Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 May 27

= May 27 =

03:27:11, 27 May 2021 review of draft by Nhergert
Hello Wikipedia Editors, looking forward to better contributing on Wikipedia and understanding notability more correctly. I volunteer with a local non-profit journalism organization and thought it would be a good idea to note the  work they have done so far on Wikipedia. While the Oregon Arts Watch article I have cited is local, it does the best job of going in depth into the subjects and the intent behind the organization. The international news articles I cited go less in depth, but I think they do a decent job of summarizing the interviews they had with the founder for their local audiences. All are independent to myself and the founder (and anyone on the team I think) and are not from any press releases.

If possible, I would like more specific advice as to why the page was rejected or if something was missed on either end. Looking at other recently accepted "local" non-profits, I got really confused when I found an article for North Dakota State Poetry Society, which seems to have none of the notability requirements listed in the help pages.

Also, it would be helpful if the original reviewer left more specific feedback in the review, instead of providing the generic template of a large list of issues that I need to try and reason through.

Much appreciated. Thanks! Nhergert (talk) 03:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Your draft does little more than tell of the existence of the subject. Note that Wikipedia is not for merely telling about good works or merely telling about something. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about an organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Typically a draft should summarize at least three sources with significant coverage.  You are welcome to ask the reviewer directly for more information on their user talk page. 331dot (talk) 06:23, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * My intent was to provide the stub of the page along with citations to establish notability first before doing the work of summarizing their writeups in an accurate, unbiased way. I believe I read the help pages recommending that I do this strategy, but I can't find the reference right now. Regardless, I will consider whether to continue my efforts, and appreciate the advice. Thanks! Nhergert (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't have to provide the complete article for submission. But most reviewers look for at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage that establish notability has been met in order to accept a submission. It also needs to be written completely dispassionately; essentially dry and dull as possible.  The first line is clearly written by someone with a COI- someone should be able to read it and not know that it was written by someone with a COI. 331dot (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

05:21:55, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Derek Alexander
Derek Alexander (talk) 05:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Why was my article about Carlos Garrido declined or rejected from being approved & submitted? If anything, and if I want it to be approved, how can I change the name to Carlos Orlando Garrido? Because I am making this page for him as a trusted & reliable source of his and he doesn't always go by his first, middle & last name as his full name. Most of the times he uses his first & last name. And I even put his middle name in the description box of his birth name just like I did as well under his "early life & education" column of his article.
 * The draft was not rejected, only declined, meaning that it is possible to resubmit it(as you did). However, it will be rejected again, because it has no sources.  All articles, especially those about living people must be sourced to independent reliable sources.  A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.  That should be done dispassionately, without language such as "Carlos Orlando Garrido is an American Actor, Director, Producer, Writer, Business Owner & Entrepreneur who is an up and coming performing artist & filmmaker on a journey for stardom.".  Please see Your First Article.
 * You should also review conflict of interest so you can make the needed formal declaration. As for the article name, you may leave a note on the article talk page for the reviewer; when it is accepted it will be placed at the proper title. 331dot (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

06:21:16, 27 May 2021 review of draft by KapowKapow
Hi there, I am attempting to learn the ropes of article creation by contributing fashion-related entries for brands and designers that are not currently represented in Wikipedia.

My latest submission was 'declined due to not being adequately supported by reliable resources'.

Would it be possible to get some examples of where I am going wrong? I have only used mainstream media outlets as sources and as far as I can tell, the quality of my sources doesn't differ from other fashion-related Wiki pages.

Thanks a lot for your help"

KapowKapow (talk) 06:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Both the Daily Mail and the sun have been deprecated as a source and are regarded as unreliable. If they are in use elsewhere, this most likely means that they should be removed there as well. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:23, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

08:21:30, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Mediainchargecs
Hello!

Mr. Rajendra Kumar Tiwari (IAS) is the seniormost administrative officer having the rank of Chief Secretary in the executive branch of the government of the state of Uttar Pradesh, India.

Uttar Pradesh is the largest province in India with an estimated population of around 240 million. The state is both politically and geographically important, shares a long international border with Nepal and currently at the forefront of fight against Covid-19, and successfully beaten the second wave of infection, as compared to much developed and economically stronger provinces.

In addition, previous Chief Secretaries of Uttar Pradesh have Wikipedia pages of their own, link of which are given below.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahul_Bhatnagar

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajive_Kumar

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anup_Chandra_Pandey

Multiple references to the executive orders given by Mr. Rajendra Kumar Tiwari and carried by major News outlets of India, have been attached in the article.

I request you to kindly go through the article and links again and approve the article for publishing on your esteemed portal.

Thanks!

Mediainchargecs (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If you work for or represent this person, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. The draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. There does not seem to be the significant coverage of him personally that is required for an article at this time, even if previous holders of his position merit articles.(see other stuff exists) He is a civil servant, not a politician. 331dot (talk) 09:39, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

09:49:20, 27 May 2021 review of submission by PedarPadesha
I did fix the Citations and want to get a re-review for Kimia Sharbafian Musician biography page. thanks PedarPadesha (talk) 09:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Citation fixed please make a re-review. thanks PedarPadesha (talk) 10:07, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . I don't read Farsi, but not a single one of the 25 or so English-language sources even mentions Sharbafian, let alone addresses her directly and in detail, which suggests that you don't grasp Wikipedia's requirements at all.


 * Rejection is meant to convey that you should stop, not create a new version, because the topic is hopeless. It is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing would make the draft acceptable. There is no option to re-submit because volunteers do not intend to review it again. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for your writing. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:03, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

10:04:35, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Msp7com
Msp7com (talk) 10:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 22:14, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

10:53:56, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Prem6361
i am new creator in wikipedia. it is my first time that i created a wikipage for a online food services company, but i do not understand exactly why my draft is declined. can i create page of this type of company or not. if not how can i create my page. please check and suggest in detail. Prem6361 (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Just blatant advertising...zero independent sources and no indication that they pass WP:NCORP are you connected to the company by any chance? Theroadislong (talk) 11:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

11:04:47, 27 May 2021 review of submission by RealSpill123
RealSpill123 (talk) 11:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft (on your user page, which is not for drafting articles) was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It was wholly promotional. 331dot (talk) 12:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

11:33:50, 27 May 2021 review of draft by Dellas777
Hello, I have a couple of questions about my Draft. In the reasons for declining the submission you have mentioned that it lacks independent, reliable sources. I would like to ask you which section (Bio, Accomplishments, Discography) of the Draft needs additional sources so I will be able to search for them and add. Thanks for your attention.11:33, 27 May 2021 (UTC) Dellas777 (talk) 11:33, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi . The draft doesn't cite a single independent, reliable, secondary source that contains significant coverage of Arys. Replace the ones currently cited (all in the Biography and Accomplishments sections). Discographies are usually self supporting, in the sense that the disc itself or its packaging proves the artist's role in the disc. WikiProject Albums/Sources contains a list of sources Wikipedians have found useful when writing about music. Equally important is identifying which criteria, if any, of WP:MUSICBIO Arys meets. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Request on 12:25:12, 27 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Pszichoszemle
Can you please review my draft?

Pszichoszemle (talk) 12:25, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

12:29:42, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Pszichoszemle
I would like to ask for a review of my draft before publishing it to avoid decline

Pszichoszemle (talk) 12:29, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * way too much in this Draft is sourced to the subject's Curiculum Vitea, see WP:ABOUTSELF Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:43, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

12:32:23, 27 May 2021 review of draft by ToruNitadori
I added some references at the "reference" term before last submission. However it was declined because of lack of secondary resources. These references are different website even if it is a same name. I can't understand how i can fix the problem. I think the number of references are enough. If it's not enough to match the regulation, I can add some references such as bellow. 1. https://takumicraft.com/?page_id=325 2. https://kogeijapan.com/locale/en_US/echigoyoitauchihamono/ 3. https://nippon-kichi.jp/article_list.do;jsessionid=5F8186FF37E54664969E960B23F7DDE9?p=5522&ml_lang=en even though All websites write almost same thing. The technology comes from japan.

ToruNitadori (talk) 12:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

15:18:44, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Giuseppe Ardolino
Hello, I already submitted this draft and it has been declined. I would like to know in which section I need to improve in order to respect Wikipedia's guidelines and try to publish it. I already followed some feedback but the draft is considered not in line with a neutral approach, and I want to understand the reasons. I am available to make all necessary changes. Really thanks for your availability Giuseppe Ardolino (talk) 15:18, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * On your user page you state “This is an account that I have set up to introduce the new page on Sadas company to explain its history, market, and clients” Please note that is NOT what Wikipedia is for.

Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. A Wikipedia article about a business must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable business. Wikipedia has no interest in what a business wants to say about itself, only in what others unaffiliated with the business choose to say about it(no press releases or announcements of routine business activities).Theroadislong (talk) 15:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

16:07:54, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Failure9x
I am asking for a specific indication of all the factors that make my article seem more an advertisement than an article in an encyclopedia. I do not know what to change in the article so that I can publish it. Failure9x (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It's an advertisement because it just tells about the subject and what it does. Wikipedia articles must do more; they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the subject, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 17:22, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

17:09:28, 27 May 2021 review of draft by KevinLasing
How do I provide multiple independent reliable sources to show notabilities to publish this article on live space.? KevinLasing (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You find such sources and then provide them; a Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources state about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. If such sources do not exist, the person would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. If you have a connection with this person, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures you may need to make. 331dot (talk) 17:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

17:19:56, 27 May 2021 review of submission by 106.220.169.100
106.220.169.100 (talk) 17:19, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You have no other edits other than this one; if you have an account, log in first- or otherwise please tell what it is that you want help with. 331dot (talk) 17:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

21:21:11, 27 May 2021 review of submission by Positivity5631
I would like to re-submit this Wikipedia article. I understand that it has been rejected because its contents were similar to another Wikipedia page (the Harvard International Relations Council wiki page). I have suggested that the Harvard International Relations Council wiki page be split. The Harvard International Relations Council is an overarching body with several organizations. I believe it would be incredibly valuable for different organizations under the Harvard International Relations Council to have their own separate page. Thus, I have gone through the process of splitting the Harvard International Relations Council page. As it stands, it is too long and it has lots of information, and it would be useful for its sub-organization – such as the Harvard National Model United Nations – to have its own separate Wiki page. That way, the Harvard International Relations Council can serve as an organizing/overview page that can provide summaries for its sub-organizations and link readers to other more detailed pages that are specific to each organization.

I have already gone through the formal process of splitting the Harvard International Relations Council page and would appreciate guidance in order to finalize this process and submit the Harvard National Model United Nations page. Thus, I would link to respectfully ask for a re-review of this article.

Positivity5631 (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The draft was rejected, so you should appeal to the last reviewer, though if you have split an article this shouldn't be necessary as the splitting process would have created the article. 331dot (talk) 21:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

22:55:58, 27 May 2021 review of draft by Rosemary0807
Rosemary0807 (talk) 22:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

I have a concern with the grueling process of Wikipedia review.

Truthfully, I am quite frustrated and need a resolution. With all due respect, I am REALLY SICK of my submission being rejected. I have properly cited footnotes and 25 sources. If a couple of sources don't meet your guidelines, SO WHAT? There are 23 other sources on which to rely. Herbie J Pilato IS A NOTEWORTHY PERSON. He has his own show (entering Season 2) on Amazon Prime and Amazon Prime UK. He has written more than 15 books and has hundreds of published articles. He is an actor as well.

I have edited and re-edited my submission close to 10 times over the past 2 months. How many times does it have to be rejected?

May I please get some help from a friendly Wikipedia person who not only knows what they are doing but actually wants my submission to eventually be published? It feels like I am in the middle of some sort of game with people like Gene93K. If Wikipedia has more than 6 million approved entries, then Herbie J Pilato should be one of those. He is a SOMEBODY and I am a fan.

Thank you for your consideration of my irritation in this matter. As per your request, I will be happy to remove the IMDB and Authorpedia sources. But I also have sources from Newsday, the Omaha World-Herald, television societies, Amazon, Barnes and Noble and other noteworthy publications.

Please give me some positive feedback and not just reasons for rejection.
 * I've responded at the Teahouse, please only use one method of seeking assistance, to avoid duplication of effort. The suggestion that reviewers don't know what they are doing is not helpful to your cause. 331dot (talk) 23:44, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In terms of establishing notability, a lot of sources is actually a negative- fewer high quality sources are preferable to a large number of low quality sources. As I said at the Teahouse, it's not enough to just tell us about what this man has done, we want to know what others say about him. 331dot (talk) 23:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)