Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 March 22

= March 22 =

01:03:21, 22 March 2020 review of submission by HayleO
I do not understand why "Unwritten Rule" can not have a Wikipedia page but the band they competed against "Real Like You" can.
 * 1) REDIRECT Target page name

HayleO (talk) 01:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

HayleO, if you check out the page for "Real Like You," you will see that it is supported by reliable sources that are independent of the subject and mention the band significantly (so not just trivial mentions). This is required of an article per WP:Notability. Your article has not been completely rejected: if you add reliable sources it will be accepted. Wikipedia isn't considered a reliable source, and the other two sources you have seem to be routine coverage (it's just profiles of them, and all of the three articles seem the same which suggests they are press releases or something like that). Your article was declined, which means you can resubmit it once you find sources that support notability. Also (although not required to be accepted), I would recommend you learn how to use inline citations on Wikipedia. You can learn more about this at here. Let me know if you have further questions! Sam-2727 (talk) 01:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

05:47:53, 22 March 2020 review of submission by FastCube
I created the BRFC player article for players have have 1-24 appearances with BRFC. And users are not allowing me to make this article stand. I am outraged, because this has been happening for the past three months. The reason is that they are saying that splitting the player list is a bad idea. However, I strongly disagree. When I did the same with Adelaide United FC player articles. No-one complained about it. And I'm more upset, because the BRFC player list references section have more than the AUFC player lists. And NO-ONE is replying to my messages on trying to say that these lists on stay on Wikipedia or on how to improve this. Plus, those split lists is bigger than the whole list of players who played between 2005 and 2018. Please tell me what I should do!!

FastCube (talk) 05:47, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The list page has been rejected which means it will not be considered further here. I would suggest what has already been suggested and continue to work with the people on the already created list page. If and when consensus is built to make another page, then it will be appropriately considered. As it stands, looks as if the consensus is to leave it as is. Cheers. Sulfurboy (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

07:31:06, 22 March 2020 review of submission by FrostyWolfDev
Curious as to what specifically is needed for the page to be accepted and what I am missing in the article in terms of having significant coverage and not just passing mentions. FrostyWolfDev (talk) 07:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , One review on a blog site isn't going to be enough. Please review WP:GNG and WP:NVG. Also, do you have a connection with the makers of this game? Sulfurboy (talk) 07:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

I work with the developers as a Community Developer that works on sponsorships and public image of the game via Twitch etc. Is there a minimum amount of references needed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrostyWolfDev (talk • contribs) 08:28, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. There is extensive advice regarding writing about video games at Manual of Style/Video games, including a link to a list of sources that Wikipedian's have found useful when writing about them. If, as a new editor, you find yourself citing sources that aren't on the reliable sources list, odds are you haven't found fantastic sources that no one else has ever noticed before, but that you're using ones so inappropriate that no experienced Wikipedian would even consider citing them. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:49, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

07:57:10, 22 March 2020 review of draft by Schota17
Dear AfC team, I need help with the mentioned article. I tried to follow the reviewer suggestions as close as possible, i.e. changing sections, reducing examples and adding much more footnotes to the article. Would it be possible to get more feedback, which aspects of the article could be strengthened? Thanks a lot! Schota17 (talk) 07:57, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

10:10:05, 22 March 2020 review of submission by 216.174.67.55
216.174.67.55 (talk) 10:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

13:09:12, 22 March 2020 review of draft by TheBirdsShedTears
How long does it take for an article to be approved via AfC without posting a review request here on help desk? Thanks TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 13:09, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Depends on the article and how easy it is to review. There are 2600 drafts waiting for review and it can easily take 3+ months. Simple rejections are usually done much quicker. Approvals can take even longer. Posting a review request is discouraged and normally doesn't result in a quicker approval (but often results in a quicker decline if applicable). — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 13:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay thank you! TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 13:57, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:45:57, 22 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Chatsha57
Hello, I have submitted the article but denied two times, I guess the first point of the issue is that reference websites are mostly from the Japanese site, so the reviewer cannot judge if the websites are published by the third person or not. And the biggest issue is for me now, the way of writing seems to be an advertisement, could you specify which expressions make such impression? could you help me to specify them??

Chatsha57 (talk) 14:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , The wording and phrasing is not that of a neutral encyclopedia article. The biography is just a list of achievements by year, which looks like a resume. The awards are in all caps. But as the latest reviewer noted, the sources are inadequete. We can still use Google translate on sources to read them, and some of our reviewers speak other languages. The sources need to mention him, be reliable, and give significant coverage to him. At the moment they do not, so the article remains in draft. If such articles cannot be found, then he is not notable. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

16:27:06, 22 March 2020 review of submission by Farishta Maryam Satari
Dear Wikipedia Help Desk,

Please advice on how to improve my page for it to be accepted by Wikipedia. Thanks

Farishta http://farishta.me

Farishta Maryam Satari (talk) 16:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not the place for self-promotion and social profiles. There is nothing at this time that you can do to improve the page to get it accepted. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 16:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

17:22:04, 22 March 2020 review of submission by Farishta Maryam Satari
Dear Wikipedia Help Desk,

I am creating a Person page for myself to share notable work on Wikipedia.

Your comment, "Wikipedia is not the place for self-promotion and social profiles. There is nothing at this time that you can do to improve the page to get it accepted," does not correspond to reality.

I am the first mathematician and philosopher to have proved the existential question.

"Do I exist?" "I think, therefore I am." Rene Decartes of France made a philosophical statement.

"I was because I am; 'I am,' therefore I shall be." Dr. Farishta Satari proved the existential question by mathematical induction.

My proof is published on my http://farishta.me, which I have included in the reference section.

In plain words, if Rene Decartes of France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Descartes can have a person page then so can Farishta Satari of Afghanistan.

Farishta Maryam Satari (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The René Descartes article has 141 independent reliable sources, your draft has zero. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Rene Descartes also invented analytic geometry. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a medium for sharing your work. To be written about on Wikipedia, others independent of you must write about your work.  It is also inadvisable to write about one's self here, see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 20:50, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

20:38:12, 22 March 2020 review of draft by Aceithistorian
Hi. I am working on the Allan Flanders article draft. It has a lot of information and has been written with a number of academic sources and citations and is a neutral article that does not promote a particular point of view or unduly promote the topic, however this is the information the reviewer cited as an obstacle to publishing. I was wondering if someone might take a look and see if there is anything that stands out to them as contravening these wikipedia policies and perhaps post to the page's talk page so that they might be fixed.

This is the link for the article Draft:Allan Flanders

Aceithistorian (talk) 20:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I would suggest asking the reviewer directly, but otherwise I would suggest reviewing the links provided in the decline message on the draft. The issue is more the tone and style than anything. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)