Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 April 20

= April 20 =

05:30:57, 20 April 2023 review of submission by Caerdyddcymru
I had written a contribution on this Welsh writer, who has had international success and whose most recent work Lost Boys and Fairies (for BBC) is currently filming in Cardiff and has had widespread media attention. I have extensively sourced the article, however the rejection states not of significant coverage or lack of references, neither of which is accurate. Look forward to hearing more on why this article was rejected.

Caerdyddcymru (talk) 05:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Caerdyddcymru: okay, calm down, nothing has been rejected, only declined. Rejection means you cannot resubmit; decline means you can, you just first need to address the reasons why the draft was declined. No need to go straight for the biggest gun in the arsenal, arbitration hearing (which this wouldn't be eligible for anyway).
 * Per WP:GNG, we need to see multiple sources, each of which simultaneously meets all the following criteria: they are secondary published sources which are fully independent of the subject, reliable (meaning, a reputation for editorial oversight and fact-checking) and provide significant coverage of the subject. Primary sources such as the Curtis Brown website don't count. Interviews don't count. Sources covering related subjects, such as James's works, don't count. Works authored by the subject don't count. IMDb is not considered reliable, as it is user-generated. Against all that, which of the 42 (!) references would you say best meets this GNG standard? Please highlight the strongest three to five. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to respond, I truly appreciate your guidance on this matter and is much clearer that what's on the wikipedia help pages. :-)
 * In terms of body of work (i.e. the subject matter's theatrical and tv programmes), how are these sourced if you can't use primary sources? i.e. for the 3-5 sources, would links to the actual work (i.e. for radio programmes a link to the broadcaster where you can listen to the piece mentioned). For awards, would the URL for the actual award received be sufficient (i.e. LA Drama Critics Award website)?
 * Very much look forward to hearing back from you. With best wishes. Caerdyddcymru (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Caerdyddcymru: you can use primary sources to verify facts (well, some types of primary sources, and some types of facts – see the next paragraph), but you cannot use them to establish notability, which is the reason why this draft was declined.
 * To give a concrete example, if a company states on their website that their HQ is located in Toronto and their CEO is Cindy Lee, we can pretty much take those at face value. (But we wouldn't necessarily believe it if they tweeted it, say.) If they state that they have built a perpetual motion machine, we would clearly need independent sources to corroborate that. And no matter what they say on their website (or elsewhere), this won't contribute in the slightest to their notability. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for explain that, and I totally understand why the draft was declined. Caerdyddcymru (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Request on 10:04:01, 20 April 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Cadencerock
The article was not accepted to publish and recommended for deletion, all the facts and figure given in the text are true and the content of the article is also organisational input, thus assistance was felt to figure out the reason of rejection of the article again and again and simultaneously learn how to publish the same article as it is one of the important missions undertaken by Indian Navy

Cadencerock (talk) 10:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Cadencerock: it was declined and deleted as a copyright violation (for the second time). Please review our policy on copyright violations before editing further. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

12:56:51, 20 April 2023 review of draft by MariaRocha16
My article got declined and I need help citing my sources so they are deemed reliable.

MariaRocha16 (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi @MariaRocha16: see WP:REFB for advice on referencing, WP:RS and WP:GNG on what constitutes good sources, and WP:BLP on how articles on living people need to be referenced. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

13:07:23, 20 April 2023 review of submission by Kolhapurisaaj
Hey can Please tell me the cause of deletion. Kolhapurisaaj (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * op blocked lettherebedarklight晚安 13:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

13:09:55, 20 April 2023 review of submission by Ashe7896
why was my article declined

Ashe7896 (talk) 13:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Ashe7896: please read the comments left by the reviewer. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

17:54:07, 20 April 2023 review of submission by 104.251.77.50
I just think it deserves a page man 104.251.77.50 (talk) 17:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * There's no such thing as "deserves a page". If a subject has been covered in appropriate published sources enough to make it notable, an article on it can be included in Wikipedia; otherwise not. Desert doesn't come into it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

20:54:35, 20 April 2023 review of draft by Johnmrri
I'm editing the draft of Tom Wilson Weinberg and want to link to several other Wikipedia pages. Two of the links are ambiguous so if you were searching Wikipedia, it would ask you which one you wanted. But I'm not sure how to differentiate them in the editing code. Right now, for example, there is a link to "Giovanni's Room", the novel by James Baldwin. But it is supposed to be a link to the LGBTQ bookstore by that name.

Johnmrri (talk) 20:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi @Johnmrri: this is more of a general editing question than anything to do with the AfC process, but... it sounds like you're asking about piping links (see WP:PIPE), which is a way of making a wikilink point to a different target than what is displayed to the reader; this is useful eg. when you want to use a simple display word for the link, but need to use a more complicated link word because of disambiguation needed. So for example, you might have  if you wanted a link displaying the name 'Snowy' and pointing specifically to the article on Tintin's dog. If you simply make a link to , that would point to the disambiguation page, which wouldn't be helpful to the reader. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

23:05:37, 20 April 2023 review of submission by Wequant
Wequant (talk) 23:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey I'm writing Wikipedia About GMT Token but is was declined, i can't understand reason Wequant (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Wequant: did you read the decline notice? It gives the reasons. The main one being, your draft doesn't cite a single source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * , your draft fails the core content policy Verifiability. Cullen328 (talk) 07:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * , your draft fails the core content policy Verifiability. Cullen328 (talk) 07:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Is Their Any Way To Improve My Draft
I just recent got a alerts from my draft saying that my draft references does not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article and the reception section is extremely lacking. i normally seen this draft as perfect and nothing to change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NatwonTSG2 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)