Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 September 29

= September 29 =

13:43:49, 29 September 2021 review of draft by Emmarose12
13:43:49, 29 September 2021 review of submission by Emmarose12

Hello my username is Emmarose12 and I corrected my article Multimmersion on September 15 before re-submitting it to your team.

I would like to know what is the problem with my article, and how can I fix it so it can be posted.

Thank you in advance for your kind help.Emmarose12 (talk) 13:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Emmarose12 (talk) 13:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the wait. From the looks of this, this reads like a research essay or some sort of native advertizing (we don't use (TM) or (R) or any similar trademark/copyright symbols). Even if the sources are valid, which I'm in no position to say if they are (Copy required), the article would need to be substantially rewritten. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 16:47, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The draft contains references to Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3, but there are no figures. Either they have been removed, or they should not have been referred to in the first place.  Portions of the draft read like an advertisement for the proprietary Multimmersion system.  Wikipedia is not for advertising.  Portions of the draft are marketing buzzspeak.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:02, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

14:38:08, 29 September 2021 review of draft by GRIMREAPER-SLM-thg
i translated another wiki article (https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B3%A2%E7%BE%85%E3%83%8E%E9%AC%BC)

GRIMREAPER_SLM-the hentai god (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

15:46:31, 29 September 2021 review of submission by حارث سین خیل بلچ
حارث سین خیل بلچ (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

17:41:15, 29 September 2021 review of draft by Samuel-Rothstein
Hello, my article submission to Articles for Creation was not accepted. The reviewer left a comment stating that "Youtube etc are not considered sources (except special circumstances)." However, the article itself is about a viral Youtube video, so that video itself was referenced. Therefore, this is not a secondary source. Given this context, is this a sufficent reference? Samuel-Rothstein (talk) 17:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * you are correct the reviewer missed some vital information. They should have stated that none of the references are considered reliable as none of them are independent. The first reference is to the video it self and should not be used as a reference and instead be only list as an official link. A Youtube link is only considered reliable if it from a source that we already consider reliable, with the proper editorial oversight and fact checking. This would include most news media and the like. In order for this to be considered notable you need to base the article what others have said about in published reliable sources. Generally a rule of thumb is 2-3 independent published reliable sources to meet WP:GNG. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:49, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

18:31:31, 29 September 2021 review of submission by Emmachernandez
Hello! I have modified Conor Allyn's article a couple times to prove his notability but it has not been approved! I looked up the guidelines of notability and he seems to fall within those guidelines as he is a director and producer for award winning films and has had his work applauded in publications such as New York Times, LA Times, and the Hollywood Reporter. I have contacted the editor on the talk page and have not received feedback. Is there anything you know of that I can do to improve my odds of getting my article accepted? Thank you! Emmachernandez (talk) 18:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Emmachernandez (talk) 18:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)


 * pending conflict of interest disclosure, see User talk:Emmachernandez. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC)