Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 25

= November 25 =

00:51, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Lear419
The draft was rejected because it didn't cite secondary sources. The GitHub FRET project has references to a couple of dozen publications from organizations other than NASA involving the use of FRET as well as its relationship to formal methods. Here are a couple of samples:

Ivan Perez, Anastasia Mavridou, Thomas Pressburger, Alwyn Goodloe, Dimitra Giannakopoulou. Integrating FRET with Copilot: Automated Translation of Natural Language Requirements to Runtime Monitors, NASA/TM–20220000049, January 2022.

Zsófia Ádám, Ignacio D. Lopez-Miguel, Anastasia Mavridou, Thomas Pressburger, Marcin Bęś, Enrique Blanco Viñuela, Andreas Katis, Jean-Charles Tournier, Khanh V. Trinh, Borja Fernandez Adiego. From Natural Language Requirements to the Verification of Programmable Logic Controllers: Integrating FRET into PLCverif, NFM 2023.

Is that what you are looking for as secondary sources? Lear419 (talk) 00:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Lear419: just to clarify, this draft was declined (not 'rejected') because it failed to show that the subject is notable, which is demonstrated through referencing. At the time of review, it didn't cite a single source, ergo no evidence of notability.
 * You can read about secondary sources here WP:SECONDARY, and about the general notability guideline here WP:GNG. You may also wish to take a look at WP:NSOFTWARE (an essay, rather than a formal policy statement) specifically. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

03:54, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Xwallawallax
\ Help with academic researcher profile page Hello,

I am seeking input on how to improve this page: Draft:Saad Bhamla

It was rejected on the following grounds:

meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria or cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth and

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Having read the eight academic-specific criteria, it is clear that Prof. Bhamla meets several of these. I have also cited reliable secondary sources (e.g., NSF, NIH, etc.) to support this assertion.

I do need some help on the advertisement vs encyclopedia rejection. Most academic bios are written in the form that I supplied, but any tips on converting it into an encyclopedia-style diction would be appreciated. Xwallawallax (talk) 03:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I've fixed your post to provide a link to your draft.
 * Wikipedia is not a place to merely document the accomplishments and accolades of a person. That is considered advertising. I would urge you to read the notability criteria carefully to learn more about what is being looked for when you assert that an individual meets them. 331dot (talk) 07:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * @Xwallawallax: please don't ask for support both here and at the Teahouse (and certainly not within minutes of each other), as this wastes volunteer effort when multiple contributors are taking part in multiple conversations. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * My fault - did not realize they were separate forums until after I posted at Teahouse (and realized that was the incorrect place to post). 73.155.253.30 (talk) 14:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

05:51, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Ninjascrollqc
im trying to make this page that looks like this other journalist :Yoani Sánchez

But im having a hard time to find all the coding or format to add all the required information, example, interviews that the journalist received, conferences where he participated, the schollarship he participated in europe, life in Canada and his career as Journalist and Programmer. Ninjascrollqc (talk) 05:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Your draft is actually in your sandbox, so I've fixed your link to it. We also don't need the whole url when linking to another article on Wikipedia, so I've fixed that.
 * Drafts created in a sandbox need the submission template added manually, I've done this for you so you can submit it. This information is provided automatically if you use the Article Wizard to create a draft.  Before you submit it, you will need to format the references properly, instead of having bare urls.  Please see Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 07:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

10:26, 25 November 2023 review of submission by 2409:40C4:C:DD87:8000:0:0:0
I have information about thebandwala.. There is a website on this topic and indiam udyog registration of thebandwala taken on 2021. Are these 2 sources will be enough for refference of this title ? 2409:40C4:C:DD87:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 10:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Please be sure to log into your account as it make communication easier. Their website is primary source and not independent so not useful.  Read through all the links in the decline message which outlines the type of sources needed.  S0091 (talk) 21:52, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

10:34, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Le Palais de Tokyo
Hello everyone at the Teahouse! I recently submitted my first article draft, and unfortunately, it was declined. I'm seeking some guidance on how to improve it and ensure it meets Wikipedia's standards. I'm eager to learn and make the necessary changes, so any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your help! Le Palais de Tokyo (talk) 10:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Le Palais de Tokyo the draft reads like a listing of things they have done sourced to themselves or routine announcements/press releases with no independent in-depth coverage about them. What they say or want to say about themselves is not useful, nor are sources that make no mention of them.  Also, if you are affiliated with them, you need to make the appropriate declaration and will leave you additional information on your talk page.  S0091 (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi S0091! I appreciate your detailed review. I see what you mean about the need for independent and in-depth sources to enhance the article's quality and neutrality. In the creation of the article, I have basically based the content and structure on other articles, and tried to familiarize myself with Wikipedia's style manual. Perhaps some of those articles I have seen about design studios were based on lists of mainstream competitions or prizes following a brief summary, and seldom about the studios relationship to its subject and practice.  I don't have any direct affiliation with the studio itself. As a former art and design student passionate about conceptual design and art I hope to contribute to Wikipedia in a specific field (design studios not focused on advertising and branding, but operating within the arts and culture) of design practices that is hard to find content of despite this fields development, parallell to traditional design and advertisng businesses, since the turn of the millenium. I’m very grateful for your detailed feedback and I’ll go over the article and try to make it more inline with wikipedias standards. Thank you for your time and assistance. Best wishes, Le Palais de Tokyo (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. 331dot (talk) 19:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks 331dot, and apologize for any newbie misbehaviour. Le Palais de Tokyo (talk) 19:42, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

10:39, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Le Palais de Tokyo
Hello I recently submitted my first article draft, and unfortunately, it was declined. I'm seeking some guidance on how to improve it and ensure it meets Wikipedia's standards. I'm eager to learn and make the necessary changes, so any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated. I posted this question in the Teahouse community feed as well. Any help or guidance is greatly appreciated! Le Palais de Tokyo (talk) 10:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * See above. S0091 (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

10:57, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Chellers123
It's a small, but notable traction in the small town/city of Norway in Hønefoss Chellers123 (talk) 10:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Your draft offered no sources whatsoever, which is why it was rejected and will not be considered further. An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about topics that meet the notability guidelines, such as a notable event. 331dot (talk) 11:00, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

15:01, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Musitafa Kalyowa
Can't see resubmit option Kalyowa Musita (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Musitafa Kalyowa: that's because this draft has been rejected, which means that resubmission is no longer possible. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

18:08, 25 November 2023 review of submission by IDruben77
The proposed article was rejected because "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject." I need some help on how to follow this guidelines because it seems to me that the text is written with a neutral point of view. Could anyone help out with improving it or pointing out what could be improved in the article? Thanks IDruben77 (talk) 18:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @IDruben77 you need to fairly summarize what source state and attribute opinions. For example footnote 9 is an opinion piece so not something that can be stated as fact in Wikipedia's voice.  For footnote 10, you summarize what the NAACP states but nothing else. What did Price say and are there independent sources with no affiliation to either Price or the NAACP that puts it context?  Right now, it comes across as if you are pushing a narrative that aligns with a specific point of view even if that is not your intent. S0091 (talk) 22:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you @S0091 for providing feedback on areas for improvement in the article; your guidance is much appreciated. In response, I have made some adjustments. Firstly, I opted to delete footnote 9, as it was based on an WSJ opinion piece. Instead, I directly quoted Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price to ensure a more factual foundation.
 * Regarding footnote 10, it's essential to note that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) carries significant weight as a well-respected entity with over a century of history dedicated to racial justice and police accountability. Their stance against the perceived inactivity on crime in Oakland is noteworthy in itself, and it seems to me that that their position is not driven by partisanship. Upon revisiting the San Francisco Chronicle article, I found that, despite the journalist's attempt to contact the Office of the District Attorney, no response or alternative perspective was provided. Consequently, the article from the San Francisco Chronicle stands out as an independent source that diligently reported on this fact. I welcome any further suggestions on refining this section to ensure accuracy and clarity. IDruben77 (talk) 04:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

19:18, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Redstar0005
I would like to know if the sources I use in my article are reliable, if you have time, please review them. Redstar0005 (talk) 19:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Redstar0005 Fan sites and IMDB are not reliable sources and generally neither is YouTube unless is a video by a reputable new organization or the like (see WP:RSPYT for additional information). S0091 (talk) 22:23, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

21:41, 25 November 2023 review of submission by Jack Massing
I guess that I have made a mistake in trying to publish an entry about myself. How can this be accomplished or could I do this? Jack Massing (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read the Autobiography policy; writing about yourself, while not absolutely forbidden, is highly discouraged, in part because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia strives for a neutral point of view. 331dot (talk) 21:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC)