Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 March 16

= March 16 =

04:21, 16 March 2024 review of submission by ScriptKKiddie
I need help finding reliable sources and ensuring the accuracy of my article on Fraud Risk Management. Can I get feedback from other Wikipedians? ScriptKKiddie (talk) 04:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @scriptkkiddie: stop using chatgpt to write an article. ltb d l (talk) 07:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

08:04, 16 March 2024 review of submission by LetsGetBotanical
Hi! I've just embarked on an a quest to create pages for overlooked female botanists. I've hit a hurdle with my first attempt.

I have written about Louisa Grace Fortescue, Lady Clermont, who discovered a fern known as Lady Clermont's Spleenwort. It took me *days* of research to find out who Lady Clermont was and so I decided that no-one else should have to struggle like I did.

I created a page, linked her to her husband and father, who both have pages, and added in her discovery - a fern that was thought to be a new species, and subsequently was one of the first ferns to be suspected (and then confirmed) as a hybrid. It has a hybrid binomial in her honour, Asplenium x clermontiae.

Unfortunately my article has been rejected on notability grounds, but this feels a bit subjective. Her husband has a wikipedia page after all, and - if I was being facetious - I'd say that all he ever did was 'be born an artistocrat'. Lady Clermont actually *did* something!

Checking notability guidelines, I see that one criteria is "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field" - like discovering a fern named after you.

Thanks, LetsGetBotanical LetsGetBotanical (talk) 08:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have to say I'm rather surprised that this was rejected rather than declined, by an admin as well. Theroadislong (talk) 08:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think I see why he did- she discovered the fern, but the botany advances were made by others long after her death. In looking at the sources, they don't seem to extensively describe her influence on this. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Any idea what I can do? LetsGetBotanical (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Just because there exists an article on her husband is certainly no reason to create one on her. Especially as that article possibly shouldn't exist either, as notability isn't demonstrated by the cited sources (two cites of a book written by himself, one cite of a deprecated source, and one with only the briefest of passing mentions). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How do we get that deleted then? And on that point, how is an article like this: 2021 Rugby World Cup squads notable, but the discoverer of a fern isn't? I *am* being facetious but it feels there is a lot of personal preference involved in this process. LetsGetBotanical (talk) 19:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Please see Articles for Deletion to learn about the process. National rugby teams are usually extensively covered in independent reliable sources. The main issue here is that sources do not give Lady Clermont extensive coverage. She could likely be mentioned in an article about the fern, she just doesn't seem to merit a standalone article. 331dot (talk) 19:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

10:49, 16 March 2024 review of submission by Coco Adnan
If I add more info on this budding actor with relevant sources, will I be able to continue editing? Coco Adnan (talk) 10:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Coco Adnan: technically speaking you can continue editing, but you cannot resubmit it for another review. If you can demonstrate notability clearly and unequivocally, you may appeal to the reviewer who rejected this, but that's only worth doing if notability is obviously there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back. So, would it be better to just restart again? rather than editing this draft (which has already been rejected) Coco Adnan (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Coco Adnan: no, that could be interpreted as an attempt to game the system. Make your edits to this draft, and take your case (assuming notability is demonstrated) to the last reviewer. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "Budding actor" almost certainly means they do not yet meet the definition of a notable actor. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * so how does this work? If I re-edit the article and cannot resubmit it for another review, how will I get it reviewed then? Coco Adnan (talk) 11:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Coco Adnan: for the third time, you need to make your case directly to the reviewer who rejected the draft. That's how this works.
 * But as 331dot points out, "budding", as well as "actor who recently made his acting debut", etc. imply pretty much the polar opposite of notable, so you may well be on a hiding to nothing here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:32, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * will circle back once the actor has more body of work. can this page pls be deleted till then? thanks. Coco Adnan (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It can be, but it can also remain so that there is a starting point for later; other than by request, drafts are deleted after six months of inactivity. 331dot (talk) 11:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

16:28, 16 March 2024 review of submission by Kchoose2
Brand new to contributing. I believe this person is worthy of an entry, because I came here looking for information on her and, finding none, tried to start a page that others could contribute to. Two tries came up short and I am wondering what I can do next. Thanks! Kchoose2 (talk) 16:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You have only two sources; to pass this process most reviewers look for at least three sources to be summarized. And as noted, one of the two sources is an interview, which does not contribute to notability, and the other just mentions her video. These are not significant coverage of this person, showing how they meet WP:BIO. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

19:17, 16 March 2024 review of submission by Mr Francesco Miranda
I sent the article for review two times, but I think that I did not really understand what is wrong. So could anyone tell me how to fix it? Thanks! Mr Francesco Miranda (talk) 19:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Part of the issue is that your citations are not next to the information they are citing. See referencing for beginners. 331dot (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

22:00, 16 March 2024 review of submission by Matttimings
Hi there,

Hoping for some pointers on what more would be required here, the individual is what I believe qualifies as "notable" as he's a multiple world record holder in powerlifting and I provided references to rankings, however, this is my first Wiki creation so I appreciate that I could have done something wrong. Any pointers would be much appreciated.

Many thanks, Matt T Matttimings (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. He may be notable, but most if not all of the sources you have do not have significant coverage of him. Some sources are just his businesses, which are not independent sources.


 * If you work for him, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, see WP:PAID. You did declare a COI, but the paid editing declaration is stricter. 331dot (talk) 22:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the suggestions, I do not work for him although I have used his mentorship service previously. I've added some more references in, hoping that'll be enough Matttimings (talk) 23:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)