Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 October 30

= October 30 =

00:54, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Wickkey
I need help getting Louis Boasberg approved, please help me, thanks. Wickkey (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * What specific help are you looking for? 331dot (talk) 07:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Findagrave and ancestry.com are not reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 11:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

06:00, 30 October 2023 review of submission by TrainFreak125
My article was declined for "lack of reliable sources", most of the article was translated from the Japanese version of the article, which does not contain many sources, should I remove these sections or find reliable sources for them? Or can I reference the Japanese version of the page (probably not)? Which sections of my article do need additional sources? TrainFreak125 (talk) 06:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Please know that what is acceptable on the Japanese Wikipedia is not necessarily acceptable here- each Wikipedia is independent, with their own editors and policies. The English Wikipedia tends to be stricter than others.
 * The solar panels part is unsourced, but overall you need sources that provide more significant coverage of this defunct theme park than you have now. If these don't exist, it may not merit an article on the English Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 07:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

11:41, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Bestkitchenettes
Why you reject me Bestkitchenettes (talk) 11:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

11:56, 30 October 2023 review of submission by 102.220.41.253
I need support on how to create referece string 102.220.41.253 (talk) 11:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:REFB. Your references should be within the text, where the citation numbers are to appear. The software will display them in the References section. And you don't have to use citation templates such as cite book (though personally, I strongly recommend that you do); but if you don't use such templates then there is nothing to interpret the "parameter=value" syntax that you have used.
 * Also note that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. This means, for example, that unless an independent commentator has specifically discussed an organisation's "vision", the vision does not belong anywhere in a Wikipedia article about the organisation. ColinFine (talk) 12:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

12:56, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Dkoltorcan
Hello, I just saw that the article was refused again. I really would like to make edits that would be approved. Can you please guide me on what I should remove? All the sources are legit and there are no unclaimed sources, everything is about Bernhard Ruchti's work so I don't really know what to do here... Thank you for your help. Also, I never received the notification that the article was rejected, I don't know why... Anyway. Any help would be appreciated. I am writing this article on M. Ruchti's behalf and I have been rejected twice already so it is difficult for me to understand what to do, knowing the time between the submission and the approval. Thank you, Dkoltorcan Dkoltorcan (talk) 12:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi there @Dkoltorcan. Firstly you need to make a conflict of interest declaration by following the instructions at WP:COI. If you are being financially compensated by M Ruchti in any way you must also make a paid editing disclosure by following the instructions at WP:PAID. Failure to do either of these is a breach of the Wikimedia Term and Conditions and may result in your account being blocked from editing.
 * Let me know when you've done that (either COI or both COI and PAID), and then we can look at the draft.  Qcne  (talk)  13:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not financially compensated. I just find his work interesting and would really much like to see him on Wikipedia. I have worked with him several times as a musician and find that he should be in Wikipedia, that's all. Dkoltorcan (talk) 13:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Dkoltorcan: there is unreferenced content in the draft, starting with the DOB. In articles on living people, pretty much everything must be referenced.
 * The reason why you didn't get the decline notification is that this goes to the editor submitting the draft, and this was submitted the second time from an IP address.
 * You must make a conflict-of-interest disclosure, given what you say about writing this on the subject's behalf. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * As I already stated twice, there is no conflict-of-interest, I am an individual editing this article without compensation. I just find that his story should ne published on Wikipedia, and I am talking about it. I am not being paid. I just contribute to general knowledge, Dkoltorcan (talk) 13:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Dkoltorcan: being compensated is a special type of COI, but not the only one. If you have an external relationship with the subject, which is how I interpret your statements above, you almost certainly have a COI, and need to disclose it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok I understand. So what should I indicate? That I am not paid by the person and that I don't know him except that I performed with him as a colleague? Also regarding the DOB, I don't understand. This is his date of birth. When I look at other articles, there is nothing that proves the DOB. What should I do? Thank you Dkoltorcan (talk) 13:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I just reviewed the list of COI (Conflict of interest) and I don't find anything that corresponds to my scenario... Dkoltorcan (talk) 13:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Dkoltorcan: alright, only you can know what, if anything, your relationship is. I was merely going by your statement that "I am writing this article on M. Ruchti's behalf", which sounded to me like he had asked or instructed you to write this.
 * Per our guideline WP:BLP, articles on living people have strict referencing requirements due to privacy etc. reasons. DOB is something that many people are sensitive about being released into the public domain, and for that reason Wikipedia articles must not include it unless it has already been reported previously, and even then it can only be included if supported by a reliable published source. If you cannot find such a source to support the DOB, then it must be removed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks noted. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I am not writing writing this "on behalf of" but write on his work. So I can proceed with the edits now? I will try to find a source about his DOB. Should I quote his website? Dkoltorcan (talk) 13:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yep, basic facts like DOBs can be sourced from the subject's own website or other primary sources.  Qcne  (talk)  13:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting us know about the lack of COI. We have to be careful with these things. Taking a look at your draft, here are some issues:
 * - The essay was the beginning of a lifelong interpretive and musicological exploration of the subject. a little break of the WP:NPOV guidelines. The Wikipedia voice should not make assertations unless paraphrasing a source
 * - As of 2017, Ruchti is increasingly appearing as a pianist. In 2018, he began his "A Tempo Project". unsourced
 * - In 2017 he was awarded by the city of St. Gallen with the Förderpreis Kultur. unsourced
 * - Starting with Volume V of the A Tempo Project... unsourced, but I wonder if citations #16 to #19 can source it? Perhaps combine the paragraphs
 * - The "Source" section should be titled External links and I'd remove the interview. Check the guidance on external links at WP:EXTERNAL
 * - In your references, the Dutch Wikipedia cannot be used, please remove
 * - You have quite a few interviews with the subject, which is fine, but you first need to establish if the subject passes the WP:NMUSICIAN criteria, through the use of significant coverage in multiple secondary independent sources (which are not interviews).  Qcne  (talk)  13:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

14:54, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Karthikkrishnamurthy123
Hello Team, I had submitted a page for moderator review. The page got rejected on the following lines: "See WP:CORPDEPTH. Many stock market notices do not confer notability. Come back with reliable sources WP:RS about the company."

@Tagishsimon - Thank you for your inputs.

Can you or someone help in understanding this: 1. Is the content tonality fine? Are there any feedback or concerns there? 2. If I manage to find notable references, will the chances of acceptance increase?

Many thanks in advance.

Thanks. Karthikkrishnamurthy123 (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello Karthikkrishnamurthy123. Let us take an analogy. In building terms, somebody is telling you that they're concerned whether your house has any foundations, and whether the land it is built on is stable, and you're asking them about the quality of your building. Nobody is going to spend very much time evaluating that when they think the ground may collapse underneath it. Sort out the foundations first, and then worry about the actual building.
 * But I did take a quick look - and my eyes glazed over. Do you honestly expect Wikipedia readers to care about the details of a routine corporate financial transaction. The question that your article needs to answer is What is it about this film company that has made independent commentators want to write about it? And of course the answer must come from what those commentators said, not from anything at all the the company says or wants to say. ColinFine (talk) 11:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

16:42, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Brogonee
I have properly cited the article...i don't know why it keeps getting rejected? Brogonee (talk) 16:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

16:52, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Brogonee
Please kindly review the article Bala Sanusi Turaki. I have properly cited it and made valuable corrections Brogonee (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Brogonee I have now rejected your draft- there is simply no evidence this person meets our WP:NPEOPLE notability criteria, and you've already had five reviews. Your two new sources are trivial mentions and do not count towards notability.
 * I would recommend giving up on this draft.  Qcne  (talk)  16:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * i agree with you, but can you help me do something?, kindly google this name sharply "sesi whingan", i once created a draft about him too, but the editors keep rejecting it, when there are almost 1000 reliable sources on google mentionning about him...he is the current deputy charman on petroleum resources, Upstream for the House of Representatives (Nigeria), it still baffles me why you guys do such things...don't make wikipedia biased please. Brogonee (talk) 16:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I can't find any draft titled 'sesi whingan', and there's nothing in your contribution history. Did you use another account to submit it? Without seeing the draft I have no idea why it was rejected.  Qcne  (talk)  17:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

18:15, 30 October 2023 review of submission by GimmeKittens
I don't know how to fix my mistakes where my Wiki got declined!GimmeKittens (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It reads like it was written by a child and doesn't pass the WP:NSCHOOL criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

18:19, 30 October 2023 review of submission by 72.34.120.68
i think a problem with MAKING them is that if i press enter, it doesn't make it to where as the finish, it's just all blobby, like in a paragraph. 72.34.120.68 (talk) 18:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi IP editor. I don't understand your question but your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You have now made three drafts, all of which have been inappropriate for Wikipedia.
 * May I suggest you go elsewhere to write your articles, perhaps a blog? See WP:ALTERNATIVEOUTLETS for a list of places that are not Wikipedia.  Qcne  (talk)  20:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi IP, you need to press enter twice to get a new line in wiki markup. -- asilvering (talk) 07:29, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

20:40, 30 October 2023 review of submission by Lovefishtropicalcane
For my first page, I figured the right thing should be to create a page for someone who deserves a Wikipedia page but does not have it yet. For this purpose, I picked one of my seniors from the university.

The submitted bio was 2-3 lines. And I submitted two links to cite the validity of the person.

I kindly request all to share whether there is a minimum word count and number of citations required to get approved. Lovefishtropicalcane (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Lovefishtropicalcane I'm afraid you are asking the wrong question. If the subject of your very brief draft has passed WP:NPROF it is likely that it would have been accepted.
 * However, LinkedIn is a user generated site and cannot ever be a reference. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lovefishtropicalcane Generally one aims for three solid references. However, inherent notability trumps quality of references. The exception is that living people do require very careful referencing. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them,  in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make a draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
 * I hope that helps. My first answer was to set you on the right path. My second is to help you see the path more clearly 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:04, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. I was demotivated after my first draft got rejected, but now i have some leads to work on. I am already working on fixing the issues, and improving my article before submitting it again, hopefully this time i will get approved. Lovefishtropicalcane (talk) 05:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Sir, I referenced to LinkedIn to prove his tenure at University. I see the point in your response. I am working on to fix the issue. Thanks a lot for replying. Lovefishtropicalcane (talk) 05:19, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

20:50, 30 October 2023 review of submission by 128.249.96.242
Hello,

Is there anything else I can do to get this page approved? 128.249.96.242 (talk) 20:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi IP editor,
 * Your draft was declined, not rejected, so it has potential. The problem is that the vast majority of your sources are patents or papers by Todd, which means they are not WP:INDEPENDENT of him. We need to see significant coverage of Todd in reliable, secondary sources that are independent. You can certainly use Todd's primary sources to evidence parts of the biography, but first we need to prove notability under WP:NPEOPLE or perhaps WP:NACADEMIC. The criteria for proving notability is at those two links, the easiest of which is to find those reliable, secondary sources that cover Todd in detail.  Qcne  (talk)  20:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * thanks for at least being reasonable Uwuboi69 (talk) 00:32, 1 November 2023 (UTC)