Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 January 5

= January 5 =

06:17:48, 5 January 2021 review of submission by Daniellesmall247
Can anyone help as I previously asked this question and it was archived without a response. I resubmitted an Article for Creation and the article was deleted because I unintentionally 'blanked' the article. The article has now been restored but if anyone could explain what 'blanking' an AfC entails so that I can avoid repeating the same mistake. Thanks for your guidance.

Daniellesmall247 (talk) 06:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Daniellesmall247 (talk) 06:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * in essence, blanking a page on WIkipedia is defined as opening the edit window, deleting the most part of the contents (or all content) and hitting save. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

08:03:46, 5 January 2021 review of submission by United World President
This page is about an Indian journalist. United World President (talk) 08:03, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It appears that this journalist does not meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources.  The sources you offered are not such sources. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

14:01:58, 5 January 2021 review of draft by Eergh
I would like to write an article on a public figure mac ferrari who created an event called bikestormz to give the youth something positive to do instead of persuing crime and violence. I have made a draft but need help with the rest of the article

Eergh (talk) 14:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

14:15:28, 5 January 2021 review of draft by 130.132.173.252
130.132.173.252 (talk) 14:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC) I am happy to re-do the sources in footnote fashion. However, does this address the decline that Dan submitted -- stating that Dr. Tamborlane's work is not significant? His colleagues in the field, with less credentials, have been granted pages.
 * Please read other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. It could be that these other articles are also inappropriate. We can only address what we know about. If you'd care to point these other articles out, we can address them or see if they are appropriate.
 * For this person to merit an article, you must summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about them, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

14:43:52, 5 January 2021 review of submission by PriyaKE
Would like constructive feedback on how to improve the article, because I feel it deserves to be published.

PriyaKE (talk) 14:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I've commented on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

15:34:30, 5 January 2021 review of submission by 103.121.62.127
103.121.62.127 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You didn't ask a question. None of the references provided are reliable sources (And they aqre also inappropiate, while I am sure that www.facebook.com contains something about Mehedi Hasan Shahed in one of its billions of pages, the start page does not, making the link useless. The same goes for the other ones). Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

17:15:32, 5 January 2021 review of submission by Music biograpiez
I have added reliable sources including a newspaper article by the national newspaper of India mentioning the subject's education, designation, other information and also added multiple references and also a google search result showing the subject is Notable and has a knowledge panel in his name.

Music biograpiez (talk) 17:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Google searches are not a reliable source, because they may change at any time, things that are on a google search today might already be gone tomorrow. The thehindu.com article is virtually no coverage if I were to remove the quotes, and if I were to leave them it would be a primary source and don't contribute to notability either. You may want to have a look at WP:CSMN. I haven't specificiely checked out the Google Search, because I don't currently have time to search for a needle in a full granary (about 13,6 million sources to check out is a bit far beyoynd my limits...). Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:22, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

18:20:38, 5 January 2021 review of submission by Gsgle
Gsgle (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Since the channel URL in the Draft leads to nowhere, I assume you meant to link this channel. Long story short, I currently see no evidence of Esparnia Edna meeting WP:NPERSON. The draft is currently unverfiable. The draft's text combined with the play count of the Youtube Videos makes me think you might have a WP:COI with this subject. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:29, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

20:20:29, 5 January 2021 review of submission by Jgmbennett
Jgmbennett (talk) 20:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC) African Solidarity Fund

I do not understand why this important, fully well researched and accurate article has been transferred into the "sandbox".

This article is especially relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic when many small and medium-sized enterprises in Africa are struggling to survive.

Investment guarantees and refinancing arrangements are important tools for such firms to overcome the crisis.

I remain committed to fulfilling Wikipedia's high standards, but also feel thwarted in my efforts to understand the standards themselves.

I prepared important information to add to the article, but the transfer from the draft to the sandbox status is very frustrating.

I would be happy if anyone cound explain to me why this downgrading has happened.

JB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgmbennett (talk • contribs) 20:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty of filling out the template assuming you were referring to your own sandbox at User:Jgmbennett/sandbox. This page was created by you in your sandbox, it was not moved there by anyone else.
 * If you are referring to African Solidarity Fund which was moved to "draftspace" in August 2020 then deleted after you blanked it, the reasons are explained on your talk page.
 * If you are referring to another page, please add a new request at the bottom of this page, putting the name of the page in the proper place in your request, right after link and before the closing . davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs) 🎄  20:51, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Slight clarification After the article was moved to draft, Draft:African Solidarity Fund was deleted because you slapped a Db-g7 template on it. The sandbox article was something you created in April 2020. That's the entirety of it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Why my draft of book Why does a man is declining?
They don't show only mention if you clearly read the Policy Times article or Diverge Media, it clearly shows about book. Like in the policy times article it talks about the book and says that ‘Why Does A Man Rape?’; Uncovering the Dark Truths behind the Heinous Act of Rape. Moreover, other articles also talk about the book it's just they have mentioned the author in the beginning and then they have talked about the book but that doesn't mean it is only a mention. In addition, every article shows that what is inside the book and why the author has written it like "This book addresses some taboo and controversial issues related to rape. Why do people rape? Who to blame for rapes? Is rape confined to the human race? Is this new in this generation or are there any references to such incidents in our history? Such questions are answered fluently in his book, 'Why does Man rape'. Kindly tell me your review on this so that I can resubmit it @Bilorv Rajveer90 (talk) 22:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The explanation for the decline is in the big pink box at the top of the draft. Two major issues: it sounded like an advertisement to one editor, and another editor or editors felt that you failed to establish that the subject meets our General Notability Guideline (GNG), as most of the references you used appear to be press releases, meaning, they are not independent of Jasbir Singh, which is one of the requirements that must be met to pass our General Notability Guideline. Further, six of the references you used have the exact same press release content, which is just ridiculous. Surely you don't think we just count references and pass articles that have 8 or more? It is also odd to quote The Times as having said that Singh 'has revealed truth on rape in this book', when that phrasing may have come directly from Singh or his publishers/publicists.
 * Of the last three sources, neither are reliable sources. Policy Times appears to solicit contributions from the public, which makes it seem like there is no clear editorial standard, and likely conflicts with our guidelines on user-generated sources, and the last is just a posting on an LPU alumni page, which isn't the press.
 * So, those are the reasons why the article fails to meet our GNG. As a more minor point, you call the book a novel, which means that it is a fictional work. If it is supposed to be a book representative of research, that would likely not be called a novel. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)