Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 August 11

= August 11 =

06:22:06, 11 August 2022 review of draft by Alicia.Lizzo97
The references I gave for my article are not enough to publish my article. I don't know what else I need and should give as a source for the music label.

Alicia.Lizzo97 (talk) 06:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Alicia.Lizzo97: the draft only cites the label's own website, which does not contribute towards notability per WP:GNG. We need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources, such as newspapers or magazines, TV, radio, etc. (And this expressly excludes press release regurgitations, routine business reporting, most interviews, etc., which are not truly independent even if they might superficially look so.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, Thank you!!! Alicia.Lizzo97 (talk) 07:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I did a Google search and don't see any media coverage of the label. I'm afraid your efforts are not going to be successful without coverage. TechnoTalk (talk) 06:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

08:34:23, 11 August 2022 review of submission by Roberto25664546825
Hello,

I have been declined the submission of the page - Can I have assistance and concrete correction in order to get my page published?

Best,

R.

Roberto25664546825 (talk) 08:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Roberto25664546825 — sure thing:
 * Dial down the promo language. It should read like an encyclopaedia entry, not something issued by the company's marketing department.
 * Cite several secondary sources that are reliable and truly independent of the subject, to demonstrate notability per GNG.
 * Ensure that every material statement is supported by citation to a reliable source.
 * Remove all passages copied from the company's website.
 * Declare any connection you may have with the business. (I've posted a message on your talk page with instructions.)
 * Resubmit, when done. HTH -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * (ec) If you work for this company, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing(which is not limited to being specifically paid to edit, but includes general employment) for information on required formal disclosures. Please review the comments left by the last reviewer. Language like "Secondary Capital is aligned to a fundamental shift that companies are staying private longer" is just blatant advertising.  Any article about this company must not merely tell about the company, what it does, and its strategy, it must tell us what others wholly unconnected with the company have chosen on their own, with significant coverage, to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia defintion of a notable company. It appears that several of the sources don't even mention the company, and that the article is more about their business strategy than the company itself. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Your draft is just blatant advertising eg. "Secondary Capital invests in the best late stage companies globally backed by the best investor in the world" Theroadislong (talk) 08:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Abdul Aziz Bin Thani Al Thani
Abdul Aziz Bin Thani Al Thani is a member of royal family of Qatar, who is currently CEO of Qatar Media Corporation.he is serving for Qatar since last 21 years in various roles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reshnas (talk • contribs) 08:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Is there a particular reason you are telling us this?  This page is for seeking assistance with writing AFC submissions. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for sharing, @Reshnas. Do you have a question?
 * If you're referring to Draft:Abdul Aziz Bin Thani Al Thani, that draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:48, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

11:03:58, 11 August 2022 review of submission by Pritesh D Patel
Hi, This is not a biography but this page is being written and curated by one of his student. Pritesh Patel is a mentor for his students. Pritesh D Patel (talk) 11:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Pritesh D Patel: the first question I have to ask is, why is your username Pritesh D Patel, if you're not in fact Pritesh D Patel? You can see why it would be an obvious assumption to make that this is indeed an autobiography. I would suggest you change your username ASAP.
 * Secondly, based on what you say, you must formally declare a conflict of interest (COI); I will post a note on your user page with instructions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

12:41:25, 11 August 2022 review of submission by Hcdmdigital
Hi,

Thanks for reviewing this page. It would be helpful if you could provide some more information about why this submission was rejected - is it that the organisation needs more references in media articles? Or perhaps that I work with them and was the one who created the page.

We were hoping to be added to this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Hedge_fund_firms_in_the_United_Kingdom

I have read the linked guidance but am unsure if there is anything I can do to amend the submission before re-submitting. Some guidance would be helpful - thanks very much. Hcdmdigital (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There is zero evidence that the company passes the criteria at WP:NCORP. Theroadislong (talk) 12:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Hcdmdigital: when you say you "created the page", could you elaborate? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:06, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Courtesy update for other reviewers: draft has been rejected. TechnoTalk (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

12:55:50, 11 August 2022 review of draft by Vortex3427
Is the sourcing adequate enough for this draft to survive AfC? I have two sources listed as reliable on WP:RSP, but have no idea on the others as there isn't any Indian-specific RS page. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 12:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * (presumably?) DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Vortex3427: that is precisely what the purpose of the AfC review is, to ascertain whether the draft will 'survive' (a hypothetical AfD, rather, but still). The draft is now in the pool, and will be reviewed in due course. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * A few other sources that show media coverage that could help with notability: [], [], [] TechnoTalk (talk) 15:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Request on 15:30:04, 11 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by TravelingFollower
I have done my best to make sure I "refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed" I haven't included any citations from Talisen's official channels besides one Twitter post mentioning the attendance of a conference. A majority of the sources are coming from the St. Louis Business Journal, clients and partners of the company, and official government records.

I have disclosed on my talk page that I have been working closely with Talisen Technologies. Is there any change I need to make on my talk page to get the warning of an undisclosed paid editor removed?

I did realize some numbers that were included in sources I had that I added made the article seem like an advertisement and I have since removed them. Any other advice that I can make changes with? Thank you in advance.

TravelingFollower (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

TravelingFollower (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @TravelingFollower: clients and partners of the company, as well as most types of gov't records, are primary sources, and do not contribute to notability. Bizjournals.com looks like a secondary source, but trade press of this kind are notorious for accepting press releases, marketing materials, etc. without much scrutiny.
 * In any case, to save the reviewers having to plough through 40+ sources, could you please point out (eg. on the draft talk page) the 3-5 strongest ones in terms of being independent and reliable, secondary (genuinely), and providing significant coverage, per WP:GNG? Thanks.
 * I've changed the undisclosed paid tag to disclosed paid, based on your user page. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Didn't realize that primary sources didn't contribute to notability. Added the top sources on the talk page. St. Louis Business Journal articles are all written by separate staff reporters over a 20 year long period without the hallmarks of similar press releases, I have reason to think they aren't PR. Thank you so much for your help and changing the tag to disclosed paid! TravelingFollower (talk) 18:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Except for Twitter, LinkedIn and a press release, the sources seem independent (edit - with the caveats pointed out by DoubleGrazing). The problem is that the news is routine, and to a lesser degree, somewhat regional. There's nothing that suggests this company has done anything except but be a fairly successful medium sized company. The standards for notability are higher than ever.  Even I just had an article deleted for a multinational software company covered in the Wall Street Journal that's valued at $5.6 billion. I think you should go back to your team and tell them there's just not enough non-routine coverage to get an article approved. TechnoTalk (talk) 16:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

16:00:41, 11 August 2022 review of draft by Laurier
I stumbled onto this page, with the draft and review templates, and have worked to improve it. I think the subject is relevant and the page is well written and documented, could it be published please? I can publish it myself, but have never dealt with the AfC process before, so I'm not sure I'm supposed to... Laurier (talk) 16:00, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Okay, I just read this on the page Articles for creation: "Established users in good standing, however, are encouraged to not clutter up the AfC queue with pages that do not need support or guidance from AfC reviewers. If you are not required to use the AfC process but still need time to work on a new article before it's ready for mainspace, please do not submit it for review." So I'll just go ahead and publish the page, you can ignore my messages. Laurier (talk) 06:52, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

16:07:16, 11 August 2022 review of submission by Loisopokupr
Hi there! I was updated Langston Uibels Wikipedia Page with recent information and pictures with sources that prove Langston Uibels notability. He has starred in various prominent Netflix shows including How to Sell Drugs Online (Fast) and Unorthodox. Many of his colleagues in these production have pages and he his mentioned on plenty show pages without link. I think the sources also show the notability.

Loisopokupr (talk) 16:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Get some coffee or tea and refer to User:Jéské_Couriano/Decode:
 * We can't use https://www.numeroberlin.de/2022/03/in-conversation-with-actor-langston-uibel-about-his-career-and-the-newest-g-star-campaign/ (unknown provenance) and even if that were addressed it'd still be useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview with no byline.
 * https://www.oe-magazine.de/stories/a-chat-with-langston-uibel-at-platte-berlin/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview with non-substantial lede.
 * https://fault-magazine.com/2020/08/langston-uibel-talks-unorthodox-in-new-photoshoot-and-interview/ " " " " (" " "). " " "-" ".
 * https://www.photobookmagazine.com/features/2020/12/23/langston-uibel " " " " (" " "). " " "-" ".
 * We can't use https://i-d.vice.com/en_uk/article/bjnxva/meet-german-films-new-generation (unknown provenance) and even if that were addressed it'd still be useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview under a role byline.
 * We can't use https://www.spotlight.com/9977-7837-5075 (too sparse, connexion to subject). Content-free profile written by the subject or one of their surrogates.
 * https://www.vogue.de/lifestyle/artikel/das-neue-blau-langston-uibel-ueber-repraesentation is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Yet another interview.
 * We can't use https://www.netflix.com/title/80189522 (connexion to subject, streaming service, [[WP:SPS|no

editorial oversight]]). We don't cite fiction series or streaming services. I should note that you do not need a reference for saying someone was in a show as long as they were properly credited under their real name or a known pseudonym. (A source is required if they went uncredited or took an Alan Smithee credit.) This applies to all Netflix cites.
 * We can't use https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIqbHadXLnk&t=854s (unknown provenance). The video is marked as private, but as a general rule YouTube is only usable as a source if the following two conditions are met: (1) the video is produced by an outlet we would ordinarily regard as a credible source to begin with; (2) the video is uploaded to that outlet's verified channel.
 * We can't use https://www.bild.de/sport/american-football/nfl/super-bowl-langston-uibel-ueber-werbe-spot-dreh-68561290.bild.html (No editorial oversight). Bild is considered to be a scandal rag and should not be cited.
 * https://closeupculture.com/2018/12/07/close-up-an-interview-with-pele-and-langston-uibel/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Yet another interview.
 * https://032c.com/magazine/neue-deutsche-welle is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Yet another interview.
 * We can't use https://thetab.com/uk/2020/03/31/these-are-the-instagrams-of-the-cast-of-netflixs-unorthodox-150211 (too sparse). Listicle photo gallery.
 * https://www.emmys.com/shows/unorthodox is useless for notability (wrong subject). This helps Unorthodox's notability, but not Uibel's as he didn't direct it.
 * https://www.goldenglobes.com/tv-show/unorthodox is useless for notability (wrong subject); even in the context of Unorthodox this is useless for notability as it's merely nominations.
 * https://cineuropa.org/en/newsdetail/427571/ is useless for notability (too sparse). Name-drop.
 * https://www.asos.com/de/damen/mode-updates/2018_06_11-mon/asos-magazine-langston-de/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Yet another fucking interview. Let me be blunt: All of these interviews are doing significant damage to the draft. We don't care at all what the subject or their surrogates have to say; we care more about what unaffiliated third-parties have to say about him or his performances. Thus far, none of these sources provide anything like that.
 * We can't use https://zta-management.com/en/from-z-to-a/langston-uibel/ (too sparse); even if it were fleshed out to be more than a photo gallery and a one-paragraph blurb it'd be useless for notability (connexion to subject).
 * We can't use https://www.independenttalent.com/actors/langston-uibel/ (too sparse). Content-free profile. We also can't use the cirriculum vitae, for the same reasons.
 * In summary, the lot of your sources are completely unusable, with over half of them being an interview of some stripe. Given your username as well, I have to ask: What is your connexion to Uibel? —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 16:52, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * (ec) Please see other stuff exists as to why the existence of other poor articles(not "pages") does not justify adding more poor articles. The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. If you work for or represent this person, the Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi. First of all, I don't mean to cause any harm with my suggestion. I just simply believed it would be relevant to have a Wikipedia Article for the British/German actor. Articles exist in German and French and I believed an English on would be of interest. Given his English work. I don't not work for him nor do I represent him. I am just a film and series enthusiast. I am dazzled because I did not expect such a response but I obviously respect your guidelines.

Also, the interviews that seemed to be a problem include a paragraph which is third party speaking on his performance.I have added another article from the glamour magazine that is third party only. It might help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loisopokupr (talk • contribs) 20:02, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Loisopokupr Once the draft has been rejected, new references won't help. Rejection means the draft won't be considered further. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:36, 16 August 2022 (UTC)