Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 February 17

= February 17 =

01:06:01, 17 February 2020 review of submission by Stevenper
Hi, the above draft page has not been accepted. I don't know why as the company is at least as well known if not better known, than competitors such as Pet Circle. VetShopAustralia is the oldest online retailer of pet products in Australia (est 1999) so is noteworthy etc. I have provided many 3rd party references.

Stevenper (talk) 01:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * None of the article's secondary source references show in-depth coverage of the subject. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Articles are evaluated on their own merits and not by comparison to other similar things, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Pet Circle appears to be the subject of multiple profile articles in reliable sources. The sources that you have provided all appear to be routine coverage of business activity which do not establish notability. shoy (reactions) 14:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @shoy. I have updated the article with links to multiple profile articles and resubmitted. I appreciate the feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenper (talk • contribs) 02:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

02:01:45, 17 February 2020 review of draft by Spasiba5
I am new here and know that that draft at Draft:Religious conversions in Pakistan may not be perfect which is why I am asking for help. There are conversions in Pakistan that are voluntary and I think, an admin, with this edit at the Hinduism in Pakistan article shows that he supports that idea. Now please help improve that draft so that we can put it back where it belongs. Right now, the religious conversions in Pakistan article redirects to the forced conversion to Islam in Pakistan article. Thanks!&mdash;Spasiba5 (talk) 02:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The draft I submitted has been rejected by, so I request someone experienced to improve that draft - I don't think I can do it myself. Thanks!&mdash;Spasiba5 (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I would advise you to read WP:BUILDER Sulfurboy (talk) 02:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The draft I submitted has been rejected by Sulfurboy, so I request someone experienced to improve that draft - I don't think I can do it myself. Thanks!&mdash;Spasiba5 (talk) 14:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you improve my draft also please?

Request on 03:49:14, 17 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by AlarSebas
AlarSebas (talk) 03:49, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

06:24:26, 17 February 2020 review of submission by 117.211.133.124
117.211.133.124 (talk) 06:24, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


 * , firstly, I think you may be logged out, if you are Krishna34552?


 * It was rejected as a functionally identical version was submitted to the one declined. If you have a more specific question, please clarify Nosebagbear (talk) 12:04, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

07:52:15, 17 February 2020 review of submission by Shasta02
Hi, I would like some help with getting my page reviewed and accepted. What changes would you recommend I do to fix it? Thank you! Shasta02 (talk) 07:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


 * , two main issues. I don't believe it's currently notable, as there are only 2 significant news sources, and 1 of them is an interview so isn't independent. You'd need to find more suitable sources that are in-depth (10+ lines), secondary (newspapers etc), independent (no interviews), reliable (the news source). The content also needs to be mainly about the company and its actions.


 * It's also written in a fairly promotional fashion - the founders section in effect alludes to the qualities of the founders "After entered high school, the two realized that when taught with an engaging curriculum and knowledgeable teachers, STEM camps had the potential of being inspirational". Nosebagbear (talk) 12:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

17:39:31, 17 February 2020 review of submission by Elnencatala
Elnencatala (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The concerns noted by the first reviewer were not addressed before resubmission. WP:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability.  JTP (talk • contribs) 19:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Elnencatala (talk) 12:08, 18 February 2020 (UTC) Hello, I have now found some more sources, how do I resubmit it for review?

18:52:28, 17 February 2020 review of submission by Sukoner
Sudip Koner 18:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA.  JTP (talk • contribs) 19:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

20:56:34, 17 February 2020 review of submission by KataMor
Hello, I would like to submit a photograph of Rebecca Senf for this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Senf

I have the permission of the photographer and copyright holder, but it is not a Commons license. Is this allowable?

Thank you.

KataMor (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi KataMor if the image is released under a valid free licence then it can be used, if not it would only be OK if it was compatible with Non-free content. However that is very unlikely for any living person due to "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created". Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

21:39:06, 17 February 2020 review of draft by Mollygmorris
Hi! I know that it states my article is pending review and that this can take a while, but I just want to confirm this is actually happening and that my article isn't just stuck in a void. I'm asking because I submitted a previous draft of this article and was told it contained information that looked like an advertisement, so I've made adjustments and hopefully submitted it for review again. Is there anyway to get confirmation that it is actually up for review? I'm not specifically asking someone to review it right away, I just want to make sure it's actually in the queue.

Thanks for your help!

Mollygmorris (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it is currently submitted. The current wait time for review is 4+ months. Someone will get to it when they can. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Request on 22:35:34, 17 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Nianda
The feedback I got on the page was "WP:ONEEVENT at best" which isn't really any actionable feedback.

I believe the studio has released a few more games since I first created the page, so I think I could add more about that and maybe some logo information. I tried to summarize the "controversy" as much as possible since if a page is created someone will edit it in. But I'm not too sure what more information needs to be added about an indie game studio. Looking at other studios (ex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenheart_Games) doesn't help point out the differences.

Ottawa only has approximately 5 studios, and Kindly Beast was (as of October pre-layoff) the biggest and most famous. (Next to Fuel which is a skeleton crew at best right now.) I would like some more information to help since I would like to add information about the other studios to Wikipedia too, if possible.

Nianda (talk) 22:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling if you read the provided links in the decline message, it will become overwhelmingly clear what needs to be done. The page creator provided six sources, three are just talking about the the WP:ONEEVENT of the major layoff (would also be considered WP:ROUTINE. The other three sources are either primary, unreliable, or both. WP:RS. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I read the provided links and it wasn't clear what needed to be done. So I need to add more sources that talk about the company than the event? Which sources are primary/unreliable/both? Nianda (talk) 22:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * All of your questions are answered by links that have been provided to you two times over. I recommend reading them and if you have any additional questions or clarifications about the policies then please ask them? That is to say, you need to put in the work and meet us halfway. WP:BUILDER Sulfurboy (talk) 00:53, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

22:43:35, 17 February 2020 review of submission by Richevans69
Hi, I made this article on a Brazilian regional bank serving the Amazon region. The initia article was rejected for lack of notability, which I found somewhat questionable given that other Brazilian banks had even less notable references, but nevertheless complied with by adding references from newspapers of record. As it is currently in review, I'd appreciate reviews on it to ensure approval when an editor stops by again. Richevans69 (talk) 22:43, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Your article is already submitted for review. An editor will review it when they get a chance. Please know the wait is up to 4+ months. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:46, 17 February 2020 (UTC)