Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2025 August 1

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< July 31 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 2 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


August 1

edit

01:00, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Weilandofthefree

edit

Has been declined multiple times for LLM language. Have revised and rewritten everything. Looking for advice on why and how to correct. Weilandofthefree (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted it. In time, a reviewer will get to it. We don't normally do pre-reviews here. ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

02:22, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Jilletegreas

edit

Hi, I’ve submitted Draft:Serenade (company) three times and it continues to be declined with the vague statement that it "does not show notability". However, the article cites several high-quality, reliable, independent sources, including:

All are secondary, independent, reliable, and provide in-depth coverage (not press releases or brief mentions). I've also posted detailed justifications on the draft talk page and my user talk page.

Could an experienced editor review this for notability or possibly move it to mainspace if appropriate?

Thank you! Jilletegreas (talk) 02:22, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've already had three experienced editors review it for notability and decline.
I agree with those declines. Almost all the sources focus on acquisitions and funding rounds. Under WP:NCORP these fall under the category of trivial coverage (see WP:CORPTRIV). Arguably the only one that doesn't is a pseudo-interview largely sourced from discussions with the creator of the app and one of the artists affilliated with the app. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 03:29, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, it's a moot issue now as the draft has now been rejected, and will not be considered further. I'm not sure why you submitted it again multiple times without changes; AFC is not a slot machine on which you keep pulling the handle until you hit the jackbot. What exactly was so urgent? Was this a work assignment? CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:02, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

06:24, 1 August 2025 review of submission by 95.82.155.121

edit

Hello, I would like to publish an article about an extraordinary Czech-American architect. I work at an institution whose library has acquired a large number of documents from the estate of architect Dvorak. Czech libraries have a number of articles and references to his life. A significant portion of the documents have been digitized, but they are only accessible to registered readers of libraries and archives. From the comments of reviewers of articles on Wiki, it appears that it is necessary to cite only those sources that can be easily and immediately verified on the internet. Essentially, reviewer Hoary argues that articles on Wiki can only repeat other easily accessible internet sources. I don't know how to deal with sourcing an article in such a case. Can you advise me please? 95.82.155.121 (talk) 06:24, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources have to be published, meaning they cannot be private archives or correspondence or solely oral accounts, etc. They do not have to be online, however; for example an old book which only exists in hardcopy format but which is found in a number of libraries would be perfectly acceptable (in the case of offline sources, sufficient bibliographic detail must be provided to enable the source to be reliably identified for verification purposes, see WP:OFFLINE). Sources also don't have to be in English, and paywalled sources are acceptable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:37, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

06:33, 1 August 2025 review of submission by 2604:3D09:B977:1800:2F48:3957:FE1C:611

edit

I want be reason for a make biography page Nathan Delmo he very famous world on tiktok called adinclip on over 13 million views that why from tiktok video 2604:3D09:B977:1800:2F48:3957:FE1C:611 (talk) 06:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but Draft:Nathan Delmo has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:38, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP user. Notability, as we use the word on Wikipedia, is not about being famous or popular: it is about whether there is enough independent published material available to base an article on (bearing in mind that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ) ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

07:21, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Carlo322

edit

Declined submission. Can you please explain why this has been declined. I have compared the content to other people in her area of interest and cannot see what is missing. The links are verified as are the citations. Hayley is also a well known figure in the area. Can someone please advise what needs to be changed. Carlo322 (talk) 07:21, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Carlo322: One source, no matter how good it is, is not enough to support an article on Wikipedia, and especially not a biography which requires that literally EVERY claim a reasonable person could challenge be sourced. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:29, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Carlo322: it's not the content which is the problem, it's the sources. This draft cites a single, close primary source, and only once. This means that there is no proof whatsoever that the subject is notable enough to warrant an article (this is the reason why the draft was declined). Also, there is no way to verify that anything you've written is true. Articles on living people have particularly strict referencing requirements, and pretty much every statement must be clearly supported by an inline citation to a reliable published source. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:29, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS: You have plenty of inline external links in the text, some of which could probably be converted to inline citations. External links aren't even allowed, whereas citations are required. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:31, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

07:22, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Hazshez

edit

Articles for creation how Hazshez (talk) 07:22, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hazshez: are you asking how to create an article draft? Go to WP:YFA, you'll find pretty much everything you need there (well, obviously not the sources that you would need to summarise per WP:42, but other than that). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hazshez there's nothing here. Please see the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 07:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10:05, 1 August 2025 review of submission by LarsArtmann

edit

Hello, can somebody help me get my first article published? I had a bunch of questions about the review I got. It's posted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Ralf_S._Engelschall LarsArtmann (talk) 10:05, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LarsArtmann Why don't you ask your questions then, or better yet, address the comments that the reviewer gave you? ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 00:55, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:37, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Jilletegreas

edit

Requesting reconsideration of Draft:Serenade (company) rejection

Hi there — I’m seeking help with the draft Draft:Serenade (company), which has now been **fully rejected** as "not sufficiently notable." However, I believe this decision was made in error, as the subject clearly meets both WP:GNG and WP:CORP.

The article cites multiple reliable, independent, and in-depth secondary sources that provide significant coverage of the subject, including:

  • The Australian Financial Review — Profile of Serenade’s fan engagement model and direct-to-fan monetisation strategy during COVID:

→ https://www.afr.com/technology/app-lets-you-buy-a-serenade-from-your-favourite-singer-20200825-p55p4s

  • Music Business Worldwide — In-depth feature on the company’s $4.2M funding round, use of eco-friendly blockchain, and product roadmap:

→ https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/serenade-just-raised-usd-4-2-million-whats-it-going-to-spend-it-on/

  • Startup Daily — Independent coverage of Serenade’s acquisition by ASX-listed Vinyl Group, with full deal terms and strategic context:

→ https://www.startupdaily.net/topic/business/asx-listed-vinyl-buys-blockchain-music-startup-serenade-in-shares-deal-worth-up-to-2-3-million/

  • Business News Australia — Coverage of Serenade’s funding history, investor base (e.g. Hugh Jackman), and market entry strategy:

→ https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/articles/hugh-jackman-backed-nft-music-marketplace-serenade-raises-6-million.html

All four sources are: - Independent of the company - Non-routine and not press releases - In-depth (feature-length or major business write-ups) - Published in well-regarded, editorially controlled outlets

I’ve also integrated these citations directly into the body of the draft to make notability clearer. Could a senior reviewer please take another look or advise how best to proceed?

Thanks so much! Jilletegreas (talk) 14:37, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jilletegreas If you are associated with this company, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID.
Routine business activities like funding rounds do not establish notability. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jilletegreas: please don't keep making the same argument over and over, and if you do, please add it to the existing thread (just a few threads above) so that the discussion is not fragmented.
These sources do not meet NCORP.
  • The AFR article seems okay, although I can't read it as it's behind a paywall; it alone isn't enough, though.
  • The MBWW piece is an interview, ie. primary source.
  • The other two are routine business reporting (finance raised).
Also, if you keep resubmitting a draft without any attempt at addressing the decline reasons, you risk it being rejected outright, which is what happened here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

15:51, 1 August 2025 review of submission by TJPR225

edit

Hello- how can I create a wiki page for an award winning author and physiologist? TJPR225 (talk) 15:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You don't violate copyright.
Creating a new article(not a "wiki page") is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and we usually recommend that new users first gain experience by editing existing articles in areas that interest them, as well as use the new user tutorial.
An article about a person should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. An award would only make someone notable if the award itself has an article(like Nobel Peace Prize or Academy Award). 331dot (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

17:13, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Jonkeren1

edit

Hi, I translated the page from the NL Wikipedia (https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrike_Nagel_(journaliste). I can not get one reference to work, gives an error in red (nr. 18). Thx -- Jonkeren1 (talk) 17:13, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonkeren1: {{Cite news}} would seem to be the equivalent template on en.wp. Templates aren't shared 1:1 between Wikipediae. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:38, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

18:51, 1 August 2025 review of submission by Ddcvrrrr

edit

Premanidhi Majhi Ddcvrrrr (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Ddcvrrrr. The fact that you entitled your draft "Premanidhi Majhi official" implies that (like many people) you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is.
No Wikipedia article is ever "official" (in the sense you apparently meant it). This is because a Wikipedia article is not owned by its subject, not controlled by its subject or their associates, and does not necessarily say what the subject would like it to say. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost exclusively interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
If you are trying to use Wikipedia to tell the world what somebody (or some organisation) wants the world to know about themselves, then Wikipedia is the wrong place. ColinFine (talk) 10:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2025_August_1&oldid=1304598498"