Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 February 26

= February 26 =

07:38:15, 26 February 2022 review of submission by Billapartygang123
Please check my draft now. I have done extensive changes in the draft. Please approve it for an article. Billapartygang123 (talk) 07:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

10:39:36, 26 February 2022 review of submission by Sharma9819
I just want My Rabra Family Wikipedia page as there is page available for Kapoor family bachchan family etc that's it please approve it Sharma9819 (talk) 10:39, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. You offer no independent reliable sources in the draft. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability. If you just want to tell the world about your family, you might try social media or other alternative forum with less stringent requirements. 331dot (talk) 10:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

14:47:37, 26 February 2022 review of submission by Navodya mobile
Navodya mobile (talk) 14:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a vehicle to promote your YouTube channel. Autobiographys, while not forbidden, are strongely discouraged. Judging by the birth date in the draft you should read Guidance for younger editors. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:09, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

15:03:50, 26 February 2022 review of submission by 175.157.242.30
175.157.242.30 (talk) 15:03, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

16:10:44, 26 February 2022 review of submission by Mahmoudfarag92
Mahmoudfarag92 (talk) 16:10, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. We have zero interest in what the company says about itself on or off Wikipedia. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 23:20, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 22:20:40, 26 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 72.142.115.6
I am requesting assistance and have in the article because I am not an expert in writing encyclopedia articles and I can only offer the basics. It is actually degrading that this is considered an essay when it is not currently an assembled product. It also appears to be theft of a trade secret despite that I already shared this idea with both Masdar.ae and Peterbilt. Essays are shorter and aim at presenting the writer's opinion with supporting arguments. Research papers are more complex and require a deep study on the matter and presentation of other scientists' opinions as well as the writer's conclusion..

I appeal the decision that this is an essay, closing the door on it that fast actually appear mischievous in that the intention is greed silencing of a trade secret. Obviously, considering the invention is incomplete, it's going to be short. I ask that you assist in helping form an idea that is capable of really helping humanity now and into the future. Considering humanity really needs it in a time where we have amassed millions of oil wells around the world and for the sake of climate change. I also appeal if there was any consideration that this is opinion based when I provided several sources of information all of which are relevant to the invention. I am unsure this reviewer is legitimate. I have made edits before to articles and noticed trolls which reported it with a return message from you that the troll was banned.

72.142.115.6 (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * We will not help with that goal. We're an encyclopaedia project, not someplace to try and push a novel concept. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 22:48, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 22:24:44, 26 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by 72.142.115.6
I accept your decision however, it is the final time I share any ideas here that actually utilizes existing technologies. Nothing essay about that. I welcome you to improve it and claim it as your own article as I can already see, that is your intention. Just keep in mind, I already shared this with Masdar, Peterbilt and the Russian Federation, with my name attached. So your reviewer can be selfish all he wants, doesn't defeat the fact.

72.142.115.6 (talk) 22:24, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

23:41:34, 26 February 2022 review of draft by 74.104.151.221
I looked at the requirements for academics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#:~:text=Every%20topic%20on%20Wikipedia%20must,library%20holdings%2C%20and%20so%20on.) and noted that a Guggenheim can be enough to demonstrate criterion 2: "(a) For the purposes of Criterion 2, major academic awards, such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for History, etc., always qualify under Criterion 2. Some less significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige can also be used to satisfy Criterion 2. Examples may include certain awards, honors and prizes of notable academic societies, of notable foundations and trusts (e.g., the Guggenheim Fellowship, Linguapax Prize), etc. Significant academic awards and honors can also be used to partially satisfy Criterion 1 (see item 4 above in this section)." Since Emily Greble has won a Guggenheim, and since the Guggenheim "can" be used to satisfy Criterion 2, that means determining if it does or does not is subjective. Given the statistically-demonstrated and notable bias against biographies of women on Wikipedia (see the following portions of the Wikipedia page on Gender Bias in Wikipedia: "Of the roughly 1.5 million biographical articles on the English Wikipedia in 2021, only 19% were about women.[50] The biographies that do exist are considerably more likely to be nominated for deletion than existing articles of men.[50]" and "According to a 2021 study by sociologist Francesca Tripodi, biographies on Wikipedia about women are disproportionately nominated for deletion as non-notable.[55][56]" -- I'd like to point out that this is a perfect example of a FEMALE ACADEMIC who DOES meet your criteria for "notability" (having won a Guggenheim) in a way that makes it 100% up to editors (predominantly male) to decide whether they want to accept it or not. This seems like a classic case of a missed opportunity to help users, like me, work against the gender bias in biographies on Wikipedia. Please reconsider.

74.104.151.221 (talk) 23:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I haven't investigated the notability of the person, but it appears that you currently have 3 sources, all of which are associated with the subject in some way. If you can find independent sources, that will be good. Skarmory   (talk •   contribs)  02:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

23:42:26, 26 February 2022 review of draft by Surfcaster33
{{SAFESUBST:Void|

FIRST TELL US WHY YOU ARE REQUESTING HELP ON THE LINE BELOW THIS LINE. Take as many lines as you need. --> 1. I was working in Sandbox on my article "Barbara Andres" and had added quite a few book citations. I submitted my draft and realized that all the citations had disappeared. Two internet citations remained with the submission. Do I have to reconstruct my references, or is there somewhere I might still find them?

2. How do I go about entering a table that I have constructed in Numbers in my article?

3. I plan to continue to improve and change my article while it gets reviewed, especially the book references I mentioned above. Will this delay my review? }

Surfcaster33 (talk) 23:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi . (1) The disappeared citations are nowhere in the page history, so they must never have been published (saved) successfully. Unless you have a copy of them on your computer, you'll have to reconstruct them. (2) See the how-to guide Help:Table. (3) Submitting a draft for review before all the references are in place is highly risky. If the draft is reviewed before it's ready, it will be declined, and you'll have to "return to the end of the line" after you've fixed it. You may continue improving a draft while it is waiting for review, but it should be in an acceptable state before you submit it. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)