Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 March 12

= March 12 =

00:12:36, 12 March 2022 review of submission by Mohsman
I have tried to publish a page for the American Society For Mohs Surgery (ASMS). There are currently two major Mohs surgery societies in the USA. The other group, the American College of Mohs Surgery (ACMS), already has a Wikipedia page. So, I modeled the draft for the ASMS almost exactly the same as the ACMS article. Indeed, several of the secondary references are the same.

Almost immediately, it was rejected because the references " they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Yet, the references are in some cases identical and in all cases of the same significant coverage as the ACMS. Yet, the Wikipedia "Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)" guidelines says this does not apply to "non-profit educational institutions, religions or sects, and sports teams."

The ASMS is of nearly identical membership size and influence as the ACMS within the profession of dermatology. Please advise what additional references I can provide to prove "notability" as the secondary references already supplied would seem to be sufficient.

Thanks Mohsman (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Mohsman (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see other stuff exists. The existence of other articles has no bearing on what happens to your draft.  It could be that this other article is also inappropriate and simply has not been addressed yet(I may look at it after I post here).  As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us.  We can only address what we know about.
 * The ACMS does not "have a Wikipedia page" here. Wikipedia has an article about the ACMS. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about an organization and what it does.  A Wikipedia article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization.  A professional association is not a non-profit educational institution(which is mostly high schools/universities) so it must meet that criteria.  If no independent sources give the organization significant coverage, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time(even if another similar organization might). 331dot (talk) 00:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see some of the same problems with the ACMS article. I have marked it as problematic. I would advise against using other articles as a model unless they are classified as good articles. 331dot (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi
 * thanks for your explanation. I appreciate you taking the time to answer.
 * The reason I noted the ACMS article is that their structure and function is nearly identical, and Mohs surgeons are often members of one or both. That is why I patterned the ASMS article on the ACMS one.
 * Thanks for the clarification on non-profits. I'm very new at editing pages and am clearly still on the steep portion of the curve.
 * Sincerely,
 * Mohsman (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

06:10:23, 12 March 2022 review of submission by Ronydip4
Ronydip4 (talk) 06:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It is a long way from being a Wikipedia article.  I might suggest that you use the new user tutorial and read Your First Article to learn more about Wikipedia, as well as spending much time editing existing articles, before attempting to create a new one, which is the hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

09:53:50, 12 March 2022 review of submission by Arbil44
Anne (talk) 09:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

May I have a second opinion, based on my "comment" following 's rejection? I would add, having studied the American Revolution for many years, I know for a fact that hundreds (thousands?) of Revolutionary War records have been lost or destroyed - especially, and particularly, where Militia officers are concerned. Robert Hicks did not claim a pension. Pension records are one of few surviving records for Militiamen, hence there are scarce sources for this particular officer. Mrs Cicero W. Harris makes the point that she has based her biographies on oral history passed down to her by the people who knew her subjects in their lifetimes. She thought Robert Hicks worthy of being her first-mentioned subject. This can be verified in her opening paragraph. Could comment, having suggested to me that I write this short article? Anne (talk) 09:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Even in these better documented times, it is hard for a soldier to warrant an article. Just being brave isn't enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You downgrade him further by calling him a "soldier", . He was an officer. There are articles on Wikipedia for officers who have done less - qualifying simply because they were officers. Anne (talk) 10:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Who for example? (Also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a valid argument.) Clarityfiend (talk) 10:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I came here for a "second opinion" and yet you continue to express yours, which are known.  I hope  will comment, since the article was written at his suggestion.  He congratulated me; thought it would be accepted, but perhaps needed tweaking (without giving me specifics). Anne (talk) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not blocking you from getting a second or third opinion. I'm just trying to help you understand why this man does not satisfy our notability standards (WP:GNG, WP:BIO). I'm afraid Cordless Larry has raised false hopes. If you check List of Wikipedians by article count, you will see that he doesn't appear on it. I, on the other hand, have created 3070 pages. But since you are offended by my efforts, I will cease and desist. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:05, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Had you "turned down" the AfC in pleasant terms, with some thought to the feelings of the creator - indeed, much more so, the subject ('Tis well that a State should often be reminded of her great citizens.) - I would probably have left it at that. But you chose wording which did, indeed, "offend me". Furthermore, you demean Cordless Larry, who is as first-class Administrator and also a volunteer who replies to the millions of emails sent in by members of the public, and Wikipedians. I can only imagine that leaves him little time for more than his full time job. Anne (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I vaguely remember discussing this but I can't find that discussion now, . I see that previously suggested that Hicks might be notable but that more coverage was needed. Are all the sources you can find now cited in the draft? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

, your comments were in an email, last year. Your suggestion was, I think, on the talk page of the Battle of Guildford Courthouse, or the wp article for a descendant of Hicks - whose name now escapes me. I will try to find your email again and email it back! However, the article is as sourced as it is possible for me to make it. I have explained that it would have been helpful had Hicks claimed a pension, but he didn't - the family was very wealthy, and I believe such families did not claim pensions. Anne (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You might be confusing me with at Talk:James W. Crawford Jr., . In any case, it doesn't really matter who suggested it - that doesn't really come into the notability question. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:03, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I have found the email in which you made comments about the article and have returned it to you. Thank you for the reminder of James W. Crawford's name, which had escaped me, but as your email will attest, I am not confusing you with anyone else. Anne (talk) 13:08, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I see from what you sent me that I congratulated you on creating the draft, which isn't quite the same as suggesting that you write it. But none of this really helps the matter at hand, which is whether the draft is acceptable. Can other reviewers comment on that, please? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A review of the sources, Wheeler- good source, Torch Light - Assuming the transcription is true and accurate, appears to be a good source(partisan paper of its time but that's not disqualifying). Its a good start but then you get to Spangler, Dar, Hicks, & Mayflower, none of which can contribute to notability. They prove existence, but existence is not notability. The lack of a third secondary source makes me agree that the subject does not meet the notability guidelines.Slywriter (talk) 20:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A quick search of Google Books suggests there might be other sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Wow, thank you ! The first thing I did was to contact the people in Granville County (---@granvillecounty.org) and asked them if there were any sources of information about the Hicks family. The man in question was a close personal friend of James W. Crawford, so I thought I was right where I needed to be. But I was told a resounding "no" (other than the sources I have used) so, thinking I had gone to the horse's mouth, I only searched Hathitrust, but not Google books.  I have my time cut out for me now, looking through that lot!  I am so grateful to you for this help. Anne (talk) 02:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , that was an interesting exercise. It is no wonder I did not find these books on Hathitrust, because virtually all of them have been written in the 20th and 21st centuries, so the contents are copyrighted and only snippet views available. Really frustrating because a few of them would have been fascinating for me to read. I think they all relate to "the" Hicks family, in one way or another, which shows that they will always be integral to the history of America. I haven't, however, found the "golden nugget" which would change the situation on Wikipedia. I still think it is sad that such outstanding bravery is considered to be of no value whatsoever. Today, he would have been awarded the Victoria Cross. Please would you delete the draft and send it to its Wikipedia graveyard since I would like to put this chapter firmly behind me now? Many thanks. Anne (talk) 11:58, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Before requesting deletion of the article,, you might want to check whether any of the books are available to borrow electronically here, , in case it helps you find something not visible via Google Books. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A kind thought. I did check on this one Brunswick County, Virginia, 1720-1975, but the answer was 'not available'. The sad fact is that this family were very involved in all aspects of life in New York, and the Southern States, in particular. I must console myself that they are mentioned here! ferry operation But the "outstanding" event was the act of bravery at Guildford Court House.  This is of no interest to Wikipedia.  This, plus the long wait, has been stressful for me, so I would like to put an end to it now, but thank you for your (as always) practical help. Anne (talk) 12:24, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * OK,, draft now deleted. I'm sorry that this proved to be a waste of your time. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

17:10:11, 12 March 2022 review of submission by Mytom3
Dear, Team Why did you decline the page I created?

Mytom3 (talk) 17:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The reason for the decline was left by the reviewer at the top of the draft. Please review it, and the policies linked to therein, carefully, as well as Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Also asked and answered at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

23:06:21, 12 March 2022 review of draft by 88.98.165.58
The citations mentioned include links to reputable sources, including a full writeup on Microsoft News specifically about 57Digital. But for some reason, the wikipedia page was rejected due to "mentions in passing". However, the sources are products created by 57Digital, and a full biography news article.

88.98.165.58 (talk) 23:06, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * An interview(the Microsoft News source you mention) is not acceptable, as it is a primary source. Sources must have significant coverage of the company itself, not just its products. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 00:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)