Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 29

= November 29 =

01:14, 29 November 2023 review of submission by HodgeBrad
This was rejected by the script, but I think that the sources cited are verifiable enough. I have the New York Times, the Washington Post, Variety, and The Hollywood Reporter as well as others listed as sources, and he is notable enough to have a page. Please reconsider. Thank you! HodgeBrad (talk) 01:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Evaluate each of your sources against the WP:Golden rule. Only those that pass it are capable of contributing to establishing notability. I can see straight away that several of your sources don't (eg 1,3,4,5,10,11). ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

01:32, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Greshthegreat
My draft was declined back on November 1, 2023 because, as user KylieTastic who reviewed it said, the "references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject..."

Piper Rubio is definitely noteable though, yet I am having a hard time finding any articles to cite that primarily are about her, that make more than a passing mention of her.

She currently has 128k followers on her instagram account (which is run by one of her parents), and when I searched for Piper Rubio on TikTok, all the videos that come up collectively have 98.3 million views, several which themselves have over 1 million views. She also starred in her first major movie this year, Five Night's at Freddy's. That all in my opinion, among a few other things, shows that she is definitely very notable and popular.

Could I get some help finding some articles primarily or exclusively about Piper Rubio too cite? Thanks in advance to anyone who replies. Greshthegreat (talk) 01:32, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Number of followers has zero affect on notability here, what we need are independnent sources that discuss her in-depth, Instagram is not a reliable source either. Theroadislong (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I am very aware of that. That is why I am asking for some help getting independent sources that talk about Piper Rubio beyond a passing mention.
 * I only mentioned her Instagram followers, how lots of videos featuring her on TikTok have gotten many millions of views and that she was in a major movie, Five Night's at Freddys to point out that she is noteable. Also with all that in mind, surely there are some sources that discuss her at length. I am just having a hard time finding those sources. It is also possible somehow no such sources exist yet, which would be suprising given that she is somewhat famous. Greshthegreat (talk) 03:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Rubio may indeed be notable in the usual sense of the word, but unless you can find suitable sources, she is by definition not notable in the way that Wikipedia uses the word.
 * I don't think you're likely to get much help in finding sources from people on this page: you're the one who wants to write an article on her, so you're the one with the motive to look for sources. (I may be wrong, of course: somebody may choose to look. I'm not interested in doing so myself). It's possible that if you ask on WT:FILMBIO somebody may be interested. ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

06:38, 29 November 2023 review of submission by 49.181.236.195
I was trying to make a wiki page for my father showcasing his accomplishments and achieving such a high rank in the military can you please advise the information needed to validate and have the page upload. 49.181.236.195 (talk) 06:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It is not recommended to write an article about your father, as that would be a conflict of interest and it will be hard to stay neutral. Practically only thing that matters for accept or decline is whether he is notable. Read that guideline for details. Sungodtemple (talk &#8226; contribs) 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

09:08, 29 November 2023 review of submission by NAMAN.GAUBA007
for editing what all things need to be change in this draft NAMAN.GAUBA007 (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The first thing you need to do is to turn your floating list of sources into inline references, so that it is apparent where every single piece of information in the article is sourced to.
 * When you have done that, you can resubmit it, and it will be practical for a reviewer to look at it and see whether or not he seems to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. But it will be helpful if you look critically at your sources to check that before you resubmit. ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

10:19, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Good parents
Why this article has declined? Good parents (talk) 10:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I fixed the link to your draft(it lacked the "Draft:") but it was a copyright violation. A Wikipedia article should not just be copied from elsewhere, it should summarize independent sources. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

10:35, 29 November 2023 review of submission by 116.212.108.22
why it is restricted ?? 116.212.108.22 (talk) 10:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The reason for rejection was given. 331dot (talk) 10:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have restored the rejection notice in the draft. Removing it was disruptive editing.
 * Please read WP:YFA. The very first step in creating a Wikipedia article is to find several reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the subject. From that you will know whether or not the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. The "sources" you list are worthless: the first one is merely a name: I don't even know what it is, never mind where to find it. The second is clearly not independent, and so is worthless for establishing notability.
 * The fact that the draft has been rejected suggests that the reviewer has looked for, and failed to find, suitable sources, and has therefore concluded that there is no point on you or anybody else spending any time on this.
 * If you are sure that you have several suitable sources, you can take it up with the reviewer on their user talk page. ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Requests for accepting non-notable autobiographies constitute highest portion of total Afc. This was just another example of it. zoglophie •talk• 17:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

12:48, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Semigall
Hello. I don't understand why article about architect and urban planner Arnold Baron von Maydell is declined and considered not enough significant? There are several articles about similiar latvian architects which are published despite their short length and poor quality. Semigall (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Semigall a common misconception is that since other crappy articles exist, my crappy article is acceptable. Practically the only thing that matters is notability, or whether enough reliable sources have significant coverage about von Maydell. Try to find other high-quality sources about him. Sungodtemple (talk &#8226; contribs) 12:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * If you would like to help us reduce the number of inappropriate articles, you may work with us to idenfity these other inappropriate articles for possible action. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 13:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

13:37, 29 November 2023 review of submission by 87.1.48.40
I ask for the page to be unblocked Draft:Gaetano Minale 87.1.48.40 (talk) 13:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * OP blocked for block evasion. 331dot (talk) 13:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

14:49, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Lummoxxxx
How I can improve my work on this article Lummoxxxx (talk) 14:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * There is nothing that you can do, the draft was rejected and will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

15:10, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Metalbro
I would like some help with the citation side of this page Metalbro (talk) 15:10, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * What aspect do you need help with? 331dot (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

15:51, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Lilly0010
Why has my article been declined Lilly0010 (talk) 15:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Lilly0010 because it is not an encyclopedic article but an essay or as you put it a report. Social media or a blog are the types of place for you to write about such things. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

16:11, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Secretsauce99
Hey, I thought this article would be deemed notable given that it pertains to an existing Wikipedia page Pitchblack Playback and is about the founder of this event? I'm sure in the past this would have qualified someone for their own page? An event is notable but the person who created it is not? I don't quite understand the logic, even if I understand that the editor who has rejected this may not deem the person notable solely based on the citations added to the new article..

Thanks Secretsauce99 (talk) 16:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * No, the founder of something notable is not necessarily notable themselves, see WP:NOTINHERITED. It would depend on coverage in independent reliable sources being about them personally and not just what they did- and they would probably need to be notable for something in addition to creating a particular event in order to merit a standalone article. Most of the sources you provide discuss the importance of the event, not its creator. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

16:15, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Sidharthsnair
I have updated my page with more references and i need advice to make it to the approval team. Sidharthsnair (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The draft was rejected, which typically means that it will not be considered further. If something has fundamentally changed about the draft, such as new sources that the reviewer did not consider, you must first appeal to the last reviewer(the one who rejected the draft).
 * As you are associated with this topic, that must be formally disclosed, please see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In looking at the draft it appears that the sources provided are wholly inappropriate for establishing notability as Wikipedia defines a notable film. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

17:25, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Javert13
I'd love getting some help optimizing the page I'm trying to create so that it is eligible for publishing. My overall goal is to publish pages for more noteable parishes within the American Byzantine Catholic Church, and if I get good at that, figure out what else to grow next. Some of them already have wikipedia pages, and I'm attempting to add more in the same style as the previously published verisons. As far as I could tell, I used multiple sources to validate all of the information, and didn't just copy or paste from any one source (it was actually interesting to see a complete story synthesize from across the different sources).

Any advise as to how I could modify the page to be eligible, and what I could learn for future pages to avoid this?

Thank you!!! I use wikipedia enough, figured it was time to help it grow. Javert13 (talk) 17:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Most of your sources have brief coverage, or are not independent of the parish. An article must primarily summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the topic. 331dot (talk) 17:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Got it, thank you. I think I was more focusing on sources that verified or illustrated facts, and not so much looking at the breadth or quality of the actual sources. The quality of the sources seems kind of fuzzy, is there a helpful rule of thumb I could use when looking?
 * Is using the parish as a source useful at all, or does it draw a red flag right away? I find it useful as a starting point to then go and verify with independent sources elsewhere, but is that not a good approach?
 * Thank you for the quick feedback, super helpful already. Javert13 (talk) 17:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * You may read reliable sources to learn more about what is considered a reliable source, but in short, a source is considered reliable if it has a reputation of fact checking, editorial control, and basic journalistic or academic standards of process- they don't just publish anything they like without checking for accuracy, like a blog or self-published book.
 * The parish itself as a primary source, can be used as a source for certain things, but not to establish notability or claims beyond basic information like location, number of members, staff, etc. The history of the parish in general would need an independent source. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, incredibly helpful. Thank you! Javert13 (talk) 18:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

18:30, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Bperu
Just wanted to get an update on my last submission of this article about 2 months ago.

I've made all the edits suggested by everyone who has reviewed it so far, and am curious to know if it now has all the elements necessary for it to be published.

Thanks! Bperu (talk) 18:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * We don't usually do pre-review reviews- but the external links in the body of your draft need to be removed. Please see Referencing for beginners if you intend them as references- but your own newspaper can't be used as a reference to establish the notability of your newspaper. It's a primary source. An article needs to primarily summarize what independent reliable sources say about the paper.
 * References need to be in line, not just gathered at the bottom, so we know which references cite what information. Again, please see referencing for beginners. 331dot (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * You'll need to make a formal conflict of interest disclosure, or if you work for the paper, a paid editing disclosure, a Terms of Use requirement. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

19:49, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Klevis Elmazaj
Dear Team at Wikipedia, I received your latest refusal because of 'Autobiography on promotional tone'.

I believe if you compare this page to others of similar artists who are listed on wikipedia, it follows the same guidelines and content. This is not intended for promotional purposes, but mostly for informative purposes, where people can read and know more about the person or artist they encountered. It can be easy to say for every page that it has a promotional tone, unless of course someone else writes for them which can also be an agent, doing it for promotional tone.

Could you help me understand and guide through what I would need to do in order to have this page accepted?

Thank you for you understanding,

Warm regards, Klevis Klevis Elmazaj (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF - Do not try to use the existence of other articles to argue the validity of yours. It's also not cited properly, you need in-line citations, not all of them gathered at the bottom, please read WP:REFB - Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 20:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

20:04, 29 November 2023 review of submission by VictoireIsdor
Can you help me to not be rejected VictoireIsdor (talk) 20:04, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, no; you do not meet our definition of a notable musician, and your draft is completely unsourced. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

21:21, 29 November 2023 review of submission by Iulia pantea
Hello,

Can you please advise me about the modifications I must make to the Wikipedia page for Daniel Epure in order for it to be approved?

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Kind regards, Iulia pantea (talk) 21:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi thanks for reaching out. Did you see the note on the draft? Wikipedia subjects need in-depth coverage (full-length articles, not just passing mentions) in usually at least 3 reliable sources that are not written by or affiliated with the subject.
 * ~WikiOriginal-9~ ( talk ) 21:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)