Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 January 10

= January 10 =

02:13:59, 10 January 2022 review of draft by ZX2006XZ
What exactly does an independent source entail? This is not a review!!!

ZX2006XZ (talk) 02:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * For everyone's sanity, please just wait until the movie comes out.Slywriter (talk) 02:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , Will do ZX2006XZ (talk) 03:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

05:11:14, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Aashish.bhatnagar
Aashish.bhatnagar (talk) 05:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC) Hi Guys, I have been trying to create a page about a company but am unable to do it. It has already been 6 months that it was launched with media coverage. I see many big firms listed but small firms need to struggle to get listed. :(
 * Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages". This is a subtle but important distinction.  Your draft is only sourced to two announcements of the company's activities.  This does not establish notability. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a company and is not a directory of companies where mere existence merits inclusion.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion. A company merits a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company.  Basic announcements, press releases, interviews, the company website, and other primary sources do not establish notability. New companies rarely merit articles, they must be establish and recognized in their field to the point where independent sources write about them on their own, not merely publish announcements of what they do.
 * I see that you declared a conflict of interest; if you are a company employee or other paid representative, you must make the stricter paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement and mandatory. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 07:44:40, 10 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Madhat1988
I know I am new on here but I am asking for help with getting my article published. I have given citations to News, magazines, etc. Still nothing. There are other bands published on here with no News coverage, no magazines published, and yet. These bands get published on Wikipedia. The grindcore band named DAHMER is a good example. Please help me with Edit: Demi Dahmer. Thank you so much for your time !

Madhat1988 (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see other stuff exists. The existence of other articles that are inappropriate does not mean more inappropriate articles can be added.  As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, and with over 6 million articles to manage and only tens of thousands of editors, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us.  Furthermore, it is possible(though not necessarily a good idea) to create an article without going through this process(except for new accounts and IP users) so these other articles you have seen may not have been looked at by experienced editors yet.  We can only address what we know about.  If you would like to help us out, you can identify these other articles you have seen for possible action.
 * Your draft is sourced primarily to interviews and announcements, these do not establish notability. An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own- and not based on any materials put out by the subject or their associates- to say about the musician, showing how they meet the speical Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. Interviews are the person speaking about themselves, not what others choose to say about them. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

09:43:18, 10 January 2022 review of draft by Channire
The article I am trying to submit is a translation from an article already existing in the German Wikipedia realm. I am curious: why is it considered not relevant for the English Wikipedia?

Thank you!

Christoph

Channire (talk) 09:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Different language versions of Wikipedia all have their own policies- what is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. The English version tends to be stricter from others in my experience. Here, it is not acceptable to merely tell of the existence of a company and what it does.  An article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. The sources you have offered are just announcements of the company's activities, or simple profile listings, neither of which is significant coverage.  331dot (talk) 10:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

10:07:53, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Camila Hazel
Camila Hazel (talk) 10:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was a blatant promotional piece. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

12:24:26, 10 January 2022 review of draft by Vladdy Daddy Silly
What do you think about my draft? It's a stub from the Italian page about the same argument.

Vladdy Daddy Silly (talk) 12:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

13:59:06, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Iwrite1117
This article is made for information purpose and it is a notable company that should have a presence on Wikipedia. Please let us know the exact reason on why this is not being accepted. Changed to improve the article can be made. Iwrite1117 (talk) 13:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not for merely providing information or for merely telling about the existence of something. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion. Your draft was rejected because it does not show how the company meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Please read Your First Article.
 * If you work for the company, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 14:17:43, 10 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by ThejusRajTheju
ThejusRajTheju (talk) 14:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

14:27:39, 10 January 2022 review of draft by Kateewilliamson
Hello!

I've been trying to publish this draft for some weeks now, following all the advice - but it seems to be in a deadlock. The article has more references and citations and far more detail than numerous other similar music producers. There are also numerous big articles published both about, in discussion with and mentioning Jolyon Thomas. I'm including another load of links here where is he mentioned which I thought would be overload - can you advise which how to get the article published?

https://mpg.org.uk/mpg-awards/2018-photo-gallery/ https://milocostudios.com/releases/i-slept-on-the-floor/ https://gavinfriday.com/archive/people/jolyon-vaughan-thomas/ https://promotionmusicnews.com/u2-kendrick-lamar-american-soul https://charleshutchpress.co.uk/tag/jolyon-thomas/ https://www.hmv.com/music/the-magic-gang-interview https://milocostudios.com/client/the-magic-gang/ https://conversationsabouther.net/jolyon-thomas-celebrates-first-no-1-album-with-royal-blood-new-music/ https://ourculturemag.com/2021/10/13/francis-of-delirium-release-new-single-all-love/ https://warnermusic.com.au/artists/royal-blood https://dirtyfilms.uk/director/youth-hymns/ https://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/u2-songs-of-experience-album/ https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/arid-20463243.html https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/hear-u2s-exuberant-new-song-featuring-kendrick-lamar-197487/ https://etcanada.com/news/272207/u2-and-kendrick-lamar-release-second-collaboration-american-soul/ https://www.officialcharts.com/search/albums/how-did-we-get-so-dark/ https://www.billboard.com/pro/u2-songs-of-experience-billboard-200-chart/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/arts/music/u2-songs-of-experience-interview.html

https://hitsdailydouble.com/news&id=313935&title=GRAMMY-TALK:-U2

Kateewilliamson (talk) 14:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fewer high quality independent reliable sources are preferable to a truckload of low quality sources. Tell us what the three best sources you have are.
 * I am curious as to why you identified yourself as a paid editor and then removed it from your user page. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

16:12:31, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Emmy1707
Emmy1707 (talk) 16:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Unfortunately, I don't understand what is not enough in reliable sources. Are there too few? Or is it due to the first one that is no longer directly available? Or because most sources are in German? I read similar Wikipedia articles about German o Austrian actors who had much less sources. What can I do? It would be so nice if the article were finally published. Thank you very much for your support and best regards.Emmy1707 (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

16:25:07, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Sauravlal
Sauravlal (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume or otherwise tell the world about yourself. Please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 17:35:05, 10 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by SpartanburgBooks
I have been trying to get a page created for the Spartanburg County Public Libraries for the past year and have been unsuccessful. I have included sources that link to the library's website as well as articles published by news outlets. I'm not sure why my sources are being considered unreliable since other libraries have pages that only reference their website (see Orange County Library System). Why are the rules different for one library system versus another?

SpartanburgBooks (talk) 17:35, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have tagged Orange County Library System for relying on primary sources, the existence of one poor quality article doesn't mean we need another. Theroadislong (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

17:48:39, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Alo788
Alo788 (talk) 17:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This page has been rejected and will not be considered further. This isn't an encyclopaedia article; it looks like an answer to a Q&A. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 19:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

18:08:30, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Tvcgfiba
Tvcgfiba (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, My editor at Charlesbridge Publishing asked me to create a Wikipedia entry, but I obviously don't know how to add citations, links to my website, and references, etc. The instructions aren't clear enough for me. I'm not sure what to do next.
 * Your editor is a clown. See Help:Referencing for beginners, WP:Autobiography, and WP:Conflict of interest. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 18:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Unhelpful as your editor might be, it is still possible that you meet WP:AUTHOR--several of the books are in hundreds of libraries. If you declare your COI, there is no reason why you should not add references to substantial reviews in third-party published independent reliable sources, not press releases, blurbs, blogs,  Amazon, or Goodreads--and preferably not Booklist or Kirkus, which are neither substantial nor reliable for notability purposes.  The other thing uyou would need to do is rewrite the present material, which is copied from the publishers blurb and cannot be used here for copyright reasons.
 * Though we certainly do discourage autobiographies, it is not totally impossible to write one in draft space that will be satisfactory. Look at articles for other notable children's authors to see the usual style. It is also possible that someone seeing this might write an article. (It would help guide them if you did add references to book reviews to your userspace  draft (in any format )--it's the basic criteria for notability  as an author.  DGG ( talk ) 01:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC) �

20:21:05, 10 January 2022 review of draft by JohnMoss67
Hello. I am new to this, so am not entirely sure whether my first article is being considered, or has been rejected. Could you let me know pls. Apologies for being slow on the uptake! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mark_Taubert Best wishes, JM JohnMoss67 (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I can understand your confusion. Notability can be by WP:GNG or WP:PROF. The article was first declined by another reviewer on Dec. 29 for not showing notability by WP:GNG, without considering WP:PROF. I commented, later on Dec. 29, that PROF needed to be considered, but said that it did not seem to meet WP:PROF either as the citations to his professional articles was too low. . You have made extensive further additions since then.   I still consider the citations too low. Google Scholar's first item is a 2002 edition of a formulary, a medical reference book, listed as  edited by someone else. WorldCat shows it to have several editors, but does not specify them the National Library of Medicine catalog record for the book does show all the editors, and he is not among them. [https://catalog.nlm.nih.gov/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma9911588333406676&context=L&vid=01NLM_INST:01NLM_INST&lang=en&search_scope=MyInstitution&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&tab=LibraryCatalog&query=any,contains,50935735-  It is more likely that he may have written one of the chapters of the book, but it's not listed in his CV.   Otherwise the citations  to his papers show citations of 112, 56, 56, 51...which is too low--in biomedicine the minimum has been 2 articles with over 100 citations each, tho we usually expect nowadays 2 with over 200 citations each. The award listed is not significant enough for the other criteria of WP:PROF.
 * It is possible that he mets WP:GNG as a public speaker. I did not analyze that; some other reviewer will. I'm linking  this as a comment to the draft.  DGG ( talk ) 01:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

20:30:25, 10 January 2022 review of submission by Garnetdarkmatter
Hi, all. My draft was declined on the basis of unreliable sources. I don't see any further comments, so I'm not sure which sources were deemed problematic. I know Wikipedia has its own rules, but I've only used sources that would be proper in a scholarly setting. Could someone take a look and let me know where I've gone astray? I just want to make sure that any further edits I make are really in service to community standards and not just what I guess them to be.

Thanks a million (and I hope I've formatted this message correctly)!

Garnetdarkmatter (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You're missing sources, actually. You have claims that lack sources; this is not acceptable for articles about living or recently-departed people. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 20:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)