Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 August 18

= August 18 =

03:23:17, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Tarawade.Atul
Reference given is from independent sources but are in regional language. The draft is about political candidate and have support of Mr.Yogesh Tilekar. Tarawade.Atul (talk) 03:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Tarawade.Atul as you will have seen by now, the draft has been deleted as overly promotional — a common fate of attempted autobiographies, and one of the many reasons why they are not encouraged. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

06:25:58, 18 August 2022 review of draft by BCross2003
I'm trying to get an article published however I am being told that my sources aren't reliable. However, my activity with the Grammy Award-winning artist Amy Wadge is everywhere. I wrote the song 'Just The Same' with her on her latest EP which is available on all major platforms, to which I am credited by the PRS and PPL. Everything else is difficult to source as my earliest releases were between 2003 and 2010.

BCross2003 (talk) 06:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi @BCross2003, Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. A article needs to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines (in this instance Wikipedia's notability guidelines for music) in order to have a stand alone article. Notability in general requires 2-3 reliable sources providing significant coverage to the subject. The two sources in the article (currently amazon and apple music) are not reliable.  Just ' i ' yaya  06:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Also please read WP:conflict of interest  Just ' i ' yaya  06:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * So do I just need to add another source on top of the other sources? Thanks for the reply btw BCross2003 (talk) 06:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @BCross2003 you would likely need to declare a conflict of interest with the subject first (instructions can be found at Conflict of interest). Then find two reliable sources (providing significant coverage) regarding the subject (a list of sources usually considered reliable can be found at WP:ALBUM/SOURCES). Then submit the article for review after adding the sources in.  Just ' i ' yaya  07:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @BCross2003 Unless you can show (backed up by reliable sources) that you satisfy the WP:MUSICBIO notability, of which there is currently no indication, then you will need to demonstrate notability via WP:GNG which requires significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. You currently cite no such source, therefore you need to add three or more.
 * You also need to support every material statement by citing a reliable source. Currently almost the entire draft is unreferenced. See WP:REFB for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Confusing stuff indeed! Does the fact that my name is clearly on the record title count for anything? BCross2003 (talk) 07:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * In a word, no. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @BCross2003 Amazon, etc. just show that the music exists. Having co-written a song  is not enough to make you notable in Wikipedia's definition, unfortunately. Notability for a musical artist requires, most commonly, that independent journalists have written about you (and not just from interviews with you). The blue  word in a reply above, music, is a link with  the notability  guidelines. Please read that.  It's a high bar. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Justiyaya, @BCross2003 I believe that Amazon and Apple Music are reliable,  but not independent.  Those blue words are clickable links; please read them. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Eh, you're right that it is not independent but likely reliable and using that would've probably made it clearer. I'll take note next time answering, thanks :D  Just ' i ' yaya  11:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi there, just to let you know I have changed the citations which are now all reliable sources and clearly prove my involvement with Amy Wadge and my songwriting credits. I truly hope this helps.
 * Many thanks,
 * Benn BCross2003 (talk) 05:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @BCross2003: I don't think anyone is doubting your involvement with Wadge; what we're trying to say is that that alone doesn't make you notable in Wikipedia terms. If that's your main musical achievement, then you don't meet the MUSICBIO notability test. There is also a general notability standard, GNG, which could justify an article, but that requires significant coverage (of you, directly) in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. Your draft cites no such source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @BCross2003 I don't think that you read what I wrote:  "Amazon and Apple Music are reliable, but not independent. Those blue words are clickable links; please read them." 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:36, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

08:12:03, 18 August 2022 review of submission by Customweb01
Customweb01 (talk) 08:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. This is the English Wikipedia, contributions need to be in English.  If you are attempting to translate an article, keep in mind that what is acceptable on one version of Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable on another, as each version is a separate project. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

08:31:03, 18 August 2022 review of submission by Knowledgeleaders
Knowledgeleaders (talk) 08:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * What is your question, @Knowledgeleaders? Your draft has been rejected and won't be considered. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

12:11:53, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Roman Maler
Roman Maler (talk) 12:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello everybody, after several declined admissions I now ask for help. Today I added two further exhibitions of the artist, a book that was published about his actual exhibition in the Lemke House and I changed the source of the german television weblink from a youtube-video to the original website of the tv channel (German TV "ARD"). Can you tell me, what the problem is, what I maybe I don't understand? Thanks a lot.
 * Your draft was reviewed and declined by a fake reviewer User:Gorutna now blocked, it would be worth re-submitting it, the Museum collections are what will make it pass the criteria at WP:NARTIST. Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much! I just re-submitted the draft. Roman Maler (talk) 10:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

12:56:15, 18 August 2022 review of submission by Wstnharris
I'm not sure why this has been declined, apart from the Personal Life section being light on sources. Everything else has been sourced to my knowledge, and I'm not sure what's missing or needed based on the "not adequately supported by reliable sources" feedback. The Conflict of Interest page was also linked as an additional comment. I declared myself a COI before starting the article (I'm one of his grandsons) thinking it's the right thing to do, but are there extra steps I need to take because of that? Can I even write about him because it's a COI? Thank you for your time. Wstnharris (talk) 12:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Content like “Baum is an avid golfer and remains true to his Cincinnati Reds. He also collects sweatshirts from colleges across the country.“ is not appropriate for an encyclopedia and being a classmate of Jerry Rubin confers zero notability. The personal life section has virtually no sources we cannot accept any content that you add from personal knowledge. Theroadislong (talk) 13:06, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Wstnharris I see that you took it out, but for future reference, mentioning Jerry Rubin doesn't tell the reader anything about Dave Baum.  Cheers. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Wstnharris, there are several unreferenced statements in there — basically, if a paragraph doesn't have at least one citation, it's by definition unreferenced. Especially personal details and anything potentially contentious needs to be supported by a clear and immediate inline citation, see WP:BLP. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

14:55:58, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Helenjbaileyauthor
Helenjbaileyauthor (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Why has my submission been declined for 'dumping citations at the end?'

These have not been dumped at all and having read multiple wikipedia pages I cannot understand why this one is being decline?

Many thanks for your response.
 * In a Wikipedia article, sources are provided in-line with the text, so it is known what sources source which information. If done properly, the actual sources appear at the end, but are placed within the text. Please see Referencing for beginners. 331dot (talk) 15:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * E/C It is hard to tell if your draft is original research or not, if the citations were placed directly after the content that they support it would make it easier to evaluate. Also please remember to sign your posts. Theroadislong (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ahh ok thank you. I do know how to do this but thought you preferred everything sourced at the end. I'll cite properly and hopefully it will then be published. Many thanks! Helenjbaileyauthor (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

15:40:27, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Dawnpalmyra
Greetings. I am requesting a review of a recently re-submitted draft article for Postindustrial Media. Thank you and regards. Dawnpalmyra (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Happy to oblige, your draft is still blatant advertising from beginning to end, do you have a conflict of interest by any chance? Theroadislong (talk) 16:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Dawnpalmyra The first citation comes half way down the article. Where is the preceding information coming from?
 * And please remove all those inline external links. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

16:38:19, 18 August 2022 review of submission by 103.5.132.35
103.5.132.35 (talk) 16:38, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

17:48:07, 18 August 2022 review of draft by MTVsleuth
Hello,

I do feel I need to ask questions as this is one of many Television Personalty Biographies I intend to write. I just need help getting the format and cites down.

For the Biography of Ashley M Lands, I wanted to choose Another model & Tv Personality that had a similar career trajectory that also has a Wikipedia Page. I chose Ashley Graham, I have linked her Wikipedia page here for reference. Ashley Graham (model)

If you look at the current page I have written about Ashley Lands, I believe it is very similar to Grahams. If you look at Grahams page, it also includes references and statements I feel would be considered "puffery" as well her personal website is used to verify sources and cites.

If you can, which cites on this declined article of (Ashley M Lands) are not acceptable? IMDb is the most trusted source I found, so I chose to use it the most often as that is a verifiable media platform that lists Lands in the cast. Should I removed every single mention of her personal or owned website except listing it is her 'official website'? Also, I had previously used media articles and interview with Lands I found to tell more of a story of her career, but I was told the article did not "read like an Encyclopedia Entry". I am feeling jammed on what I am allowed to use.

Please Advise, Charles (MTVSleuth)

MTVsleuth (talk) 17:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I forgot to ask -- Is it possible I should make these TV Personality Entrees shorter than I am? Example: List Ashley M Lands 68 Television credits in a table below but not give a written statement about them?
 * Thanks! MTVsleuth (talk) 17:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Biography MTVsleuth (talk) 17:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem with aping an existing irrelevant/tangential article is that you're going to inherit the flaws of that article. As to your sources, refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
 * We can't use IMDb, full stop (no editorial oversight). IMDb is a wiki, and while it claims to have editorial oversight, its fact-checking is hideously bad at best. You also do not need to source that she appeared in a work as long as she didn't take an anonymous or Alan Smithee credit. All the IMDb links are completely worthless.
 * We can't use https://www.ashleymlands.com/news (connexion to subject, circular reference). Anything the subject controls is useless for notability in the first place, and circular references are academic blasphemy. All the ashleymlands.com links are completely worthless.
 * We can't use https://archive.vogue.com/issue/20211101 (Incomplete). Use and provide the page numbers, article title, and byline. And if you're literally just citing an advertizement, get rid of the cite altogether; we don't cite those.
 * We can't use https://medium.com/authority-magazine/power-women-ashley-m-lands-of-stuff-oui-love-on-how-to-successfully-navigate-work-love-and-life-62701b8ecba0 (deprecated). Medium is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia, full stop. Even if this weren't on Medium, it'd be useless for notability (connexion to subject) as it is an interview with the subject; anything a subject says, films, writes, commissions, pantomimes, semaphores, interpretive-dances, etc. is useless for that subject's notability.
 * We can't use https://www.thenealhamilagency.com/talent/ashley-lands?main_portfolio=talent-women&portfolio=talent-women (too sparse, connexion to subject). Content-free vital statistics from her agency.
 * We can't use https://megaflashmodels.com/Ashleymlands/ (too sparse). Content-free profile.
 * https://www.funair.com/funair-on-front-cover-dockwalk-magazine-july-2017-issue-with-my-katherine/ is a non-sequitur.
 * https://www.yahoo.com/news/sarah-jessica-parker-and-cynthia-rowley-designed-the-chicest-flight-attendant-uniforms-of-all-time-221305991.html " " "-".
 * https://secretmagazine.com.mx/2019/11/19/ashley-m-lands-modelo-rompe-estereotipos/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview with Lands.
 * We can't use https://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/ashley-lands/credits/3000176389/ (too sparse). Content-free profile. I should also note the reality show appearance does nothing to help prove notability; we generally discount coverage of such and regard a player's run on those reality shows as something that cannot support a biography on its own, partly because reality shows present people at their absolute worst.
 * https://www.monstersandcritics.com/tv/ashley-lands-on-double-shot-at-love-will-this-adrenaline-junkie-excite-or-scare-the-jersey-shore-bachelors/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). Coverage in the context of Double Shot at Love.
 * We can't use https://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/meet-the-ladies-on-pauly-d-and-vinnys-dating-show-double-shot-at-love/ (too sparse). Photo gallery. Even if we could use it it wouldn't help for notability as it's in the context of Double Shot at Love (routine coverage).
 * " " " https://www.eonline.com/news/1035309/pauly-d-and-vinny-learn-a-lot-of-dirty-laundry-about-their-potential-wifeys-on-double-shot-at-love (" "). " ". " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " (" ").
 * https://atownszone.com/2019/04/18/double-shot-at-love-is-the-next-mtv-hit/ is useless for notability (too sparse, no editorial oversight). Name-drop in a cast list on a gossip website (and in the context of Double Shot at Love).
 * We can't use https://www.inquisitr.com/5347545/a-double-shot-at-love-spoilers-meet-the-women-of-pauly-d-vinnys-new-mtv-series/ (no editorial oversight). Inquisitr is a news aggregator. Even if you cited the original article it'd be useless for notability as it's (say it with me) in the context of Double Shot at Love. (routine coverage)
 * We can't use https://www.distractify.com/p/double-shot-at-love-contestants (too sparse). Photo gallery. Even if we could use it it wouldn't help for notability as it's in the context of that fucking reality show. (routine coverage)
 * " " " https://www.bustle.com/p/the-double-shot-at-love-contestants-have-one-way-to-even-the-playing-field-with-vinny-pauly-d-17021217 (" "). " ". " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ". (" ")
 * https://www.mtvpress.com/series/double-shot-at-love-with-dj-pauly-d-vinny is 404-compliant.
 * Absolutely none of your sources help for notability, and the only claim that could feasibly be made is one we heavily discount for very sensible reasons. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Please remove/replace all instances of IMDb it is absolutely not a reliable source and cannot be used, her own website is also useless as it is a primary source. Theroadislong (talk) 18:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "context of that fucking reality show" --
 * Absolutely disgusting language from a moderator. MTVsleuth (talk) 18:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not a moderator. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not about your "title". It's the fact that just because I am a contributor in a space you don't like, you feel the need to curse at me while I am trying to learn.
 * - Charles MTVsleuth (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That is not why I am cursing. I am cursing because the same sort of source is being repeated ad nauseam. You try the same sort of thing being shoved in your face six or seven times in a row. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I thought that is what you were supposed to do to show the scope of the project.
 * I am simply trying to create articles that showcase more GeNZ and Millennials Media Personalities as they are not represented on Wikipedia. But I have never contributed so aggression like "ad nauseam" "fucking show" is not helpful.  MTVsleuth (talk) 19:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want someone to give you glasses that view Wikipedia in rainbows and pastels, then my job is to break those glasses. I am not averse to pointing out if someone is actually citing good sources, but that is not the case here, and I am not going to hold back my criticism of a source (or sources) just because it hurts the feelings of the person citing it.
 * As to the matter of "GeNZ and Millennials Media Personalities"[sic] the reason they're underrepresented on Wikipedia is because of the dearth of sources that report on them in the first place that Wikipedia can accept. Writing about them on Wikipedia is a daunting task in and of itself especially when we also have WP:Biographies of living persons (which has legal considerations and cannot be ignored) to consider. A reality show star is a textbook example of a media personality we shouldn't have an article on barring reliable reporting about events divorced from the reality show. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As to the matter of "GeNZ and Millennials Media Personalities"[sic] the reason they're underrepresented on Wikipedia is because of the dearth of sources that report on them in the first place that Wikipedia can accept. Writing about them on Wikipedia is a daunting task in and of itself especially when we also have WP:Biographies of living persons (which has legal considerations and cannot be ignored) to consider. A reality show star is a textbook example of a media personality we shouldn't have an article on barring reliable reporting about events divorced from the reality show. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

The draft has been reviewed and declined thrice by three different reviewers, one of whom explained that imdb can't be used as a source, and there are comments on the draft from a fourth reviewer about the use of imdb as a source. Take that information to heart and remove all references pointing to imdb, and take the information in Jéské Couriano's thorough source evaluation to heart and remove all sources that are not reliable. At the moment there is no actual claim to notability in the article – a person doing her job isn't notable in itself. --bonadea contributions talk 20:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

18:45:40, 18 August 2022 review of draft by MTVsleuth
MTVsleuth (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I am writing a follow up as it pertains to articles I am writing.

I will once again reference this page (Ashley Graham) as this entire article contradicts my submitted pieces.

This week, I have been told I cannot use the following to verify a TV personality or Model:


 * 1) 1 IMDB film credits
 * 2: Interviews with the person discussing their career
 * 3: Digital Magazine References to Vogue (USA)
 * 4: The persons personal website
 * 5: Articles in Spanish (or other languages)
 * 6: The models Agency website page (even though the original moderation stated that I HAD to add a current agency website that listed the persons name. They said this was an absolute MUST).
 * 7: IMDB Runway show credits
 * 8: YOUTUBE (even if the TV series/Podcast/set of Interviews were only on Youtube)

However, all the the aforementioned that are rejected to reference notability are all contained in the Ashley Graham Wikipedia.

At this time, I would like to rephrase my question as it seems as the rules are not applied to all media personality entrees: What type of cite should I be using to create pages about TV personalities and models?

Best, Charles (MTVSleuth)
 * Stop focusing on the irrelevant/tangential article that likely needs to be deleted in the first place and start focusing on your draft. Using another article as a yardstick, especially one that is blatantly tagged as having issues and which completely predates Articles for Creation as it exists now, is doing you absolutely no favours what-so-ever.
 * We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. Any reporting on her reality show appearances is considered routine coverage and thus useless. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 18:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * See other crap exists! Theroadislong (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

19:45:26, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Bernard-Riley-artist
My page Bernard-Riley-Artist was rejected “This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia But I do have coverage in independent sources, an article in the New York times and a long 7 page feature in American Artist. He also had paintings in the Metropolitan Museum in New York, the Corcoran in Washington DC, other museums and many private collections. I think that should qualify for an article. Please help Thanks John Bernard-Riley-artist (talk) 19:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Bernard-Riley-artist (talk) 19:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Your sources are all missing critical bibliographic information (article title, article byline, page numbers). —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The draft has been declined not rejected. The references are appalling please read WP:REFB for help with correctly formatting them. It isn't possible to verify any of the content, see WP:NARTIST for the criteria you need to pass. Theroadislong (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Request on 20:49:08, 18 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Tigin taagane
Tigin taagane 20:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Your only source is a Facebook login page. Not surprising that it was rejected. (We don't cite Facebook in any event due to its lack of editorial control.) —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 20:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

21:29:51, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Meenween
Hi, I was trying to find out more about why this article was declined for publication. I specifically picked a challeging entry so I could see what was out there in order to better support the previous iteration of this subject. The user Gorutna stated the subject did not meet the threshold of notability, however this seems disingneous as they did not leave any specific feedback. That is counter to the mission of wikipedia to improve and grow topics of interest through dialog. Additionally Gortuna feels like a vandalism profile. Reading their (talk) page I get the sense that this account was started to take down articles at will since they were already blocked from commented.

Meenween (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I'm more concerned with the very extensive quotes with every cite. —<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 21:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Meenween The notice in the draft did give specific feedback: it said "see the guidelines on the notability of people". All of those blue phrases in the notices are clickable links that give detailed policies. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

23:51:59, 18 August 2022 review of draft by Melbawab
Dear Sir/Madam,

I am contacting you in regard to a draft page Draft:NumXL, which was recently declined.

We have several mentions of the software in published papers, but as a tool in their research, not to document the software for-say.

Examples:

1. Sunitha Kumaran | (2022) Modelling the downside risk potential of mutual fund returns, Cogent Economics & Finance, 10:1, 2015084, DOI: 10.1080/23322039.2021.2015084

2. Return Based Risk Measures for Non-Normally Distributed Returns: An Alternative Modelling Approach

3. Seasonality of deaths with respect to age and cause in Chitral District Pakistan

4. Efficient Unsupervised Classification of Hyperspectral Images Using Voronoi Diagrams and Strong Patterns

Can this type of 3rd party publication satisfy the requirement for eligibility to be included in Wikipedia?

Thank you for your time, and look forward to hearing back from you.

Melbawab (talk) 23:51, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * None of those matter because (1) you're not citing them as you should be doing to demonstrate WP:Notability (in fact, the draft is completely unsourced) and (2) mere mentions do not help a whit for notability, even if you did cite them; we need in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources about the software that are written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. —<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 00:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Noted, thank you Jéské. Melbawab (talk) 14:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)