft User:JoomHayden/sandbox

is this page ready to publish?

help me

JoomHayden (talk) 10:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It reads in a rather promotional manner, more like a CV. Wikipedia articles need to be written in a neutral tone. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I have done some changes on this page, can you suggest more needed changes or improvements.

Draft:Shiv_Mangal_Sharma

JoomHayden (talk) 11:07, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

13:04:10, 30 September 2019 review of submission by 216.8.157.70
Please see notoriety in Bulgarian Wikipedia:https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80_%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87

and Serbian Biography. Thank you!

216.8.157.70 (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

13:09:12, 30 September 2019 review of submission by 216.8.157.70
216.8.157.70 (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

17:48:13, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Joeseph Sparrow
Just wondering why my submission was considered not notable enough? If it needs more html references I could probably find some. The guidelines say the subject does not need to be famous so I'm not sure what the problem is? Just because it is not well known to other areas of the country or world? Other larger famous companies are listed like Bell MTS. Joeseph Sparrow (talk) 17:48, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The company needs to pass WP:CORP which means it needs to be notable, not famous, ie multiple independent sources have been written about them in-depth. Theroadislong (talk) 18:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

18:51:39, 30 September 2019 review of submission by 75.112.85.189
Fitness has been around for several years at this point, had countless interviews, multiple tours, a handful of singles and music videos, and a third album on the way. Social media accounts of the band and two of their band members are verified.

75.112.85.189 (talk) 18:51, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

19:10:16, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Ontarrio
I would like the girl group ARIAZ to have their own Wikipedia article. They are debuting on October 24, it was confirmed today by their agency Rising Star. They have already revealed teaser photos, album name and the debut date. I don't understand why the group isn't notable enough for Wikipedia. Ontarrio (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ontarrio It's a bit too soon we are going to have to wait until they actually debut and get some reviews about their album. After that feel free to come back and create a draft again.  Whispering ( t ) 00:41, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

19:33:06, 30 September 2019 review of submission by Joeseph Sparrow
I added some independent, significant, verifiable, second hand sources to the mix. Tell me If I am spamming cause I do not want to get banned. Joeseph Sparrow (talk) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Request on 19:57:59, 30 September 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Lawzilla
Hello! I am working on editing the above referenced submission which has been declined with reference to a non-neutral point of view and unreliable sources. Can you please kindly advise as to which sources are problematic and resulting in the decline of the submission? I reviewed Wikipedia's verifiability and notability pages, and our sources seem to fit within the requirements - especially with regard to the subject matter being cited and not fitting the criteria for a circular reference.

Any further feedback would be appreciated as I continue the editing process.

Thank you!

Lawzilla (talk) 19:57, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

20:16:58, 30 September 2019 review of submission by LM TMRW
Hi there, just wondering if I can get some more specific guidance on the TMRW page draft. They've been covered in multiple news segments and obviously I don't want to resubmit until this is 100% in compliance with Wikipedia's notability guidelines--but it would be helpful to know exactly what would make them notable enough to included.

(Thought it was a timely addition particularly as news stories have been stacking up regarding IVF mix-ups and embryo losses and this is the only technology in the U.S. that is testing in clinics as a solution for these specific issues--but this is not laid out in the draft as we wanted to remain neutral and non-promotional).

Appreciate any feedback you can give me, thank you!

LM TMRW (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi The draft's only source worth citing is the Institutional Investor article. The others lack independence or are not significant coverage. It would be highly unusual for any two-year old private company to be notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). Most businesses are not. You may find WP:BFAQ informative.


 * Rejection is meant to be final, to convey that the topic is not notable. No amount of editing can fix that. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:43, 1 October 2019 (UTC)