Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 May 30

= May 30 =

00:08:09, 30 May 2020 review of draft by Mtennysdotter
Not sure how to proceed or what to add. Thought I wrote the article objective but getting feedback that it's not. Can someone help me improve it? It's my first one I do. Mtennysdotter (talk) 00:08, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Mtennysdotter. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

00:12:39, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Chicago20092016
The page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fengqi_You) has been substantially revised to meet Wikipedia's rules. It is significantly shorten, and all possible violations to copyrights are removed. Could you please re-review and provide advice? Thank you!

Chicago20092016 (talk) 00:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

01:13:42, 30 May 2020 review of draft by Earthianyogi
Hi, This article has been declined three times, and I am not sure why it does not fulfil the notability requirements. I have read this wiki link: Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:British_Nuclear_Medicine_Society. However, I am not sure why the following list is not enough? What more an organisation needs to demonstrate enough notability? My article is very similar to another article successfully published on Wikipedia with only 10 references - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Association_of_Nuclear_Medicine

JOURNAL PUBLICATIONS/CONFERENCE POSTERS:

1. Competencies and training of radiographers and technologists for PET/MR imaging - a study from the UK MR-PET network" European Journal of Hybrid Imaging. 4 (1): 1. doi:10.1186/s41824-019-0070-6. ISSN2510-3636. (2020).

2. Clinical trials in molecular radiotherapy—Tribulations and Triumphs Report of the NCRI CTRad meeting held at the Lift Islington, 8 June 2018 : https://www.birpublications.org/doi/abs/10.1259/bjr.20190117?journalCode=bjr

3. Evaluation of Radiopharmaceutical Adverse Reaction Reports to the British Nuclear Medicine Society from 2007 to 2016: http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/58/12/2010.short

4. Quality assurance in myocardial perfusion tomography: a collaborative BNCS/BNMS audit programme. British Nuclear Cardiology Society/British nuclear Medicine Society. https://europepmc.org/article/med/10581589

5. A survey of nuclear cardiological practice in Great Britain https://heart.bmj.com/content/heartjnl/67/3/273.full.pdf

6. Global shortage of medical isotopes threatens nuclear medicine services BMJ 2008; 337 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1577 (Published 05 September 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1577

7. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence: A consensus conference organised by the British Cardiac Society, the British Nuclear Cardiology Society and the British Nuclear Medicine Society, endorsed by the Royal College of Physicians of London and the Royal College of Radiologists https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00259-003-1344-5

8. The radiation dose to ward nurses from patients having nuclear medicine investigations: https://inis.iaea.org/search/searchsinglerecord.aspx?recordsFor=SingleRecord&RN=18036859

9. Improving information for nuclear medicine department outpatients. https://europepmc.org/article/med/8047325

10. Hogg P, Holmes K. The interpretation of nuclear medicine data by non-medical health care professionals: Developments in the United Kingdom. Journal of Radiography and Diagnostic Imaging. 2000; 3: 77–85.

11. Audit of nuclear medicine scientific and technical standards: Nuclear Medicine Communications: August 2004 - Volume 25 - Issue 8 - p 771-775; https://journals.lww.com/nuclearmedicinecomm/Abstract/2004/08000/Audit_of_nuclear_medicine_scientific_and_technical.3.aspx

12. Evidence-based indications for the use of PET-CT in the United Kingdom 2016. https://europepmc.org/article/MED/27207376

13. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence: https://europepmc.org/backend/ptpmcrender.fcgi?accid=PMC2562441&blobtype=pdf

14, Setting up a myocardial perfusion scintigraphy service: clinical and business aspects. https://europepmc.org/backend/ptpmcrender.fcgi?accid=PMC1876393&blobtype=pdf

15. Guidelines for the provision of radiopharmacy support to nuclear medicine. https://europepmc.org/article/MED/12744229

16. Guidelines for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate using plasma sampling. Nuclear Medicine Communications: August 2004 - Volume 25 - Issue 8 - p 759-769. https://journals.lww.com/nuclearmedicinecomm/Abstract/2004/08000/Guidelines_for_the_measurement_of_glomerular.2.aspx

17. The new BNMS guidelines for measurement of glomerular filtration rate. Nuclear Medicine Communications, 01 Aug 2004, 25(8):755-757DOI: 10.1097/01.mnm.0000136714.77658.4a PMID: 15266168

18. Isotope shortage is limiting nuclear medicine across Europe. BMJ 2008; 337 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1575 (Published 05 September 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1575; https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a1575.extract

19. Guidelines for the Provision of Physics Support to Nuclear Medicine; Nuclear Medicine Communications, 1999, 20, 781–787; http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.458.6208&rep=rep1&type=pdf

20. Nuclear medicine in district general hospitals. Br Med J 1979; 2 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.2.6201.1336 (Published 24 November 1979)

BNMS STAFF RELATED POST:

21. BNMS Vision - British Nuclear Medicine Society". www.bnms.org.uk. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

22. McCready, Ralph; Gnanasegaran, Gopinath; Bomanji, Jamshed B. (9 March 2016). A History of Radionuclide Studies in the UK: 50th Anniversary of the British Nuclear Medicine Society. ISBN25. McCready, V. Ralph (2019-11-01). "The 70th anniversary of automated radionuclide imaging". European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 46 (12): 2414–2417. doi:10.1007/s00259-019-04413-5. ISSN1619-7089.

UK GOVT

23. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/880548/ARSAC_NfG_Apr_2020.pdf

24. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/134202/bma-briefing-euratom-and-brexit.pdf

BOOKS:

25. Hamilton, David (David I.), 1951- (2011). Diagnostic nuclear medicine: a physics perspective. Springer. p.318. ISBN. OCLC1065219450.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) pg. 373

26. Sharp, Peter F. (2005). Practical Nuclear Medicine. Springer-Verlag London Ltd. p.65. ISBN. OCLC300259694.

27. Feld, Michael; Roo, Michel de (2003). History of Nuclear Medicine in Europe. p.81. ISBN.Festschrift – the Institute of Nuclear Medicine: 50 Years. 23 October 2011. ISBN. Pg 33.“The University of Leeds Review". 1987. Pg 278

REPORTS:

28. Royal College of Physician: Hybrid imaging guidance on legislative, reporting and training aspects Read the guidance". RCP London. 2016-11-25. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

29. The society of Radiographers: Covid-19 nuclear medicine recovery guidance | Society of Radiographers". www.sor.org. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

30. No-deal Brexit guidance for nuclear medicine teams | The Royal College of Radiologists". www.rcr.ac.uk. Retrieved 2020-05-05.

BLOG:

31. Nottingham University: “Far more talent than we counted on". Postgraduate Placements. 2019-10-21. Retrieved 2020-05-05.http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/postgraduateplacements/2019/10/21/far-more-talent- than-we-counted-on/

32. ECMC: https://www.ecmcnetwork.org.uk/news/announcement/cert-welcomes-support-british-nuclear-medicine-society

AWARDS:

33. The PET Centre". www.sthpetcentre.org.uk. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

34. King's College London.mp4, retrieved 2020-05-29

35. IPEM > About IPEM > Prizes and Awards > IPEM Members winning external awards". www.ipem.ac.uk. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

36. https://www.uhs.nhs.uk/ContactUs/Directoryofconsultants/Consultants-by-service/Radiology-scans-and-imaging-consultants/SaadDrZia.aspx

Thank you for your help. Earthianyogi (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Earthianyogi (talk) 01:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * the concerns aren't about the count of references, its about their type. Wikipedia reqires reliable independent sources for establishing notability. I haven't checked them all, but stuff written by the subject or the article (or persons working at the subject of the article are not accepted. (and btw said page has 5 references, at least 2 of them appearing reliable and independent) Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:27, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * , thank you. I initially thought so. But when my article got rejected a couple times, I am forced to think that numbers do matter. Earthianyogi (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

01:45:06, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Watermelen
Watermelen (talk) 01:45, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Why was my draft about Lydia Palmatier declined?


 * As stated on Draft:Lydia Palmatier and on your user page, the draft fails to show that Palmatier is notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself, your family, or your friends. Its articles are not a place to express your opinions. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

03:04:57, 30 May 2020 review of submission by 2601:8C:C100:CE62:1150:B1CB:5D96:EC5E
This is my first complete article to be written from scratch and entered for submission. I know I am not very good at it yet, but I am trying hard to get better by taking the advice given and making the changes suggested. I feel like I might have gotten it right this time, which is why I am requesting a re-review, but I know that I need others to feel the same way for it to be able to actually be published, so please let me thank you all who have helped me for both your great patience and continued kind consideration. Thank you. 2601:8C:C100:CE62:1150:B1CB:5D96:EC5E (talk) 03:04, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

2601:8C:C100:CE62:1150:B1CB:5D96:EC5E (talk) 03:04, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging as the reviewer who rejected. For the talkpage: I wasn't able to check the first two sources, but for the third one could argue that it is not WP:SIGCOV. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:21, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . Thanks for checking. I am happy for the article to be re-submitted now, so that someone else can review it. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 00:33, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

06:11:39, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Benedict2005
Im sorry if the wikipedia Article i created (The Goodwin Family) for review was not pleasing, or appropriate. However, is it ok to still work on my Article and still submit it for review if i just remove the "Place of Memorials"? The Goodwin family are in fact a significant family for the Titanic. Benedict2005 (talk) 06:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . Removing some small part is unlikely to transform the draft from a memorial into an encyclopedia article. The first source is a dead link. The second is a personal blog, so not a reliable source. Find-a-grave is a generally unreliable source. Encyclopedia Titanica is user-generated content, so not a reliable source either, see the WP:RSN archives. To continue working on the draft you would need to blow it up and start over from scratch, using reliable sources for history, like books from academic publishers.
 * Wikipedia has some articles about RMS Titanic's crew and passengers, and possibly another one could be acceptable. However, the overwhelming majority of people involved will never meet the encyclopedia's notability guidelines (inclusion criteria). Given the popularity of the topic and the number of Wikipedia editors, you can assume that articles about the most clearly notable people already exist. None of those articles is very good. Your time might be better spent improving an existing article instead of trying to create a new one. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:17, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

06:18:20, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Saileshkolanu
I am unable to create a biography page. Saileshkolanu (talk) 06:18, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Writing an autobiographical article (not just a "page") is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, please see the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, that's what social media is for.  Wikipedia summarizes only what independent reliable sources say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, that of a notable creative professional like a director).  If you truly meet that criteria, independent editors will eventually take note of you and your work and write about you.
 * Please also note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

17:15:09, 30 May 2020 review of draft by Hana Moh HN
For the Draft:Nasser Al-Aswadi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nasser_Al-Aswadi Mr.1292simon put this question for me: This BLP does not include events that pass Wikipedia's notability thresholds. Does the WP:SPA author have a COI that should be disclosed? I am from Yemen, and I am interested in writing about artists in my country. This artist is a famous artist who has many artworks that you can search about and find on the internet. His exhibitions international ones. I hope you confirm it to be published. Hana Moh HN (talk) 17:15, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

17:31:17, 30 May 2020 review of submission by YiruoLiu
I was wondering why my submission was declined? I'm aware that there is already an OpenResty wikipedia page, but OpenResty and OpenResty Inc. are different things.

YiruoLiu (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi . As stated on Draft:OpenResty Inc. and on your user page, the draft fails to show that the company is notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia), separate from the product OpenResty (which also fails to demonstrate notability, and will likely be deleted shortly). --Worldbruce (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

18:21:01, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Jackbigfan
What did i do wrong Jackbigfan (talk) 18:21, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a place to write about yourself, your family, or your friends. Its articles are not a place to promote or adulate anyone. --Worldbruce (talk) 00:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

18:51:50, 30 May 2020 review of submission by Amitmgosavi
Amitmgosavi (talk) 18:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

20:43:08, 30 May 2020 review of submission by RichardZack
Hello, an article submission I made was declined due to alleged notability reasons, however, multiple articles from independent sources were provided, including from TechCrunch and the Times Union, both well respected, independent publications. Can anyone help me understand why this wouldn't be considered notable?

RichardZack (talk) 20:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

20:52:49, 30 May 2020 review of submission by D.rainer
Editor said there are not enough sources. Which sources does it need for the article to be released? D.rainer (talk) 20:52, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:NWEBSITE requires at least three reliable independent sources. Your draft currentely has two sources:


 * #1, alexa.com appears to be a directory listing, which are generally not accepted
 * #2 is the subject's own terms of use page. (which is not independent)
 * Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

21:13:21, 30 May 2020 review of submission by DenverBB
DenverBB (talk) 21:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC) Hi, could I please get advice on which areas of this article are causing the it to get rejected? All sources used are secondary sources not connected with the subject. All language is objective and fact-based from sources given. I would like to know what to change and how to avoid these issues on any other articles I contribute to in the future. Thank you!
 * Your submission has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. The draft just tells about LaPedis.  Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable author).  Your sources don't have in depth, significant coverage, they just tell things this author has done. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)