Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 May 28

= May 28 =

03:32:09, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Khetarpals.a
Khetarpals.a (talk) 03:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

i dont understand why is it said that I have violated the copyright. The article published on soolegal is written by me only, and I published the article there also. So how does this violate any copyright.


 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy, you can license that text so that it can be republished elsewhere. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Even if you are able to establish a compatible license, it likely will be impossible to use the text here. Material on that website has been written to encourage the hiring of an immigration attorney, a purpose which is fundamentally incompatible with Wikipedia. Writing an encyclopedia article is an entirely different undertaking. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

05:10:10, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Terminalbud
I am requesting a re-review of this article because the reasons given for it being declined feels both vague and simply untrue. First of all it states I did not add sources after the second review, which i did and even made sure to write in the details of in the editing log. Second of all, it says it sounds like a biography, i have just followed the way other biographies have been written on Wikipedia, but i personally don't know miss Iversen, so if the reviewer is indicating that I am not reliable enough to write this article because i don't actually  know her then fair enough,  but i was under the impression that anyone can write articles about someone as long as the sources of information is legit. and everything i have found for this article is directly translated from online articles and magazines i have found and they are all added linked in the source section. Terminalbud (talk) 05:10, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Between the second review on 5 March and the reject on 9 May, you made two edits to the draft. Those edits did not add any sources. What you say above is simply untrue.
 * The problems identified in the first two reviews have not been fixed. The first section, for example, cites IMDB and an article in Halden Arbeiderblad. IMDb, being user-generated, is not a reliable source. The Halden Arbeiderblad article supports only that she graduated from NISS in 2011-2012, which is a small part of the section. If you aren't being employed by Iversen to write this, then reviewers will wonder where you got information like: "Iversen grew up on the countryside of Norway before she moved to the City Trondheim where she studied ... from 2007 to 2009. This is also where she started her hosting career as a main host for the weekly show, created for and by students, Student Magasinet."
 * Six of the inline citations are split between Halden Arbeiderblad and Kampanje. Possibly they could form the foundation of a draft. But the remaining citations do nothing to establish notability. Seven are to TV2 and NRK Radio, which are her employers, so not independent (they have a vested interest in promoting her). VGTV is an interview without analysis by the interviewer, it's Iversen in Iversen's words, so not independent. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

07:07:59, 28 May 2020 review of submission by 70.59.84.88
70.59.84.88 (talk) 07:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

09:08:54, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Abhinavsidharth
Can I know which of the citations are reliable and which of them I should take off? Also, how many more reliable citations do I need? Abhinavsidharth (talk) 09:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . None of the citations are to independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of the company; all of them should be removed. The draft doesn't need a greater quantity of citations. The topic would need higher quality citations to demonstrate notability (suitability for inclusion in the encyclopedia). The reviewer's analysis is that no good sources exist, so no amount of editing will make the draft acceptable, and volunteers do not intend to review it again. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

09:37:47, 28 May 2020 review of submission by LuckyAnimations
Because It is my favorite movie and there is no info about it, anywhere. You ca only see it in the cinemas. LuckyAnimations (talk) 09:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If there's no info about it, then it's not notable. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

10:34:13, 28 May 2020 review of submission by 2A02:587:DC14:8500:3D09:D167:1416:1B90
{{SAFESUBST:Void|

Hey I want to know why want to delete the Vasileios Diagoumas article? If you search on the internet you will see many articles of that person, please answer me so I can know what you think
 * The page hasn't been deleted yet. The submission was declined because the submission didn't indicate how the subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Note that many Youtubers dont meet them. You can read The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

14:15:13, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Dbloom81
Hi, I was looking for some help. My article got rejected with the comment that Wikipedia is not for WP:PROMOTION or WP:ADVERTISEMENT - I crafted my page around this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_Beach. The company this linked article is about is also a law firm, and I structured it in a very similar way. I was wondering what that article does differently versus what I did, and what I have to change to get my article accepted. All help in this regard would be greatly appreaciated! Dbloom81 (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello,, The Harris Beach article was an unfortunate choice of model -- it is tagged as being promotional, and its notability has been challenged. it may be significantly rewritten or even deleted in the near future.
 * The key issue here is notability (a term which Wikipedia uses in a special sence. See our guideline o9n the notability of companies and WP:CORPDEPTH. In general an article should demonstrate the notability of the topic by including citations to multiple independent published reliable sources that each discuss the topic in some depth and detail. In the current draft:
 * ref 1 is to the firms o0wn web site -- not independent.
 * Ref 2 is to bestlawfirms, which ranks firms but gives no details -- no significant coverage.
 * Ref 3 is to a Rochester Business Journal article behind a paywall, so I cannot evaluate it. But it would be only one source at best.
 * Ref 4 is to a list of articvles written by (not about) a firm member in the  NY Daily Record -- not independent, and no significant coverage of the firm.
 * Ref 5 is the same as ref 4, for a different member of the firm
 * In short, none of these (except possibly the Rochester Business Journal article, has anything to demonstrate the notability oif this firm. News coverage or other independent writing about (no9t by) the firm would be needed. Not blogs, not passing mentions or directory entries, and not anything based on PR from the firm.
 * The secondary issue here is promotion. The lists (with no detail) of areas of practice and office locations do not add much to the encyclopedic value of teh text, and do have a flavo9r of promotion. The areas of practice in particular should probably go, unless there are noted achievements in some of them that are discussed by indentation sources in some detail. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

14:24:11, 28 May 2020 review of submission by 27.4.7.178
27.4.7.178 (talk) 14:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC) {{SAFESUBST:Void|}just give me few more changes to make please to all administrators. Let me Put all relevant sources once again please. And do help me with it requesting all

14:27:29, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Swasti Salecha
Because I am not given any particular reason as to why my article is rejected. Please explain me and share the details since I am doing all this for the first time. Swasti Salecha (talk) 14:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It was rejected because it is a blatant advertisement sourced to their own website. Theroadislong (talk) 14:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * See further the answer I gave at the Teahouse. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 14:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

14:31:42, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Tauqir baig
Tauqir baig (talk) 14:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This isn't even close to being an article. Please note that Wikipedia is not a social network. You can read WP:YFA for information about writing your first article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:28, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

15:15:20, 28 May 2020 review of submission by SONGEZO SA
SONGEZO SA (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

15:43:02, 28 May 2020 review of draft by RoyBuchanan
Hello! I am trying to create a basic Wiki page for the 112 Drive-In movie theater in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Doing so would start the process of beginning to link to it on other Wiki pages that list remaining drive-in theaters in America (there are only about 330 left in the country), so it can be easily found by people seeking such information. My submission was rejected, and I was told, "The sources you currently have don't demonstrate any particular importance." However, I feel as though the establishment itself — which is the oldest remaining drive-in in the state, and one of only three left in the entire state — demonstrates particular importance in and of itself, due to its rarity, and that needing to provide such a description from a source, which I am unable to find via Google Books, local/state media, etc., will keep me from creating the page.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

RoyBuchanan (talk) 15:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * first of all, your draft was declined, not rejected. I am going to ping the reviewer, as I am not that comfortable with special notability stuff like here. Howewer, for the sources of your draft:


 * #1 appears to be a directory listing, I am unsure if its reliable but most are not
 * #2 could be useable
 * #3 is a book I wasn't able to check right now, but it could be. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * all of what says is correct. #3 I would doesn't indicate notability because it's a list of drive in theaters in the United States. Surely not every drive in theater is notable or deserves a Wikipedia article! If it is indeed a "rarity" then there are likely news articles that discuss it in the depth. Looking up "112 drive-in" (with quotes) on google finds plenty of sources. Just add these sources and you should be good to go. An interesting direction you could take here is mentioning the drive-in theater during COVID-19. It seems that there are a lot of news articles online that discuss that. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You can of course submit your article again once you add these sources. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

16:19:51, 28 May 2020 review of draft by S.elrefaie
S.elrefaie (talk) 16:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * your draft currently does not establish how this subject meets WP:NMUSIC. You have a single non-independent source linked. We require at least three reliable, independent sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

16:24:25, 28 May 2020 review of submission by 2601:646:4201:AE40:75D7:9382:98A7:2403
2601:646:4201:AE40:75D7:9382:98A7:2403 (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

The topic is notable enough, as it is searchable on all streaming platforms, and you can find It on many social media sites. There is also already a Google knowledge panel on the topic.
 * Social media networks are not eigible for establishing notability. Please read WP:42 for what wikipedia looks for. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

17:45:54, 28 May 2020 review of submission by BristolAlex
Hello, my submission of this draft was declined. It said it's not "qualified" and doesn't meet the formal tone. The draft is a 1:1-translation from the German article about the same person, which was approved and is online for quite a while now. I know that the two Wikipedias are different things, nevertheless I don't have a clue what to improve. IMO it is written in a formal, neutral tone and every detail has got a reference to it. Thank you very much for your help.

BristolAlex (talk) 17:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Non neutral content includes "the saxophonist with the famous german musician", "participated on the highly successful albums", "at the renowned", "taking place in the sold-out „Stadthalle Sigmaringen", " multifaceted and versatile". Theroadislong (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

19:16:57, 28 May 2020 review of submission by Coder196
The page has been substantially revised to meet Wikipedia's rules. Please re-review and provide advice. Thank you! Coder196 (talk) 19:16, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

19:27:17, 28 May 2020 review of submission by মোছাঃ নূরুন্নাহার
মোছাঃ নূরুন্নাহার (talk) 19:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Draft6:Nurunnahar does not cite any independent sources There is nothing in it to indicate that the subject is notable. In particular it does not indicate that this person comes close to meeting the criteria in our guideline on notability for actors or our general notability guideline. Most professional actors are not notable, and will not have Wikipedia articles. Unless there are multiple, professionally published reliable sources that each discuss Nurunnahar in depth and that are independent of him, or unless he fulfills one of the other criteria of WP:NACTOR (which does not seem to be the case) he is not notable at this time, and there will not be an accepted article, no matter how it is written. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)