Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 February 6

= February 6 =

05:58:09, 6 February 2022 review of submission by Jennamaree
Jennamaree (talk) 05:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello I am an Australian actress and am trying to get my wikipedia page can you please help me
 * , Wikipedia is not social media. It's not a place for you to promote yourself, provide your resume or otherwise write an autobiography. As it stands your article is not written in an encyclopedic tone, provides no sources and gives zero indication that subject would meet WP:NACTOR.14:49, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Given the flowery prose of the article and the link to the subject's Instagram profile, this qualifies for deletion via WP:CSD for blatant self-promotion. -- Kinu t/c 06:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

09:12:24, 6 February 2022 review of draft by Tariqarafa1
Tariqarafa1 (talk) 09:12, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi I'd like to know why my submission on Connected Kerb has been removed. I've deliberately tried not to write it as a promotional advert. Please explain why.
 * , The article is an ad. Founders, Products, Awards... all things the company wants to tell the world about themselves without any indication of in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources. Routine business annoucements and press releases do not contribute to notability.Slywriter (talk) 14:46, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

10:39:28, 6 February 2022 review of submission by Wikiwizard1225
I really nee to expedite getting this article approved... can you help in this area? Wikiwizard1225 (talk) 10:39, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * First, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID. There is no way to ensure a speedy review; we have no interest in any deadline you may be under. Reviews are conducted by volunteers who do what they can when they can, in no particular order.
 * Please review the comments left by the reviewer on the draft. 331dot (talk) 11:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi
Why did you deline my submission please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.27.26.121 (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Courtesy link: Draft:Untitled Bad Moms project
 * Hi IP user, the draft you created and submitted does not show that the upcoming TV show meets any notability criteria, and almost none of the info in the draft has a source. There is one single source from 2018 which talks about "early development stages" of the show, and doesn't mention the "ensemble cast" (from what I can tell, it says that Kunis, Bell, and Hahn are not going to be in this show, but it's all super vague, and the other names you've listed aren't in the source at all). The director/writer info is also unsupported by the source. --bonadea contributions talk 17:49, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

21:27:29, 6 February 2022 review of draft by CrustyBurgerhead
Hello, I have some questions about getting "Klairmont Kollections" published. Is the lack of notability because I only have four or so references to the museum, are the sources not reputable enough (Chicago Tribune and Chicago Magazine,) or is it how I'm citing them in the article? Would it help if I put "cite web" in? I'm comparing it with the published "Volo Auto Museum" page which is a very similar museum. Thank you.

CrustyBurgerhead (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is not the sources themselves that are the problem, but their content. (some of them are not cited properly but that is not the main issue; you may see Referencing for Beginners to fix that) The sources are either not independent(the museum website), are just announcements, or tell us more about the founder of the museum rather than the museum itself(it could be that the founder of the museum merits an article and not the museum itself).  Please see Your First Article.
 * Be wary in using other articles as a model for yours, unless it is classified as a good article(Volo Auto Museum is not and has some of the same issues, and I have marked that article as such) 331dot (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

21:53:03, 6 February 2022 review of draft by Sabine Hagmann
I don't know what else I can do. I created an article that keeps getting declined for lack of citations. But I have added so many citations, many more than I can detect in other articles that have been approved. I am at a loss on what to do. Can you help? Thank you, Sabine Hagmann (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2022 (UTC) Sabine Hagmann (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That other articles exist does not necessarily mean that they were "approved" by anyone. Only new users and IP users are required to use this process(though it's a good idea for all without experience), and it has not existed for the entire time Wikipedia has existed; those are just two ways that an inappropriate article could get by us.  As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, and there are over 6 million articles, it's possible to get things by us- and we can only address what we know about.  If you would like to help us out, you can identify other probematic articles you have seen for possible action.
 * Please read other stuff exists. That other articles exist does not automatically mean that yours can too.  Otherwise, nothing could ever be removed from Wikipedia. Each article is judged on its own merits.  If you want to use other articles as a model, you should use those classified as good articles.
 * Regarding your draft, it's not more sources that we need- it's higher quality sources. A Wikipedia article about an artist must not just tell us about the artist and that their work exists- it should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the artist, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable creative professional. "Significant coverage" is the key here; the coverage must do more than just document the existence of the artist or their work; the coverage must tell us in its voice(i.e. not an interview or other primary source) how the artist is significant.  Please read Your First Article.
 * My suggestion is to take the three best sources that you have and summarize what those say- leaving everything else out. All that is needed to pass this process is three sources with significant coverage.  Other stuff, if needed, can come later. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

23:58:35, 6 February 2022 review of submission by 95.162.161.211
95.162.161.211 (talk) 23:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)