Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 May 10

= May 10 =

00:52, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Snigdhakm
The person is a notable person and has multiple reliable sources of his biography. This age is not a part of self promotion and vandalism. I and Mayukh Mukherjee are two separate person. He is not in any direct connection with me or the other editors who are editing about hm. Snigdhakm (talk) 00:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , IMDb is not a reliable source. See WP:IMDB. Amazon is a dubious source. See WP:AMAZON. Another Wikipedia article is not a reliable source. See WP:CIRCULAR. Your first two sentences are copied directly from Moviefone. That is a copyright violation, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Things written by Mukherjee do not contribute to notability. The GoldPoster source is a passing mention. The District Court source is a passing mention. Movie credits do not constitute significant coverage. You draft is poorly referenced and has significant problems. Cullen328 (talk) 04:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

05:14, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Tedolightnirvana
Why is my article declined? I've cited enough sources not less than 10 which are totally independent and reliable. Tedolightnirvana (talk) 05:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Tedolightnirvana: it has been declined for the reasons given in the decline notice, namely that the sources are insufficient for establishing notability, and the draft is written in a promotional manner.
 * Several of the sources don't work. The ones that do, are either interviews, things written by the subject, or passing mentions, none of which counts towards notability.
 * You've also not cited anything, you've merely listed some sources at the end. Articles on living people require comprehensive inline citations throughout. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

06:38, 10 May 2024 review of submission by 2600:1700:1690:46B0:38EB:1894:A4C6:803A
Then why Atlantic Records Russia 2600:1700:1690:46B0:38EB:1894:A4C6:803A (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Are you perhaps asking about ? ...an unreferenced mini-stub on an alleged record label founded yesterday – do you really need to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

06:54, 10 May 2024 review of submission by 2600:1700:1690:46B0:38EB:1894:A4C6:803A
Return my article 2600:1700:1690:46B0:38EB:1894:A4C6:803A (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove the rejection notice. I have restored it for you. —  Wasell ( T ) 09:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This article is borderline-gibberish to me. Is it about a record label? A recording artist? A shop selling vinyls? It's impossible to get that from the article. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 17:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

07:19, 10 May 2024 review of submission by CSharpStudentToo
Comment has been left saying that the references don't qualify when they've in fact been lifted from the Finnish Wikipedia article and have been found valid there: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyrki_%E2%80%9DSpider%E2%80%9D_H%C3%A4m%C3%A4l%C3%A4inen CSharpStudentToo (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @CSharpStudentToo: every language version of Wikipedia is a completely separate project with their own policies and requirements. I know for a fact that the Finnish version has much less stringent referencing and notability requirements than we do here at the English-language one (which, in fairness, probably has the strictest of any).
 * This is a common problem in translating content from other languages to English: the sources often are insufficient to qualify for publication here, meaning that you need to go hunting for more and better sources to make sure they exist, before even starting to translate. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. The article still mentions "Review waiting, please be patient.". Will there be a second opinion on the article or is it just plain rejected? Plenty of UK and international sources, which makes you think it would be valid for the English Wikipedia as well. CSharpStudentToo (talk) 07:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @CSharpStudentToo: the draft (not yet 'article') has not been rejected, which would mean that it cannot be resubmitted; only declined, which means that it can be, once the decline reasons have been addressed. (And given that it has now been declined three times, that gives you the second, and even third, opinion.)
 * As I already said in a comment on the draft, "plenty of sources" is good, if they are of sufficient quality. Plenty of poor-quality sources doesn't help, and actually hinders.
 * I see nothing there that would make this person notable per WP:AUTHOR or WP:MUSICBIO, so we're reliant on the general notability guideline WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage, directly of the subject, in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent of both the subject and of each other.
 * One more thing: sources must be cited in a way that enables them to be reliably identified for verification. This means that offline sources must have full bibliographical information. Anything that is available online should ideally cite the online version, as this obviously makes it much easier for a global readership to access the source.
 * HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

07:41, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Huothak
I have an issue of my submission Articles for creation "Huot Hak". The reasons left by ToadetteEdit were: 1- submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources 2- submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage I would like to request to assist and double check on these issues. I am (Huot Hak) is the minister of Ministry of Inspection, Cambodia. In the references, they clearly shows I was appointed. If any reference you need, I will provide for you. This is the urgent case.

Regards, Huot Hak Huothak (talk) 07:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Please be aware of the autobiography policy; while not forbidden, writing about yourself is highly discouraged. Wikipedia wants to know what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about you, not what you want to say about yourself.
 * Almost nothing in the draft is sourced; every substantive fact about a living person needs to have a source, per the Biographies of Living Persons policy. There is also much promotional language, "illustrious career"; "broadened his academic horizons", etc.  Articles should be written very dry, without embellishment. 331dot (talk) 07:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @Huothak. Firstly, nothing on Wikipedia is urgent. Secondly, we really do discourage writing autobiographies about yourself (see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY) and having a Wikipedia article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing.
 * In order to show you merit a Wikipedia article, you must pass the WP:NPOLITICIAN criteria. You probably do meet that criteria as a senior Civil Servant, but the draft has lots of other problems too: it is full of promotional language (which is prohibited), and vast parts are unsourced (every statement in a biography must be sourced).
 * To resolve the issues in the draft you need to:
 * Completely re-write it to comply with our strict neutrality policy.
 * Cite every single statement, starting with your date of birth, to a published source. If you cannot find published sources, the statement must be removed.
 * Let me know if you have any questions.  Qcne  (talk)  07:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I would also add that the photo of you appears to be an official government photo, but you claim that it is your own personal work, that you created it. If you were not the photographer, you cannot say that the photo is your personal work. I do not know what the laws are regarding copyright in Cambodia, and if images taken by your government are in the public domain. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

08:45, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Tvfilmpodcastuk
first time adding a page Tvfilmpodcastuk (talk) 08:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You don't ask a question, but your draft is completely unsourced. Please see referencing for beginners to learn how to add references for your information to the draft. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

09:22, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Gs6Kt1An7
Just now I was attempting to edit the draft titled Babu_Ezhumalai but wrongly clicked the submit button. My draft was submitted without any editing. I want to re-edit and resubmit before this article is reviewed. Kindly help me in this regard immediately. Gs6Kt1An7 (talk) 09:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Gs6Kt1An7: I've simply undone your submission, which you can do yourself also, it requires no advanced tools or permissions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you Gs6Kt1An7 (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

09:35, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Devendrasingh365
i am Devendra Singh. i have a website of king peedia that i provide history, culture, king, temple on our website. it is help for need person and they improve knowledge through our website.

I summit my website on your platform and i provide all current information for my website that user understand of my website. but my wiki page had been deleted.

I request to you that check my wiki page that i provide all information is correct. Devendrasingh365 (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , your draft is unreferenced and overtly promotional. It cannot possibly be accepted into the encyclopedia in its current form. Cullen328 (talk) 09:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Devendrasingh365: your draft hasn't been deleted, although it soon will be. Wikipedia is not a marketing channel for your website, you'll need to find other ways to promote it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is just a blatant advert for your website and has no place on Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 09:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

09:53, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Chitranshuagarwal
Why my article not qualify instead of providing many news and site references Chitranshuagarwal (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Fixed your link for proper display. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Refer to my /Decode subpage linked in my signature below ("critiques").
 * We don't cite Wikipedia (circular reference).
 * We can't use https://www.jagranjosh.com/colleges/rr-institute-of-modern-technology-lucknow-27030 (too sparse). Content-free profile.
 * https://collegedunia.com/college/14667-rr-group-of-institutions-rrgi-lucknow is useless for notability (connexion to subject). The stuff credited to "Ankita Banerjee" on the page reads like an advert written by/on behalf of the university.
 * We can't use https://www.shiksha.com/college/r-r-group-of-institutions-lucknow-31804 (unknown provenance) and even if we could it'd be useless for notability (connexion to subject). It's safe to assume all the content written on this page (which goes unattributed) was written by/on behalf of the university.
 * I can't assess https://aktu.ac.in/List-affiliation-institute.html (technical barrier). Consistently times out.
 * We can't use https://www.firstuni.in/colleges/rr-group-of-institutions-rrgi-lucknow-22766 (too sparse). Save for an obvious promo blurb at the top written by/on behalf of the university, this is a content-free profile.
 * https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/students-briefed-about-engineers-day/articleshow/103705103.cms is useless for notability (too sparse). Name-drop. (Also, Times of India is a fairly sketchy source.)
 * I can't assess the article intended to be sourced from https://www.pressreader.com/india/hindustan-times-lucknow/20220425/page/4/textview (walled). Use and treat it as an offline cite. (we need, at minimum, paper name, paper edition (e.g. 1 Jan 1924), article title, article byline, and the page(s) the article is on).
 * https://www.pressreader.com/article/281715503175215 is the exact same source as the above, and I still can't assess it for the exact same reason.
 * None of the sources you have that I can assess are any good. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 17:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

10:58, 10 May 2024 review of submission by CProvat
PERMAS software is outcome from the University of Stuttgart-Germany, which was initially was developed by the team of the famous professor John Argyris, the pioneer of the Finite Element Method (FEM). In this sense, I strongly believe that it has to be a permanent record in Wikipedia. Personally, I am using it in my lectures at the University, and I confirm that I have not been paid to create this entry. I woud be glad if you could suggest me possible changes so as the entry becomes acceptable. Thanks! CProvat (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @CProvat: the draft has been resubmitted and is awaiting review, so you will get feedback once a reviewer gets around to assessing it.
 * The main thing that makes a draft 'acceptable' is that it demonstrates notability. That arises in most cases, including this, solely from sources, which need to satisfy the WP:GNG guideline. This requires significant coverage, directly of the subject, in multiple (3+) secondary sources that are both reliable and entirely independent of the subject.
 * On that last point, independence: in the case of scientific software such as this, relevant sources are likely to be scientific papers or textbooks, and they should not be authored by anyone involved in the software's development or distribution, or published by publishers affiliated with the university in question. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

15:50, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Jpgroppi
I see that my page has this comment: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. I am suppose to go to the talk page. The talk page does not help me to prove that this accusation is wrong. What should I do? Jpgroppi (talk) 15:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Clearly your user name gives the impression that you have a conflict of interest, why have you chosen that as a name? And still not remotely clear how they/you would pass WP:NARTIST.Theroadislong (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jpgroppi If the accusation is incorrect you may state that simply and truthfully on the draft's talk page. However, it is unimportant unless you can prove that he passes WP:NARTIST. Impossible to prove that? Then it will not be accepted 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

16:49, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Xfmol
I'm trying to insert an infobox person using, as it is sugested in the tutorials, but the box is not being automatically filled from Wikidata, eventhough a Wikidata element does exists with the same title as the article. In the draft edit page, under Tools menu, I'm not finding any link to Wikidata. Xfmol (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The infobox is the least of your worries. One source, no matter how good it is, cannot support a Wikipedia article. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 17:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have added another source and also an info box, please find more sourced content to show how he passes WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help. Xfmol (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is a draft editing page and I am just starting to write the article; of course the article will be far more extended and will have >10 references. I'm almost a begginer editor, I've already contributed to the catalan, spanish and french Wikipedias, but this is the first time I'm contributing to the english Wikipedia. Xfmol (talk) 18:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * On en.wp, we don't see an infobox as necessary for an article or a draft. Sure it's a nice-to-have, but it doesn't really help move the needle when it comes to getting a draft accepted, and often can introduce other problems (infobox content generally needs sourced if the article doesn't already cover it or the content implicates WP:BLP). Focus on getting the article sourced and written first, then worry about the infobox once that is done. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 18:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

18:19, 10 May 2024 review of submission by Vistopher
I believe my draft has been rejected due to a lack of sources. I would like to know how many sources I would need in order to have a sufficient amount of sources for my draft to be allowed to be published and if there isnt enough sources or articles about this person does that mean that he is not worthy of having a wikipedia page yet? This is the first Wikipedia article/draft ive made, ive updated several other articles before I had this acount but never made a full article/draft and would like to have it submitted if possible. Looking forward to hearing from you. Vistopher (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi @Vistopher, your draft was only declined, not rejected. This means you still have the opportunity to improve and re-submit it.
 * Our rule of thumb is you should have a minimum of three sources that each meet these criteria: independent of Griffin and of each other (not interviews, PR pieces, from his racing team etc); give significant coverage (analysis, discussion, debate, commentary, etc); are from reliable places (not random blogs or social media).
 * If you can't find those sources, then perhaps it is too soon for there to be a Wikipedia article about him yet
 * Have a look at our notability criteria for sports people which explains what we're looking for.
 * Hope that makes sense, let me know if you have any questions.  Qcne  (talk)  18:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I got a few more questions concerning the source.
 * Is FormulaScout.com a good source or not, Im pretty sure its an independant news site not linked to a team or anything similair, and am I allowed to use the same site as credit multiple times or is it required to use diffirent sites? And how do I check if they are credible sites or not? Thanks for answering my questions and assisting me in making this draft/article. Vistopher (talk) 19:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have had a look at FormulaScout and it looks like a reliable source to me: it has an editorial team, looks to be editorially independent, each article is written by a named editor, active social media, been around for a long time.
 * Identifying if a source is reliable or not can be difficult, but there's a useful essay here: Reliable_sources_checklist.
 * You can re-use the same source if you are citing multiple things to it, or if it has different articles you want to cite.  Qcne  (talk)  20:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for answering my questions, Ill do my best to add credible sources to my article about Griffin Peebles. Thanks for the help! Vistopher (talk) 22:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)