Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 May 2

= May 2 =

00:38, 2 May 2024 review of submission by 2409:40F3:1019:8863:8000:0:0:0
Can you give reason by explaining it. It also contain much references. Sun Neo is a new channel launched, you can get information on search engines. 2409:40F3:1019:8863:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 00:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but this draft has been rejected and will not therefore be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

00:56, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Edcous
Per User talk:Clearfrienda, suggested that if I wanted a second opinion on the article, I should request it here.

The question is if there are enough in-depth references for the term God Committee to prove notability. There are 4 major ones included: John Hopkins University, the Baylor College of Medicine, the American Enterprise Institute, and the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics.

Please let me know what you think. Edcous (talk) 00:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Edcous: I don't want to 'overrule' another reviewer's assessment, but I can tell you that if this came up before me I would probably accept it. The sources do seem pretty extensive, and some of them cite further sources discussing the same concept. That said, the concept does appear to go by different names – 'god committee', 'god squad', 'god panel', possibly others – so whether 'god committee' is the best one to use, I don't know (although now that the film The God Committee is out, it might become the one). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi DoubleGrazing. The other reviewer explicitly told me I could ask here for an additional opinion (if you look at the talk page) “You could also ask at the AfC help desk to get another reviewer's assesment sooner”. Should I resubmit it for another review then, or can you just approve it? Edcous (talk) 11:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Following up on this. Edcous (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

01:35, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Diatom.phage
The Article subject in draft prefers a shorter version of name lately. I used published information on artist which supported Elizabeth, and I so Iisted Beth as and alternate in introduction. I come to find out in my research that Beth is her current preferred name. There IS a name space conflict with Elizabeth Goodfellow, but not with Beth Goodfellow. Diatom.phage (talk) 01:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * uh...what should I/we/us do? Diatom.phage (talk) 01:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Diatom.phage: I can't comment on what this person's 'correct' name is, nor can I speak for other reviewers, but when I accept an article like this I would publish it on a title that corresponds to the way the name is written at the start of the lead. So if you write Elizabeth ('Beth') Goodfellow, I'd place it at Elizabeth Goodfellow (musician), whereas if you show her name as Beth (Elizabeth) Goodfellow, I'd go for Beth Goodfellow. Does that help at all? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. This helps. I started it as Elizabeth Goodfellow, so I have to navigate the unknown to me space of changing it to Beth (Elizabeth) Goodfellow. Your perspective gets me part of the way down the road. Very kind. Diatom.phage (talk) 23:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

01:54, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Antwan123123
finished edit Antwan123123 (talk) 01:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Antwan123123: okay. Did you have a question you wanted to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh yea, i updated the references, was wondering if they are good enough or should i add more Antwan123123 (talk) 06:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Antwan123123: I'm not going to do a full source analysis here, as that would pretty much amount to a review, and the draft has already been resubmitted so it will get a review sooner or later anyway. However, I can tell you a couple of things. There is too much unreferenced content, given that this is an article on a living person (WP:BLP). For example, where does all the info in the first paragraph of the 'Biography' section come from? And what source gives this person's DOB? Also, you cannot cite (ref #3) Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia. And YouTube is user-generated, and therefore not considered reliable (it could be, if the clip is from a reputable publisher and included in their own channel, but I don't think someone named 'HistoryLover12345678' quite cuts it!). China Daily also doesn't have the greatest reputation as a source, being basically a mouthpiece of the CCP. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * PS: Actually, now that I've done all that, I might as well decline the draft, to save another reviewer having to repeat what I've done. No comment on notability, declined purely for the quality of some of the sources, and the insufficient citations throughout. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ok thank you! how many more references do you recommend? Antwan123123 (talk) 07:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Antwan123123: as many as are required to appropriately support the information. In a BLP, every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details must be clearly supported by inline citations (immediately following the statement, not way down at the bottom of a long paragraph) to reliable published sources, or else removed. This means in practice that just about every sentence you write must be backed up by such a source, because if it's not a material statement, it's just filler and waffle, and should be cut out anyway. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

04:24, 2 May 2024 review of submission by AC1are
Just wondering what the hold up is on publishing this article? AC1are (talk) 04:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @AC1are: I don't know that there's a hold-up as such, just a backlog of drafts. As it says on top of the draft, reviews "may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,477 pending submissions waiting for review." Please be patient, thanks. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks! AC1are (talk) 05:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

08:36, 2 May 2024 review of submission by A.Atig
Hello, I would like to know where I could get help on getting this draft reviewed so that I can enhance it and make sure it gets published. Thank you A.Atig (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @A.Atig: it will be reviewed (again), once a reviewer gets around to it. You only resubmitted it a moment ago. Please be patient, we have 2.5k drafts just like yours awaiting review also. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answer.
 * I am conscious of the fact that there are many articles pending review. What I meant was where can I get help to improve the quality of the article, sources etc from experienced writer? Maybe someone who can help me expand it a bit more. Is there such a place for finding this kind of help? A.Atig (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We don't help with co-authors on this board; you could try the more general Help Desk. I would just suggest that you wait for feedback from the reviewer so you know specifically what to change, if needed. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Is this an alternate account for you? This account has never edited this draft. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Your draft Draft:Cedric Koukjian has no evidence of passing the criteria at WP:NARTIST or WP:GNG? Theroadislong (talk) 12:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

12:28, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Gabbellaokeeffee
Hi there,

Can someone help me with how I can edit the name of a page?

Thank you in advance! Gabbellaokeeffee (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I will shortly move it so that it is in Draft space and not your sandbox- though the particular title of a draft is not that relevant until the draft is accepted. Changing a title requires a page move, which new accounts can't do immediately. 331dot (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have placed it at Draft:FileCloud. I am wondering if you have a connection to this company. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

13:59, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Eminatore
Hi there,

my draft article Draft:Collisional-Radiative Modeling has been rejected because of missing resources. However, there are three adequate resources. My question is if the first paragraph is fine? I could add one two resources for the last paragraph? Would that be enough to get it accepted? Thanks for helping a newbie. Eminatore (talk) 13:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. You have sources that describe what this modeling is, but no sources that describe what makes it notable. 331dot (talk) 15:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @331dot @Umakant Bhalerao Why was the reason not notability then? Would it be accepted if I add a sentence after the first one like 'This plasma radiation physics is critical for the diagnosis and simulation of astrophysical and nuclear fusion plasma.' I would cite source [1] for this. Eminatore (talk) 15:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm still not clear on how that makes this topic notable enough for a standalone article- perhaps as part of nuclear fusion, plasma, or some other article? It could be that this topic is just too far above my pay grade, but I do see that the last paragraph is completely unsourced. 331dot (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, then I integrate my article to the Plasma Modeling article and add two references for the last paragraph. Thanks for helping. Eminatore (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

14:31, 2 May 2024 review of submission by 202.134.148.121
Hello, edited page according to previous messages but still not accepted. 202.134.148.121 (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Apparently you didn't, as the draft was rejected. Please see the message left by the reviewer; it appears that this organization is simply not notable as Wikipedia uses the term. 331dot (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

18:04, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Thetruthseeker12
I need to ask a question. A person declined my submission and said that most of my references are links to songs. So do I delete all the links to songs and only keep the links to news and sites? Which would only make me have 17 references. Thetruthseeker12 (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Thetruthseeker12 it isn't the quantity of references that make a good article, it is the quality. Three really strong references that follow the golden rule are much preferred to 17 poor quality references.
 * For your draft: yes, remove all the Apple Music references. Then see what that leaves you, and check if the references that are left prove this person is notable under WP:NMUSICIAN.  Qcne  (talk)  19:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

19:12, 2 May 2024 review of submission by 2607:FEA8:1F1D:8400:A771:4E66:3C57:BE85
Cannot submit for review unless additional references, styles, and paragraphs with over 100 words. Please add additional references, styles, and paragraphs with over 100 words, and then try to submit for review again. 2607:FEA8:1F1D:8400:A771:4E66:3C57:BE85 (talk) 19:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi IP Editor, did you have a question?  Qcne  (talk)  19:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

20:42, 2 May 2024 review of submission by Diatom.phage
Hi- I added more refs to this draft subsequent to the initial rejection. I read the musician notability requirements page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Musicians/Article_guidelines

and feel that she meets the requirements and so on the Talk page for the draft made an argument for article status. That said, I also read TONS of Wikipedia articles on notability and see that it is a complex issue. I think I need advice. I don't want to bomb with references. Goodfellow is a highly desired sideman that I discovered after seeing she drums with every new musician I find. She is listed on Wikipedia pages for several musician as a member on a record or tour member, but lacks her own page. THANK YOU in advance Diatom.phage (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)