Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2025 July 8

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< July 7 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 9 >
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.


July 8

edit

09:04, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Afshandgreat

edit

How do I make this article get published. It has legit valid citations/references from top India publishers and institutes. Afshandgreat (talk) 09:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your disclosure for proper display(you had some junk coding in there preventing display).
Rejection means that the draft will not be considered further and that there most likely isn't anything you can do. You had numerous chances. I would suggest that you read WP:BOSS and have your superiors read it, too. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

09:58, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Martinkutum25

edit

What is the reason for rejection? 

Martinkutum25 (talk) 09:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinkutum25 You kept repeatedly re-submitting with no improvement, and there is no indication this person meets WP:NPERSON. qcne (talk) 10:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10:23, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Teuku2012

edit

Why was this article declined? Teuku2012 (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because there isn't evidence the song meets our WP:NMUSIC criteria with your current sources. qcne (talk) 10:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:NSONG (part of the linked policy in the decline notice) for what is required to show notability for songs. Note that discogs.com is not a generally reliable source so does not help show notability. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 10:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

11:10, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Jiri Pecinovsky

edit

Hello everyone,

I hope you are doing well. I would like to kindly ask for your advice concerning a page dedicated to the short film, which was quite successful on the festival circuit. The film is titled 'I Died in Irpin'. It received an award at the prestigious Clermont-Ferrand festival. From what I understand, the article wasn't published due to insufficient references. Do you know, please, what my options are at this point?

Below are my references: https://variety.com/2025/film/global/clermont-ferrand-buzz-titles-ridley-scott-hellfest-bill-murray-1236290694/ https://cineuropa.org/en/newsdetail/473511/ https://www.animationmagazine.net/2025/02/clermont-ferrand-fest-awards-juried-prizes-to-i-died-in-irpin-ashen-sun/

Thank you very much in advance for the feedback, all the very best

Jiří Jiri Pecinovsky (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jiri Pecinovsky: Chatbot-written requests will not be entertained. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:21, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Osa Higgins

edit

if I am citing reputable newspaper and magazine articles that I have the physical copies of from the 1980's and 1990's do I have to find a way to link them to a physical source or webpage? Osa Higgins (talk) 12:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Osa Higgins. Sources don't have to be online (although it's preferred), so if you are citing an offline source that has no online equivalent just provide as much bibliographic information as possible to allow a reader to find the source in a library or archive. The only requirement is that the source has been published, it does not have to be easily accessible. qcne (talk) 12:30, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Osa Higgins a brief look at your draft: it has lots of promotional words throughout. It could also be condensed substantially, removing all the minutiae and all but the most relevant of quotes. qcne (talk) 12:32, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking at look at my draft and for the constructive feedback. I’ll edit later today and I’ll be mindful of promotional words. Osa Higgins (talk) 13:18, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

13:41, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Redcoatwairoa

edit

Hi there, I am trying to update and re-submit this page, but Wikipedia doesn't seem to let me do so. Redcoatwairoa (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to click the "resubmit" button, it will be in the lower right corner of the last review. You shouldn't resubmit unless you have changed the draft to address the concerns raised. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

15:38, 8 July 2025 review of submission by TNTplayerTNT

edit

I can clearly understand the guidelines you posted, however I still am unable to understand what independent sources I can add regarding this specific topic. More than about a million people have registered in this specific server, and we can prove that, however according to this niche genre where minimum independent sources write about minecraft servers, I am unable to find a lot of citations except just voting affiliated third party independent linked websites. I need a clear guideline to this specific issue, and with all due respect do not require the same guidelines which tell me to add more sources, I understand that clearly however I think you get what I'm trying to say. Thank you. Help! TNTplayerTNT (talk) 15:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see many people come here to edit about their Minecraft servers, but the vast majority of them do not merit articles. We don't just need documentation that it exists or has a lot of members, we need independent reliable sources with significant coverage that show that the server is notable as Wikipedia uses the word. If you do not have such sources, the server does not merit an article.
If you just want to tell the world about the server, I might suggest a more Minecraft specific wiki, perhaps on Fandom. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agreed. Sources matter a lot, but as I said, it is not about just this Minecraft Server, journalists/online news sources/etc do not post about minecraft servers in general, so I just wanted advices of want I can use as a replacement for this specific genre, that acts as a "reliable source", and is thoroughly available at the same time.
Note: I am a relatively new wikipedia editor, that is why I needed advices. TNTplayerTNT (talk) 15:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Much smaller topics can easily get coverage from independent sources, and it is mainly because of the topic. Just wanted to ask you since you would've seen multiple others try to create articles related to Minecraft here, what could be something I can do to make my article have more sources, in other words, what sources can I use? TNTplayerTNT (talk) 15:53, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TNTplayerTNT: The problem is that servers/Roblox games/private servers rarely, if ever, get enough coverage in the relevant press (in this case, video game media like Kotaku, IGN, Massively Overpowered, etc.) to even allow us to consider an article. It's also worth noting that coverage tends to be about controversies rather than the merits of the server, which would make for a poor article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:57, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any source that has a reputation of fact checking and editorial control(i.e. they don't just publish stuff) can be used as a source. That's usually news outlets, but doesn't have to be. Please see WP:BACKWARD; you should have the sources in hand before you attempt to summarize them in an article, you shouldn't write your text and then look for sources to support it.
Our requirements do mean some topic areas do not get the needed sources, and need to be covered elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 15:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:46, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Susydrake

edit

I really want to make this page as neutral as possible and informative without sounding promotional. I think this page is needed since the company is growing a lot (to the same levels of Idealista), has a worldwide presence and has external, neutral sources talking about it. I'd appreciate some help in reviewing the page and let me know which parts I should amend/remove to not sound promotional. Susydrake (talk) 16:46, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Susydrake: Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):
Nothing you have is usable as a source for eligibility. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:01, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the insights, I really appreciate them. I have now removed all those references and found a couple independent sources. Susydrake (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

17:28, 8 July 2025 review of submission by 2025aravmentors

edit

I have request you that what's reason for rejected my content please tell me 2025aravmentors (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2025aravmentors: We have a zero-tolerance approach to using Wikipedia for advertizing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:30, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

18:34, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Stuartfost

edit

Trying to establish/adhere to the notability requirements? Stuartfost (talk) 18:34, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest reading WP:NCORP from top to bottom and because to topic is the company, the qualifying sources that meet NCORP need to be about the company. S0091 (talk) 19:40, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:02, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Dm07891p

edit

The firm has been around for 15 years with several notable cases. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but if you could please advise me? I've provided links to independent sources as well. Dm07891p (talk) 19:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dm07891p Wikipedia uses "notability" as a test to see if a topic meets our criteria for inclusion, but our special definition of "notability" doesn't mean "famous" or "popular" or "well-known". Instead, take "notability" to mean "noted in multiple reliable published secondary sources". For more information about how we define notability, see the policy page Wikipedia:Notability. None of your sources show evidence that the company passes our notability test. The draft has now been rejected, which means it's the end of the road. qcne (talk) 19:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dm07891p: Three of your sources 404 out (IBT, LABJ, LAT). Several others appear to be about irrelevant entities (https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/los-angeles/profile/personal-injury-lawyer/jy-law-1216-100115546 for example redirects to a BBB profile on a flag company). I'd go as far as to say the references list appears to be mostly hallucinated. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20:46, 8 July 2025 review of submission by JenHart1981

edit

My draft was rejected because my sources were either not in-depth, reliable, secondary, or strictly independent. Do reviewers ever comment specifically on which source cited is not meeting the above criteria? It's a little hard to figure out what to change from a blanket rejection. JenHart1981 (talk) 20:46, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JenHart1981: No.... but I can.
You have one somewhat OK source that's about one of its products. You don't have much of anything other than routine coverage about Humminbird specifically. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 21:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jéské Couriano Thank you for the details and insights. I have found very few citations to replace the citations in my draft which is surprising. I am confident the entry of the brand in Wikipedia is noteworthy, as they are one of the leading manufacturers in their category (marine electronics / fish finders), contributed to the invention of the applied use of the technology, and their products are carried by major retailers.
I'll keep looking for more citations or other ways to improve the draft. JenHart1981 (talk) 18:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

21:00, 8 July 2025 review of submission by Gbresource

edit

Hi there, I’ve rewritten the article but it is still rejected. Could you please advise how to fix it? Thanks, Michael Gbresource (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gbresource: Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
You have nothing useful. Three of your sources aren't even about Tjendara, but about the supplements he's selling. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 21:12, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2025_July_8&oldid=1300377878"