Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk
| Main page | Talk page | Submissions Category, Sorting, Feed | Showcase | Participants Apply, By subject | Reviewing instructions | Help desk | Backlog drives |
- This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
- For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
- For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
- Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
- Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
- Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
| Ask a new question Please check back often for answers. |
| Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions |
|---|
January 17
00:36:51, 17 January 2022 review of submission by 2603:300A:99C:9800:1195:F2D5:2AF2:8D9F
2603:300A:99C:9800:1195:F2D5:2AF2:8D9F (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Kale My Name is quite quite notable and popular. Probably most popular vegan business in America.
It has huge African American fan base and closing eyes on that as "not notable" is disrespectful.
- Popularity is not the same as notability, see WP:ORG. 331dot (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
02:13:09, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Bitsmedia
Can I check which sections in the draft needs to be edited?
Bitsmedia (talk) 02:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
On hold pending- @Bitsmedia: Thank you for declaring your connection. Some in the community will be troubled by phrases you've used, such as: "we want them to have a proper understanding of what Muslim Pro is from the perspective of others" and "we wanted it to start off from the right perspective". I think you will find that Wikipedia can't be used the way you want it to be. You may find WP:BFAQ#COMPANY informative.
- Some specific problems with the draft include:
- The lede is not an accurate summary of the body, it includes things that don't appear in the body.
- Citations are sparse in the history section, and at first glance, none of them are obviously independent, reliable, secondary sources.
- The product section is highly promotional. It is also very short on citations. The Vent Machine has none of the characteristics of a reliable source, and the piece in the New Straits Times is a press release.
- From a cursory examination, the quality of sources in the collaboration and criticism sections appears to be better. There are entire paragraphs, however, that cite no sources.
- The CSR section is promotional, and two of the three sources are press releases.
- The reception section is the company's view of how the app has been received. There is no independent analysis where one would most expect some.
- --Worldbruce (talk) 06:16, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
03:57:20, 17 January 2022 review of submission by GADGET0000
- GADGET0000 (talk · contribs) (TB)
GADGET0000 (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @GADGET0000: There is no way to fix this draft, when the subject isn't notable. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 04:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I have no one to make a pagefor me... I followed your help desk guildlines and because of my social media population was advised to make a page.
Help me fix it instead of denying me a chance
Why am I being bullied when I have no one to make this page for my works. I followed all you help suggestions and instructions. Please understand that some people are not privileged to have knowledgeable friends who can do this.
GADGET0000 (talk) 04:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @GADGET0000: Please stop making new topics for every response. And what about the links? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
DID YOU EVEN LOOK AT THE LINKS
- @GADGET0000: Please actually read the notability policy. It isn't about whether I think they are famous or not. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- This draft cannot be fixed. The subject isn't notable enough. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I will not stop because it says to ask for advice and all you say is no because the subject is not famous in your eyes.
You are to help fix it not bully me.. Trust me if I could I would delete my account cause I see this site is not for someone like me and the subject.
- We are here to help, not necessarily to help you fix a draft that has no chance of becoming an article. The subject is not notable enough according to our inclusion criteria. It may be best that you move on to other subject matter and learn more about Wikipedia before you continue to try to take on the most difficult task there is on the site which is article creation. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 05:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Please delete all my accounts with your site now GADGET0000 (talk) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- We can't. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 05:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- GADGET0000 What other accounts do you have? It is not possible to delete an account, but you may abandon your accounts. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
03:58:24, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Cmcmill
I am trying to correct my draft so I can insert it into an article to be added to my high schools sports notable alumni list. Please can you help me. Cmcmill (talk) 03:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Cmcmill. If I understand correctly, you were drafted by the Kansas City Kings in the 7th round of the 1978 NBA draft, but never appeared in a game for them. So you don't meet any of the notability criteria of WP:NBASKETBALL. As talented as you were, you are not a suitable subject for a stand alone encyclopedia article. You may wish to consider alternative outlets, with different inclusion criteria, for what you've written. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
06:11:48, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Gvrpkumar
Phanindra Kumar.GVR (talk) 06:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
08:41:24, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Imcherokeedazz
- Imcherokeedazz (talk · contribs) (TB)
Imcherokeedazz (talk) 08:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Imcherokeedazz You don't ask a question, but I declined your draft as a clear advertisement that didn't indicate notability. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
09:31:38, 17 January 2022 review of submission by VickyWiki247
- VickyWiki247 (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hi Team, I think we have added sufficient information and citation to each facts in this draft. All the articles are sourced from notable sources and are from reputed newspapers. Please do the re-review of the same and approve the same.
VickyWiki247 (talk) 09:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- This was rejected it won't be considered again. Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
10:05:02, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Nagasaikrishna2004
- Nagasaikrishna2004 (talk · contribs) (TB)
add my changes Nagasaikrishna2004 (talk) 10:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Nagasaikrishna2004 As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
10:38:48, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Surya1012
My article recently got rejected for some reason. Being a new editor its difficult for me to spot the reason ,so a support from experienced Editor will help to catch the reason and remove it.
Surya1012 (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Surya1012: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia but your draft was written as a 'how to' but Wikipedia isn't the right place for 'how to' articles. Wikipedia already has an article about off-roading which you are welcome to improve, rather than creating another one. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
11:07:37, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Boringmikesmith
- Boringmikesmith (talk · contribs) (TB)
Thanks. An advert sells a product or service. I utterly fail to see how this entry can be classed by you as such. You are clearly unfit to veto Wiki pages.
Boringmikesmith (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your draft Draft:Interim Spaces starts with a spam link to the business, it is clearly nothing but advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- You need to declare your paid editor status, before editing further, undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI. Theroadislong (talk) 11:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hello there, I have had my entry for Interim Spaces declined by an editor for being 'blatant advertising' which it is obviously not. Could I please have this entry reviewed.
- Many thanks
- Boringmikesmith (talk) 11:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Since this paid user considers me " clearly unfit to veto Wiki pages" would another reviewer please care to comment. Theroadislong (talk) 11:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong: I would, but the draft has since been deleted. Boringmikesmith, Theroadislong is one of Wikipedia's most experienced and trusted reviewers. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Boringmikesmith I urge you to heed the advice of Theroadislong and instead of criticizing them because they did not tell you what you wanted to hear, learn from them so you can do the right thing. Please read your user talk page for important information. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong: I would, but the draft has since been deleted. Boringmikesmith, Theroadislong is one of Wikipedia's most experienced and trusted reviewers. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Since this paid user considers me " clearly unfit to veto Wiki pages" would another reviewer please care to comment. Theroadislong (talk) 11:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Boringmikesmith (talk) 11:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
11:17:47, 17 January 2022 review of submission by LalKhan2022
- LalKhan2022 (talk · contribs) (TB)
- Please help me in publishing my article. please
LalKhan2022 (talk) 11:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- As explained on the draft, you need to find reliable sources and then re-submit. Theroadislong (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
12:36:12, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Sophron~trwiki
- Sophron~trwiki (talk · contribs) (TB)
The remark about town of Bodrum (where the hotel located) has been deleted. NYT article was was about Bodrum town, not the hotel. It seems like it doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT so I removed all sentence. 5 star classification stated in a separated sentence with reference to Turkish Ministry of Tourism website. There is no direct link to the hotel's page but please do a search with "lujo" and you will see that state gave 5 star accreditation to the hotel. Please re-review. Thank you.
Sophron~trwiki (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Sophron~trwiki. The hotel is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia as a stand alone article). Being 5-star is not a marker of notability, and the awards are meaningless. Rejection of the draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. Wikipedia may not be used for any form of promotion, publicity, of public relations. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
12:41:49, 17 January 2022 review of draft by Sammyy07
My draft article was declined, it said that it fails WP:NSEASONS but I don't know what I need to do to get it accepted
Sammyy07 (talk) 12:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sammyy07 There is nothing you can do if the season does not meet the criteria laid out at WP:NSEASONS. If it does, you must demonstrate that with independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
15:05:31, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Bscglasgow
- Bscglasgow (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hi there, BSC Glasgow is a professional football team in Scotland playing in the West of Scotland leagues. The club parted with part of the football team and they formed a new team called Broomhill FC. We had a wiki page, but for some reason our Wiki page went to Broomhill FC and we require a page for ourself. Broomhill FC should never had got the page for BSC Glasgow, and if you look at Broomhill FC wiki page you will see it points to the website for BSC Glasgow www.bscglasgow.co.uk
Please help Alan Hubner (BSC Glasgow)
Bscglasgow (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- We have no interest in what your organization "requires". Our only goal here is to write an encyclopedia; any other benefit is secondary. Your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It offered no independent reliable sources with significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
15:52:27, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Alanhubner
- Alanhubner (talk · contribs) (TB)
I have now login through my personal account as did not know it could not be a username like bscglasgow. My username is now alanhubner. Please can you let me know how I can fix this page so I can publish it. Thanks Alan Hubner
Alanhubner (talk) 15:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your draft is unsourced, promotion and has been rejected, it will not be considered further. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
15:41:51, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Digitalpankajsharma
- Digitalpankajsharma (talk · contribs) (TB)
Text of draft
|
|---|
|
Haider Raza (born 07 March 1980) is a prominent social worker of the state of Uttar Pradesh. He is also the President of Safipur Jan Vikas Sangh. He started his career as a cricketer. He was also a national player seven times and twice All India C.K. Also won the title of the best captain in the Naidu Championship. Personal Life- Haider Raja was born on 07 March 1980 in Safipur, Unnao district of Uttar Pradesh. He is the son of Late Syed Zeena Raza Naqvi. Father Gina is known to be a man of great perseverance. Raza is a Muslim by faith. Raza ji has four brothers. His elder brother Shri Mohsin Raza ji did M. R. f. Started his career with Pace Foundation (based in Chennai). and represented his state Uttar Pradesh in the Ranji Trophy. Later, on behalf of the Bharatiya Janata Party, in the year 2015, became the spokesperson of the party. In the year 2017, he became the Minister of Muslim Waqf and Haj Department in the Yogi Government of Bharatiya Janata Party. Younger brother Arshi Raza is a national player of cricket. Arshi Raza is playing an active role in politics since October 2009. He is also a better politician than the National Congress Party. He is also the chairman of the sports cell of Uttar Pradesh Congress Committee. The youngest brother of Haider Raza ji is Abbas Raza ji. He is a cricket coach and Ranji Trophy player. Early career Haider Raza ji started his career as a cricketer. He was also the national player of cricket for seven times. In which he represented the state of Uttar Pradesh. He was twice as C.K. Naidu was also a better captain in the national championship. He is also the Joint Secretary of Lucknow Cricket Association and President of Safipur Jan Vikas Sangh. |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitalpankajsharma (talk • contribs) 16:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Digitalpankajsharma. If you have a question about the draft, ask it. There is no need to post the content of the draft, just link to Draft:Haider Raza. Normally, rejection of a draft is meant to be final, to convey that no amount of editing will make the topic acceptable. There is no option to re-submit the draft because volunteers do not intend to review it again. If you believe the reviewer is mistaken, that Raza meets one of the criteria of WP:NCRICKET, then I suggest you discuss it with them directly. You will need to be far more specific than saying "The source ... is Internet and other websites". Most websites are self-published, so not reliable sources. In particular, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media sites; personal web pages; and Wikipedia are not reliable and should not be cited. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
16:45:43, 17 January 2022 review of submission by 172.58.4.62
- 172.58.4.62 (talk · contribs) (TB)
- 172.58.4.62 (talk · contribs) (TB)
- No draft specified!
hello i have been updating Ray Strachan page for a long time and t keeps getting declined and i need some help improving it so if you see anything that needs to be fixed please fix it because a lot of his fans are waiting to read this page. 172.58.4.62 (talk) 16:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
17:42:24, 17 January 2022 review of submission by Ethicsblogger
- Ethicsblogger (talk · contribs) (TB)
- No draft specified!
Many thanks to the hard-working reviewers who keep this site honest!
I just had a draft entry rejected, on the grounds that the citations "do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject."
The person who is the subject of the draft article is an academic, one who has held a major "named chair" in his discipline. My understanding (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) ) was that that was a sufficient criterion. Is the problem simply the source cited for that fact?
Thanks in advance for clarification!
Ethicsblogger (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- It looks to me like he passes WP:NPROF (has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research) but would benefit from some reliable independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Ethicsblogger: You buried the lede. The first sentence or two should explain why Danielson is notable. At present it reads, "... is a philosopher and Professor Emeritus in the Centre for Applied Ethics at the University of British Columbia". The reason he's notable, that he held a named chair at a major institution of higher education and research, doesn't show up until deep in the first paragraph of the body. Consider changing the lede to, "... is a philosopher and emeritus Mary & Maurice Young Professor of Applied Ethics at the University of British Columbia". That will better communicate to readers why he is worthy of notice. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Ethicsblogger: in the nature of WP:NOTBUREAU and WP:BEBOLD I've just made the correction myself and promoted it to mainspace, congrats Nosebagbear (talk) 11:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
20:50:46, 17 January 2022 review of draft by William E Ostrem
- William E Ostrem (talk · contribs) (TB)
I'm currently looking for additional secondary sources such as books or journal articles that discuss the Marvin company extensively. After finding nothing further online so far, I've just contacted some librarians who might be able to help.
If you have any other advice, please let me know.
I do feel there are article subjects on Wikipedia that are less notable than this one, though, and, frankly, much more ephemeral.
January 18
00:12:22, 18 January 2022 review of draft by DKingWorldwide
- DKingWorldwide (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hello,
For my draft, I understand that the artist doesn't have his own solo debut yet, thus he is not qualified as a solo musician, however, he has debuted as a main producer and songwriter for the group, as shown on the information below:
On February 6, 2020, iKON released their third EP, iDecide, which included five tracks with Dive as the lead single.[15] Kim Dong-hyuk debuted as songwriter and record producer of “Flower” ((너란 바람 따라; neolan balam ttala; lit. Follow the wind that is you), one of the sidetrack singles, in which he also choreographed their dance performances.[16][17][18]
Linked articles that have coverage of this news are as follow (all in the Korean language): https://www.hankyung.com/news/article/2020020121764 title translated in English: iKON comeback D-5, YG said, "DK participated in producing and Bobby's involved in 3 songs" https://n.news.naver.com/entertain/article/469/0000466341 http://pop.heraldcorp.com/view.php?ud=202002121103029069392_1 title translated in English: "Donghyuk Kim of iKON “My first production challenge, the members responded well”
Will this be sufficient enough to prove his notability as he has enough coverage in the news regarding his debut as the music producer/songwriter? Please advise. Thank you so much for the help.
DKingWorldwide (talk) 00:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
02:17:07, 18 January 2022 review of draft by MyrellBW
I am requesting this draft to be approved for doing all the content that I did for a living person Biography as I already give all the citations possible that I needed to do it.
MyrellBW (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Why is my Draft always declined? MyrellBW (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- MyrellBW The draft was finally rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by reviewers for future reference. It appears that the person does not meet the notability criteria for a notable creative professional. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Request on 02:52:30, 18 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Axel20301000
- Axel20301000 (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hi, I want to create a biography page of myself page within Wikipedia as is a Tweeter validation requirement, based on the previous resolutions, after reviewing my references,they are mainly on social media from my home country from TV shows that were nationally aired while I was on vacations (see links at the end of message). I also complete google validation process to be found by going ogle search (https://g.co/kgs/cGqUfz)
Web Tune https://web.tunecore.com/discography#.YeSQLGkUlSA
TV Show Exit from Grupo Megavisión El Salvador
Jan 17 2019
https://m.facebook.com/stor y.php?story_fbid=2061294463950615&id=123113551102059
Feb 25 2019 https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2061294463950615&id=123113551102059
March 22 2019 https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=3823125911100786&id=123113551102059
Spotify Link https://open.spotify.com/artist/6k9a9Xe2FHkmYjYByDSm4n
I would like your advice about if any of the above reference meets the requested criteria
Axel20301000 (talk) 02:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Axel20301000:, you seemed to have misunderstood what Twitter requires for validation in regards to Wikipedia. It requires a stable article which meets our inclusion criteria of WP:GNG as validated by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. So far you have failed to show how any of these requirements have been met. Writing autobiographies is highly discouraged and having an article on Wikipedia is not always a good thing. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 04:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Axel20301000 Wikipedia has no interest in helping you get verified by Twitter or any social media, or how an article might help you personally(there are in fact good reasons to not want an article). What matters is if you meet our notability criteria; any other benefit is secondary. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Facebook and Spotify are not reliable independent sources, and the Tunecore link leads to a login page. Please take a moment to read the information that is linked from the decline notice, and from the posts above. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
04:24:32, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Bharattudu0987
- Bharattudu0987 (talk · contribs) (TB)
Bharattudu0987 (talk) 04:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Bharattudu0987: You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. --Finngall talk 02:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
05:06:53, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Rambabuyadavnepal
- Rambabuyadavnepal (talk · contribs) (TB)
- No draft specified!
Rambabuyadavnepal (talk) 05:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
please approve this article Draft:Milan Pandey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rambabuyadavnepal (talk • contribs)
- Rambabuyadavnepal As you were told by reviewers, it seems that he does not meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable politician or more broadly a notable person. The draft must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coveage have chosen on their own to say about him(and not based on any materials from him or his associates like an interview). 331dot (talk) 08:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
07:02:40, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Masry684
Masry684 (talk) 07:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Masry684 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
07:47:20, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Syedshoaib370
- Syedshoaib370 (talk · contribs) (TB)
Syedshoaib370 (talk) 07:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Syedshoaib370 You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 08:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
09:24:46, 18 January 2022 review of draft by BregtjeV
Dear moderator,
I made a translation of the existing Dutch article on this artist, which is now declined for the second time for reasons of not meeting the standards of quotation. I have a few questions: - Does this concern the parts which are red (people by whom Caspar Berger studied), who don't have a page on the English Wikipedia? Can I link to the Dutch pages on Wikipedia in these cases? - Can I refer to the site of the artist himself when making a quotation? - Is it allowed to cite the existing Wikipedia for the Sacha Tanja Penning?
At this moment I don't know where the problem lies.
Thank you for your help and have a nice day.!
Anne Vollebregt
BregtjeV (talk) 09:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi BregtjeV.
- It is okay to have red links, a draft will not be declined for that reason.
- You may link to articles on the Dutch Wikipedia using template {{ill}}, which produces links such as Maja van Hall.
- You may cite the artist's own website, but only for uncontroversial information, and the article should cite mainly independent sources. See WP:BLPSELFPUB for more details.
- Wikipedia is user-generated, so it is not a reliable source and should not be cited.
- The draft's most obvious problems are that there are no inline citations in the "Life and work" section or supporting the museum collections. You use inline citations elsewhere, so you evidently understand the technique. I strongly recommend that you use inline citations throughout, rather than the current mix of mostly general references and a few inline citations. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
09:44:47, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Meshkati20
- Meshkati20 (talk · contribs) (TB)
Mr. Panahi is an established artist, and we were hoping to get him included on Wikipedia to highlight his background and early life which made him the artist that he is today. There have been many exhibitions held in his honour, where he showcases his different works and explains to the audience what made him make the piece in question. Specifically his 'Musicalligraphy" pieces hold the highest regard because of their complexity yet fundamental idea, wherein he blends his love for music and calligraphy in one abstract piece of work.
If you could please offer us some guidance on how we should proceed in this venture of ours, we would be extremely grateful. Meshkati20 (talk) 09:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Meshkati20 Who is "we"? The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. As noted by reviewers, the sources offered are either very brief mentions or associated with the subject. Wikipedia requires sources with significant, in depth coverage that are completely independent of the subject. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
By 'we' I mean myself and Mr. Panahi. Please find below referenced pieces from magazines and newspapers supporting this submission.
Hadara Magazine - https://www.hadaramagazine.com/?p=3187&fbclid=IwAR3VlNIFWKt45h-ODyg53lSBnxBer6q6iJkoktwECI5tfYL-S4AtiXD0z60 Islamic Republic News Agency - https://en.irna.ir/news/83767758/Persian-calligraphy-art-of-balance The Sunday Times - https://www.sundaytimes.lk/970302/plus4.html The National - https://www.pressreader.com/uae/the-national-news/20191201/281921659906756
There are various galleries that discuss Mr. Panahi, along with curators - if there is something that is missing, guidance would be appreciated instead of just being given a "rejection".
Thanks
Meshkati20 (talk) 10:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Meshkati20 For additional comment, please edit this existing section, instead of creating additional sections for every comment. If you work with Mr. Panahi, you have a conflict of interest that you should disclose. If he is compensating you in any manner(not just money or even anything tangible) you are required by the Wikipedia Terms of Use to make a formal declaration as a paid editor, see the paid editing policy. As the draft was rejected, there is nothing that you can do to improve it further. The sources you list here seem to be interviews with him, this does not establish notability as an interview is the person speaking about themselves. Wikipedia wants to know what others independent of him choose on their own to say about him, not what he says about himself. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
09:49:04, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Jaanus K
Jaanus K (talk) 09:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello! The article was rejected for not answering the COI inquiry, however I have answered it on the Talk page and added the relevant notices.
- Jaanus K That was the last comment by a reviewer, but not the reason it was rejected. It was rejected for being promotional. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves and what they do; an article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own(and not prompted by any materials put out by the company, like interviews, press releases, announcements) to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. As the draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Jaanus K (talk) 06:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC) Hello! I've submitted multiple drafts that have relied on independent and accepted sources per the wikipedia notability criteria - such as Bloomberg etc. However I do not see how the article is more promotional than say https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northvolt, which is a very similar company making similar products?
- I've reverted the rejection since COI was declared even if I couldn't find it due to mobile limitations. However, it remains likely the next reviewer will decline or reject as there is no indication of notability and every indication the only purpose of the draft is promotion of the subject.Slywriter (talk) 14:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
12:06:00, 18 January 2022 review of draft by CristeenaC
- CristeenaC (talk · contribs) (TB)
I cannot add photographs in the page I am creating. Please help.
CristeenaC (talk) 12:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- CristeenaC Images are not necessary for submitting a draft; the presence of images is not usually considered by reviewers. Once accepted, you can begin to add images. You must be autoconfirmed to be able to upload images yourself(account is four days old with 10 edits or more). 331dot (talk) 12:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
15:24:49, 18 January 2022 review of submission by BarbaraLassen
- BarbaraLassen (talk · contribs) (TB)
- No draft specified!
BarbaraLassen (talk) 15:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia friends, it seems that I need advice. When offering the entry on the poet Jurgen Theobaldy, I based it on the entry in the German language Wikipedia which is inadequately supported by referenced sources. (Perhaps because the poet is so well-known in Germany, it was not deemed essential.) I agree that my entry had to be rejected because there were few sources added in the form of references. Now, the entry is rejected because there are too many references and too many sources and I quoted at great length (in the original with added translation to English.) I have deleted some links to sources that are online. My experience is that sources that are available in few libraries are often rejected. Is it because some reviewers accept only resources that can be checked online with ease? I need help. Is it still too much I add to the initial, badly referenced text on Theobaldy? Or have I deleted details that I should not have deleted? I am certain that experienced Wikipedia editors can give good advice. Thank you so much for your help, dear friends. My best/ Barbara
20:54:00, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Masry684
Masry684 (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
21:42:58, 18 January 2022 review of draft by CopyKait
I'd like help with the notability of my article. It seems like a notable company, but it was declined previously for not having good enough sources. I'm hoping to find out if my updated citations meet the standard for a tech company before resubmitting, or if I should submit it. Thank you! CopyKait (talk) 21:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
22:47:21, 18 January 2022 review of draft by Swamp Greetings
- Swamp Greetings (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hi,
After submitting my draft I got the message "Need independent reliable sources".
So far I've included:
- An official record from the Spanish Ministry of Justice re. the subject (direct link).
- A direct mention from an official agency/foundation, directly connected to the Spanish Ministry of the Presidency.
- 3 direct mentions from peer organisations from two different countries (also recognised by the State), acknowledging the subject (more available, but it'd be saturation).
- 3 news from 3 different newspapers.
- 1 radio program.
- 1 TV special (Channel 5, UK).
- Direct links to 2 relevant "wider" associations (one national, one international) the subject is a member of (thus fully acknowledged as a peer).
- 5 examples of subject's involvement in a number of causes: 1 from a learned/research society, 1 from a local government (official), 3 from other established associations (more available, but it'd be saturation).
- Ps. And a couple of published papers (university proceedings). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamp Greetings (talk • contribs) 22:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The Galician and Portuguese pages have already been published:
https://gl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irmandade_Dru%C3%ADdica_Galaica
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irmandade_Dru%C3%ADdica_Galaica
Obviously, for some actual info about the organisation itself I had to dig into its own website and social media (external sources are not going to explain how exactly it works).
Please advise. Regards.
Swamp Greetings (talk) 22:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Swamp Greetings, Other Wikipedias have different standards and en-wiki tends to be the strictest. Your sources are largely primary sources or sources connected to the subject. Wikipedia cares about what independent reliable sources have to say about the subject. Official records, direct mentions in primary documents, write ups by other organizations do not show notability. The radio program is a website hosted on wordpress with no author. Praza is a passing mention(and that's being generous), and at least one of your academic sources is about Druid, not the specific organization. Reviewers are not expected to review dozens of low quality references to find notability for you. The organization may be notable, but any hint of that notability is buried in the use of primary and connected sources.Slywriter (talk) 13:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
23:19:21, 18 January 2022 review of submission by Cakepops or bust
- Cakepops or bust (talk · contribs) (TB)
My article was declined, even though it is not finished. Please tell me why it declined so I can improve!
Cakepops or bust (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Cakepops or bust Your draft is sourced to nothing but another wiki; Wikipedia articles must summarize independent reliable sources like news reports. If no one has written about what I assume is your micronation, it would not merit a Wikipedia article. Compare your draft to Republic of Molossia and Principality of Sealand. 331dot (talk) 23:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
January 19
00:33:26, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Muamalq
Hello, I wrote an article about this person because he is considered one of the talented people in Iraq, and he is old In all the Spanish conferences in the name of Iraq He has many sources Muamalq (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
03:35:40, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Hgizemtas
Why my article was declined? What can I do to make it published? Hgizemtas (talk) 03:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Hgizemtas: One source - especially a source from the subject themselves - is not enough to demonstrate notability as Wikipedia defines it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 05:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
06:48:16, 19 January 2022 review of submission by 122.186.82.18
- 122.186.82.18 (talk · contribs) (TB)
the Content is Not Promotional and not even any paid contribution.. Please check the Content again and do whatever changes are required to get this Publish.. My Concern behind the article is only that they are providing Diagnostic Services and reaching to Rural areas very fast along with CRS activities, So would be good to read on this Company.
122.186.82.18 (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you are employed by the lab, you are a paid editor, you don't have to be specifically paid to edit. The draft was sourced to nothing but press release type stories, or announcements of the routine activities of the company. Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources with significant coverage that are unconnected with the subject and do not write based on what the company tells them or merely what it does. Because the sources did not do that, the draft was rejected and will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
07:12:33, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Shakirullahsahir
- Shakirullahsahir (talk · contribs) (TB)
We have TV channel to create wikipedia page for the reason of biography of our channel so this information will not use for illegal aim so please re-review and accept this,thank you Shakirullahsahir (talk) 07:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
it is important for us to have our tv channel information in wikipedia for clients so please re-review and i have completed the all requirements for the page i don't know where is my mistake kindly you point that area where is mistake. Thank you Shakirullahsahir (talk) 07:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Shakirullahsahir Wikipedia has no interest in helping your clients, as that is a promotional purpose. Our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about(in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Any other benefit is secondary and not our concern. As your draft was rejected, it will not be considered further. Please review the comments left by reviewers and the policies linked to in the message. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
08:30:27, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Bahram2010
Since I started to edit the UArchitects page on Wikipedia, and it was my first edition on Wiki, so I requested for a review. The reason is that i would like to expand people s knowledge at Dutch architectural offices, who deliver or have delivered meaningful works.
Bahram2010 (talk) 08:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
08:31:02, 19 January 2022 review of draft by 43.248.153.213
- 43.248.153.213 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I'm a newbie and have no idea on how to rectify the errors for this draft. I really wish to publish a wikipedia page for this celeb. If you can advise in particular what is missing in this draft, I'll try my best to work on it.
The draft has been prepared by another user and I've no link with them. I'm a fan of Pratik Sehajpal and came across this draft while trying to create a page for him. It is very crucial for him to have it in this point in time. 43.248.153.213 (talk) 08:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has no interest in how the presence of an article (not a mere "page") benefits a potential subject. There are, in fact, good reasons to not want an article. Our only interest is in summarizing independent reliable sources with significant coverage. Wikipedia articles cannot be used to source other Wikipedia articles per WP:CIRCULAR. The other sources merely tells what the person has done and do not demonstrate how they meet the notability criteria. Please see the messages left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
09:00:01, 19 January 2022 review of submission by HYPER2011
HYPER2011 (talk) 09:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Please give a summary of the problem you are facing. Wiki Emoji | Emojiwiki Talk~~ 10:34, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
10:27:46, 19 January 2022 review of draft by Leegiaphu17
- Leegiaphu17 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I have created an article titled as "Samuel Hwang". It is at Draft:Samuel Hwang. The thing is I don't know if the article got rejected or not and how I can improve this article. Unlike other articles at User:"my user name"/sandbox/"article title" which I know why these articles got rejected, I have no clue about how to fix this article Draft:Samuel Hwang. Can someone help me? Leegiaphu17 (talk) 10:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Leegiaphu17: Your article is being rejected. Don't worry, you can always improve and submit the improved version. Wiki Emoji | Emojiwiki Talk~~ 10:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
10:46:10, 19 January 2022 review of draft by ReaElle
How can I ask Wikipedia cracks for support so that a contribution makes it quickly to be published? Specifically, it is about the Collegium Helveticum, an Institute for Advanced Studies, whose draft has not yet been released. I'm not really experienced here and would be incredibly grateful for support from a professional who can finish the whole thing cleanly.
ReaElle (talk) 10:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- ReaElle There is no way to ensure a speedy review. This is a volunteer project where people do what they can, when they can do it. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? If you are associated with this organization, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. You may ask for assistance here. Your main problem is that your draft has no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content. A Wikipedia article is not for merely telling about the existence of the subject and what it does. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage (not primary sources) have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. If no independent reliable sources give this organization significant coverage, it would not merit an article at this time; not every organization merits an article, even in the same field. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
10:46:44, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Leegiaphu17
- Leegiaphu17 (talk · contribs) (TB)
How do I know about the status of this article? How can I make this better? Leegiaphu17 (talk) 10:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Leegiaphu17: it had not been a day since you submitted the draft for publication. do wait a couple of days next time. I have declined and left comments in the draft on what's missing. – robertsky (talk) 02:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
11:44:07, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Open Browser Wiki
- Open Browser Wiki (talk · contribs) (TB)
Open Browser Wiki (talk) 11:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
12:15:27, 19 January 2022 review of submission by President Diary
- President Diary (talk · contribs) (TB)
I wrote an article on Olumide Fayakin and I feedback that the submission is contray to the purpose of Wikipedia.
I need clarity on the purpose of Wikipedia.
President Diary (talk) 12:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
How do you mean by personal resume/CV and NOT what Wikipedia is for.
I want to write a biography for the said person, how do I go about it?
Thanks! President Diary (talk) 12:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your draft Draft:Olumide Fayakin has no sources, independent sources are what we base articles on. A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Theroadislong (talk) 12:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
I wrote the the article, please review. President Diary (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- President Diary Please edit this existing section of the page, instead of creating additional sections. Your draft was rejected and will not be considered any more. You are only wasting your time and that of others by pursuing this further. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
14:00:04, 19 January 2022 review of draft by Drej.miha.2021
- Drej.miha.2021 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I have made changes to this article and the references. However the article was rejected even though the subject is supported by a writen work of the author as well as two encyclopedia entries. Why are these references not correct?
Drej.miha.2021 (talk) 14:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Clearly a book written by the article's subject "Velimir Brezovski' cannot be independent. Theroadislong (talk) 14:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
19:00:37, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Joffejs
Why was my page for Ricky Dale Harrington Jr. declined?
Joffejs (talk) 19:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- I wasn't sure that Draft:Ricky Harrington Jr met the criteria at WP:NPOLITICIAN just being an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. Theroadislong (talk) 19:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- That makes sense. I figured he fell under "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage," since he was the first black
Senate candidate in Arkansas and the best-performing Libertarian candidate in a U.S. Senate election. Also the fact that he has been a notable candidate in two races (2020 Senate and 2022 Gubernatorial). Will defer to your judgment though Joffejs (talk) 19:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Feel free to re-submit, I'll leave it to another reviewer, I could well be wrong and you could well be right! Theroadislong (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Thanks for your edits Joffejs (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Theroadislong, I declined it for failing WP:GNG. I did not feel it was proven through the sources cited that he experienced
significant press coverage
. However, if at least 3 sources that pass WP:RS can be found, I will gladly accept. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:59, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Theroadislong, I declined it for failing WP:GNG. I did not feel it was proven through the sources cited that he experienced
20:44:12, 19 January 2022 review of draft by Chiulander
Looking for extra clarity on the reviewer comments. I've read through the guidelines on citations and notability. Am I understanding correctly that for organizations, I'd need to have some veritable 3rd party source do a write up of Malecare in order for me to have an acceptable citation? This would *exclude* articles that quote the founder or more "human" pieces that describe a patient's personal experience, right? Chiulander (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Chiulander If you enlist a third party to write about Malecare, it is no longer a third party, but someone you have asked to help you. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the (in this case) organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Those reliable sources should write about the organization not based on any materials put out by the organization or requests from its members/staff.
- If you work for this organization, please review the information I placed on your user talk page regarding paid editing; also review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 21:07, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- I think the author was asking about third party media coverage, not a Wikipedia writer. I did a quick Google search and couldn't find additional coverage. Might be WP:TOOSOON. TechnoTalk (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
21:42:32, 19 January 2022 review of submission by Masry684
Hello, I’m asking what is needed for this article to be approved. Kindly note that the film is important and well known to Egyptian audience. Thanks for understanding. Masry684 (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Masry684 There is nothing that you can do, as rejection means that the draft cannot be resubmitted. No amount of editing can confer notability. Please review the comments left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
January 20
02:45:56, 20 January 2022 review of submission by 122.177.98.206
- 122.177.98.206 (talk · contribs) (TB)
- No draft specified!
I little bit confused because the source and references which I had attached are reliable, independent and reputed media houses. But my draft was declined by giving these reasons. Please advise 122.177.98.206 (talk) 02:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- No draft specified. – robertsky (talk) 02:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
04:12:33, 20 January 2022 review of submission by 157.46.115.246
- 157.46.115.246 (talk · contribs) (TB)
157.46.115.246 (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
11:29:48, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Sanjith kanth
- Sanjith kanth (talk · contribs) (TB)
Sanjith kanth (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sanjith kanth You don't ask a question, but your draft was blatant advertising. 331dot (talk) 13:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
13:56:35, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Jontickner
- Jontickner (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hello. I'm having trouble with this draft, as the sources previously didn't make the credibility/reliability grade. I've made some minor changes to a couple of sources, and believe the article to be "based on reliable, published sources" now. I've also ensured all the information in it is properly covered by those sources.
The article will involve closer scrutiny, of course, because it's a biog for a living person. All the sources used are independent, in no way self-published, do not involve trial/court transcripts and so on. Many of them are sources to back up something that physically exists - books, in the main. I've also made clear what information/facts they are referring to.
Although the subject makes an appearance in plenty of other wikipedia pages, I have not used these as sources or references.
But I may have miss-judged, and I wonder whether there is a particular source (or sources) I still have in the most recent edit which is not considered high enough quality.
Can you point me to the specifics? Once I know which one(s) I'll address either by sourcing new information or deleting that content.
Huge thanks for your help on this - it's really appreciated. Jon Jontickner (talk) 13:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC) Jontickner (talk) 13:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
13:57:05, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Dwightkomproe
- Dwightkomproe (talk · contribs) (TB)
- You need to disclose your paid editing status before editing further. Theroadislong (talk) 14:22, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
13:57:37, 20 January 2022 review of submission by ShinexStar
- ShinexStar (talk · contribs) (TB)
I need a re-review as I have done the needful. Please check it now ShinexStar (talk) 13:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
16:13:07, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Ajayjagtap1632000
- Ajayjagtap1632000 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I have quite a good number of citations in this article, so all the information I am writing is true and trustworthy. If it's about notability, Dr Shridhar Pandya is a notable person with several review articles and research papers online by his name.
If it's not enough, let me know if there is anything I could do to get my article published on Wikipedia.
Ajayjagtap1632000 (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
16:54:07, 20 January 2022 review of submission by 831n
Since the initial submission, the variety and number of sources has increased. Is this ready for submission now?
831n (talk) 16:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
17:36:08, 20 January 2022 review of draft by Cvu27
Hi, I recently got a wikipedia submission rejected due to the following
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
I am wondering if I can keep passing mentions in the submission as well as include significant coverage in my submission? Thanks.
Cvu27 (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- Cvu27, most likely you can. AfC reviewers are mostly focused on WP:Notability and WP:GNG which require independent secondary sources. Once notability has been met the bar moves to WP:DUE for inclusion of material.Slywriter (talk) 17:39, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- E/C Sure you can keep passing mentions, but they do not contribute to any notability. Theroadislong (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Request on 17:44:24, 20 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by CyrilPul
I am a member of a choral society and have tried to produce a Wikipedia page showing the history.
I have checked the design with and got approval from the Chairman and the person responsible for the web page.
My history on the Wikipedia entry, that I am trying to submit, does contain some phrases from the URL of the society.
I have looked on the website https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates and found a template containing:-
To: permissions-commons at wikimedia.org
I hereby affirm that I choose one: [am name] or [represent copyright holder's name], the choose one: [creator] or [sole owner] of the exclusive copyright of choose one: [the media work][1] or [the work depicted in the media][2] or [both the work depicted and the media][3] as shown here: [exact URL of the file uploaded on Wikimedia Commons],[4] and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the following free license: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International.[5]
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
[Sender's name] [Sender's authority (if applicable. E.g. "Copyright holder", "Director", "Appointed representative of", etc.)] [Date]
If I get this signed and sent off, will I then be able to use some of the wording from the Society's webpage?
Thanks
CyrilPul (talk) 17:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- CyrilPul, are there multiple independent secondary sources that discuss the subject? Even with permission, the subject's own words are of limited use (WP:ABOUTSELF) and do not contribute to WP:Notability / WP:GNG. I'd focus on getting the article accepted first before worrying about content from the subject. Also see WP:COI as you have a clear conflict of interest and must declare it.Slywriter (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- CyrilPul, are there multiple independent secondary sources that discuss the subject? Even with permission, the subject's own words are of limited use (WP:ABOUTSELF) and do not contribute to WP:Notability / WP:GNG. I'd focus on getting the article accepted first before worrying about content from the subject. Also see WP:COI as you have a clear conflict of interest and must declare it.Slywriter (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- CyrilPul (ec) You are putting the cart before the horse in that Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have said about a topic, not what it says about itself. Put another way, we don't want to know what the society considers to be its own history, but what independent reliable sources report to be its history. The society's website is where it may tell about its own history. 331dot (talk) 18:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
20:00:24, 20 January 2022 review of draft by Smith216
Come Out Fighting (2022 film) is an American war film.
This film is centered on history meeting with changes will include as of the historical "being" mention that a "war film" includes Wikipedia affirmation.
Smith216 (talk) 20:00, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Smith216
- Smith216 Wikipedia is not here to affirm films or any topic. To merit an article, this film must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable film. Unreleased films are generally not notable unless some aspect of the production of the film is notable(such as the recent on set shooting at Rust (suspended film)). Your draft has no sources at all, even if the film was released. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 20:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
20:31:17, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Avi Sindhu
- Avi Sindhu (talk · contribs) (TB)
Avi Sindhu (talk) 20:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Avi Sindhu: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. Pretty much all your sources are the subject themselves and do not help for notability as a consequence. It's also written as if to try an attract an audience; we do not tolerate advertizing masquerading as an encyclopaedia article and neither does Wikipedia's readers. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 07:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
22:09:03, 20 January 2022 review of submission by Ebates01
This is written from an neutral point of view. Ebates01 (talk) 22:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Not done Heck, no! It was hopeless promotional, a shameless advertisement with a side order of brown-nosing of the family who donated the money. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
January 21
11:17:24, 21 January 2022 review of submission by 103.85.11.216
- 103.85.11.216 (talk · contribs) (TB)
103.85.11.216 (talk) 11:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
11:22:48, 21 January 2022 review of submission by Sainathsengundhar
- Sainathsengundhar (talk · contribs) (TB)
Sainathsengundhar (talk) 11:22, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sainathsengundhar The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. You have no independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this person. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
13:29:48, 21 January 2022 review of submission by 103.4.125.25
- 103.4.125.25 (talk · contribs) (TB)
103.4.125.25 (talk) 13:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a how to guide or guidebook. 331dot (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
16:43:57, 21 January 2022 review of draft by AdjectiveGuy
Hi. I've used Wikipedia for a while and I totally forgot something. How many citations needed for an article?
AdjectiveGuy (talk) 16:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- AdjectiveGuy There is not a specific number, but to pass this process most reviewers look for at least three sources with significant coverage. 331dot (talk) 18:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- AdjectiveGuy Would you consider merging the content and redirecting to Kalaleng? TechnoTalk (talk) 19:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
18:08:05, 21 January 2022 review of draft by George-Amherst
- George-Amherst (talk · contribs) (TB)
The title of my submission has been changed without my permission. The new title is totally unacceptable. Please advise on how I should proceed. I would demand to withdraw the submission altogether rather than proceed with the title which has been substituted for the original title. George-Amherst (talk) 18:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- George-Amherst, the page can be moved to a different title, if sources support but what it can not have is three different titles and an opening line that says "Subject is...". All three can be used in the opening sentence if sources support.
- What is the proper title for the article?
- Also, you can abandon the draft and it will be deleted in six months or you can place {{Db-author}} at the top of the page and an admin will clear it out.Slywriter (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
The page name has been changed without my permission, and it is a totally incorrect title of the subject of the article I have submitted. The correct title of the article is: Le Musée français, Le Musée Napoléon and Le Musée royal. It should not be considered under the title Le Musee royal, and I need to withdraw it if this change cannot be corrected. George-Amherst (talk) 18:30, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- @George-Amherst: if and when the draft is accepted, it can be moved to a title that better reflects the content. --bonadea contributions talk 18:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- George-Amherst (ec) Please leave a post on the draft talk page regarding the title; if the draft is accepted, the reviewer can place it at the proper title. Please note that Wikipedia typically uses the name of a topic that is most commonly used by independent reliable sources, and not necessarily official or legal names. See WP:COMMONNAME. 331dot (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- I am curious as to why the title would be a deal breaker for an otherwise valid article (if it is). 331dot (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- George-Amherst If this were a company article, it would not list all the previous names of the company in the title. It would just list the current or latest name, and mention the earlier names in the history, bolded if there are redirects. Otherwise you'd have an article called Verizon, GTE, Bell Atlantic. The last title the publication held should be the article title. Once an article is loaded, it isn't owned by anyone, so sometimes that can be hard for the writer. Perhaps a blog might be more to your liking, since then you can keep others from changing it. TechnoTalk (talk) 19:23, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have done some minor edits to bring it into further alignment and hopefully clear up the title issue a bit more. I believe, this article is not about a single publication, but about three publications as a series. This series does not have a singular title, as one may expect with most other series. They are referred to by all three when written about in the sources or individually if you are only speaking of a single publication. I do believe an article on each could be possible but would duplicate much of the content. So I can see some of the frustration of George-Amherst, but this is a strong over reaction to something this minor which can very quickly be cleared up with some discussion. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
20:33:45, 21 January 2022 review of submission by Eatthecrow
- Eatthecrow (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hello! I was wondering if someone could help me out. I'm still learning how to write a good Wikipedia article. In the Draft:Jo Bamford, one of the reasons they declined it was it needs to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Can anyone offer some pointers on how I could do that to improve the draft article? Thanks! Eatthecrow (talk) 20:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Request on 22:43:43, 21 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Itsfrizzy
My article has been rejected for using content that I own the copyright of, isn't that acceptable?
Itsfrizzy (talk) 22:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
- It has also been declined because the references do not show that you qualify for a Wikipedia article, the references are your own website and Wikipedia has zero interest in what that says about you, we require independent sources that discuss you in depth. Theroadislong (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
January 22
11:37:33, 22 January 2022 review of draft by Irishkiwi007
- Irishkiwi007 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I am not sure what more I can do to reference this article. The documentary was published on You Tube and is still there. The Director commented on facebook the number of views in the first 48 hours (reference to FB post added). The movie details (producer, director, cast, etc) have all been taken from the movie credits.
This is a small time product on a small budget with no advertising. Maybe watch Battleground Melbourne before you reject again?
Irishkiwi007 (talk) 11:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- Irishkiwi007 The content of the documentary is immaterial. Wikipedia is not for documenting the mere existence of a topic. It will only merit a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable film. If no independent sources write about this documentary, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. Facebook and YouTube are not independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- I also gather that you may have an association with this film, if so, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
14:29:20, 22 January 2022 review of submission by A Cutting Edge Glass
- A Cutting Edge Glass (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hello, I would really like to know the reason why my post was rejected. The text is written organically and all the information is 100% accurate, I also I think the information about this product is very useful and I don't think there is any misuse. Can you please give me advice so that I can improve my post and so that it is eventually accepted by you.
Best Regards! A Cutting Edge Glass & Mirror A Cutting Edge Glass (talk) 14:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- A Cutting Edge Glass Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a topic, or to advertise a topic. An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a topic, showing how that topic is notable as defined by Wikipedia. Your draft offers no sources, which are required for verification purposes. It is also worded as more of an essay than an encyclopedia article. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
15:47:36, 22 January 2022 review of draft by Rkieferbaum
- Rkieferbaum (talk · contribs) (TB)
Hi, everyone! I'm experienced in ptwiki (portuguese) but haven't done many edits in enwiki, so I'm here to request a little assistance. The article above was moved to draft with the request to add more reliable, independent sources. It currently has 26 references, most of which are from well established media vehicles (including the BBC), though, granted, most of these aren't in English. I'm guessing this is the reason for the move and am currently working on adding more sources in English.
If there's anything else of note, then constructive input would be more than welcome.
Thanks and cheers. Rkieferbaum (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC) Rkieferbaum (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
19:28:45, 22 January 2022 review of submission by A40585
I'd like some more in-depth feedback on my article's rejection. The reason it was rejected was reading like an essay. I would like a bit more feedback on why this was, since I read the links the reviewer linked when I was writing the article, and I thought I was writing in a relatively encyclopedic fashion. Everything is sourced in primary/secondary sources (I admittedly need to fix up citing Wikipedia for a few sentences, I will do that tomorrow when I have the time). I made sure to not include my opinions, and basically summarize what my sources said about the topic. I would find it very useful to find more specific pointers about what language/parts of my article are specifically essay-like, since I thought I was doing what the links my reviewer linked were doing. Thanks a lot! A40585 (talk) 19:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
January 23
00:28:15, 23 January 2022 review of submission by Sunil2404
Sunil2404 (talk) 00:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
I wrote an article about a crypto project and also provided the link of an article published on Postmannews but still it got rejected. Please help me to publish the article.
- Sunil2404, Wikipedia is not a promotional tool. It requires independent, reliable secondary sources discussing the subject and must be written in a neutral tone. Additionally, it has been tagged for deletion as in its current state, there is no chance of it being an article.Slywriter (talk) 04:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
06:15:05, 23 January 2022 review of draft by Deshabandara
- Deshabandara (talk · contribs) (TB)
My Article "Ruwan Fernando" has been rejected due to lack of references. Shall I put the youtube links of my released video songs?
Deshabandara (talk) 06:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
06:55:41, 23 January 2022 review of submission by 192.88.124.49
- 192.88.124.49 (talk · contribs) (TB)
I have resubmitted much more information to Wikipedia in the correct format and would like it to be re-reviewed and aproved. 192.88.124.49 (talk) 06:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Request on 06:59:56, 23 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Sachitj
I can understand there are long pending request but cannot expect rejection within 3 minutes of publishing my content. Reference are from wikipedia pages itself. Will request to review it again and I promise, I will keep updating the page.