Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 June 10

= June 10 =

00:09:03, 10 June 2020 review of draft by AviationFreak
I'm not sure what needs to be done to improve referencing on my draft. I received a AfC denial after submitting a draft for Holly Grove Christian School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Holly_Grove_Christian_School). I did what I thought was necessary in the way of reliable sources and adding inline citations. I tried not to overload the reader with inline citations and placed references that applied to an entire section at the end of the first sentence in that section. I'm not sure if I need more inline citations, more references, sources that are more reliable (though most of the sources are directly from the school's website), or something else. Thanks in advance for your help. :) AviationFreak (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The draft was subsequently accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:32, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 00:17:27, 10 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Yankeejess
Yankeejess (talk) 00:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * please don't post your email address on a public Wikipedia page. Most communication will happen on the website anyway. If you really want, you can check out Emailing users for how to set an email address in your preferences. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

00:42:38, 10 June 2020 review of submission by MEMBER SG
artist name its naked on its own on goole without info,so i hope you could accept this as commom creativity cause the name is in use everywhere like play store music and now goole recognise it, just need to verify that name MEMBER SG (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * this was an advert and will never be a part of Wikipedia in the form it was deleted. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

00:44:15, 10 June 2020 review of submission by MEMBER SG
MEMBER SG (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

03:30:58, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Sachi1307
Hello, My submission is neutrality, which provides references, and no other same article existing. However,I find an article which is not reliable resource, it became an article. :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosto_Kingtee I am confused about the review of wikipedia. Please let me know how to do.

Sachi1307 (talk) 03:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

09:08:29, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Tbiw
I don't understand the references doesn't meet the criteria of article,please other reviewer help me to check. I am not the beginning writer of this article I just try an helping hand,please cross-check it again.review again, Tbiw (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 11:30:17, 10 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by RealIK17
Hi WikiProject,

Please help me understand the refusal for my submission. I just translated this page from the German Wikipedia. Surely the German editors were satisfied with the German sources of that German article. I also translated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aracillum, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Iplacea, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Askaukalis from Polish and Spanish Wikipedias. Thx.

Best regards, S RealIK17 (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , You just need to add WP:RELIABLE sources in references. Visit WP:REFB to get acquainted on how to cite sources in references in English Wikipedia ~ Amkgp  💬  13:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

11:36:42, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Sbmnlaw
I am unable to understand why Draft:QuickX was declined when it is notable technology related topic has ios application for apple store and Worldwide operations and other pages of similar nature are there. Sbmnlaw (talk) 11:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

13:13:36, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Rasel Shahid Siddique
Rasel Shahid Siddique (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't your way to promote a buissness. Note that if you are affilated with the organisation in any way, you must read and comply with WP:COI and WP:PAID. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

13:40:01, 10 June 2020 review of draft by J stapling
Hi,

Thanks for reviewing the submission - is there anything I can do to help this get somewhere towards publishing. I appreciate the concerns about paid editing, but I think the subject matter does still pass the threshold for notability given that two other UK-based retailers of equivalent size have their own Wiki articles: Jessops and Calumet Photographic, the latter of which is actually now merged with Wex Photo Video (which is even mentioned explicitly in the Calumet article.

I appreciate that this is deeply not your problem, but if there's anything I can do to get this page publishable, please just let me know. Happy to add more sources etc

J stapling (talk) 13:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

14:39:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Juniorrohan

14:39:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Juniorrohan
Juniorrohan (talk) 14:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * the draft currently lacks reliable independent sources. It therefore fails WP:NPERSON. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

17:02:09, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Lauratheschit
Hi, I want to know what kind of sources we need to give the show credability?

I have included a source where the show was advertised on BBC Radio 4 (a huge national radio station) which should be more than enough to prove it's real and credible?

The show is being published on Youtube, so will linking the Youtube channel help boost credibility? I can also link tweets and the individual Youtube videos for each episode to give each episode/guest credability. Would this be sufficient?

What else can be suggested to enable this page to be published?

Lauratheschit (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Generally, for notability you are going to need at least three sources that satisfy all of the following:


 * they have some reputation
 * they are independent of the subject (that includes being independent from the creator of the series)
 * they cover the subject more than yust a passing mention.
 * I failed to find any such sources in the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

19:15:39, 10 June 2020 review of draft by ShadowBee
A submission of an article I've wrote has been declined - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mish-mash_(food) "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

Ok, first of, this is an existing article in Bulgarian (BG) Wikipedia - "https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%88-%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%88" and Hungarian (UK) Wikipedia - "https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%88-%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%88" that I have translated. It is also on this (EN) Wikipedia disambiguation page - "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mish_Mash"

Second, this is a very popular Bulgarian dish, like Banitsa - "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banitsa" - all the tourists try it, etc. It is one of the 50 most popular dishes in Bulgarian cuisine, according to some sources. But where is this dish referenced? Food blogs, local cooking shows (all in Bulgarian), local cook-books (that I don't have access to, all in Bulgarian, too), etc. Where can one find significant coverage of a local dish, if I might ask? Look at the Banitsa pastry article I've mentioned above - terrible references - one of a Russian dictionary explaining the origin of the word, and two local recipes on Bulgarian blogs, even not in English. No one would remove the article of this famous pastry, though. My point is, there are just no reliable sources when it comes to local cuisine, unlike many other topics.

ShadowBee (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Congratulations, Draft:Mish-mash (food) was subsequently accepted. To answer the mish mash of issues you raised:


 * Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So an article may satisfy the rules for the Bulgarian Wikipedia but not the English one, or vice versa. Thus arguing that the topic already has a Bulgarian version and a Hungarian version carries zero weight in the question of whether it should have an English version.


 * Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of an article doesn't mean it should exist, it could mean only that no one has gotten around to deleting it yet. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines is not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why.


 * One of the pillars of Wikipedia is that it summarizes reliable, authoritative sources. If there are no such sources, Wikipedia shouldn't have a stand alone article on the subject. If there isn't enough material to write a whole encyclopedia article about a subject, there may still be enough reliable information to mention the topic in a broader context, such as mentioning a dish in Bulgarian cuisine.


 * WikiProject Food and drink/Tools/sources gives advice on sources for encyclopedic writing about food (WikiProjects are good sources of subject-specific information). For help accessing sources, try The Wikipedia Library or a library near you (especially ones at major research universities). Significant coverage may not exist online or in English. If it isn't accessible to you, you may not be the right person to write about the topic.


 * I hope you find these explanations enlightening, and useful when you choose your next topic to write about. Wikipedia has over 6 million existing ones to choose from, 98% of which are rated less than "good" by the community, so there is much scope for improvement. See Community portal for ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

19:38:10, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Svarshavsky
I am trying to get help with the page: "Draft:Georges Kugelmann" that I created. It was rejected for the lack of citations, which is quite logical, and it was my fault. I added citations and resubmitted, but now I do not see where is it and don't know if it has been accepted or not. Please tell what to do next. Thanks for your help. Sergei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Svarshavsky (talk • contribs) 19:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Svarshavsky (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . Draft:Georges Kugelmann is in the pool to be reviewed. The current backlog is around 4 weeks. You may continue improving the draft while you wait, or see Community portal for other ways to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

20:58:49, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Kconstalie
Hello, and thank you so much for reading! I believe that the article I wrote about Conduit Magazine has not been fairly evaluated. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Conduit_Magazine) This article seems to meet and exceed the objectivity standards set forth by Wikipedia. It is written in a straight-forward, matter-of-fact style. Yet this article was recently rejected because it contains links to Wikipedia's own pages for Best American Poetry and Pushchart Prize and these pages don't contain reference to the magazine. That these pages should mention Conduit Magazine is not a realistic expectation. For example, if an author has written for the New York Times, the Wikipedia article may have a link to the New York Times, but the New York Times article is not expected to mention the author. That would not be realistic.

This is an informative article about a literary subject. Please consider that it is fit to publish. Please notice that is plainly and objectively stated. If technical changes with the layout are necessary, I will be happy to make them if I can receive some guidance.

Thank you sincerely! Kconstalie (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Kconstalie, to make it short: Your draft lacks tremendously of reliable sources, see over here Reliable sources - lots of sections in your draft are totally unreferenced. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

22:13:31, 10 June 2020 review of draft by Jujiang
Jujiang (talk) 22:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

23:01:59, 10 June 2020 review of submission by Thespiansapien
Hello, I need help on adding verifiable references to the draft page above. The reason why it was denied was because "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". I added five references to the article. Where else would I need to ref?

Thespiansapien (talk) 23:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . Provide a citation for "A first-generation ... of seven children" and "When a knee injury ... passionate about pursuing acting" or remove them. More critically, replace weak sources with higher quality ones. IMDb, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. Wiles Magazine is so obscure it can't really be said to have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. It has an editor-in-chief, which is good, although it's that editor-in-chief (and publisher) who wrote the piece in question, so it isn't clear how much editorial oversight took place. The piece is also, like the one in Pursuitist, fundamentally a primary source interview, lacking in independent analysis by the interviewer. Deadline is a reliable source, but appears to be churnalism, and only has one sentence about the subject. Until he has had a couple major roles, it's unlikely enough will be written about him to make it possible to write an encyclopedia article. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)