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

= January 6 =

04:00:33, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Deyrel
there is evidence godomiscient is at work as we speak. apple, google, and elon musk all have mind reading technology and have created a digital multiverse aka a simulation inside of computer, however we still have to contend with the matter at hand. where does it all come from, i named at birth edward lyons, have stumbled across the nacsent of the myth of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elyon. these coincidences are not coincidences they are the universe formulation a direction. there is a massive bitcoin mining operation that i accidentally caused, i also help unveil the final mysteries of how our universe works. the differentiation btween https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God and  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Godomiscient  is that God can die and was possible killed in a previous universe. however the energy and requirments for anything to exist at all cannot be killed, ie Godomiscient. at these facilities google apple and elon musks company they are undertaking the task of creating a new digital super intelligence aka a god to rule over us. which can be killed. but the presense of energy in the first place is indicitive of the will of existence to exist at all. and this is what we will refer to as "Godomiscient".Thank you for your time. do not deny this being published. articles about god to require citation or reference are what will be the worst of occasions for the effort i, Deyrel, have layed forth.

HERE IS JUST THE TIP OF THE TIP OF THE TIP OF THE TIP OF THE TIP OF THE TOP OF THE ICEBERG ~ you Hoary. PUBLISH MY ARTICLE ON Godomiscient ive highlighted here some keywords to show you what im talking about is what he is saying. everything ive told you is highly classified.

According to Musk, a dense and true metauniverse can only be built with brain implants.(they can already immerse you in a digital multiverse WITHOUT A CHIP IMPLANT, again highly classified)

“In the long run, an advanced Neuralink can completely immerse you in virtual reality“, he said.

https://newsbeezer.com/bulgariaeng/elon-musk-the-metaverse-is-stupid-my-chips-are-getting-stronger/

Much love and Blessings to you. Deyrel (talk) 04:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * , you don't seem to understand concepts such as verifiability. What you have written is utterly unsuited to Wikipedia and will never be suited to Wikipedia. Please post it on some other website, perhaps your own blog. -- Hoary (talk) 05:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

06:10:38, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Dmarkan
external link and reference added

Dmarkan (talk) 06:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * No, Dmarkan, it's impossible. Please apply your energy to publicizing the game on some other website. -- Hoary (talk) 07:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

07:44:29, 6 January 2022 review of draft by Aidris2
Hi, I'm a little unfamiliar with the article publication process. I fixed up the draft I've linked to a few weeks ago. It had a host of issues that I think have now been resolved. Do I now just wait for it to be reviewed again, or is there a specific process of submitting it for re-review? Thank you.

Aidris2 (talk) 07:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * You have -- or somebody has (I didn't check) -- already submitted it for rereview. So normally I'd say that you should just wait for it to be reviewed again. However, a comment attached to it on 25 November 2020 says "Reads like a resume"; and now, in 2022, it still reads like a resume. He has published books and papers; what has been written about them by other people (of course in reliable sources)? If the answer is "nothing much", then I regret to say that (in common with most professors) no article can be created. However, if good material about this man or his work does exist, then hurry to integrate summaries of it into your draft. -- Hoary (talk) 08:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

14:02:56, 6 January 2022 review of submission by 2409:4071:229C:276:BC48:6160:FC28:3CC
2409:4071:229C:276:BC48:6160:FC28:3CC (talk) 14:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone or post their resume.  If you are the person you wrote about, be aware that autobiographical articles are highly discouraged, see WP:AUTO. Wikipedia is not social media, but an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

16:26:26, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Rzzor
I have had my draft declined numerous times because I don't have "significant coverage". The link to it is right here. What would be a good minimum for citations? What are some good websites I could site from? Would UploadVR.com be an ok site? I currently have 6 citations and I think that would be enough.

Hope you answer, Rzzor

Rzzor (talk) 16:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Draft:Pavlov VR for the reasons explained on the draft. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of their topic. At most one of the current citations is sufficiently independent and reliable. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

17:25:04, 6 January 2022 review of submission by IRunnerI
I changed the content as per the references and made it simple to read, feel free to edit it or let me know what I have to change and I will do it.

Thank you for all your efforts... really appreciate it IRunnerI (talk) 17:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi . The free trade zone is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone article). Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable here. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

17:28:36, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Schumilegend33
Hi, can you please explain why this is not suitable for Wikipedia? I've spent a lot of time on this page and many other blockchain pages, including IOTA (which is a similar tech project to Iotex and is also a similar size.) Schumilegend33 (talk) 17:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

17:41:18, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Yukta6599
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WazirX WazirX has their wiki page too. Please help us get a chance. This is for the users to get more information about us.

Yukta6599 (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * We have no interest in helping you promote your company. Please read other stuff exists, WP:PROMO, WP:COI, and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)  Wikipedia is not here "for the users to get more information about you".  Wikipedia does not have "pages"--it has articles on notable subjects.  Your draft has been rejected, and has been tagged for speedy deletion as blatant advertising for a second time.  As for comparisons with WazirX: Firstly, it appears to have received the coverage from multiple independent sources which qualify it for an article here.  Secondly, regardless of the previous, each article is to be judged on its own merits regardless of comparisons with other articles--see WP:OSE.  Wikipedia is not the place to advertise for your company, and if it grows to the point where it does qualify for an article here, people like yourself who are connected with the company should not be involved in writing it.  Thank you for listening.  --Finngall talk  18:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

18:33:46, 6 January 2022 review of draft by MrInaugural
Hi, my page has been declined as the references do not meet WP:ORGCRIT. I've referenced from independent websites of note including BBC, Financial Times, FCA among others. I'm seeking guidance because I'm not quite sure how to resolve this issue surrounding the references. Thanks. MrInaugural (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , FCA is a Primary source which does not help establish notability. Most of the rest looks to be passing mentions of the company and routine transactions likely from Press Releases.  Really the only thing lending notability is them being fined and without independent reliable coverage beyond that, this one event is not likely to confer notability.Slywriter (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback . I've removed those press releases and opted for sources that demonstrate notability. MrInaugural (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

22:23:32, 6 January 2022 review of submission by Nomoneybutrichanyway
Hi, there's a Swedish page of the in Sweden very famous Buddhist monk Björn Natthiko Lindeblad, which I made an English version of because of his upcoming book. I have no relation whatsoever with Natthiko, other than that I'm deeply impressed by his positivity and thoughts about life. I saw a post by him on Linkedin, that he now sits 14-18 hours a day in his special chair so he gets to think a lot, and he's started to wish things. Big things. Impossible things. Impossible since he was diagnoses with ALS 2018 and will soon die out of this horrible muscle disease. One of his wished was for someone to make him an English Wikipedia page to compliment the Swedish one, since his book is now translated to English and will be launched 7 of february. So I did. But I got this weird refusal of adding it because he's not famous enough, which is insane. He's very famous in Sweden and has been part of the biggest TV-shows and radio programs in Sweden, being voted by the Swedish population to be the most popular "Sommar" (summer program) talker of all influential summer talks.

So, what do I need to do in order for the page to be published? Nomoneybutrichanyway (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Nomoneybutrichanyway Please read WP:GNG and WP:RS, thank you. Nyanardsan (talk) 23:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Nyanardsan I've read them. All sources are both RS and the content is GNG. Please prove me wrong User:Nomoneybutrichanyway (talk) 00:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)