Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 March 23

= March 23 =

00:04:05, 23 March 2022 review of draft by PreyBird
PreyBird (talk) 00:04, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I delete my page?

00:14:18, 23 March 2022 review of submission by PreyBird
PreyBird (talk) 00:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

How do I delete my wiki page?

03:43:32, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Thecontentcreator20
Hi there, can kindly elaborate how i can amend the article for it to be published. What do you mean by your comment? Is there anything wrong with my current references. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thecontentcreator20 (talk) 03:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , You do not have any secondary sources that would establish notability. Press releases and routine business announcements are useless for this purpose.Slywriter (talk) 04:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

09:02:19, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Gobautista
Looking forward to reconsider this article. Thank you. Evo1885 09:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review the messages left by reviewers.  If you have new information that the last reviewer did not consider, please appeal to them directly. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

10:06:03, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Samwel peter masinga
Samwel peter masinga (talk) 10:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC) i just submit my aritcle declined so i would like your help
 * Fixed your link for you. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves or their accomplishments, please see the autobiography policy.  Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.  Please read Your First Article. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, please use social media, a personal website, or alternative forum where that is permitted. 331dot (talk) 10:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)


 * okay can i get an example Samwel peter masinga (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * An example of what? 331dot (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

11:08:30, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Padres Hana
I have been using the subject of this article as the source for additions to over thirty Wikipedia pages and I am concerned that no-one will know where I am getting the information from. Can you help? Padres Hana (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Padres Hana (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A publication does not need to have a Wikipedia article about it in order to be used as as source in other articles. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I can see that it would be impossible to have a page for every publication used as a source. I am currently working on pages relating to the modern history of Lebanon which are littered with dubious references to dodgy websites and such like. I would like a reader who wants to know more about the source to see some of its background. e.g. published by a couple of heavyweight British politicians; 500-600 issues over thirty years etc. Examples where I have used it are Michael Aoun and War of Liberation (1989-1990). Padres Hana (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

14:17:17, 23 March 2022 review of submission by 188.96.230.188
Alexandra Würzbach is editor-in-chief for German newspaper Bild in Germany. This newspaper is one of the most important newspapers in Germany. 188.96.230.188 (talk) 14:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The draft does little more than state that she exists and works for the newspaper. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about her, showing how she meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The draft shows, that Würzbach is editor-in-chief for German newspaper Bild, one of the most important newspaper in Germany, --188.96.230.188 (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, but if the sources do nothing other than document her position, that is insufficient for an article. An article about her needs to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about her personally, not just that she holds a position. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please make further comment in this section only, do not create additional sections. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

15:44:34, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Joliehorowitz
I am reaching out to get a better explanation for why my page was declined. I was notified that my submission lacked sufficient relevant coverage—however, I carefully followed the stipulated instructions while creating this post by utilizing three objective press sources. If the reviewer could give me more information on how to edit my page for resubmission, that would be extremely helpful. Thank you in advance.

Joliehorowitz (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Your sources consist of a piece that briefly mentions the organization, an interview and a promotional piece written by a trustee. These are not objective sources. A Wikipedia article about this organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization.
 * I see you declared a conflict of interest; if you work for this organization you must make the stricter paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement. 331dot (talk) 15:52, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

16:28:03, 23 March 2022 review of submission by Francewhsd
Francewhsd (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a host for primary source content like a speech transcript.  331dot (talk) 16:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

16:28:30, 23 March 2022 review of draft by Breadyornot
Hi there, I, and other more experienced WikiProject Writing editors, have made significant progress to this draft article on Dr. Linda Adler-Kassner. We recognize that the review process can take over three months, and we have been waiting almost two months as of now, but we think the article is in good shape to be added to the mainspace. We've addressed significant errors to citation, close paraphrasing, and neutral point of view suggested by our previous reviewers. Additionally, we've added new independendent reliable sourcing to improve the article for the Wikipedia mainspace. This is just a friendly bump that we believe the article is ready to be moved. Thank you! Breadyornot (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Breadyornot (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Who is "we"? Only a single person should have access to your account. As noted on your draft, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,983 pending submissions waiting for review." Volunteers doing what they can when they can pick drafts to review, there is no queue to "bump" a draft higher up.  Please continue to be patient. 331dot (talk) 16:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi 331dot, thank you for your speedy reply. 'We' refers to WikiProject Writing participants, most notably Matthewvetter and JayKayJay. Your response is noted, thank you.
 * I took a quick look at the article, and the biggest issue is demonstrating notability. In Wikipedia's definition, that means finding media coverage of Adler-Kassner or her books, or at least showing her influence by demonstrating that her scholarly work is heavily cited. The coverage there is mostly things she has written, or school biographies. It doesn't seem to be enough to meet the threshold. See WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOLAR.  TechnoTalk (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @TechnoTalk Thanks for the clarification. I am aware of WP:GNG and am continuing to work on this article to show notability. DarthVetter (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * @TechnoTalk I have done some additional work on the Linda Adler-Kassner article to demonstrate notability. Per WP:NSCHOLAR, Adler-Kassner "has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level" (CCCC Chairship; CWPA Awards for "Best Book" and "Outstanding Contribution to the Discipline") - this is criterion #2. Adler-Kassner has also satisfied criterion #6, by holding the "highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society" (CWPA President and CCCC Chair).Finally, Adler-Kassner has also satisfied criterion #7 "making a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity" by promoting the Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing as president of Council of Writing Program Administrators to the department of education under Obama administration. Keep in mind that, according to WP:NSCHOLAR, the subject only has to satisfy one of those criterion. Thanks so much for your review. DarthVetter (talk) 17:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

20:55:07, 23 March 2022 review of submission by JaneLoone
JaneLoone (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

This organisation has recently gained further popularity and notability following the introduction of UK roaming fees and has become widespread within France and Spain in particular among businesses and the organisation service provider industry and is highly relevant to recent amendments in roaming fees.
 * , Nothing added indicates that. Neither article has a reporter byline. One is a passing mention and the other (Olive Press) is clearly written by the subject. "We came up with Xpatfone, powered by Devyce;". Now then please see WP:PAID, WP:COI and WP:NCORP and make any necessary declarations and to see what Wikipedia policies are for inclusion of corporations.  We are not a place to market a product and take a dim view on such attempts to waste other volunteers time by attempting to do so.Slywriter (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)