Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 April 22

= April 22 =

02:23:56, 22 April 2020 review of submission by 27.34.28.32
27.34.28.32 (talk) 02:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * - that draft is both promotional "The Best Web Hosting Company In Nepal Which Provides Cheapest Web Services In Nepal" but also the functioning sources don't provide anything close to notability for a person. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

09:50:57, 22 April 2020 review of submission by Ishfaquerinas
Ishfaquerinas (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , Did you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

10:11:59, 22 April 2020 review of submission by MrTaghizade
Why page submission declined?

MrTaghizade (talk) 10:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The decline notice tells you this have you clicked on the links? Your submission has zero independent sources so notability cannot be established. Theroadislong (talk) 10:27, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

12:13:47, 22 April 2020 review of submission by ThisIsACreeper0101
This article is about an Indian gamer and YouTuber. It was created many weeks ago, but had not been submitted for review. So I'm submitting it now. ThisIsACreeper0101 (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I submitted it for you. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

13:41:59, 22 April 2020 review of submission by ArtistofWNY
Draft:Alberto Rey

Hello, I submitted this draft article for review a few days ago and it was tagged as employing inconsistent language with that of Wikipedia standards. I would very much like to know what parts of the draft appear this way and would like to make the necessary corrections to get the page approved. I was surprised the article was tagged for its language as I made no evaluations of the subject's success, nor any qualitative assessments of his artwork. I believe I used neutral language and reported merely what he has done in his life, without judgment, praise, or criticism. I have worked very hard on this draft over the past few months (as I'm sure many people writing their own draft articles have), and I would love to be able to get some feedback to better my chances of getting the article approved. Thanks for your time, ArtistsofWNY.ArtistofWNY (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

ArtistofWNY (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging the reviewer, - that notice is, as you point it out, expansively broad, and could use some clarification on the specific failure point. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:54, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the ping ., The personal life section is fine. However, there's quite a few troubling lines in the works section. Whether it was your intention or not, the article provides commentary in many parts that comes across as WP:OR for a few reasons.
 * The overwhelming issue is the few dozen cites of the book "Life Streams: Alberto Rey's Cuban and American Art". You often just cite this book at the end of paragraphs, however, page numbers are never provided which makes verifying of many claims nearly impossible. I actually have a means of seeing this book and would like to see a few of the claims verified.
 * While central themes or inspirations of this artist may be readily apparent to you, many claims are not fully supported or provide non-dispassionate opinions, here are few examples:
 * "The 2001 black and white 16mm film “Seeing the Dark” (6:30 run-time) encapsulates Rey’s return trip to Cuba and signaled a change in viewpoint to cease depicting his home country in nostalgic methods."
 * Who says it encapsulates his return trip? Who said it signaled a change? Who said he ceased depicting via nostalgic methods?
 * "The Black Lace Series spurred from fascination of Catholic rituals, sainthood, and the artist’s exposure to Santeria, a Cuban synthesis of Catholic and African religions. The duality of personal items such as veils worn by women for modesty in church can also be seen as seductive in other contexts."
 * Who said any of this? If it's stated in the book it needs a page number.
 * "His marriage in 1989 reinvigorated his interest in depicting religion and its influence on marriage. "
 * Who said this?
 * "Desiring to reconnect to his Cuban identity as an American with no actual memories of his country"
 * Who said this desire? Who said he had no actual memories? Again if this is sourced from the book it needs a page number for verification.
 * "Moved by the passing of his sister, Mayda, and his father-in-law, Neil Strong, Rey’s series confronted death directly by depicting sick, dying, and deceased steelhead fish. " A source was provided at the end of the paragraph, but the source failed to verify this statement.
 * Again, the problem likely is that you've done a lot of research on this subject, so some of this information just seems obvious to you, however, facts, particularly those surrounding a subject's motivation, should not be assumed and need to be properly backed by sources.
 * Please understand this is a bigger issue because the subject is still alive. We have pretty strict guidelines that direct us how to handle biographies of living people. Particularly, if there are claims, such as motivations for their work (particularly when they involve intimate matters such as the death of loved ones) they need to be properly cited or removed until they can be properly cited. The subject is undoubtedly notable, and I know you've put a lot of work into it. However, you can't just cite a 300 page book as a whole to support two thirds of an article. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * "Desiring to reconnect to his Cuban identity as an American with no actual memories of his country"
 * Who said this desire? Who said he had no actual memories? Again if this is sourced from the book it needs a page number for verification.
 * "Moved by the passing of his sister, Mayda, and his father-in-law, Neil Strong, Rey’s series confronted death directly by depicting sick, dying, and deceased steelhead fish. " A source was provided at the end of the paragraph, but the source failed to verify this statement.
 * Again, the problem likely is that you've done a lot of research on this subject, so some of this information just seems obvious to you, however, facts, particularly those surrounding a subject's motivation, should not be assumed and need to be properly backed by sources.
 * Please understand this is a bigger issue because the subject is still alive. We have pretty strict guidelines that direct us how to handle biographies of living people. Particularly, if there are claims, such as motivations for their work (particularly when they involve intimate matters such as the death of loved ones) they need to be properly cited or removed until they can be properly cited. The subject is undoubtedly notable, and I know you've put a lot of work into it. However, you can't just cite a 300 page book as a whole to support two thirds of an article. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, the problem likely is that you've done a lot of research on this subject, so some of this information just seems obvious to you, however, facts, particularly those surrounding a subject's motivation, should not be assumed and need to be properly backed by sources.
 * Please understand this is a bigger issue because the subject is still alive. We have pretty strict guidelines that direct us how to handle biographies of living people. Particularly, if there are claims, such as motivations for their work (particularly when they involve intimate matters such as the death of loved ones) they need to be properly cited or removed until they can be properly cited. The subject is undoubtedly notable, and I know you've put a lot of work into it. However, you can't just cite a 300 page book as a whole to support two thirds of an article. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Please understand this is a bigger issue because the subject is still alive. We have pretty strict guidelines that direct us how to handle biographies of living people. Particularly, if there are claims, such as motivations for their work (particularly when they involve intimate matters such as the death of loved ones) they need to be properly cited or removed until they can be properly cited. The subject is undoubtedly notable, and I know you've put a lot of work into it. However, you can't just cite a 300 page book as a whole to support two thirds of an article. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Please understand this is a bigger issue because the subject is still alive. We have pretty strict guidelines that direct us how to handle biographies of living people. Particularly, if there are claims, such as motivations for their work (particularly when they involve intimate matters such as the death of loved ones) they need to be properly cited or removed until they can be properly cited. The subject is undoubtedly notable, and I know you've put a lot of work into it. However, you can't just cite a 300 page book as a whole to support two thirds of an article. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Ahhh, I see. Thank you for all of the clarification. I have access to the book and will start providing the correct page numbers and references. Your commentary has helped a lot and I believe I know how to take the article in a better direction now. Thank you! ArtistofWNY (talk) 16:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

16:16:12, 22 April 2020 review of draft by Parislav
Parislav (talk) 16:16, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I dont understand why my article is not being published. I have 10 sources from reliable places, such as Fox5, Newsday, USCF, etc. Everything is true, I am the person in this article, and this happened. The USCF validates these claims as well. I don't understand, please help. The link to this should be article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Parislav/sandbox I have personally experianced these events, along with thousands and millions of other people.
 * Per WP:NCHESS, chess players who are only NMs are rarely considered notable. If and when the subject becomes a GM, they would be considered notable. Sulfurboy (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 17:10:05, 22 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Jrthpt
I received the notification that my submitted article "The Flow System' was not approved due to "This is a promotional essay"? This is a new organizational transformation model that is competitive with Agile and Lean methodologies. It is new but taking root and is being incorported into peer reviewed articles and book chapters as we speak. It is an empirical model. It is not commercial as a number of other Wiki articles (see examples listed below):

Examples: Flow - Journal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(journal)

CFXJ-FM Canadian Radio Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFXJ-FM

An Indie game created in Flash - Flow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(video_game)

A trade name of the Caribbean telecom Cable & Wireless Communications (CWC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(brand)

Calligra Flow - A free diagramming software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calligra_Flow

These examples are purely commercial. The article on The Flow System is descriptive in nature as it introduces a new system of understanding for organizaitions operating in complex environments (e.g., today's envioronment with COVID-19).

Notification received is copied below: Your submission at Articles for creation: The Flow System (February 9) AFC-Logo Decline.svgYour recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by DGG was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This is a promotional essay, not an encyclopedia article DGG ( talk ) 22:52, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I request the articles titles 'The Flow System' be approved.

Thanks, John R. Turner

Jrthpt (talk) 17:10, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , Unfortunately the article has been rejected which means it will not be considered further at this time. The article read like an outright advertisement and nothing like a formal, neutral encyclopedic article. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 18:57:54, 22 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yazil Ehtesham
Yazil Ehtesham (talk) 18:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Articles require significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject, your draft has none. Theroadislong (talk) 19:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the submission is only self promotional. Yazil Ehtesham promoting himself, clearly saying Yazil Ehtesham is an famous Photographer aslo know as YAZIL_EHTESHAM_404. I don't think this submission deserves a place on Wikipedia. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 23:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

21:07:52, 22 April 2020 review of draft by Maizbhandariya
requesting a second review for the article Shakir Ali Noorie

Maizbhandariya (talk) 21:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)