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

= June 17 =

02:55:10, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Reppop
Hello. I need advice on my draft for the Orthopaedic Hospital Medical Magnet High School. The draft was declined because the "Language has WP:TONE issues." Can anyone help me with rewriting the article or rewriting with some of the sections?

reppoptalk 02:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

11:27:52, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Mkjoshidcpl
Mkjoshidcpl (talk) 11:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

12:06:45, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Accurateinfoomg
Accurateinfoomg (talk) 12:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft has been declined, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, why has it been declined? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Accurateinfoomg (talk • contribs) 12:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The reviewers indicated why in the draft. 331dot (talk) 12:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

14:20:05, 17 June 2020 review of submission by VovATooL
Hello, I need some help with my first English article.

VovATooL (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:29:13, 17 June 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by VovATooL
Hello, I need some help with my first English article. I've already contributed a few texts in Ukrainian (different account). I didn't think this would be so hard to do in English. I've tried to find as much sources as I could. I also deleted all phrases that could possibly be considered as promotional. Can someone give me a few advices? What should I delete or add? Can someone make those corrections for me? This is a short article about the cloud gaming platform.

VovATooL (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

14:39:30, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2600:6C5E:177F:E1F0:79D9:EEF9:E4A1:F938
2600:6C5E:177F:E1F0:79D9:EEF9:E4A1:F938 (talk) 14:39, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

16:02:28, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Gautamakadrag
Gautamakadrag (talk) 16:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

17:37:16, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Pranayndv
Pranayndv (talk) 17:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This is far from being an acceptable article. Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself and neither a social network. You may want to read User:Ian.thomson/Howto. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

18:15:56, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Kayla kas
I would like some help with my page! It was declined and I love some tips on how to improve it so it can be accepted into the mainspace. Kayla kas (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Please see your talk page for what you need to do as an undisclosed paid editor. Theroadislong (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Ignore . His comments aren't helpful and I've admonished him for them.


 * More sources would be nice (please follow WP:RS and WP:V) as you are writing about a school. You can never go wrong with having too many sources.  You do mention the college admissions bribery scandal.  Perhaps expand on that.  Was anyone from the school involved, etc.  Write more in-depth about the school, their services, what they offer.  Look at other pages for other schools and see how they are formed.  Look at the Shenandoah University page.  This is a small university in Virginia.  See how the page is laid out, there is a little more depth?  The article tells the classes that are offered?  That's what we are looking for.


 * Athletics are a staple of most schools, though some don't have them. Put that in there too.  Are there any notable alumni that have gone to InGenius Prep?  Can it be sourced?  That last part might be tricky, but it is a new article, you will run into a little extra scrutiny.


 * Instead of listing the offices in a list, try writing them out. Something like "InGenius Prep has campuses in four countries, the United States, Canada, China, and South Korea, and branches in Toronto, Vancouver, Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Seoul, among others."  Mentioning the larger cities and allowing the user to check the sources for the smaller cities.  While I know Guangzhou and Shenzhen (had a friend who travelled there), some might not, and you will lose the reader's interest (read: they get bored) if you start listing too many cities.  Remember, you want to keep your reader's attention, but be informative at the same time.


 * Expand on basically everything about the school. More sources for everything: make sure they are from reliable, third-party sources.  Make sure everything is verifiable.  Redo that section with the list of cities.  You are off to a good start, keep going, don't get discouraged. :) -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 06:06 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) •  #StayAtHome
 * I strongly suggest you do NOT ignore my perfectly polite comments on your talk page about paid editing, you are editing using your own name, so it is clear for all to see that you have a conflict of interest which you are required to disclose by the terms of Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I strongly suggest you do NOT post another piece of nonsense like this again or I will find an admin and make sure you are blocked for unconstructive editing and violating BITE at the least. Multiple editors, some admins, editor under their own name and that shows no evidence of conflict of evidence or paid editing.  Back it off now. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 08:53 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) •  #StayAtHome


 * Question pending conflict of interest disclosure (one way or another), see User talk:Kayla kas. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * User has said "It is true that I do work for InGenius Prep. However I am not being paid to edit." Paid-contribution disclosure says "Users who are compensated for any publicity efforts related to the subject of their Wikipedia contributions are deemed to be paid editors, regardless of whether they were compensated specifically to edit Wikipedia." Meanwhile I am being threatened with this " I strongly suggest you do NOT post another piece of nonsense like this again or I will find an admin and make sure you are blocked for unconstructive editing ". Theroadislong (talk) 16:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, that was picked and chosen very well. Let's try the entire text, shall we?  "It is true that I do work for InGenius Prep. However I am not being paid to edit. I found creating Wikipedia articles to be enjoyable and so decided to create one for InGenius Prep since I was familiar with the primary sources and felt I could write it in an objective way. I am more than happy to change the tone of the article if it comes off as advertising or promotion. I am happy to work with admins and editors on this to make it the best article possible. But I am not being paid by this company to edit this article."


 * Theroadislong actually said this bizarre sentence "...you are editing using your own name, so it is clear for all to see that you have a conflict of interest which you are required to disclose by the terms of Wikipedia." So, we can't use our own names, lest we be considered paid editors or have a "clear" conflict of interest per Theroadislong's logic.


 * Theroadislong has also made it a point to tag articles that Kayla has edited in the past, claiming COI. This is not only BITE-y, but POINTed as well.  It's clear that Theroadislong has an issue with Kayla, whatever it may be, he can edit with a clear mind and needs to be back off.  I did take this matter to an admin, and while they didn't think it rised to the level of BITE-y I did, they suggested that I change the snarky COI templates to something more friendly.


 * Kayla has made it very clear that she is willing to learn and wants to learn. I believe we take her at her word and help a new editor with no more than 20 edits, who clearly shows she is willing and able constructively, and show her how Wikipedia works.  We are always complaining that Wikipedia is one big "sausage fest", why push away a female editor who actually wants to learn. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 23:36 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) •  #StayAtHome • #BlackLivesMatter
 * Oh, and one final thing. I ask people who think that someone can't work for a company and still edit that company's Wikipedia page and it not be considered paid editing or conflict of interest, to read my response to Theroadislong.  It should give you a few lessons on how, yes, we can be editors and employees at the same time and seperately. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 23:38 on June 18, 2020 (UTC) •  #StayAtHome • #BlackLivesMatter

18:29:05, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Mopbroomdustpan
I wish to add WikiProject Biography to the top of the talk page as directed but I could not find a definition of Talk Page. Is that the actual article that I wrote is that something else? In short, where do a put it?

Thank you Mopbroomdustpan (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . Talk page guidelines defines them and how to use them. The TP in question would be Draft talk:Kim Kraig Thompson. You may add  there if you wish, but there isn't much point, except perhaps to help reviewers who want to steer clear of biographies, many of which are vanity spam. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

18:46:07, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2405:201:6C01:8FE3:21BC:2AFB:D4BF:DD21
2405:201:6C01:8FE3:21BC:2AFB:D4BF:DD21 (talk) 18:46, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

19:53:46, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Bestinshow1917
Bestinshow1917 (talk) 19:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Why is my submission is rejected???
 * Hi Bestinshow1917, well, it is clearly stated in the red Message box - "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." - your draft does not cite any sources at all. Please have a close look at Help:Referencing_for_beginners ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

21:21:57, 17 June 2020 review of draft by Livelovers
Good day, About 6 months ago, I translated the article “Draft:Jan Gezinyus Dunning” from Russian Wikipedia. In my opinion, the article complies with WP:BASIC because reputable Russian media (such as Kommersant, Interfax, Vedomosti, RBC, Regnum, Forbes, ТАСС, Financial Times) indeed write about Dunning. Besides, in the English Wikipedia, similar articles are published (e.g. “Sergey Galitsky”, “Oleg Zherebtsov”). I tried to ask 1292simon about what was wrong in the article with BLP, but did not get any reply. I would like to ask editors to review the article or point out specific blocking issues. Thank you.

Livelovers (talk) 21:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well Livelovers, no idea why 1292simon did not reply - but my question is: Why did you not resubmit the draft in order to get it reviewed again?! Your references are unfortunately all in Russian but this should in the very end no problem at all. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

22:06:11, 17 June 2020 review of submission by Rontl
The original decision on this page was that it did not meet the bar for notability, and I have tried to address this. The subject of the article, the Reverse Logistics Association, has since been profiled twice in leading magazines, including Supply Chain Management Review, which is considered by most to be the Harvard Business Review of the supply chain field. The standard for notability requires profiles in leading outlets. I have added citations for those profiles.

The RLA has also been cited numerous times as experts by the Wall Street Journal and Forbes. If the WSJ and Forbes reach out to the RLA as a source of expert information on issues, that would seem to me to be further proof of high standing and reputation. Although this is not part of the Wikipedia standard for notability, I think to most people, if the WSJ and Forbes reach out to you for your expertise, you must be considered a leading expert in a field that is of wide, general interest.

I hope that these inclusions complete the case that the RLA is a widely respected, influential association. Thanks.

Rontl (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

22:28:35, 17 June 2020 review of submission by 2A00:23C7:7BA4:8001:1DA2:B81C:6F34:2E4D
I have made more changes to make the article as 3rd party neutral as possible and I believe it is now sufficient to be published in its current form having studied many other pages about spinoff bands.

2A00:23C7:7BA4:8001:1DA2:B81C:6F34:2E4D (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you truly feel that this band now meets the special Wikipedia definition of a a notable band, and have the independent reliable sources to support it, you'll need to start from scratch. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)