Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 April 2

= April 2 =

00:13:00, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Yyakilles
How do you go on corvel.com

Yyakilles (talk) 00:13, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * click me. If your aim was to create an article in Wikipedia about that website, please check that it meets WP:NWEBSITE and then read WP:YFA which should help you. If you have a specific question, please ask again. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

02:44:00, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Basketball1923
Basketball1923 (talk) 02:44, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

03:01:42, 2 April 2020 review of draft by Articlegooroo
I've also contacted the person that wrote the note, but I also wanted to put a note here to get as much feedback as possible for this article!

I'm unclear why this article seems to read like an advertisement. Most of the articles are direct references to the existence of the company and the product, with the primary article, being a full page feature in the New York Times (definitely not an advertisement), which goes into detailed length about the formation of the company and the founder.

The article that was referred to, the USA Today article, was grouped with 9 other articles to provide an example that the products of this company have been covered extensively in major, established outlets with extensive reach over a long period of time, which they indeed have. This statement does not even say whether they are positive or negative.

It seems that a major company such as this, that is available around the country and has multiple products that have been spoken about by major outlets, deserves to have an article, no? I see other similar companies, like Halo Top Creamery (there's a full list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_cream_brands) all have pages.

Also I might add that this page also lists major legal controversy (which I thought was also relevant) to illustrate neutrality as well.

Thanks again for your help! Trying to understand what needs to be changed to make this publishable - I'm unclear from this statement. I came across this company while reading Lisa Lillien's page (a major influencer) and thought there should be a connection.

Best!

ArticlegoorooArticlegooroo (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Articlegooroo (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Direct references to the existence of the company do not establish that this company meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Wikipedia should only summarize what independent reliable sources state about the company, not merely confirm the existence of the company. Press releases and other routine coverage do not establish notability. The NYT piece consists of an interview with company staff, which is not an independent source. 331dot (talk) 09:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

04:31:08, 2 April 2020 review of submission by MetaGary
MetaGary (talk) 04:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Would be helpful to know which sections of the Metaeconomics submission are too much like an essay, and which are enough like an encyclopedia. Overall, it was modeled on the Microeconomics site, which in many sections reads the same, e.g. in the Assumptions and Definitions. So, I am having difficulty seeing how it differs, that drastically, as in it all reads like an essay? Perhaps some sections could be changed, and I am certainly willing to work on those: Which ones?

It it very difficult if not impossible to edit something without more specific suggestions.
 * It's about style and tone. The draft is telling us what the subject is, when it should be summarizing what independent reliable sources say about the subject. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

05:48:45, 2 April 2020 review of submission by 2605:E000:1525:4B3C:565:CB79:A37:627B
Cohen is an extremely well known real estate entrepreneur, with press features across the board. These extend far past industry publications or mere mentions in national papers - he has full-page profiles, detailing his personal life, as well as his career. Feel free to Google, the evidence is there. 2605:E000:1525:4B3C:565:CB79:A37:627B (talk) 05:48, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The "profiles" you refer to seem to consist of interviews with Mr. Cohen, which are primary sources and do not establish that he meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia should only summarize what others say about Mr. Cohen, not what he says about himself. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

10:08:12, 2 April 2020 review of submission by JomilchFrandem
}} Would someone be willing to take a look at this draft I've created for a journalist? Hope everything is on track? Thank you!

JomilchFrandem (talk) 10:08, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * As noted by the reviewer, you do not have independent reliable sources to support the content of the article and establish that this presenter meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia articles should primarily summarize what independent sources state- you have only provided sources from or related to the presenter's employer. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment. Have a query: She is one of the most well-known anchors in the country, working with a major national broadcaster, but there is no independent stories about her, as she's just a news anchor/reporter, that can meet Wiki's notability guidelines. However, she's notable in the country, a web/video search would show that, and among a handful of Indian women anchors (already under-represented on Wikipedia). What should one do in that situation, where primary sources remain the most reliable? Could reconsider it again, perhaps? Thanks for your time, in any case. JomilchFrandem (talk) 10:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid there is nothing to reconsider, if there are no independent sources we cannot have an article about her. Theroadislong (talk) 10:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The only source I have come up with is this which says "Abhijit Iyer-Mitra files defamation suit against NDTV journalist Gargi Rawat for ‘liking’ a tweet" but this isn't in-depth coverage and doesn't help with notability. Sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 10:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

11:52:38, 2 April 2020 review of submission by AlejandroLeloirRey
Hallo, I am puzzled. I was told that the references I used are weak. Well, there are thousands of articles about Carlo Masi (especially about him becoming a professor) but I am not sure which one and how many I should pick. I wrote a version of this bio to include a good deal of these sources from all around the world but I was told it sounded too much celebrative. So i decided to remove them. Now I am told that Carlo Masi is not relevant enough for wikipedia. He has been the face and most important model of the studio he has worked for (colt studio). In fact, he is the only Colt Man Emeritus and he is on the cover of the celebrative book of the 40th anniversary of the company. Moreover, one of the most important italian writer (Walter Siti) wrote his biography (the publisher is Rizzoli, one of the top 3 publisher in italy), he has been the on tv shows in Germany, italy, Greece, Spain and other country and articles and interviews of Carlo Masi appeared all around the globe. This is very much for a gay porn star. All the gay porn stars bio I consulted to have an idea of how such a biography should be written are way less relevant, most of them did nothing apart from porn and even in the porn they didn't do anything more important than Carlo did. Also their references are usually one or two web sites. I suspect that this doesn't mean much here but Carlo's biography is on wikipedia in other languages (Spanish, French, italian and Polish), isn't there a common way to judge if a bio is relevant? I will appreciate any piece of advice or explanation you want to give me. Thank you very much for your time. AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . Writing a new Wikipedia article is the most difficult, time consuming, and frustrating tasks a novice editor can attempt. It is much easier and more productive to edit existing articles, almost all of which need improvement.


 * Of everything you write above, the only thing that would make me reconsider whether the reviewer was correct in rejecting the draft is the book-length biography of Masi published by Rizzoli. That would be the strongest source, but the draft uses it only to support that the book exists, not to support any biographical information about Masi. If you wish to continue with the draft, I recommend rewriting it so that it is based mainly on Siti's book.


 * Editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. So use at least two other such sources, but not too many. Quality is more important than quantity. You don't want your best sources lost among poorer ones. Do not cite LavishStarsInsight or similar celebrity websites, they are not reliable sources. Do not cite Goodreads. Being user-generated, it is not reliable either. Avoid tabloid newspapers such as the New York Post, they have a poor 2reputation among Wikipedians. Although you may cite interviews of Masi, they won't help demonstrate notability unless there is significant independent analysis by the interviewer. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * hey, wow, thank you. It is the first time I am given such a complete and satisfying answer here. thank you. I still have some doubts. The first one is, are you sure that Walter Siti's (the author is one of the most recognized writer in Italy and winner of Strega Prize 2013) book could be used as a basis for the bio? its written in Italian and not consulted on line (not for free, the book just came out so it is out for being sold and it takes years for a book to be translated). There is a preview of the first few pages of the book online and different articles on newspapers about the book, would that be enough to use the book as a main source?. I read italian and I read the book, should I refer to the exact page or chapter or should I generally refer to the book? as a source for specific facts of his porn career would you consider https://avn.com/ and https://www.xbiz.com/ enough reliable?  --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I am sure that Siti's biography can be the basis of a draft about Masi. A Wikipedia article should represent fairly and proportionately all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. Siti's biography is the most significant view of Masi, so it should be the main basis of any article. What language the book is in and whether it is online is irrelevant to acceptability, although it could affect how long it takes to be reviewed. Reviewers who don't speak Italian (most reviewers) may avoid the draft, as may those who can't obtain the book through a library (all or almost all reviewers, until coronavirus restrictions are lifted).


 * For each statement you make, cite the specific page or two in the book that supports the statement. Various types of shortened footnotes can be used to avoid repeating all of bibliographic information in every inline citation. I'm not familiar with AVN.com or XBiz.com, but you can find some guidance at WikiProject Pornography. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)


 * you should get a medal for how nice and supportive you are, you are the first person here who gave me information that I can actually use in this project. For what I can see AVN and Xbiz are considered pretty reliable and I am using them just to support specific facts about his porn career so I think I am good with that. I am referring also to different Italian national news paper (repubblica, il giornale and corriere della sera) would you recommend me using only one of them? May be I can gather all the information from the same news paper as they all published more than one article about Masi, what would be the best to do?. How do i know if you would consider a web site reliable? I am using also Gay Star News but I could use as well PinkNews how do I know which one is considered more reliable? I think I am almost there with the project and this is thank to your help. thank you :-)
 * I have made some changing in my draft and included most of your advise, at least I think I did so. How can I submit it again? thank you

15:36:05, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Shahnawaz rules
Shahnawaz rules (talk) 15:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , You need to link to your draft or we're not going to know what you're talking about Sulfurboy (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I wrote a simple article for housing development following the standard of the wikipedia article writing but still declined. Can you please explain why this is happening ?
 * Again, you need to actually link to what you are talking about. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I assume you're talking about Draft:Lahore Motorway City. Am I correct? If so, please give three sources you think would comply with WP:GNG. I don't see any, but you have a lot. Also, the article should be more then one sentence. Try including information from reliable, independent sources (if those exist). Sam-2727 (talk) 14:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

15:57:31, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Yyakilles
Yyakilles (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , Phone calls to what? Sulfurboy (talk) 18:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

how do I make phone calls and stuff and people could call me I don't know how.

16:11:42, 2 April 2020 review of draft by Abbsonmarketing
I am not sure what is wrong with my article as I am using a wide range of sources and writing all facts. Is there more of an explanation?

Abbsonmarketing (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * User appears to represent a public relations firm, and has apparently drafted and posted a press release on behalf of a client, without responding to WP:COI concerns. That's merely the beginning of what's wrong. Also, I wasn't aware that Snopes was a left-wing website, but that factoid provides a window into the draft's quality. The editor has been reported for their username. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 16:17:37, 2 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Rayrunner
I am a board member for a nonprofit standards organization that is looking to identify ourselves and our standards on Wikipedia. I tried to model our page like the ANSI page on Wikipedia. I thought I had created enough content that informed about the group mission and the standards we support. I am not sure based on the rejection of what is defective in the page posting as specific action I can take. I would like help in identifying specific items need to met Wikipedia requirements.

Rayrunner (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , The article has deleted due to being unambiguous promotion. A subject writing about themselves is highly discouraged. If your organization is truly notable then someone will write about it eventually and from a more neutral standpoint. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

18:55:34, 2 April 2020 review of submission by AaronBir19
AaronBir19 (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , You need to specify what draft you are talking about. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I was told that my article reads more like an essay and that I need to take out instances of opinion. Could someone please point out specific spots where these things occur and how to fix it?

Draft:Potterless — Preceding unsigned comment added by AaronBir19 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . The bulk of any draft should be based on sources independent of the subject. The draft's two sources are the podcast itself and the podcast's production company. Neither is an arms length secondary source, so they do nothing to demonstrate that the podcast is notable (suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 14:22, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

20:18:57, 2 April 2020 review of submission by 93.143.167.191
93.143.167.191 (talk) 20:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 20:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

21:39:27, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Daniele Rolli
Daniele Rolli (talk) 21:39, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * 03:22, 3 April 2020 Seraphimblade talk contribs deleted page Draft:Infinitive os (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) (thank) Please post advertisements here. 10:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

22:02:45, 2 April 2020 review of submission by Nnwitts
I believe the article subject is worthy of notice. Shall I include more reference to articles that have covered her to show this? Nnwitts (talk) 22:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * You need to show that this person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 3 April 2020 (UTC)