Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 February 9

= February 9 =

please help me with my article
i am writing about a notable producer who has recorded songs for some notable people who has a wikipedia page and has won awards the people he has worked for has sources, what can i do to get this page approved. &#34;Icon240$%&#34; (talk) 01:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Promotional account, already blocked at Wikinews . 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @"Icon240$%": you have to demonstrate that the subject is notable, which so far you're very far from doing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @"Icon240$%": you have to demonstrate that the subject is notable, which so far you're very far from doing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

06:15, 9 February 2024 review of submission by SriSahi
pls review my article, I added sources SriSahi (talk) 06:15, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @SriSahi: this draft has been rejected, and will therefore not be considered further. If sources demonstrating notability have come to light which weren't taken into account earlier, you may make your case to the reviewer who rejected this, but that seems rather pointless given that of the two new sources added one is Google app store and the other returns a 404 error. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

06:37, 9 February 2024 review of submission by 41.190.14.106
It keeps saying; This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please I need help to get thus UP. 41.190.14.106 (talk) 06:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * This draft was rejected a long ago, and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

06:48, 9 February 2024 review of submission by Nerdofhistory
having trouble submitting it, the wiki is about a noble aristocrat writter Nerdofhistory (talk) 06:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @Nerdofhistory: the reason why you can't submit it is that it has been rejected and resubmission is no longer possible. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

10:30, 9 February 2024 review of submission by JossChristian
I am looking for some advice as to help get this article published but also, to learn more about how these articles are to be submitted and how their content will help the community reading them. The article has been written in accordance to Wiki preferences and remains informative, neutral, with reliable and impartial resources. JossChristian (talk) 10:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi @JossChristian, I have undone my rejection as you have removed the Datagrail references.  Qcne  (talk)  12:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * OK great, thank you. JossChristian (talk) 15:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

12:38, 9 February 2024 review of submission by PA4C101
There are 34 citations here from many third party news and government sources.

The Wiki editor who denied this article gave a model article example of a similar organization which had only 4 citations, the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, linked here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Independent_Colleges_and_Universities_in_Massachusetts

Why is a good article being rejected without cause? Thanks for your help. PA4C101 (talk) 12:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi @PA4C101, the draft has not been rejected - only declined - and you have re-submitted it and it is waiting for review?  Qcne  (talk)  12:41, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @PA4C101: firstly, this draft is pending another review, so it's not clear why you're here advocating for it. You will get a verdict when a reviewer picks it up and runs the proverbial ruler over it.
 * Secondly, I posted several weeks ago on your talk page a conflict-of-interest (COI) query. Could you please finally respond to it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As for the sources, a large number of citations proves nothing, in and of itself. Three solid sources may be enough to establish notability, while 33 flaky ones aren't. If you wish to help the next reviewer, you may highlight the 3-5 sources which you feel are strongest in terms of satisfying the WP:ORG requirements. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

14:23, 9 February 2024 review of submission by CareerCollegeGroup
I am trying to get my work listed on Wikipedia, how can I get this submitted so it can be listed? CareerCollegeGroup (talk) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @CareerCollegeGroup: this draft has been deleted as promotional, and you seem to be blocked. I'd say the prospects are not looking good... -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:41, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

15:23, 9 February 2024 review of submission by 82.7.16.167
What misinformation is on this i atucally saw it can you tell me how its misinformation? 82.7.16.167 (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Seriously? At what point did you think that was a bona fide encyclopaedia article? Don't do it again. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

17:47, 9 February 2024 review of submission by GailBev
Hello, the article has been rejected for a lack of notability. You can look back at the talk message history, so I won't repeat that here. The person who reviewed it is focused on the number of citations and publications. Due to the extensive and significant impact of Dr Kamberov's invention on humanity and the estimated 8 million healthy babies born as a result, I think the notability speaks for itself. I understand there are certain criteria for being accepted as a new Wikipedia page, but there are times when you have to consider the bigger picture and its impact. I think he deserves to have recognition of this invention.

I can include this information on the talk page for the article, but I wanted to go a different route first to see what you have to say. If needed, is there a higher level of editor we can run this past? Thank you, Gail GailBev (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I fixed your link, you need the "Draft:" with it. There are no "higher levels of editors". I can't say anything beyond what the reviewers have said. Wikipedia is not a place to honor someone or recognize work- the need to do so does not outweigh guidelines. If you feel that policies have been misapplied here, please tell how. 331dot (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing the link. I realized it after I posted that it wasn't directing to the draft page. I realize it's not the place to honor someone to recognize their work. It seems that this is a highly significant invention and as inventor that speaks to the notability. I will add this to the talk page as well. GailBev (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

23:50, 9 February 2024 review of submission by NazianzusGoat
The page I was creating was denied by Asparagus for "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." I'm not sure what further sources are needed. I said the music engineer won Grammys and cited the official Grammy website. The reviewer also said, "Grammy win establishes notability, but I'd like to see a few more sources about other things so he can pass WP:GNG." What further support is needed? What other things needs citation? NazianzusGoat (talk) 23:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * It's not that you need more citations for what you have(though the personal section is unsourced); you need more information, cited to something other than the Grammys website. Winning a Grammy makes him notable, but any article about him needs to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about him- we don't just want to know what the Recording Academy says. 331dot (talk) 00:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)