Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 December 30

= December 30 =

00:26:55, 30 December 2020 review of draft by Mvb71
I'm having trouble identifying what I think must be NPV issues on my article for Burp Suite Draft:Burp Suite. This software was requested as being needed Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences due to the frequent use of this in Application Security teaching and professional use, and I believe I have established its notability per recommended methods for establishing through authoritative and peer-reviewed sources so I don't believe that is the issue. I've modeled my page after existing proprietary software such as Nessus Nessus (software) to ensure I'm approaching this in a community approved approach to creating an article for a commercial product; I wanted to make sure it wasn't interpreted as marketing and has gone through several revs to address this. The last reviewer declined the pages without comment after I had addressed issues called in prior critiques; those comments are critical to changing my perspective to address what I'm not accounting for. Without guidance from the reviewers, I can't fix what I don't see as needing fixing, either NPV or notability, or maybe something else I'm missing. I'm not a very experienced Wiki author, but I am a cybersecurity professional of over a decade of experience, so I'm confused as to where I'm not addressing concerns. Somewhere I'm not addressing the need for ensuring enough information to show notability and describe its use but not do so in a way that appears to be marketing. Please help me understand what needs changing to address concerns with the article. Mvb71 (talk) 00:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC) Mvb71 (talk) 00:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

00:32:37, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Zgover
Please clarify which sources you deem to not be notable? I have made all corrections requested by previous reviewer Theroadislong and they no longer had any recommendations. However the recent rejection is vague.

zgover (talk) 00:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . It is irrelevant whether or not a publication is notable. What is important is whether a source demonstrates the subject's notability. That is done by sources that are independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the topic. All of the sources in the draft fail that multi-part test. Throw away non-independent sources: Caringo, businesswire, AustinVentures, and trade journals (SearchStorage, CRN, and Enterprise Systems Journal). Throw away sources that are not reliable (Owler). Throw away sources that do not contain significant coverage (Bloomberg and The Austin-American Statesman). There's nothing left. That's pretty much what one would expect of a privately held startup; they're very rarely notable, and no amount of editing can fix that. That's why there's no option to resubmit the draft, and why volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:25, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Understood, I appreciate the response and clarification . zgover (talk) 02:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

03:52:33, 30 December 2020 review of draft by Sandeep2136
Sandeep2136 (talk) 03:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 04:35:34, 30 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Moggo99
Hi there I am a first time page creator and i am trying to create a page for my brother who is a respected Australian Indigenous Scientist... He is an Associate Professor at Canberra University. Via Google Scholar his articles have been cited 180 times and has won a number of prestigious awards in Science... I am interested in your feedback.. Thank you Tim (brother of Brad).

Moggo99 (talk) 04:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You currently have one uncited paragraph about your brother; that is a long way from being an acceptable Wikipedia article. Successfully writing a new article(not a mere "page") is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia.  If you dive right in without any experience in editing existing articles, or any knowledge, your chances of success are low. It's even harder to write one with a conflict of interest.  I would suggest using the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia, and reading Your First Article before continuing.  I would also suggest spending time(months) editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. These things will give you experience and knowledge that will help you create a new article.
 * Wikipedia is not for merely telling about someone; it is for summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, in this case, a scientist- showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable academic or scientist. If you just want to tell the world about your brother, you should use social media or other outlet where that is permitted and may have less stringent requirements. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

06:50:54, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Martymcflys
I feel like Sahara Marie is notable. I Think the page should be up and live for other fans and editors to make the necessary edits it needs. But this said to ask for advise so here I am. Martymcflys (talk) 06:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If this person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable model, you have not shown that with the sources you have offered- which are not independent reliable sources with significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

09:14:14, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Sudan Bhattarai Upadhaya
why is "Hamro Patro" another digital calendar which started later than us had got the place in wiki whereas being the first digital lunar calendar based on Bikram Sambat, our Nepali Patro is not getting its place in wiki. what is the document that is needed so that we also can appear in the wiki as them. if we look at alexa ranking also we have almost the same rating. plese do advise!!! dryair 09:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Alexa rankings are not a concern of Wikipedia. A subject merits a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about it, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability.  Because of this, not every subject merits an article, even within the same field.  That your competitors merit an article does not automatically mean your app does as well, it depends on the sources. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

09:59:13, 30 December 2020 review of draft by Phualy28
I've created person profile at [], would like to know what else can i do to improve the draft

Phualy28 (talk) 09:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

10:06:49, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Furnick.jonas
Furnick.jonas (talk) 10:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * As indicated, the subject of this draft does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. There are no reliable sources discussing it, and thus it is not an appropriate topic for an article. -- Kinu t/c 10:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

14:55:18, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Not-mitch-or-toirn
i am asking why my review got denyed. i would understand the complaint if it was a historical piece of not having enough sorses but this is a podcast and the link is to their web sight with the podcast please elaborate on what i need to do more. you can find the artical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tabletop_for_the_end_of_the_world

Not-mitch-or-toirn (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

16:19:26, 30 December 2020 review of submission by Kingdomofburdette
Why doesn't it meet Wikipedia's goals? Kingdomofburdette (talk) 16:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's obviously made-up. SL93 (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 16:46:59, 30 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Qasimali2416
Qasimali2416 (talk) 16:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Facebook is not considered a reliable source. From your username, if this is an article about yourself, please have a read of WP:AUTOBIO. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

18:47:25, 30 December 2020 review of submission by LightningComplexFire
Are you allowed to submit a draft for review, but then create the article itself without a reiewer? Not that I'm going to do that obviously. And also, a lot of sources are dead for this topic, but I did find a news article and a NOAA page about it, hopefully my stub will be created

🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 18:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * At some point, you will have enough edits and your account will be old enough that you will have the technical ability to create articles and to move a draft into the main encyclopedia. That said, it is generally unwise to do so unless you already know your way around Wikipedia and are already a "seasoned editor" in all but name, such as an editor with months of active editing "as a non-logged in editor" before registering an account.  However, the fact that you are asking the question suggests that is not the case here.  Assuming you are new to Wikipedia, by the time you have enough experience to wisely decide if your draft is "ready to move" it will have been reviewed.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs) 🎄  20:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . The Articles for creation process is an optional one, you are allowed to move the draft into article space without having it accepted by a reviewer. If you do so, however, and a patroller feels it isn't ready for article space, they may bounce it back to draft space or nominate it for deletion. It would be a shame to see your effort go up in smoke. Articles for creation lets you get feedback from experienced Wikipedians and improve the draft at your leisure. I've added five potential sources to the draft's talk page. If you don't have access to them, WP:RX can help you obtain them. Use them to improve the draft, emphasizing the way(s) it meets WP:WILDFIRE-NOTE and the fire's long-term impacts. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for the ref ideas, it helped the article a lot! :) --🔥LightningComplexFire</b>🔥 21:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

22:43:49, 30 December 2020 review of submission by CherokeeLen
Mr. Graziano was a witness to specific events which occurred on D-Day, the Battle Of The Bulge, and he witnessed the signing of the articles of surrender in the Little Red School house in Reims, France. His recounting of these events is valuable information for historians studying World War II. CherokeeLen (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There might be more appropriate forums to document this man's life; Wikipedia is not such a place. 331dot (talk) 22:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm straying way off-topic for "articles for creation" here, but if Mr. Graziano is still available to be interviewed, museums that specialize in World War II would probably love to record his story, in his own voice. Another option would be the history department at a university.  Either type of organization would probably love to have custody of his war-related personal effects, journals, letters, and the like as well. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs) 🎄  23:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)