Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 February 14

= February 14 =

00:25:10, 14 February 2021 review of submission by Martinthoegersen
My draft was declined due to discogs references. I used them in the discography and member section. I can see that similar articles use AllMusic, is that considered a better source? Thøger (talk) 00:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, with some caveats. See WikiProject Albums/Sources for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

01:58:48, 14 February 2021 review of draft by TechNerd22
Some random person (doesn't appear to be a Wikipedia moderator) removed a bunch of info on my article which is waiting for review. The person was some random person, didn't even have an account, it was just an I.P. address. They removed all my info about fights and said I was off topic. The exact thing they said "off topic. Incidents at the mall are about the mall. Incidents at the school, or a school event are about the school.". Yeah, but the fights were students at the school, it wasn't just random people at the mall while people were nearby or anything. It's like saying a fight that happened between some famous people were off topic because it happened at a mall and not the famous persons house. Are random people allowed to just remove stuff from a pending article if they are not a Wikipedia moderator? I'm adding the info back. Thanks! TechNerd22 (talk) 01:58, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that any random person can edit, without even creating an account. One of the pillars of Wikipedia is that no editor owns an article and any contributions can and may be mercilessly edited. Wikipedia has no moderators, or if you prefer, everyone is a moderator. If you disagree with someone about content, don't just add it back. It's your responsibility to discuss it with them and try to reach a consensus. Before you invest too much effort in the draft, however, be aware that drafts about middle schools are very rarely accepted because it's extremely difficult to show that they meet the notability guidelines (inclusion criteria). If you want to improve Wikipedia, consider editing existing articles instead. See Task Center for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In addition to the above, these edits were, in my estimation, legitimate. You are drawing a conclusion about the school being "infamous", which is a subjective evaluation, not an objective one. Further, the one source only describes one fight, not that the school is a hotbed of fights. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

09:15:14, 14 February 2021 review of submission by Fadare123467
Fadare123467 (talk) 09:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

11:07:38, 14 February 2021 review of submission by Urbansean
All references that could have been considered not objective and suggesting a promotion of the business have been removed. I believe what remains is factual and comparable with other retail business entries.

This is not intended as adverting. I am learning Wikipedia and I selected Riviera Maison as I know the brand through friends and noted it had no Wiki entry.

I hope this helps and welcome any further advice.

Sean

Urbansean (talk) 11:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears that the brand does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. The sources offered do not seem to be significant coverage of the topic, just routine announcements of business transactions. That does not establish notability.
 * Please see other stuff exists. Each article or draft is judged on its own merits, because as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. If you'd care to point out some of the other articles you were going by, we can see if those too are inappropriate. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

12:24:52, 14 February 2021 review of draft by Henk Borgdorff
I have edited my page Henk Borgdorff after suggestions made to me: I have added a statement of Conflict of Interest and I have included external resources: ORID-iD and a reference to Google Scholar. Do I now meet the objections?

Henk Borgdorff

Henk Borgdorff (talk) 12:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . The number of times your work has been cited suggests that your research has had a significant impact in the discipline of artistic research. Wikipedia aims to have encyclopedia articles about such academics. A Wikipedia biography, however, should be based mainly on independent sources - what other people have written about you. The text of the draft is based entirely on your CV - what you have written about yourself. Wikipedia is not a place to host your CV.
 * I've added two potential sources to the draft's talk page. If you can find a couple more of a similar nature, it might be possible to use them to write an acceptable article about you. However, I strongly advise against writing it yourself; autobiographies are strongly discouraged. Instead, use Requested articles to have an experienced Wikipedian write it. It may take years, but there's no deadline. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

13:33:46, 14 February 2021 review of submission by S.A Mixing
S.A Mixing (talk) 13:33, 14 February 2021 (UTC) Hello I will be happy to know why my article was declined This is S.A Mixing assistant
 * Are you Shalev Alon, or his assistant? The reason for the decline is given in the draft, do you have questions about it? Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves; please read the autobiography policy. While not forbidden, it is discouraged to write about ourselves, as we naturally write favorably about ourselves. 331dot (talk) 13:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)