Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 August 31

= August 31 =

06:55:46, 31 August 2021 review of submission by Abm1994
someone edited the draft, what is it that we can do now. Abm1994 (talk) 06:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , has replied to you yesterday in a section above, Abm1994 The draft was rejected, and will not be considered further. If you have new information that addresses the reasons for rejection, you must contact the last reviewer and tell them what has changed. 331dot (talk) 10:49, 30 August 2021 (UTC) The only thing that is different since then is that  removed an aparent copyright violation from the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

10:50:55, 31 August 2021 review of draft by Insomniaingest
Hello, can you please review the article or give me permission to move to the article to the mainspace

Insomniaingest (talk) 10:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You have resubmitted it and it is pending, please be patient. If you move it into the encyclopedia yourself you run the risk of it being deleted or moved back to draft. Please allow the process to play out. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok thank you. -- Insomniaingest (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

15:02:08, 31 August 2021 review of submission by Salamanderxander
Hi all! I am requesting some support on this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elongate_(cryptocurrency)

A quick informal overview of the subject: Elongate is a company that has issued a cryptocurrency. It uses the funds raised to conduct philanthropic activities.

A brief backstory: I initially submitted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ELONGATE_(cryptocurrency) but it was rejected because there was already an existing draft on the subject. "Elongate" vs "ELONGATE". So, I took over editing the very poor-quality entry at "Elongate" and overhauled it.

I have reviewed GNG and the overall notability guidelines. In order to ensure that I met sufficient levels of notability for inclusion in WP, I looked towards existing articles in the same area of interest for guidance on what might be required to sum up to sufficient notability. This includes articles on DogeCoin, Shiba Inu, etc. In particular, I looked to the published article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SafeMoon SafeMoon is of particular relevance for comparison, as the organization was formed at a similar time, their cryptocurrency was issued at a similar time, and have risen to nearly identical levels of notability and reliable secondary coverage. In fact, it appears to me that the rejected "Elongate" article has more coverage and depth that the published "SafeMoon" article.

I reached out on the IRC for assistance, but was a bit disheartened at the emotional response I received, saying all entries in the "crypto" space are "Garbage". I hope that personal attitudes of reviewers towards the area of interest don't color the assessment of whether a topic is notable. Certainly, a film buff might think the subject of an Adam Sandler movie is garbage, but it's irrelevant to measuring the notability :)

If possible, I'd like some analysis and specific feedback on how to reckon the notability of the published safemoon article with this rejection. Is there specific milestones or a particular missing piece that can be sourced? Thanks for any advice!

Salamanderxander (talk) 15:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I took a look and made some improvements. I agree that this should not have been rejected, only declined, and you are not wrong to notice there's a backlash on Wikipedia against cryptocurrencies. There are too many people who want to use Wikipedia to promote their products, and that has triggered resentment. I'll also point out that it will be frustrating if you try to compare your article with others that may have been approved before there was very much attention on them. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. In this case, I think you are 2-3 sources in mainstream (non-crypto) press away from demonstrating notability.  Most of what's there now is crypto press, itself notoriously unreliable. Good luck. TechnoTalk (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

16:56:07, 31 August 2021 review of draft by Danielboczar1992
Could you please help me with the citations? I want to know which references should be removed or changed, if any. Thank you.

Danielboczar1992 (talk) 16:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Courtesy note for future editors. Article was accepted and was moved to mainspace. TechnoTalk (talk) 22:59, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

18:44:22, 31 August 2021 review of submission by 2402:4000:1181:E4F8:A052:4F43:F71E:35F3
2402:4000:1181:E4F8:A052:4F43:F71E:35F3 (talk) 18:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We can't host copyright violations Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)