Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 September 7

= September 7 =

03:30:04, 7 September 2022 review of draft by Beanpods777
It is breaking News they found womens body remains and is currently active. Thoughts??? Beanpods777 (talk) 03:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Abston won't provide details of where the body is. Beanpods777 (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

The killing of the victim maybe should have a page or possibly tye in Memphis abductions? Thanks Beanpods777 (talk) 03:42, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Please review WP:BLP, specifically WP:BLPCRIME. You cannot name someone as having committed crimes unless that person has been convicted in a court of law of those crimes. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Beanpods777 Wikipedia is not the news. Hmm, that shortcut is taking me to the wrong section of that page.  There is a section saying that WP is not a newspaper... 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

08:21:37, 7 September 2022 review of submission by 45.123.219.70
45.123.219.70 (talk) 08:21, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

09:46:46, 7 September 2022 review of submission by Dn patelll
Dn patelll (talk) 09:46, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * What is your question, @Dn patelll? Your draft has been rejected and won't be considered. Perhaps try one of the many social media sites instead? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

09:51:19, 7 September 2022 review of submission by 45.123.219.70
 * You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. This is not social media where people tell the world about themselves, this is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

12:15:59, 7 September 2022 review of submission by Lucynder
Hello, I just realized that my article has been rejected. I do not know why it is, having gone through the process of sourcing and implementing references available for the film. I would like a re-review and hopefully a guide to put me through in referencing for the article. Also would like to know why exactly it has been rejected and is not notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Hoping for a positive response to this.

Thank you. Lucynder (talk) 12:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * @Lucynder: as I said already a few days ago, eventually the draft may be rejected if you keep resubmitting it without addressing the reasons why it was declined. I think that is the case here — with seven (!) previous declines, and very little if any progress in demonstrating notability, eventually the call has to be made whether this has any realistic prospect of being acceptable. We have another 2,300+ other drafts to review also, and cannot allocate indefinite time and resource to a draft that isn't making appropriate progress. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

16:09:02, 7 September 2022 review of submission by Surm31
Hello, this submission was declined due to a lack of significant coverage. The sources (except for one) are about the subject and are not passing mentions of the same. Should I be adding more sources? Or different sources? I am a little unsure of what to do next since I don't want the submission to be rejected. Any input would be helpful. Thank you in advance! Surm31 (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * @Surm31: my opinion — and it is only that — is that with three sources, only two of which (as you say) provide significant coverage of the subject, this draft's notability is borderline; adding even just one more source that fully meets the WP:GNG standard would probably be enough to get this over the finish line. (That said, you may wish to ask the declining reviewer what specifically they had in mind when they declined this.) Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! @DoubleGrazing Surm31 (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

18:21:47, 7 September 2022 review of submission by Waterbucket123
I was told to via the wiki help chat to re do the citations, and link references correctly. I believe that has been done and I would like this page to be looked at and approved please!

Thank you. Waterbucket123 (talk) 18:21, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
 * https://outtv.ca/show/ezra/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Anything the subject (or its surrogates) controls cannot help for notability as Wikipedia defines it.
 * https://deadline.com/2022/08/canada-drag-race-priyanka-outtv-ezra-1235100873/ is useless for notability (too sparse). Aside from a plot synopsis and where to watch it the article says very little about Ezra.
 * https://playbackonline.ca/2022/03/11/cameras-roll-on-outtv-scripted-vampire-series-ezra/ seems fine to me.
 * https://bellfund.ca/bell-fund-announces-the-results-of-the-september-27-2021-deadline-for-the-short-form-digital-series-program/ is useless for notability (too sparse, connexion to subject). Since the Bell Fund is helping fund it, they're a surrogate as far as we are concerned.
 * https://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/entertainment/television/2022/03/26/niagaras-luke-hutchie-brings-new-take-on-vampires-with-ezra.html is useless for notability (wrong subject, connexion to subject). The article is about Hutchie and not Ezra; coverage of related topics is not coverage of the show itself.
 * https://www.tv-eh.com/2022/06/07/first-look-at-outtv-horror-comedy-series-ezra/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). The article explicitly states that the content is from a media release.
 * https://issuu.com/fitzhughnewspaper/docs/july14_2022sm is missing critical bibliographical information (article title, article byline, page numbers). Anything cited via Issuu can and should be treated as if it were an offline citation to the relevant periodical.
 * We can't use https://meanshappy.com/what-to-watch-ezra-a-gay-vampire-on-the-loose/ (unknown provenance). Role byline. We don't trust anything published under a role or omitted byline because the odds are very good that it's never been subjected to editorial oversight.
 * https://thenerdstash.com/canadas-drag-race-winner-to-star-in-outtv-comedy/ is useless for notability (too sparse). One sentence does not significant coverage make.
 * https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a41005828/canadas-drag-race-priyanka-acting-debut-ezra/ is useless for notability (too sparse). Plot synopsis and practically nothing else.
 * https://rue-morgue.com/new-horror-comedy-series-ezra-coming-to-outtv-october-1st/ is useless for notability (routine coverage). While the article is about Ezra it's also hideously banal, being a plot synopsis, a release date, and one-liners from company principals. There's nothing here that wouldn't be covered as a matter of course in any other TV-centric publication.
 * https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaad-wrap-trailers-queer-fear-queen-sugar-and-ezra-hbo-renews-house-dragon-and-harley-quinn?response_type=embed is useless for notability (too sparse). Plot synopsis and practically nothing else.
 * https://closeupculture.com/2022/09/05/ezra-creator-luke-hutchie-talks-gemini-vampires-killer-wardrobe/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Interview with the showrunner.
 * You have only one usable source, and one source in and of itself cannot justify an article. —Jéské Couriano  v^&lowbar;^v  a little blue Bori 19:24, 7 September 2022 (UTC)