Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 March 12

= March 12 =

00:32:41, 12 March 2020 review of draft by SystemDisrupt
SystemDisrupt (talk) 00:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for all your help; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jenny_Grant_Rankin?action=edit is my first original page and I really appreciate your help! I also wish to work on Wikipedia's goal of having more female contributors and also on adding deserving female profiles to the site to offset the historical gender imbalance in who is represented in Wikipedia.

I appreciate the feedback I have gotten so far (hi to MurielMary; the page said I should post any questions here but I hope you see this thanks) and want to meet Wikipedia's criteria. In order to provide the “significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject)” that is needed for the page to then be published/approved...

Do you/Wikipedia mean things like this (below)?

I have listed 5 samples that seem to me to fit the “Wikipedia:Notability (people)” criteria but I’d love to please check with you first (because if they don’t fit the criteria I am not understanding why they don’t fit; also, there are more where these came from, e.g., just googling her name brings up 1,800,000 webpages); thank you so much:

A) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY ORGANIZATIONS

Dr. Rankin was interviewed (and is the sole focus of the interview) by the American Educational Research Association (AERA) for an issue of AERA Highlights.

AERA was established in 1916 and is the largest educational research association in the world (larger even than the World Educational Research Association). AERA is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or in its offices, etc.).

The interview can be found online here: https://www.aera.net/Newsroom/AERA-Highlights-E-newsletter/AERA-Highlights-September-2018/AERA-Member-Jenny-Rankin-Discusses-How-Education-Researchers-Can-Share-Their-Findings-Widely

B) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN MAINSTREAM PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin was sometimes interviewed for articles in Good Housekeeping.

Good Housekeeping was established in 1885 and (according to Wikipedia) is the 7th most widely circulated publication in the United States. If you only count its U.S. circulation, it reaches an audience of 4,315,026 people per year.

Good Housekeeping is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The articles can be found online; here is one (Dr. Rankin is mentioned in 3 times even though the article is quite short): https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a27044118/what-is-helicopter-parenting/

C) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin has been interviewed (16 times) for issues of Education Week.

Education Week was established in 1981 and is funded by the likes of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Education Week is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or in its offices, etc.).

The 16 interviews can be found online here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2020/02/educators_must_have_a_plan_of_action_to_confront_our_challenges.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/12/instructional_coaching_conversations_must_be_built_on_relationships.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/10/invite_students_to_write_real_arguments.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/06/response_administrators_cant_lead_from_the_confines_of_their_office.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/06/response_principals_shouldnt_be_lonely.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/05/response_a_trauma_informed_classroom_is_a_safe_and_secure_place.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2019/01/response_technology_will_never_replace_a_great_teacher.html https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/11/response_students_as_teachers_in_the_classroom.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/08/qa_collections_advice_for_new_teachers.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/05/response_avoid_burn-out_by_remembering_what_first_drove_you_into_teaching.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2018/03/response_teachers_must_encourage_students_to_make_meaning_together.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/09/response_new_teachers_must_create_a_balance.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/06/response_leaders_can_support_innovation_by_listening_more_speaking_less.html?cn=bWVudGlvbg%3D%3D http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/06/response_career-changers_are_attractive_teaching_candidates.html?cn=bWVudGlvbg%3D%3D http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/05/response_the_toughest_part_of_teaching_is.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/classroom_qa_with_larry_ferlazzo/2017/01/response_challenging_moments_in_teaching.html?r=1953741459

C) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

Mensa World Journal did a book review of one of Dr. Rankin’s books.

Mensa World Journal is the international journal of Mensa, which was established in 1946 and is the largest and oldest high IQ society in the world.

Mensa World Journal is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked for the publication, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The book review can be found online here: https://www.us.mensa.org/?LinkServID=ECB6C2BD-E35E-D520-7FF5145152348936&type=mwj&name=2018-07-MWJ.pdf

D) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN MAINSTREAM PUBLICATIONS

Dr. Rankin was interviewed for an article in U.S. News & World Report.

U.S. News & World Report was established in 1933 and (according to Wikipedia) its circulation reached an audience of 2,000,000 people in 1973.

U.S. News & World Report is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked there, she has never served on its board or written for it, etc.).

The article can be found online here (Dr. Rankin is mentioned in 6 times even though the article is quite short): https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a27044118/what-is-helicopter-parenting/

E) SAMPLE OF COVERAGE IN SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS

The book Data as a Feature - A Guide for Product Managers by Alice LaPlante and Matt Lemay builds heavily on the research of Dr. Rankin, includes an entire segment on Dr. Rankin’s Over-the-Counter Data concept, cites her for all of this, etc.

The book was published by O’Reilly Media, which was established in 1978 in Cambridge.

O’Reilly Media is completely independent of Dr. Rankin (e.g., she has never worked for the company, she has never written for it, she has never spoken at any of the conferences listed for it on Wikipedia, etc.). The book’s authors are also completely independent of Dr. Rankin (she seems to have never worked with them or written about them).

The book can be found online here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/47943735-data-as-a-feature---a-guide-for-product-managers

SystemDisrupt (talk) 00:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . TL;DR. Skimming your question, the word "interview" crops up frequently. Interviews are primary sources. And to the extent that they're simply Rankin talking about Rankin, without independent analysis by the interviewer, they are not independent of Rankin. To demonstrate notability, the draft should cite independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of Rankin. Any other sources hurt the draft's chances by obscuring whatever good sources the draft may have.
 * Mensa World Journal is not a scholarly publication. It's a magazine. You may cite a book review in it to help demonstrate notability via WP:AUTHOR criterion #3. The link you provided is dead, so I can't evaluate how much weight the review would carry. The ideal review would be full length and by a professional book critic, think 1,500 words by Michiko Kakutani in The New York Times. I've had drafts that cite five meaty reviews declined, and have had to fight hard to keep articles that cite six or seven such reviews.
 * The 24-page book from O'Reilly contains two sentences about Rankin's work and a quote from Rankin. It contains no citations. It is not significant coverage of Rankin, so does not help demonstrate notability.
 * You may find WP:THREE a useful exercise. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

02:46:37, 12 March 2020 review of submission by 103.192.78.154
Hello, As I'm The Public Figure & Entrepreneur People Want To Know More About Me And This Article Will Inspire Them. I Request You Look Once Again On This And Approve As Soon As Poosible. 103.192.78.154 (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Every link is apart from the twitter link that is "Account suspended" - so no that article would inspire no one to do anything! KylieTastic (talk) 15:19, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

05:21:39, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Barthmelo Cubin
This article is on Salar Shamas; an emerging artist and entrepreneur in Lahore, Pakistan with notable achievements in the field of music.The person has been recognized by various international platforms includinf Spotify, Apple Music and even Google search and in turn needs a Wikipedia page to further reinforce the online presence. Kindly look into this matter. Barthmelo Cubin (talk) 05:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. They don't need a Wikipedia page to further reinforce the online presence. If they are notable, someone else will write about them.  JTP (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

06:41:07, 12 March 2020 review of draft by Fyodor Sam Brook
why is my article being rejected? how can I submit a scanned document on my computer as a reference? how should I make a reference like? Fyodor Sam Brook (talk) 06:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

07:27:47, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Twinphile
I have reviewed the old article and enriched the missing content with more notable information links. Twinphile (talk) 07:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

07:41:09, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Cimfalab
I have added external links (GitHub and OWASP) mentioning DeepScan. As of GitHub especially, DeepScan is a member of its Marketplace and now a partner of its Student pack recently. I know GitHub is the largest developer community/platform so to being with GitHub is an evidence of notability. Also, when I search 'javascript static analysis' in Google, DeepScan is shown up at the very first rank.

Cimfalab (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

07:45:58, 12 March 2020 review of submission by HZyk
Hello. I was wondering if you could tell me exactly why was my submission declined? When creating it, I was looking at already published articles about similar topics which are already approved, and I simply cannot understand why there is an issue with mine. I made sure to only disclose factual information, and I am not quite sure what is meant by it being an "advert". Articles regarding similar topics - like Dropbox, WeTransfer or MEGA that are approved on wiki disclose in my opinion a huge amount of detailed information that could be considered an advert, yet, those are allowed?

Please, if you could explain in detail what is wrong with my submission so that I can work on it more and fix it, that would be really helpful. Thank you for your time and I am looking forward to hearing from you.

HZyk (talk) 07:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Please have a look at WP:OSE. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:42, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

09:13:37, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Boongalings
Boongalings (talk) 09:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

10:05:14, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Fyodor Sam Brook
What information should be added?

Fyodor Sam Brook (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Fyodor Sam Brook, unfortunately a Wikipedia editor has determined that the subject of the article isn't notability. As such, no amount of editing would likely get the article included in Wikipedia. But if you do believe that your article complies with WP:Notability, you can list the sources here and I'll see if they do in qualify the article. Then your article could be resubmitted. However, given the experience of AFC reviewers, I believe this is unlikely to happen. I would strongly encourage you, if you want to continue to edit Wikipedia, to focus your efforts on a subject that likely meets the notability guidelines of Wikipedia but doesn't have an article yet (you can see a list at WP:Requested Articles). Let me know if you have any other questions!Sam-2727 (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

12:35:06, 12 March 2020 review of draft by Teak11
I’m trying to create an article about high fashion model and actor Karolina Muller. She’s had a successful career in fashion and entertainment industry since the 1990s. I don’t understand why the article is still declined. I’ve sent a lot of references too.

Teak11 (talk) 12:35, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I have declined your submission again. Please see your draft for tips on how to move forward.  JTP (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

12:43:35, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Baghirovmusa
Hi, I hope you're doing well, I would like to get advice for making our company's page acceptable for Wikipedia community, as I read you G11 I found out that it's declined for reason that it had promoting content, i have seen this type of message on the top of page of 'Deloitte' which is also consulting company like ours.Please give me information that how i suppose to do that in a proper way to get confirmation. Baghirovmusa (talk) 12:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Any article about your company would not be "your company's page", but an article about your company. Your company has no special rights to it as the subject.   I see that you declared a conflict of interest, but you still need to formally comply with the paid editing policy and make the stricter paid editing declaration; a Terms of Use requirement.
 * Regarding your draft, I think that you misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to merely tell about a company.  As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes information that appears in independent reliable sources with significant coverage showing how a company meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company.  Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wants to say about itself.  Not every company merits an article here, even within the same field, it all depends on the sources.  As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years- this is why it is not a good idea to cite other similar articles as a reason for yours to exist. Each article is judged on its own merits.
 * In order for you to be successful in writing about your company, you in essence need to forget everything you know about it and only write based on the content of independent sources.  Using press releases, the company website, staff interviews, or other primary sources are not acceptable for establishing notability. Most people in your position have great difficulty writing in such a manner. If you just want to tell the world about your company, you should use its own website, social media, or other alternative forum where what you want to do is permitted.  331dot (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

17:55:18, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Lendale Johnson
Looking to add hometown Kalamazoo, MI https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2015/03/kalamazoo_celebrity_lendale_jo.html Lendale Johnson 17:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lendale Johnson (talk • contribs)
 * Hi Lendale Johnson, this article already exists in the mainspace (at Lendale Johnson). There is no need to create a separate article if the article exists. Also, the fact you are referencing about him is already in that article. Let me know if you have any other questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

21:32:42, 12 March 2020 review of submission by Jeff E Mayo Jr
Jeff E Mayo Jr (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , Do you have a question? Sulfurboy (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)