Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 May 21

= May 21 =

02:02:19, 21 May 2022 review of submission by Dushyant Kukreja
Dushyant Kukreja (talk) 02:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)


 * All the sources provided are useless, with three not existing and the other two being published under role bylines. I should note that we have very little tolerance for autobiographies. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 05:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

07:26:42, 21 May 2022 review of draft by Jasvind Singh
My submission got rejected for the reason, "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I would like to know which part of the article is written as an advertisement? I have given a lot of references from some of the top media in Asia. I have also declared COI prior to submitting this article in compliance with Wikipedia rules.

Jasvind Singh (talk) 07:26, 21 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Jasvind Singh: I fully agree with the reviewer, it really does read very much like a corporate brochure or website, with expressions like "fastest-growing tech-enabled coffee chains, serving up specialty coffee at affordable prices". Even when you manage to avoid peacock terms and hyperbole, sentences like "Customers can use the Flash Coffee app to order and pay online, choosing to pick up their order at one of Flash Coffee’s striking yellow storefronts or opt for delivery via the Flash Coffee app or through major delivery platforms" have absolutely no place in an encyclopaedia. My advice is to dial down the promo level by several notches, and rewrite this in the most disinterested, factual manner you possibly can, because as it stands it is quite far from what is needed for publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Perfect. Thanks for pointing out. Will rework the submission :) Jasvind Singh (talk) 07:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

15:09:39, 21 May 2022 review of submission by 154.157.190.217
154.157.190.217 (talk) 15:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Refer to the top table here:
 * We can't use search results. Citing these is effectively telling the reader to find a bone sewing needle in a barn crammed to the roof with hay and arming them with a magnet.
 * We can't use IMDb (no editorial oversight). IMDb is a wiki.
 * We can't use any Opera News source (no editorial oversight, connexion to subject). The subject wrote them himself, and I can't find any Editor-in-Chief or position of equivalent responsibility for the outlet.
 * We can't use https://filmfreeway.com/Quafff (too sparse). Largely content-free profile.
 * All the sources offered are completely useless from a Wikipedia standpoint. That Google search you cite as the first reference puts paid to there being any chance of there being an article on him anytime soon; there's nothing we can actually cite in the general and 0 news hits what-so-ever. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:00, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Request on 17:56:09, 21 May 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Bheller1
Hi there, Thank you for reviewing my case here. I did submit an article to wiki to post about myself and my own bio. The only reason I did this is because I currently have a music page on Youtube Music with someone else's Bio attached.

See link: https://music.youtube.com/channel/UCn60Gctt6OLpMsXs4hraNug?feature=share Apparently their algorhythm pulls from wikipedia and she has the same name as me, Barbara Heller. When I inquired to YoutubeMusic about the issue telling them that her bio is not mine at all they said that I would have to create my own Wiki page.

I hope you will kindly understand and allow me to keep my bio page up on Wikipedia. I've always admired your site very much and have always wanted to be a part of it. I use it all the time for my own research and find it so helpful. Sincerely, Barbara Heller

Bheller1 (talk) 17:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you do not appear to be notable in Wikipedia terms, you will need to take the algorhythm issue up with Google. Theroadislong (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately we have no control over Google's (ab)use of its platforms, and we're especially annoyed that Google keeps passing the buck to us because they can't/won't take the time to sort things out on their own end (this is not the first time they've told complainants to yell at us for their own cock-ups).
 * As to your draft, this wouldn't be accepted at all due to its lack of in-depth, non-routine, independent sources about the subject written by identifiable authors and published in outlets with competent editorial oversight that fact-checks, discloses, corrects, and retracts. Such sources are a requirement for all Wikipedia articles, but the subject is also a living person, which means we would need at least one such source for every claim that could possibly be challenged. Note that we do accept offline sources, if cited properly, and that we accept sources from any language as long as they meet the criteria spelt out above. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:07, 21 May 2022 (UTC)