Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 May 25

= May 25 =

05:28, 25 May 2024 review of submission by Dakrfox65536
biography Dakrfox65536 (talk) 05:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Dakrfox65536: you don't ask a question, but this draft was declined because it isn't in English. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , this is the English Wikipedia. Try the Hindi Wikipedia instead. Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

05:36, 25 May 2024 review of submission by CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine
I just need more sites to cite for verification. I'm having trouble finding some. CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: do you have a question you'd like to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I already found as much information as I could about this draft. I feel like I need more though, but I can't find any since there are two aircrafts using the same registration code. Is there any other way? CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 06:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @DoubleGrazing. CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 07:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. 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 referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:35, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: an individual aircraft would have to be pretty remarkable to be independently notable; just having existed doesn't make it so, and even having featured new technologies or acted as a testbed for them wouldn't really mean it has a lasting legacy etc. What is it about this particular flying machine that would justify its place in a global encyclopaedia? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @DoubleGrazing. Then how is this article accepted? Only notable stuff here is that this is the first 737 ever built and that it was operated by NASA for flight testing. What else? CreatorMH (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which describes a common Wikipedia variant of whataboutery.
 * If you're unhappy with that article, you're welcome to improve it, or if it cannot be improved, tag it with appropriate maintenance templates, or possibly initiate deletion proceedings.
 * Now, returning to my question, what makes this aircraft noteworthy enough to be included? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @DoubleGrazing. N767BA played a pivotal role in revolutionizing long-haul air travel by introducing advanced aerodynamics, avionics, and operational efficiency. Notably, this was the first Boeing twin-engine wide-body aircraft. N767BA also helped Boeing to reuse some internal and external design for future aircraft types like the Dreamliner, helping Boeing to save money. CreatorMH (talk) 08:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The prototype, leading to other Boeing 767 variants, helped Boeing compete with Airbus's A300, A310, and A330-200. CreatorMH (talk) 08:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: okay, thanks.
 * Why doesn't the draft say any/most of that, then? And according to which source are these the case?
 * And while I can see why being "the first Boeing" of a certain type, "helping Boeing save money", "helping Boeing compete", etc. would make this an important aircraft for Boeing, that doesn't really answer my question why this deserves its own entry in an encyclopaedia.
 * Anyway, the draft has been submitted, so we don't need to debate this here; you can just wait for the review to take place, and with some luck this may get accepted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

09:25, 25 May 2024 review of submission by Zfarahi
Article declined Zfarahi (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Zfarahi: yes. That's not a question – did you have one in mind? Please read carefully the decline notice and my accompanying comments. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * please what to add i am added enugh refrences what more to add please tell Zfarahi (talk) 09:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * can we add a wikipedia article in refrence ? Zfarahi (talk) 09:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Zfarahi: you certainly haven't cited sufficient sources; the three that there are contribute nothing in terms of notability.
 * And no, you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia.
 * Please read the notability guidelines I've linked in my comment, and show that this village is notable by either of them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * but my village details is not plenty available on internt it is available on few website blogs indian ailway website my village railway station please verify from that please Zfarahi (talk) 09:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Zfarahi: sources don't need to be online. They do, however, need to be reliable (which a blog isn't), and they need to provide significant coverage of the subject, which none of the ones you're citing does. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * how to refrence what more to refrence tell me point to point please Zfarahi (talk) 09:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

My article declined but i refrences with blog indian railways website please tell me what to add what link to add to make it verifiable and good article and no decline please Zfarahi (talk) 09:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Please don't start a new thread, just add to the existing one. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

09:37, 25 May 2024 review of submission by User1373478
This was declined from being added to Wikipedia because I did not have reliable sources. Could I please have help to fix the referencing in this? User1373478 (talk) 09:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @User1373478: there's far too much unreferenced content - where did all that information come from? And the source mostly supporting this draft is a wiki of some sort, which isn't reliable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Do I need to reference each sentence? Because all the information came from only the sources referenced. User1373478 (talk) 09:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @User1373478: yes, pretty much, or at least every material statement. Now you have several paragraphs entirely unreferenced, which is unacceptable in an article on a living person (WP:BLP). And, as I said already, your main source is not reliable.
 * None of the sources also are acceptable as evidence of notability per WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

11:40, 25 May 2024 review of submission by Thevikastanwar
Please help me for publish this article Thevikastanwar (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You took an image of this person and she posed for you. What is your connection with her?  You must disclose this, see WP:COI and WP:PAID.
 * Rejection typically means that resubmission is no longer possible. If you have fundamentally changed the draft and addressed the concerns of reviewers, you should first appeal to the last reviewer directly. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @331dot To be fair, I think @Thevikastanwar found images on the web and uploaded them to Commons claiming they were their own work. I have warned them on Commons for one copyright violation and requested they supply permission for the file used in the draft. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

16:49, 25 May 2024 review of submission by Qevxoo
I want to post information about my Hacker group pls Confirm it or tell me what to add for confirm Qevxoo (talk) 16:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Qevxoo Wikipedia has no interest in what youi wish to say about your own group. We are only interested in what others say about it in reliable, independent, secondary sources. No sources? No article. 🇺🇦  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No sources, no article, no debate. An article would also seem to be counterproductive to the group and its goals. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 17:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I want people to know about this team Qevxoo (talk) 17:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Qevxoo: okay, enough now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I invite you to read what I just wrote above. Merging sections. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  threads critiques 17:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Qevxoo Please avail yourself of your own website, blog, social media accounts. Please do not attempt to bulldoze this into Wikipedia. You wil be unsuccessful. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:51, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

19:22, 25 May 2024 review of submission by ScruffyBoots
Hello, I have just had this article rejected again, and although I read the rejection reasons; really don't understand why it lacks importance due to being deep in history for the local Alvescot Parish in Oxfordshire. What do I need to do before resubmitting? Thank you! ScruffyBoots (talk) 19:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @ScruffyBoots not a hoax as I first thought, but not an article. It's a meander through what appears to be a vanity title, just like all hereditary titles. Lacks references.
 * 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 this 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.
 * Read WP:REFB WP:CITE and HELP:YFA and consider whether this is likely to fly of totally and brutally edited down 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @ScruffyBoots It has been rejected. I admit that I was seriously considering doing that when I left you this advice instead. Rejection means that it will not proceed further, unless you can negotiate a retraction with the reviewer who rejected it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply, understood! However, I do have a question remaining: I had a pop-up message yesterday to say that I have had my IP blocked from editing on Wiki for two years, then another pop-up saying the same but have been blocked for three months. ￼
 * Can you clarify if I am blocked or not and for how much time please as I don't seem to be able to find any blocking indication anywhere? ￼
 * If I am blocked, I find that harsh and dispute a blocking as being suitable treatment for a newbie. We all make mistakes and if the person who blocked me is perfect in everything that they do, I would like to know their secret. Education is a better policy, although what is simple to understand education for an expert may not be so when someone is learning. With apologies! ScruffyBoots ScruffyBoots (talk) 13:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @ScruffyBoots I am not an admin, so can only see to a certain level. I see no block entries against you. I have never edited from an IP range that is blocked, so cannot say if that is a usual popup mechanism im that circumstance. I think you will get a better answer at WP:TEAHOUSE. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)