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

= October 27 =

02:24:59, 27 October 2021 review of draft by MarkJamesHayes
Why are you generically rejecting my article, I added the References in the reference section, everything I add in the narrative section is referenced in those links, ERic's Endeavors, Eric's endeavors, and even the shows referenced for his appearances? I do not understand, I followed the simualr article to 5 other semi famous people and I even put far less and referenced the data, they were approved and have been out there for months but I can get this one published why?

MarkJamesHayes (talk) 02:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every biographical claim that could potentially be challenged for any reason what-so-ever MUST be cited to a in-depth third-party source that corroborates it or (if no source can be found for that claim) removed. This is a hard requirement when writing about living or recently-departed people on Wikipedia and is NOT negotiable. All of your prose is bereft of sources and is vanispamcruftizement to boot. It's also highly unlikely all five of those other articles were "approved", especially if they predate 2018, when the drafting process was made mandatory. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 03:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * forgot to sign, re-pinging —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 03:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

05:29:43, 27 October 2021 review of draft by 2601:645:3:7700:7C9C:396C:F61:79F
Why is this musical group not considered credible or the sources reliable? The Press Democrat newspaper is an official newspaper of the San Francisco North Bay region of California. Another citing is from the San Francisco Chronicle, a major city newspaper. The artist has won an national award, a Native American Music Award. And they are still active. How can I help to prove this? Is there an editor that will work with me please?

2601:645:3:7700:7C9C:396C:F61:79F (talk) 05:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note to other AfC reviewers: I would suggest there is a case for notability per WP:NBAND, but I am put off by the fact that this is a case of WP:PAID, which I realized only after I re-submitted the article for review. Bkissin (talk) 20:37, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

11:17:36, 27 October 2021 review of submission by J.a.simoes
I got the message that the review failed because of copyrighted material. I'm the project founder and wanted to add an entry to Wikipedia about it. Most of the content there, yes, it's coming from the official website but that's intended. And, of course, I'm "authorizing" it to be used at Wikipedia. How can this "copyright" issue be solved?

Thanks!

J.a.simoes (talk) 11:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . There is a procedure for donating copyrighted material, which you can read about here. Solving the copyright issue, however, won't necessarily solve the bigger problem. Content written for a project's website serves a different purpose than content written for an encyclopedia, and can almost never be used on Wikipedia. Moreover, the bulk of any article should come from independent sources. What projects/platforms/products/tools have to say about themselves belongs on their website, not here. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

13:43:44, 27 October 2021 review of submission by BobSminkler
My draft was reviewed and not accepted. The reviewer's comment: "I am not convinced this is a distinct field with a consistently applied name." My question, what do they mean by "no consistently applied name"? Please could you try to explain in more detail? Many thanks. BobSminkler (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC) BobSminkler (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi . When you want clarification of a specific person's comments, it's best to ask that specific person.
 * The draft describes the field as "emerging". As a tertiary source, Wikipedia aims to have articles on established topics, ones that have gained significant attention by the world at large. Do textbooks include sections on fuctional phenomics, or is it so far only Larry York and his research group that use the term and view it as a separate field? If the latter, then for now it would be more appropriate to cover the subject within a broader biology topic (perhaps phenomics or functional genomics). --Worldbruce (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you . That already clarifies a bit more. Maybe has more to add? BobSminkler (talk) 07:50, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

14:51:35, 27 October 2021 review of submission by GiuliaCali
Hi, my submission of Draft:Human Technopole was declined by User:Nomadicghumakkad because "not adequately supported by reliable sources", but I don't know what to add. Every paragraph has an external reference from international journals, italian official laws and official documents. Where should I add other reliable sources? GiuliaCali (talk) 14:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:GiuliaCali. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Answered in User_talk:GiuliaCali GiuliaCali (talk) 09:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Request on 15:48:21, 27 October 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Onmyway22
The article Muddy (film) was moved to draft Draft: Muddy (film), the reason was neither developed the production section nor not released yet. As per the suggestions by some admins from the WP:HELPDESK, I improved the production section and added more reliable references to it. But rejected. Still saying that it is not meeting film notability. But in my view and as per the guideline I think it meets WP:NFILM. Please tell where I didn't cover and where I should improve. please help! there are some film articles on mainspace which haven't been released yet such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnal_Murali That's why I am confused. Muddy is the first-ever Indian film of an off-road mud race as well as a multilingual one. I expect a scope of wikiproject film. Thank you !! Onmyway22 (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

18:33:19, 27 October 2021 review of draft by Shawn Lilley 321
Shawn Lilley 321 (talk) 18:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

can you fix it and let my album submitt
 * Moot - draft is deleted and the requestor is blocked. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 01:55, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

19:44:42, 27 October 2021 review of submission by 37.220.64.245
37.220.64.245 (talk) 19:44, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 20:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The seven different cites for each claim doesn't help the page a whit, and given what's going on here this is a textbook WP:BLP1E case. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 21:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

22:41:13, 27 October 2021 review of submission by MarkJamesHayes
The articles published as sources are from TMZ, NBC News, Netflix, ABC, and Discovery Channel?

MarkJamesHayes (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Speaking as the one who tagged Draft:Eric Love, G11 deletions are a criticism of the article text, and not its sourcing. It is possible for an article to be well-sourced (though this one was not) and blatantly promotional at the same time. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 01:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

23:17:02, 27 October 2021 review of draft by 2409:4063:6E89:7E2F:9B15:3FC7:2CE5:7E90
2409:4063:6E89:7E2F:9B15:3FC7:2CE5:7E90 (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No sources, no article, no debate. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 00:17, 28 October 2021 (UTC)