Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 December 8

= December 8 =

01:56:41, 8 December 2021 review of submission by Sjchin
Wanted to ask if this link can be used as a source? https://www.channelnewsasia.com/watch/becoming-global-hub/connecting-world-2277481 This is a part of the docuseries done by Channel News Asia. Our part starts at 28:00. Can I just mention that CNA did a docuseries with Akribis and use this reference there? CNA would not do a docuseries without verifying the company background. Also, since the business times article can be taken as the first source, Can I mention about a couple of awards that Akribis won and take these two sources as reference for those awards and patents filed by Akribis? https://sbr.com.sg/co-written-partner/more-news/akribis-systems-pte-ltd-clinches-made-in-singapore-award-automation-sys https://www.designworldonline.com/2020-leap-awards-winners-announced/ Thanks

Sjchin (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

04:30:22, 8 December 2021 review of submission by Sspringett
The CycloneDX SBOM standard is of significant technical relevance due to the requirement of the U.S. federal government on all software vendors and the downstream impact that causes on all other software vendors. By the end of 2022, millions of organizations will be producing CycloneDX SBOMs. Currently, it's estimated to be over 100K organizations.

Also of relevance is the fact that SPDX, a older standard with less adoption, is already included in Wikipedia. Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Package_Data_Exchange. I believe if Wikipedia is to be viewed as non-biased, then both standards would be included.

Sspringett (talk) 04:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * See other stuff exists for that argument. Theroadislong (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest never claiming bias if you want to be taken seriously. We are all volunteers. On the merits, if it WILL be adopted by millions then presumably one of those millions will write an independent article and it will become notable. Until then, the subject is not notable by the policies of wikipedia. Slywriter (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

10:15:17, 8 December 2021 review of submission by Garryishere
Please tell me how to fix the faults. The entity in this article is a well known public figure of national importance.

Garryishere (talk) 10:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It has been rejected and will be speedy deleted as blatant promotion. Theroadislong (talk) 10:16, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

11:37:00, 8 December 2021 review of draft by 194.78.137.162
I have had an entry on EU Code Week rejected twice because it 'sounds like advertising'. I have tired to keep the language as neutral as possible, but with no success.

Other events under the EU Code Week umbrella (like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coding_Week) have been accepted, so I am not sure how to proceed.

Will be grateful for any advice you can give on how to adapt my entry.

Thanks in advance.

194.78.137.162 (talk) 11:37, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Other article isn't a great example and seems to be of dubious quality. Regardless, we don't use other articles as the measuring stick.  Wikipedia needs independent reliable coverage.   Wikipedia doesn't want a summary of the subject's own words. Slywriter (talk) 16:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

15:56:23, 8 December 2021 review of submission by Tlc356
I'm told "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Nolands Ferry I Archeological Site. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you."

If I choose to add this information to the page "Noland's Ferry I Archeological Site", can/should the page name be changed to just "Noland's Ferry"? If yes, how should the Archeological Site information be presented (as another heading, or other)?

If I choose to proceed with "Draft:Noland's Ferry", how much content needs to be added? I beleive merging the draft into the existing may be the right answer but I am concerned that the existing article name will be mis-leading if not modified.

Thanks in advance, Tom

Tlc356 (talk) 15:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , Get the information into the other article then start a discussion on the articles tall page about what the best title is. Slywriter (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd actually prefer it split out, but I'm quite willing to take the discussion to Talk:Noland's Ferry. Can you find any examples of articles on other closed Ferries? (And White's Ferry doesn't count, I'm not sure its dead. :)) Ping me on the discussion, I'm relatively local to the Ferry.Naraht (talk) 09:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

17:58:20, 8 December 2021 review of draft by VMVS2021
Hello, the draft will not allow me to add the official photo of Bruce R. James, 24th Public Printer of the United States. It cites I do not have permission to use such a photo citing copyright issues. As a photo taken my a federal government agency and in the public domain this photo cannot be copy copyrighted. In general, images created by U.S. government agencies are not covered by copyright because federal law removes copyright protection from works of the U.S. government. This restriction extends to any work “prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties.”

If you would please let me know how I may be able to post this photo to go along with the draft just submitted for review. Thank you.

VMVS2021 (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The photo can be added once the draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia; it's not necessary to add the photo now. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if the photo were public-domain, as you claim it is, it wouldn't help the draft a whit. Focus on the text and the sourcing, as those will allow the draft to actually leave draft status. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 21:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Request on 21:07:04, 8 December 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by DMEintl
Hi Wikipedia! I understand that the article cannot be published due to lack of verifiable sources. I added a section at the bottom called press, and cited where the band has been reviewed or featured. Many of these reviewers are outside of the US, as the band itself is from India. Is that the reason why it was declined? Or do I need to remove any of the wiki citations? Please advise. Happy to make required changes. They're a great band!

DMEintl (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:NMUSIC, WP:N and WP:GNG for guidance on notability. Slywriter (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

21:31:43, 8 December 2021 review of submission by Sapodefirst
Can someone reconsider this article. I believe wikipedia users should have access to all information irrespective of how notable they are or not. What should matter to us is the authenticity of the information. Sapodefirst (talk) 21:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's not how Wikipedia works. We have articles about notable topics, notability is judged by looking at the depth of coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources and your draft had none, so was correctly rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)