Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 August 9

= August 9 =

Request on 00:00:48, 9 August 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Tetide
The person 'Theroadislong' who decided on behalf of Wikipedia, that the page I made on ERO (Dominique Philbert) is on a subject that does not have notability, justified his decision in an unfounded way: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject" and "The comment the reviewer left was: struggling to find anything but a passing mention of him in the sources let alone in-depth significant coverage?"

My founded answer, just to name one example, is a question: is the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, one of the most important and oldest in the USA, where ERO (Dominique Philbert) was just exhibited from 2020 to 2021 in the exhibition 'Writing the Future -Basquiat and the Hip Hop Generation' as an artist of the Basquiat's group, something that gave ERO enough notability? a Museum where a great ERO's painting was exhibited as on an altar, in between two pilasters painted by Keith Haring, and reproduced double page in the related catalog, with biography and mentions in various parts of the catalog. Exhibited near the big double portrait that Basquiat painted of him as a sign of esteem. ERO died at 41 in 2011, why Theroadislong wants him dead again, just for the pleasure of shooting? But is it in the interest of knowledge and so of Wikipedia? The page I wrote is full of references and proofs of his notability and historic importance, for sure for the Art History of the Graffiti Art movement of the 1980's and for American Black Art (Black Arts matters?). There are about four other (white) artists around the world that took the pseudonym 'ERO' much after Dominique Philbert did in 1982, there could also be somebody enjoying, as a sick 'ego trip', a lack of information on the first one (Dominique Philbert)? Hope not, but be aware. However among others the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston is 'independent of the subject', and their above ment. exhibition's catalog doesn't have at all just 'passing mentions'. etc. etc. etc. Upon request and explaining me how to do it, I can send extracts of the mentioned Boston's catalogue. signed Tetide Tetide (talk) 00:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

02:25:32, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Pearlaficionado
Hi, I'd like to request assistance on sounding neutral in my tone. Which specific words make this article sound biased? Thank you and please advise.

Pearlaficionado (talk) 02:25, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

03:59:13, 9 August 2021 review of submission by 68.131.21.182
68.131.21.182 (talk) 03:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

06:15:15, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Vishnu Tiwari gh
Vishnu Tiwari gh (talk) 06:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Draft is deleted, editor blocked, request moot. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 08:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

07:31:12, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Arya Mac
Arya Mac (talk) 07:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, may I know why the article was deleted since I've mentioned it very briefly? Kindly, requesting you to help me out with this. If something 's, specifically missing or needs to be updated.

I've made certain changes in the article with relevant references as well. And So, have re-published it again. Looking forward to hearing from you.
 * The draft was declined, not deleted. The draft just tells about the existence of the school and only has one source.  A Wikipedia article must summarize what multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the school, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Most reviewers look for at least three such sources that can be summarized.  Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

08:33:30, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Hakukazuki
Hakukazuki (talk) 08:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, my draft submission has been declined a few times for reading too much like an advertisement or being too promotional. I've been trying to edit these things out by making the contents of the article sound more neutral and by avoiding peacock terms but it still seems to be not enough to be approved. Could I please get some help to see which parts of the article sound too promotional so that I can try to change or edit it out and prevent being declined again? Thank you.
 * If you have a connection to Brian Cha, you must disclose it per WP:COI and WP:PAID(declaring paid editing is a Terms of Use requirement). Your draft just tells about Brian Cha and what he has done- Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about him, showing how he meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. The sources you offered are all brief coverage merely telling what Brian has done. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

09:02:23, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Pomagai
Pomagai (talk) 09:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 09:05, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

09:39:24, 9 August 2021 review of draft by JMB Shovon
My article got declined due to proper referencing. I'm not sure how to cite the websites so that the new page gets approved. Will really appreciate for any help possible. Thanks in advance.

JMB Shovon (talk) 09:39, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The sources you have offered are the company website, press releases, and a source to cite specific information. These things do not establish notability. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. Please read Your first article. If you have an association with the company, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt reply. I have actually wrote this page for official purpose. How can I change such information now? And feeling confused about which things to add or remove to get approved on the resubmission. Please help me figure this out, I will be editing this page and create few more to link with in future.


 * The company does not appear to be notable (suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia). If that is the case, no amount of editing will make the draft acceptable. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for your writing. Wikipedia may not be used for any kind of marketing, promotion, or publicity. --Worldbruce (talk)

Worldbruce thank you once again. I tried my best not to sound like a marketer in that draft even though I am one. Is there any way to keep the draft and edit until some more notable references come along in the following months then resubmit again for approval? Please do inform me.
 * Drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity, so if you anticipate independent sources giving your company significant coverage on their own(not based on press releases, announcements of routine business activities, or any other materials put out by the company), you may rewrite the draft when you have those sources. Even if the draft is deleted due to inactivity, it can be restored by asking at WP:REFUND. P.S., pinging others by linking their username does not work unless you sign your post. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

331dot thank you so much. Yes, we are anticipating significant independent coverages within this year. Will surely next time get the rewritten draft reviewed from the community before submitting for approval. Hope to receive such help and support again soon. Leant so much already.

Thanks to All. JMB Shovon (talk) 15:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

11:01:34, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Suganthancbe
Hi, i dont know why my article is rejected. please give me the exact reasons. I was new to Wikipedia

Suganthancbe (talk) 11:01, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . Draft:The Eye Foundation was declined because it cites no independent, reliable, secondary sources. It is significant coverage in such sources that determines notability - the suitability of the topic for a stand alone encyclopedia article - and such references should be the source of the bulk of the article. Wikipedia is not for any kind of advertising, promotion, or public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Request on 11:08:24, 9 August 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Abbeydavid
11:08:24, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Abbeydavid

have been trying to public an article for Ambassador Micheal Tawadrous my articles have been rejected so many time. please i need help with the articles

Abbeydavid (talk) 11:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Your sources are completely contextless. We're not going to accept a cite that's just the name of an outlet/institution; we need much more information than that. Author and title of the page/article/book being cited, among other things, are absolute requirements. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 11:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

12:47:02, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Endrabcwizart
Endrabcwizart (talk) 12:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Endrabcwizart (talk) 12:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC) for advice
 * The AfC project only reviews drafts for encyclopedic articles, which are different from social media (Facebook, Twitter etc.) profiles, which we don't have here. User:Endrabcwizart/sandbox looked more like something to put on your userpage, though messages for you (regardless of their nature) will always be posted on your user talk page. If you meant to create a encyclopedic article, check out Help:Your first article and plase be advised that creating an article about yourself is strongely discouraged. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:39, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

13:04:11, 9 August 2021 review of submission by 106.213.208.72
106.213.208.72 (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. No sources, no article, no debate. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 22:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

13:53:41, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Longh24
Hello, I have a problem with the copyright of a lots photos. Their source is the book "La fabrique et le village: la Tavannes Watch Co 1890-1918" of Cercle d'études historiques de la Société jurassienne d'Emulation, Porrentruy, Switzerland and I don't know how to cite this source. Can you show me how to do that?

Thank you in advance. Longh24 (talk) 13:53, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Photos don't benefit a draft in the first place; I would leave them out for now. As for citing books, see cite book. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 22:01, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

16:20:23, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Noddla
Hello! I'm trying to publish my first article, but it has been declined due to its reference. However the references are from renowned music industry and entertainment publications like MBW, Music Week and Rolling Stone. Could this decision be reconsidered? Thanks! Noddla.

Noddla (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Refer to the top table here:
 * https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/ditto-music-lee-parsons-interview-749510/ is useless for notability (Connexion to subject). Interview.
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/lee-parsons-theres-never-been-a-better-time-to-be-a-recording-artist-i-hope-our-politicians-can-understand-that/ is useless for notability (Connexion to subject). Op-ed written by the subject.
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/a-lot-of-artists-end-up-frustrated-if-they-sign-away-their-independence/ is useless for notability (Connexion to subject). Interview, and the extensive lede is about Ditto Records more than Parsons. (Sources that help for Ditto's notability do not help for Parsons' notability.)
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/digital-distributor-ditto-music-to-launch-coffee-chain-across-uk/ is a non-sequitur and more about Ditto Records. Sources need to actually discuss the subject at length, and we're not going to consider coverage of Ditto to be tantamount to coverage of Parsons.
 * https://ilovemanchester.com/hip-new-coffee-shop-with-indie-music-at-its-heart-to-open-in-manchesters-west-village is a non-sequitur.
 * We can't use https://www.allinlondon.co.uk/directory/cafes-coffee-shops/234820-ditto-coffee-shoreditch (too sparse). Business directory. Even if we could, it'd be a non-sequitur.
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/ditto-music-launches-london-based-artist-management-company/ is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse) and for Ditto (routine coverage).
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/ditto-management-on-going-top-5-in-the-uk-were-not-in-the-old-school-music-industry-club-weve-got-data-instead/ is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse). This would be better as a source for an article on Ditto Records.
 * https://www.musicweek.com/publishing/read/ditto-music-launches-publishing-division-headed-up-by-tom-weller/083499 is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse) and for Ditto (routine coverage).
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/ditto-launches-opulous-platform-to-help-artists-access-funding-without-the-need-for-traditional-banks/ is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse) and for Ditto (routine coverage).
 * https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/opulous-just-raised-6-5-million-now-it-wants-more-artists-to-sell-nfts-through-its-platform/ is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse) and for Ditto (too sparse/routine coverage). This source also tells me this subject falls under WP:GS/CRYPTO.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=55 is useless for notability for Parsons (too sparse) and for Ditto (too sparse/routine coverage).
 * Does this help? —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 22:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

21:07:50, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Clinozoisite
I am confused on the question of Notability? The article in question references an individual that served as the United States Chief Hydrographer and was commanding officer of 2 Hydrographic Vessels. The person in question is the replacement for a person that has a Wiki page already. All people that have held this "office" have a wiki page. I am confused on how this is not notable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_M._Smith

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Hann

Clinozoisite (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

21:17:43, 9 August 2021 review of draft by Bodega2019
Bodega2019 (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

I have added additional references as requested, including a major review published in a major publication, The Guardian. I would like to communicate with someone at wikipedia who can assist me in adhering to wikipedia standards for this article. Please let me know how I can do this. Thanks.

21:54:43, 9 August 2021 review of submission by Sks2002official
The site was once popular but now it's been discontinued. Sks2002official (talk) 21:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . The draft was rejected not because Vlare is no longer popular or has been discontinued, but because in the reviewer's judgement the topic has never been notable. Notability is not the same as popularity — although being popular may increase the chances that it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, You are welcome to seek out such coverage, perhaps from the period when Vlare was popular. The coverage need not be in English, and it need not be online. But if no such coverage exists, then no amount of editing will make the draft acceptable. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)