Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 August 28

= August 28 =

06:21:35, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Karthik CL
I have included a few more notable inclusions into the page. As the founder and head of one of India's largest Education based companies, I feel that notability should not be an issue especially because the work that he is doing with the government on education policy. Please let me know what I can do in order to prove the notability of the subject. Karthik CL (talk) 06:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You have added exaxtly one link since the rejection, http://www.businessworld.in/author/Guest-Author/Satya-Narayanan-R-83813/, which appears to be a listing of articles by the subject, and is therefore not significant coverage or realy independent of the subject. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I have included more links on the page now. Could you please have a look at it?

07:27:48, 28 August 2020 review of draft by SagnicChongder12
SagnicChongder12 (talk) 07:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but what you have written is not yet suitable as a Wikipedia article. A Wikipedia article must be more than a basic information listing, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, that of a notable organization. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 07:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you have additional comment, please edit this existing section instead of creating a new section. 331dot (talk) 07:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

10:44:44, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash
Studyash (talk) 10:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

10:46:04, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash
Studyash (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This submission lacks reliable sources and fails WP:NACTOR. We arent interested in another Seigenthaler. The contact section will be removed. If anyone wants to contact the subject, they can look at the homepage. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

12:17:09, 28 August 2020 review of submission by SKYORANGE123
Come on Accept it their is no reliable source for her All this information is collected from Instagram

SKYORANGE123 (talk) 12:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * That is exactly why it can not be accepted, the subject is simply not notable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

13:05:05, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Studyash
Studyash (talk) 13:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * see 2 sections above. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

16:46:33, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Pnwcob
Thank you for reviewing the content, but can I ask one question before I abandon the effort? In developing this page, I followed the same architecture as the following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Student_Advertising_Competition

I know the history of the event isn't there, but the content is pretty similar. Have I done something wrong in trying to stick to the example? I noticed they only had their own website sourced, but this one provides external support. Again, I just had to ask so I can understand for future efforts. Thanks in advance! Matt Pnwcob (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Unfortunately you chose a really bad example to follow, the Digital Marketing Competition article has just been deleted as blatant promotion of a non-notable topic. Following examples is generally a bad idea, rather follow the basic guidelines at Your first article. If you still want to look at examples, do make sure they have a "Good article" or even "Feature article" quality rating - which you can check on the article's Talk page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

18:05:20, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Harpaalsingh
Thank you for reviewing my article. I really appreciate the minimum time being the team have taken to review. I would like to know the mistakes to improve the article and make it to publish. I have mentioned the real Citations within the article to verify the Authenticity of the article subject. What kind of the secondary sources the WIKIPEDIA Team looking for? You can review our official website of Anand International College of Engineering to check the real existence. Please help me out to resolve the issues and publish this article. Thank you in advance!

--Harpaalsingh (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Harpaalsingh
 * The simplest answer is that you would have to find news articles, magazine articles, that sort of thing, which talk in detail about the subject. No press releases, because press releases are primary sources, not secondary, since the information comes from the school itself. Pro tip: "premier" is marketing speech and that has no place in an encyclopedia. We write in a dispassionate tone, not in a tone reverent of the organisation. This is part of why we strongly discourage people who have a conflict of interest from editing articles they are related to. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

20:08:56, 28 August 2020 review of submission by 39.41.159.39
Dhoom is the fifth highest grossing film franchise in Indian Cinema. 39.41.159.39 (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That does not change the points raised by the reviewer. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

20:24:39, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Iloveyoga
Excessive information was removed and what remains is basic info, pulled from reputable sources, about a popular website for baby names as well as information on its creation 20 years ago. The subject of this page - BabyNames.com - is used as a source all across Wikipedia pages so I feel that it only makes sense to have more information available about this commonly used resource. Iloveyoga (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

22:06:44, 28 August 2020 review of draft by Jean1010101010101101010101010
I don't understand why my draft still refused, i would like to understand why.

The reason given is "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." by AngusWOOF could you please take a look ?

The article is about a smartphone, most technical details are extracted from the vendor site is that the not reliable source ?

I also provided details on the OS used, how to do some things (like go into DLOAD), maybe as a primary source of information : is that bad regarding to wikipedia rules ?

Please give me some more verbose information on the causes of reject (could be the form, the background)

If the article is just too bad, just tell me why but I really which to add this page and maybe on my others smartphones later :)

Thanks for reply, don't hit me :)

Jean1010101010101101010101010 (talk) 22:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is mainly interested in what independent sources have writen about the subject, as subjects tend to write more favourable about themselves. An please consider changing you username, its overly long and hard to read or spell. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

23:56:39, 28 August 2020 review of submission by Oxyrinchus
Not sure how it is not sufficiently notable. The is a public figure. Please stop deleting. Oxyrinchus (talk) 23:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have explained already on my talk page. Please consult WP:NACTOR and WP:V. Just because someone is a public figure doesn't mean they automatically get a Wikipedia article. As well, the "personal communication" section makes it very clear you have a WP:COI. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)