Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 September 22

= September 22 =

06:08:50, 22 September 2021 review of submission by Sophia4100
The Grove Estate article was rejected on the grounds that it was not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. However, per the criteria in the WP:NORG, Grove Estate has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, including the local newspaper, a national Australian winery publication, and an encyclopaedia of wineries in Australia. These sources meet the four criteria of 1. Contain significant coverage of Grove Estate, 2. Are completely independent of the Grove Estate, 3. Meet the standard for being a reliable source, and 4. Are secondary sources. For example, the Halliday Wine Atlas of Australia is owned by an internationally recognised wine authority. There are also articles from a several newspapers, including the local newspaper 'the Witness' and national newspapers including The Sydney Morning Herald. In addition, there is significant coverage of this winery. Most of the sources contain articles that are exclusively about Grove Estate Wines.

Sophia4100 (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It just tells of the existence of the company and what it does; Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what the sources(with significant coverage) say about it on their own. The online sources that I can look at includes an interview with company personnel, a promotional piece for the winery, and two announcements, none of which establish notability. If the other sources go in depth and describe the significance of the winery without relying on interviews with its personnel or other primary sources, you may appeal to the reviewer that rejected the draft.
 * If you are associated with this winery, please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you may be required to make. 331dot (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

06:14:49, 22 September 2021 review of draft by PomoPo
Hi, I've used all available published sources for this article. Except for a couple of articles, all of my sources are books published in India. Is that why they have been considered not 'reliable'? I have seen single-line articles, or 'stubs', getting published by Wikipedia. What I have submitted is not a stub, is actually well-researched (I have PhD from a US Ivy League university, so I think I am qualified to judge), and written in good, if not particularly inspired, English. I really don't understand what other sources the reviewer wishes me to cite. I can definitely say that nothing I've written is based on personal experience or heresay, and all my data is backed up by published books and articles. I would be really interested in finding out what the actual problem with the article is.

It's a shame Wikipedia does not have even a mention of such an important woman saint of modern India; this is the only reason I wrote this article.

PomoPo (talk) 06:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Your offline sources are all missing required bibliographical information. (For book cites, we require, at minimum: Book title, author, publisher, year of publication, pages being cited, and either the ISBN or OCLC ctalogue number.) —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 08:27, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

06:20:49, 22 September 2021 review of draft by Adhikari Shiva
Adhikari Shiva (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question. You submitted a draft and it is pending; but it is likely to be declined quickly, as it is completely unsourced. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves; a Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person.  Writing about one's self is strongly discouraged(though not forbidden) per the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 07:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Request on 07:15:49, 22 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Mercy k
My article has been declined. I have given all the information is genuine & true. How to proceed futher to get verified or a wikipedia page.

Mercy k (talk) 07:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * No sources, no article, no debate. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 08:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Request on 07:45:49, 22 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Nee nalavanannu
I don't get why are you rejecting my page. Please explain it                                                        By nee nalavanannu

Nee nalavanannu (talk) 07:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * We are not for novel things that have never endured the Fourth Estate. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 08:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

10:05:53, 22 September 2021 review of draft by Alexis198
Hi,

I've created an article for Katrin Klimova, URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Katrin_Klimova. I don't understand why the second rejection was the same as the first one. I have changed the tone of the article to add neutrality, I've also added a few things to the body of the text that were not there before, and added a few other sources that were not written or filmed by the subject of the article. There are quite a few articles and sources that were written by other people, not only the subject of the article. Can you please help me to understand what else needs to be done? Thank you! Alexis.

Alexis198 (talk) 10:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

12:00:11, 22 September 2021 review of draft by Escooter21
I have submitted an article for review, my first one ever, and the comments for why it was declined was that I needed more sources, which I am currently working on. They also asked me to remove bold from the paragraphs and remove the indents, when I go to edit the article, I don't see any bold or indents. Is this because they already did this? Thanks. Escooter21 (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I change the name of my draft? Escooter21 (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Just leave a note for the reviewer; if they accept it, they will place it at the proper title. 331dot (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

16:31:40, 22 September 2021 review of draft by 8bt
Hello, I'm new here.

How can I improve the quality of references for an article I wrote about a Music YouTube channel? I wrote an article about MrSuicideSheep today. I believe MrSuicideSheep is one of the most respected and influential music channel on YouTube to date, and would fall into the same category as Trap Nation and NCS (No Copyright Sounds), in terms of the content he shares on YouTube. I was able to find some articles written about the channel on edm.com and youredm.com, which I had cited in my article. Please let me know how I can improve the article.

8bt (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You must have independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about this YouTube channel in depth, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notable web content. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

22:07:59, 22 September 2021 review of submission by Sethclampett
Sethclampett (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't have a connection to PerformLine. I can edit it again...though this direction is very vague and seems challenging when I'm basing what I include off of other similar company articles. This is not really helpful feedback.
 * Please see other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean that yours can too. It could be that those other articles are also inappropriate. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us. We can only address what we know about. If you would like to pitch in and help us manage the six million plus articles we have, please identify some of these other similar articles you have seen for possible action.
 * The best articles to use as a model are those classified as good articles. Please read the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Sethclampett (talk) 22:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I understand. I have submitted another version. Please let me know if this is better.
 * Please edit this existing section for follow up comments, instead of creating additional sections. As I said, since the draft was rejected, it won't be considered further, as no amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)