Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 January 10

= January 10 =

02:35:25, 10 January 2023 review of draft by Alanwrick1
Alanwrick1 (talk) 02:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @alanwrick1: what's your question? lettherebedarklight晚安 03:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

02:36:01, 10 January 2023 review of draft by Alanwrick1
Alanwrick1 (talk) 02:36, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

06:48:24, 10 January 2023 review of draft by Jaystjohn
Draft submission was declined due to lack of reliable sources. My question is, how are the sources used in this article any less reliable than the ones used in any other article about college football rivalries? Non-Power 5 rivalries are seldom reported on in national publications - compare the sources cited in my submission to those in the Royal Rivalry or the Battle for the Belt. And it's not as if it is lacking in the number of citations when contrasted with the Cincinnati–UCF football rivalry article. I have no issue trying to find better sources for the article submission, but I question how much better quality of sources are required, when the sources used are on par with ones used in similar articles.

Jaystjohn (talk) 06:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read other stuff exists; what happens to other articles isn't usually relevant, as what's there could be inappropriate as well, and simply not addressed yet. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to get by us; we can only address what we know about.
 * It's not the sources themselves that are the issue- You really only have two sources that are good for establishing notability; the 247Sports and perhaps BirdsUp(though that is the media of USTA). Most reviewers look for at least three. 331dot (talk) 07:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * OSE acknowledged, but is AP News not also a good source? Jaystjohn (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jaystjohn: that decline isn't saying that none of the sources are reliable, only that the draft as a whole isn't adequately supported by reliable sources. This can mean that some of the sources aren't reliable, or that some of the content isn't supported by sources, or both (in this case, IMO, both). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

07:24:39, 10 January 2023 review of draft by FZQMe
Can you please tell how to declare conflict of interest on an article?

FZQMe (talk) 07:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Instructions are provided at WP:COI. If you work for the company, or have any form of paid relationship with it, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure, please see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 07:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

07:57:25, 10 January 2023 review of submission by 60.60.188.211
Hello I have added sources from Britannia and articles. This person is cited in many wiki articles. Wha can I add more!? 60.60.188.211 (talk) 07:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * This draft has been rejected (after no fewer than seven earlier declines, I might add) and won't therefore be considered further. If you now have sources that may be used to establish notability, you should take this up with the reviewer who rejected the draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The source from "Britannia" is malformed. The source that is supposed to verify that the subject was "a Fashion Editor for almost a decade for publications such as Numéro, Elle and Nylon, he has been appointed editor-at-large for Visionaire Magazine since 2018, and created in 2011 his luxury streetwear fashion brand Arnodefrance" points to the home page of that fashion brand "Arnodefrance".  That link certainly does not verify all of the claims in that sentence. If there are any better sources, they need to be referenced better. David10244 (talk) 09:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

08:04:13, 10 January 2023 review of draft by Wanjuiri
I need help to edit my article please

Wanjuiri (talk) 08:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Wanjuiri: this draft was declined because an article on that subject already exists. Therefore this draft will not be accepted, and you are invited to edit the published article instead. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:17, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Please see this Article about George Barasa, same person you are writing about. I think you can edit and improve it instead. Kelmaa (talk) 09:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

08:44:20, 10 January 2023 review of draft by Sumip1990
The reviewer says that my article is copy and pasted from some other source. Please let me know the sources. Is it because that I did not add citation? would like to know more on the same

Sumip1990 (talk) 08:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Sumip1990: I said may have been copypasted from somewhere, but I also said I cannot identify the source (if any). Perhaps you could enlighten me?
 * In any case, I didn't decline this for being a copyvio, I declined it for being completely unreferenced. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

09:28:52, 10 January 2023 review of submission by Shamshul Arfin Kabiri
Shamshul Arfin Kabiri (talk) 09:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Shamshul Arfin Kabiri: you don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. Please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a social media or personal blogging platform. If you wish to tell the world about yourself and your professional skills and experience etc., try something like LinkedIn or Facebook instead. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

12:12:02, 10 January 2023 review of submission by 91.214.228.98
91.214.228.98 (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

13:41:58, 10 January 2023 review of submission by Kelmaa
This article was previously declined. I made some improvements and apparently, I can't seem to get more credible references despite the model being famous Kelmaa (talk) 13:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You have resubmitted it so I'm not sure what your question is. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kelmaa Well, being "famous" is not a criterion for Wikipedia, but having been written about in reliable,  independent publications is a criterion.  I'm not sure how a model of eyeglasses can be "famous"; that term is usually applied to people. David10244 (talk) 12:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * user:David10244 Thanks for replying. I'm not a native English speaker and I find myself using some words wrongly at times. What I meant is that the model is quite popular but may not have a lot of press articles. Almost all eyeglass companies have a panto framed eyeglasses. There are a couple of articles though which I think should be enough to get the article to the mainspace. For instance, there's an article on a Norwegian newspaper. Also, I would appreciate your review on the article. Thank you Kelmaa (talk) 12:53, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

15:37:53, 10 January 2023 review of submission by AkashhhChandra
AkashhhChandra (talk) 15:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @AkashhhChandra: what is your question? This draft has been rejected, meaning it won't be considered further -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

15:49:08, 10 January 2023 review of submission by Arun Yesubalan
Arun Yesubalan (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * @Arun Yesubalan: what is your question? This draft has been rejected, meaning it won't be considered further -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

19:49:15, 10 January 2023 review of submission by CarlyEvans444
CarlyEvans444 (talk) 19:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

21:14:27, 10 January 2023 review of submission by Frazz86
It says that wax melts are not a sufficiently notable thing for wikipedia. I do disagree with this notion as they are gaining popularity rapidly, in fact are sold by many major outlets across the world now. They are very similar to candles, they're essentially wickless candles. I can make a subsection within the Candle wiki but it felt like it made more sense to have its own page. While not quite on the scale of candles, if candles have a page I definitely believe that wax melts should too. Frazz86 (talk) 21:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. The trouble is that you only offered a single source- a topic merits an article if it receives significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. "Gaining popularity rapidly" is a strong indicator that the topic does not yet merit an article- Wikipedia doesn't lead, it follows. Once it is popular enough to receive significant coverage, it will merit a standalone article.  I think a good place to start is as you say- a part of the candle article for now. It can always be separated later. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Request on 21:45:30, 10 January 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Adefemi Ayodele Babatope
I have been working on this. Provided reliable resources yet its rejected. Please kindly enable it for submission. It is important

Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume. Wikipedia is interested in what independent reliable sources say about you, not what you say about yourself. "Rejected" means your draft may not be resubmitted. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not a resume or any of such
 * I only used resources that i considered reliable. However I will work on it. Besides its a biography. Thank you Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 21:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no more work that you can do. No amount of editing can confer notability on you. 331dot (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh wow. You are being hateful right now Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * How's that? Because I'm informing you of how things are? I have no hatred in my heart. Instead of accusing me of hatred because I didn't tell you what you wanted to hear, maybe consider the experience of those who are telling you these things. 331dot (talk) 22:17, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fine. What will be required to be considered acceptable Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

It is an important information that needs to be heard. It is an African that is notable. Kindly consider for submission Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 21:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if you are African or Asian or European or Vulcan. There is nothing more you can do. If you want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media. 331dot (talk) 22:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * You keep saying yourself. Its people that write on others, you know
 * However, what can be done to be accepted
 * It will be worked on Adefemi Ayodele Babatope (talk) 22:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have already answered your question. There is nothing that you can do other than find another topic to edit about. This is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Since you are not listening to me because its not what you want to hear, I will have no other comment. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Adefemi Ayodele Babatope I see your account is blocked, but if you are really not the person the draft is about (and I have no opinion on that) then you picked the wrong username. David10244 (talk) 12:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I've deleted the draft as blatant self-promotion and blocked the OP. Enough time has been wasted here. -- Kinu t/c 22:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)