Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 June 20

= June 20 =

01:00:42, 20 June 2021 review of draft by GroenewoldsGain
My draft of a page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mark_Wilde was recently declined, with the following reasoning given:

"Clearly notable but article is full of embedded links which per policy are illegal."

Could you please let me know precisely which links are embedded, and how I should change them such that the article can be accepted? I have edited Wikipedia a very long time ago, but there are many rules these days and it is difficult for me to understand what is going on with this advice. My impression is that an experienced editor could very quickly identify what changes need to be made in order for the page to be accepted.

GroenewoldsGain (talk) 01:00, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , the external links, such as Department of Physics and Astronomy and LSU Rainmaker Mid-Career Scholar Award (Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics) (2019). The text itself is fine to keep, so you should just remove the external links Curbon7. (talk) 03:32, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

09:38:46, 20 June 2021 review of submission by Manikanta827
There have been 10 patents filed in the filed of Machine learning, NLP which are notable publications and citations which can be considered for review please. Mani Kanteswara Rao Garlapati (talk) 09:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Manikanta827 Anyone, you, me, the person down the road, can file a patent. Patents are not of themselves useful references. The draft has been rejected, and will not be considered further unless you can persuade the rejecting reviewer to change their mind Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 09:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

10:07:01, 20 June 2021 review of submission by Shamilaksaudi123
Shamilaksaudi123 (talk) 10:07, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity: Hvae you seen the URL's in the reference section? They are commented out. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:53, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I indeed did not see them.
 * Regardless, the final three links are not valid: the fifth source is YouTube, the fourth doesn't work and there is no archive link, while the third is just a search engine result.
 * The first seems to talks about the movie, while the second source seems to be irrelevant; however, this is pure conjecture since those websites don't let me copy text (and therefore no Google Translate since they're both in Malayalam) so I can't verify whether they're relevant or not. That last point isn't disqualifying, but it certainly doesn't help.
 * Regardless, I'm rescinding my rejection and replacing it with a declination of WP:V and WP:NFILM. Thanks for catching this Victor! Curbon7 (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The first seems to talks about the movie, while the second source seems to be irrelevant; however, this is pure conjecture since those websites don't let me copy text (and therefore no Google Translate since they're both in Malayalam) so I can't verify whether they're relevant or not. That last point isn't disqualifying, but it certainly doesn't help.
 * Regardless, I'm rescinding my rejection and replacing it with a declination of WP:V and WP:NFILM. Thanks for catching this Victor! Curbon7 (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Regardless, I'm rescinding my rejection and replacing it with a declination of WP:V and WP:NFILM. Thanks for catching this Victor! Curbon7 (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

12:02:54, 20 June 2021 review of submission by KomilVokhidovJournalist
I have written an article about an artist, and for some unclear reason, my submission was denied. I have an extensive list of external sources that supports my work. KomilVokhidovJournalist (talk) 12:02, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The reason for the decline was given at the top of the draft. Do you have specific questions about it? 331dot (talk) 12:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Request on 16:26:26, 20 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Fatima exceptional
I need cradible cite add to the article Fatima exceptional (talk) 16:26, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

17:55:55, 20 June 2021 review of draft by N.v.vorontsova
Dear Helpdesk, Upon request of an author (Victor Petrenko), I have created a mirror page in English of his Russian page, which was fully approved on Russian Wikipedia. I have translated and mirrored all the references and links as available on his Russian page (please see https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE,_%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%A4%D1%91%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87 Please, advise what exactly do I need to improve for this English translation of the existing page to be approved? Many thanks in advance!

N.v.vorontsova (talk) 17:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC) N.v.vorontsova (talk) 17:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @N.v.vorontsova A number of things:
 * ensure that the Russian langauge version has an attribution. This may be on the draft talk page (unless I am corrected by others)
 * It is likely that you have a Conflict of interest, or you may have been paid to make the translation. Please disclose the correct one correctly
 * Look at Wikimedia Commons, where you need to regsiter the permission to use the picture formally. However, the copyright owner is the photographer, not the subject of the picture. You must present evidence there that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright).
 * Apart from these elements I have added (am about to add) a comment on the draft which should help you Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 18:10, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The attribution has been performed for you Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 18:29, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

18:28:39, 20 June 2021 review of submission by Maartuh
Dear Sir/Madam,

Unfortunately, my article about the "Pole" problem was declined. The reviewer wrote that my article reads more like an essay. According to him, I did not write from a neutral point of view. In my view however, I did not express any opinion or thought. Maybe you could explain in more detail how I should change my article in order to get it more "encyclopediatic"?

I hope you can help me!

Kind Regards, Maartuh Maartuh (talk) 18:28, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @Maartuh The tone is an issue. We require flat, neutral prose, dull-but-worthy is the thing you should aim for. The tone you have is not too far distant from the end result required. You have a magazine piece, but we need it to be far flatter. I make no review of the piece itself in this comment. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 18:33, 20 June 2021 (UTC)