Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 April 13

= April 13 =

04:43:57, 13 April 2023 review of draft by Rai Ramkumar
Rai Ramkumar (talk) 04:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

06:07:17, 13 April 2023 review of draft by Carry Whales
Hello! According to the editor`s note I need to put on the article more reliable resources, but unfortunately I cannot get the criteria of reliable resource. I have already added Russian edition of Forbes, big news journal RBK and social magazine Snob, and a number of small newspapers of Bali. What can I add there for example to make the article reliable? Kindly asking for help!

Thank you!

Carry Whales (talk) 06:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Carry Whales: it's not just a case of citing a few sources that are reliable; for notability to be established, the sources must meet the entire WP:GNG standard, namely be reliable and independent secondary sources providing significant coverage of the subject in question.
 * Besides that, the way you've piled most of the sources in one paragraph, while leaving the majority of the draft content unreferenced, is completely unacceptable in an article on a living person; see WP:BLP. Every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal and family details must be clearly supported by an immediate inline citation to a reliable source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

14:03:10, 13 April 2023 review of draft by 185.238.219.89
I tried to post an entry but it was rejected on grounds that it looks more like an advertisement. What should I change? This is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:NeuroCure 185.238.219.89 (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * (Please log into your account, thanks.)
 * The draft is largely unreferenced, but such citations as there are, are mostly to the organisation's own website. In other words, this is the organisation telling us what they want to tell us, and we have little or no interest in that. We want to know what others have said about them, and by 'others' I especially mean reliable and independent secondary sources.
 * You should also avoid promotional language such as "fostering local networks of scientists [...] lies at the heart of the Cluster’s efforts" and "these researchers have the potential to transform". Such blurb may be suitable for the organisation's website or brochure, but not for an encyclopaedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:12, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

17:40:06, 13 April 2023 review of draft by Bomaeremie
I do not understand why my page was rejected. Yes, I am the author and the page is about me. I included several Reliable Sources, a majority of which reflect the projects I have worked on). All the sources point to Official Project Pages, Trailers, and IMDb pages for my projects (none of which I created or curated). There is literally only one reference source created by me and that is my personal website. I am a public figure and a simple Google search will show ample proof that my claims in the draft are genuine. As it stands, I have no idea where else to get Reliable Sources from if your people are rejection Official Sites that clearly show my involvement in projects.

Bomaeremie (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Bomaeremie This is common misconception of what we consider reliable sources. When we look at notability we look at what others have published independently of the subject in sources we consider reliable. Reliable in this sense means editorial oversight and fact checking, this eliminates most things that are user generated like IMDB, Wikipedia, personal websites, blogs, any wiki etc. This is why article creation is one of the toughest tasks to do on Wikipedia and why we always warn people to not create auto-biographies as they have a hard time writing about themselves in the correct tone and using other peoples words to describe themselves. The other issue with auto-biographies is once you publish it you no longer have any control over the article and anything that is sourced to a reliable source can be added to the article whether it be good or bad. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bomaeremie: firstly, it may be about you, and written by you, but it isn't "your page".
 * Secondly, it was declined, not rejected, meaning you can resubmit it once you address the decline reasons.
 * Which are: approx. ⅓ of the sources cited are non-reliable, and many of the others don't actually support the draft contents. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * How do I delete the article? Bomaeremie (talk) 18:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bomaeremie: you can just delete all the content ('blank') the draft, and it will be deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

21:05:47, 13 April 2023 review of draft by CLT Norm
My submission for UNC Charlotte’s Belk College of Business was declined. I believe it is inline with the UNC Kenan–Flagler Business School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNC_Kenan%E2%80%93Flagler_Business_School) and the Poole College of Management (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poole_College_of_Management) pages that are currently live on Wikipedia in terms of content, tone, and references. Would someone be able to help me understand where I am falling short so that I can make the updates necessary to get this page up to the level of its peer group? CLT Norm (talk) 21:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @CLT Norm: it doesn't matter if this is "in line with" other articles; it needs to be in line with our policies and guidelines. Firstly, you need to show that the BS is notable in its own right (often individual departments/schools aren't) rather than as part of the university, by showing that significant coverage of it exists in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.
 * Secondly, you need rewrite the text as more of an encyclopaedia article, and less of a corporate brochure. Expressions like "In 2005, the college celebrated its 35th anniversary with the opening of the Center for Real Estate." and "Under Troyer, strengthening diversity and inclusion at the Belk College has been a priority for the college." are just marketing blurb and have no place here.
 * You've also been asked to disclose any external relationship you may have with the organisation. Please do so now. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @CLT Norm In line with what DoubleGrazing said, please see WP:OSE. David10244 (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)