Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 October 7

= October 7 =

00:00:46, 7 October 2021 review of submission by Lucie281
{{SAFESUBST:Void|} I recently changed my username and the the bottom of the page says "Warning: The user who submitted this draft may have been renamed. Please verify this and adjust the submission template if necessary before reviewing." I am not sure if I am supposed to do something about this. Lucie281 (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Nope. A rename doesn't change a draft's submission status. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 00:29, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Renaming a user doesn't change a draft's submission status, but I've adjusted the submission template to reflect your new name in case there's some secondary knock-on effect, such as accept/decline notices being undeliverable or some such. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:06, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

02:37:24, 7 October 2021 review of submission by Gyan.Know
I am an Afc reviewer. I created this draft. Should I myself review and accept this? If not, can any other reviewer do it on my behalf? Your help would be much appreciated.  Gyan Know  contributions? 02:37, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Request on 12:41:25, 7 October 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by MarcogazSG
Dear Madam/Sir,

I hope this message finds you well and great. I am contacting you to consult about the creation of a Wikipedia page dedicated to MARCOGAZ, the technical association of the European gas industry. MARCOGAZ has repetitively tried to create a Wikipedia page but it was rejected two times. The reason in the first time was higlighted to be the advertisement-like style of the content. In the second time, the feedback noted that the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Could you please elaborate on this second point? MARCOGAZ is a technical association of the gas industry, dating back to 1968. It is very active in the European gas industry for the last five decades, so the associaiton aspires to have a Wikipedia page. Could you please help aligning the text with the requirements of Wikipedia so that MARCOGAZ can have a page. Thank you so much.

Kind regards,

MARCOGAZ Secteriat General

MarcogazSG (talk) 12:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)


 * First of all dear Mr./Miss., you need to clarify are you someone working for the "MACROGAZ". Without this clarification, there is no moving forward.  Gyan Know  contributions? 13:31, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Second of all, there is nothing you, or anyone else at MARCOGAZ, can do directly to address the notability issue barring providing sources, online or off, English or otherwise, that discuss the organisation at length, have competent editorial oversight, and are neither routine business coverage or written/commissioned by MARCOGAZ or its staff/contractors. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 18:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

13:04:28, 7 October 2021 review of submission by BizImpro
Hello,

my recent article submission has been rejected and I am not sure what was the reason. I try to follow all the rules of posting on Wikipedia, but this is my first article and I have no experience yet. Could you please point which part of the article should be changed?

BizImpro (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * From what I can see, the content on the article is written like an advertisement.


 * One more thing, it seems you have a COI (in simple terms, personal/professional relations) with the said topic of the article. If it is so, you really need to clarify this.     Gyan  Know  contributions? 13:35, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

13:36:24, 7 October 2021 review of draft by Pro75008
Hello. I do not understand why the creation of my article is refused. I do not use any promotional tone and I have references. Moreover, there is exactly the same page in the FRENCH version and it exists. Thank you for telling me what is wrong precisely if this page is not suitable, otherwise thank you for validating it.

Pro75008 (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Pro75008 (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all its not "refused" for forever. Its only declined and you can credible changed and put it for review again.


 * And secondly if it declined for the reason for it being written like advertisement, because it is so. I looked into your draft, in it just talks about what company produces.  Gyan Know  contributions? 13:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Refer to the top table here.
 * We can't use https://www.biospectrumasia.com/news/50/19009/french-firm-poxel-launches-type-2-diabetes-drug-in-japan.html (unknown provenance). It doesn't help that it reads like a press release.
 * We can't use https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/poxel?countrycode=fr (too sparse). Stock tickers are worthless sources for a generalist encyclopaedia like Wikipedia.
 * We can't use https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/poxel (deprecated). CrunchBase is not an acceptable source because it's user-generated content.
 * https://finance.yahoo.com/news/poxel-sumitomo-dainippon-pharma-announce-063000394.html is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Press release from Businesswire (which only ever publishes same).
 * I cannot assess your last source because it is missing critical bibliographical information (Outlet, edition, byline, page(s).)
 * Of the sources I can assess, three of them are flat-out unusable, and one is written at the company's dictate. Disregarding the article text, this is absolutely fatal for a draft. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 20:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

16:35:48, 7 October 2021 review of submission by Oyindebrah
I would like to know how to make the page better

Oyindebrah (talk) 16:35, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You were given good advice by the reviewer. 331dot (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Refer to the top table here.
 * We can't use https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2020/12/30/alpha-morgan-rewards-staff/ (unknown provenance). This also seems to be waterskiing budgerigar-level news, and likely wouldn't even be covered if there was more important/pressing news matters.
 * We can't use https://guardian.ng/business-services/alpha-morgan-capital-gets-investment-banking-licence-appoints-md/ (unknown provenance). Even if the byline identified a person, this seems like it'd fall under WP:CORPDEPTH's routine coverage exceptions.
 * https://punchng.com/alpha-morgan-capital-gets-investment-banking-licence/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). This is about the exact same thing as above, but is attributed to a named writer.
 * https://fman.com.ng/our-members/ is 404-compliant.
 * https://businessday.ng/news/article/alpha-morgan-capital-gets-stable-grade-rating/ is useless for notability (routine coverage).
 * https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2021/08/16/alpha-morgan-capital-managers-gets-investment-grade-rating/ has been discussed and dismissed; it's a close paraphrase of the Business Day source above.
 * https://punchng.com/alpha-morgan-receives-bbb-im-grade-rating-from-agusto/ is useless for notability (routine coverage).
 * We can't use https://economicconfidential.com/2018/06/alpha-md-investment-banking-licence/ (unknown provenance), and even if the byline identified a person this is unambiguously routine business coverage per CORPDEPTH.
 * We can't use https://www.nipc.gov.ng/2018/06/26/firm-gets-issuing-house-licence/ (gov't document). Government sources are, as a rule, primary sources. And, once again, this would fall under CORPDEPTH.
 * We can't use https://guardian.ng/news/alpha-morgan-capital-supports-teachers-to-cushion-covid-19-effects/ (unknown provenance). The source as writ appears to be some sort of advertorial in any case.
 * https://businessday.ng/news/article/alpha-morgan-gives-palliative-to-teachers-to-cushion-effects-of-covid-19/ has been discussed and dismissed. This is, again, a close paraphrase of the source above, and thus has the same advertorialising issues.
 * None of your sources are usable for showing notability, and a massive chunk of them are just flat-out unusable on Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 21:18, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Request on 21:10:09, 7 October 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by TomahF
I have been working on a proposed new Wiki page for several months now, hoping that it can serve as a repository of significant mechanical engineering innovation in the United States. It is a lengthy list, as one might imagine, given the numerous inventions that have occurred over the years. I have been working on the list for at least a decade and my hope is that by publishing it on Wikipedia, others will be able to add additional items.

During the course of creating this page, I have responded to at least a half dozen reviews. I have found the process to be helpful. In responding to the issues, the proposed page has improved. I have also weeded out many issues and believe the process has provided me with a better understanding of how to create acceptable content.

With my latest submission, I was hopeful that it was ready for publication. However, the response that "this submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia," has left me flummoxed. There are some existing Wiki pages that provide the type of content that I am proposing, for other disciplines. For example, there is a Timeline of Electrical and Electronic Engineering available here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_electrical_and_electronic_engineering. There is also a timeline of my general historic inventions here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_historic_inventions. And several other such existing timelines that I could reference.

Could you review this matter? I'm hoping that you will find the proposed page acceptable, or at least provide me with suggestions on how it can be improved.

Sincerely, Thomas Fehring, P.E., ASME Fellow and member of ASME's History and Heritage Committee

Ps. The proposed webpage is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Timeline_of_mechanical_engineering_innovation#Nineteenth_Century

TomahF (talk) 21:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The draft submitted by you has been rejected meaning it won't be considered further.  Gyan Know  contributions? 02:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)