Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by King Momo42 (talk | contribs) at 21:05, 20 January 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category — List (sorting)		ShowcaseParticipants
Apply — By subject		Reviewing instructions
Help deskBacklog
drives
Shortcuts
Welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
  • 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 14

04:37:14, 14 January 2019 review of submission by 194.149.224.200


194.149.224.200 (talk) 04:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The comment left by the reviewer was:

Requires significant coverage in multiple independent verifiable secondary sources. Statements such as “This version is also available for forced download from a website to all users who need it.” read like a sales pitch not an encyclopaedic article.

See WP:SIGCOV, WP:IS, WP:V, WP:SECONDARY, WP:NPOV and familiarize yourself with these policies. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs)

09:40:23, 14 January 2019 review of draft by Alireza1357


Hi all, I created a page for Bahram Ghassemi based on a page for the same person on the Persian wikipedia. I added a source now but the original article in Persian doesn't have many sources either. From the listed sources, at the bottom of the Persian page, 2 or 3 don't work and it doesn't seem that all the information in the page is cited in the article. My point is, if the English article is not good enough because of a lack of citations, the Persian one has by far less citations relative to the amount of information it offers. I don't know the rules, but it seems to me we should keep it consistent between the different wikis. Thank you for your help and time.

Alireza1357 (talk) 09:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Declined English Wikipedia is not Persian Wikipedia. We have (probably) much stricter policies on our content. There's no policy in meta or anywhere which states that all articles must be kept consistent throughout all wikis. I'm glad that you finally added a reference to it, but I think more information about the subject can be provided and adding one source isn't enough to satisfy WP:ANYBIO. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 09:49, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Abelmoschus Esculentus That's OK. I just wanted to add something to the wiki, thinking it would be of value since he has already a relatively comprehensive page on the Persian and Arabic wiki and is spokesperson for the Iranian foreign ministry since about two years and has had a variety of diplomatic posts for years. There aren't many English sources about him, other than news reports and his statements obviously. I don't know how to delete the page from Draft. Would really appreciate if you could do that for me or show me how to do it. Thanks Alireza1357 (talk) 16:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, everyone! Is anyone else able to help me here, please? Abelmoschus Esculentus seems to be busy or I haven't mentioned him properly out of ignorance. Thanks! Alireza1357 (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:51:14, 14 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Aditi.agrawal.07


I recently wrote an article on Date Gone Wrong which is a new web mini-series that was released in December but it was rejected. I want to know what to improve in the content to make the article sufficiently notable enough?

Aditi.agrawal.07 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add more secondary, reliable sources that are independent of the subject. One source is not sufficient to show notability. See WP:GNG ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 09:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10:54:33, 14 January 2019 review of submission by Aditi.agrawal.07


Hey, my initial submission for the article "Date Gone Wrong" was rejected because there wasn't enough notability attached t it. I have now added more citations and information. How shall I proceed to work on publishing it? Aditi.agrawal.07 (talk) 10:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Place {{subst:submit}} at the bottom of the page. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 10:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:28:25, 14 January 2019 review of submission by RudolfClausius


Made additioanl changes to comply with first round of feedback. This book is notable, with press from multiple foreign and domestic publications. It has also been optioned for a TV series.

RudolfClausius (talk) 11:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


12:48:07, 14 January 2019 review of draft by Wikitee2014


Wikitee2014 (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC) Please, how do i get other wikipedians to improve this page? The subject on this page is notable.Wikitee2014 (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:23:08, 14 January 2019 review of submission by Aflec1

The article has been turned down because: they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject - So, do I just need to include more references. The musician in question has numerous mentions in magazines such as DJ magazine and other Main Street publications and is played on the BBC, so I'm not sure why it was turned down. I am trying to create pages for a number of notable UK rap artists. So my question is do I need more references ? Thank you Aflec1 (talk) 14:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You definitely need to add more references in order to satisfy WP:NMUSICIAN. I would also like to see more charted songs/albums and stuff as they are clear indicators of notable musicians. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 14:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:53:28, 14 January 2019 review of submission by INUSS-X


i have ideas for new list articles but how i make these article in main article space , so ihave only review option to do INUSS-X (talk) 14:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of military aircraft of the United States exists. You may improve it instead. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 15:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:28:58, 14 January 2019 review of submission by Eugenia Sawin


Eugenia Sawin (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is the problem with the article that the references are not properly formatted?

Request on 19:09:20, 14 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Mirella Silva


Hello wikipedia team, I'm on a personal mission to try to bring more visibility to emerging artists in Latin America as I notice that there is a huge gab in this particular area specifically on the english version of wikipedia. I've read about the recent progresses that a scientist was making on trying to lower the gender gap in science place by adding important scientist woman to wikipedia, and I thought it would be a good idea to do the same thing for artists that have already received a great deal of national recognition.

Being a journalist myself, I got to write some articles about some of those artist, and i was wondering if this is the reason why this post got rejected, as I signed two of his articles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gustavo_Chams

I am not a pr person, so what would be a good way to re-write this article, making it more 'neutral'? I pretty much re-wrote what some of those magazines/newspapers did write about his work so I'm not sure on how would I be able to proceed moving forward. Some of the references are from smaller publications that helped me to fill the gap when I couldn't find the best references, But there are several well known and credible Brazilian newspapers, websites and magazines on the list, so I was quite surprised that they wouldn't work.

Is there any feedback I could take in consideration?

Thank you! Sincerely, Mirela

Mirella Silva (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:27:06, 14 January 2019 review of draft by Joe-streatham


Hi team Just wondering if draft name can be changed? After publication . I have publisheddraft mareeg.com that I am not sure if I would have added dot.com instead of mareeg news

Joe-streatham (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joe-streatham: Yes, the title of the draft can be changed when (if) the draft is accepted and becomes an article. However, at the moment the references you've included do not provide sufficient in-depth coverage about the publication, and the website itself appears to be offline - it returns a '403 Forbidden' error. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:14:18, 14 January 2019 review of draft by Gervasevernon


My article appears to have been reviewed within seconds by Robert McClenon, but please tell me how I can contact him. He says I need a lead sentence (he types lede sentence, but this must be what he means) In fact the second sentence explains that Susan Vernon is a pioneer conference interpreter, but this could be moved to second sentence if desired. Then he says that I am too closely connected to the subject. However I quote many references to academic papers about her; her relevance to interpreting is easily verified, even by a current exhibition at the university of Salamanca. Gervasevernon (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2019 (UTC) Gervasevernon (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gervasevernon For general advice about features of Wikipedia, you may ask at the Teahouse or the Help Desk. However, to contact a particular editor, you may write a message to their Talk Page, which you usually can do by clicking on the talk link after their signature. I wrote lede sentence because that is the specialized spelling that we use in Wikipedia. I meant to state in the first sentence that she is or was an interpreter. My conflict of interest comment had to do with whether you are related to her. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:54:18, 14 January 2019 review of draft by Mario Gamer Expert


Mario Gamer Expert User Talk and Sandbox

Q: Why does my page have to be encyclopedic and why can't I tell people about myself???

A? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mario Gamer Expert (talk • contribs) 21:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mario Gamer Expert Editors may create a user page containing limited autobiographical information for the purpose of collaboration with other editors. If that was what you were trying to do with User:Mario Gamer Expert/sandbox, then you do not need to submit it for review. Simply write at User:Mario Gamer Expert.
It is draft articles that need to be submitted for review before being published as encyclopedia articles. If that is what your sandbox submission was intended as, then please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space, blog, or social networking site. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:00, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:01:37, 14 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Mutarjam


The article (which was literally a translation of the equivalent article on Arabic Wikipedia except I added a few sources) was declined because it didn't represent a proverb, and I didn't provide enough sources supporting my article. I would like to include the information SOMEWHERE on English Wikipedia since it explains a common coinage in Arabic (both the "faithful friend" and the "four impossible things"). I have several questions:

Mutarjam (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mutarjam.
  • It usually isn't productive to compare drafts to articles unless the latter have gone through a formal process such as WP:GA or WP:FA. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. The difference between the state of the two pages has nothing to do with the draft being about a non-English expression.
  • The Cultural Analysis source is a good one. The expression is not a perfect fit with List of idioms of improbability, but I think you could include it there.
  • Links on the left are only for equivalent topics, in other words an Arabic version of the list, not this specific expression. You may, however, link to it in the text – الخل الوفي ("faithful friend") ...
--Worldbruce (talk) 03:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:32:00, 14 January 2019 review of submission by Poke1973


Poke1973 (talk) 23:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PROMO and WP:V. The subject fails WP:ANYBIO and your whole article is unsourced. Not encyclopedic. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 05:10, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:42:18, 15 January 2019 review of draft by Rameshkumarchennai


It is one of the famous author biography and most of the people are searching about him. SO, I thought to make his wikipedia that people can get more detail about him. Their is no profit to me, it is my service towards wikipedia.org. At last I would request you to give permission to make this page live on wiki. Thanking you. 27.62.36.143 (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

☒N G11 Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 15

03:41:11, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Weihuang2019


Weihuang2019 (talk) 03:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


03:41:11, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Weihuang2019

no No action Nothing to do here. Sandbox deleted as WP:U1. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:05:37, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Anand ghumaliya model


Anand ghumaliya model (talk) 05:05, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not even an attempt at an article - I'm not sure whether G12 would apply to a page that consists purely of a URL, but there's nothing to reconsider Nosebagbear (talk) 18:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

05:28:39, 15 January 2019 review of submission by LOD Planner


I am trying to write a factual company description page for LOD Planner Inc. - we are not trying to promote we are just trying to document what the company does. Can you offer some advice what we should focus on changing? Any help would be much appreciated. Many thanks. LOD Planner (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 14:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:15:30, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Gumatas


Gumatas (talk) 06:15, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the reviewer's comments? Do not resubmit until AFTER the election. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 14:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:00:38, 15 January 2019 review of submission by The Great Yan


The Great Yan (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Great Yan: welcome. Please read WP:FIRSTARTICLE to get started, but don't feel tempted to write an article about yourself. Wikipedia isn't a place to promote yourself or your business. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:58, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

help needed

HI , can you help me completing my page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Divya_krishnan), i can give you all information you need with source, or pls let me know my mistakes, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abidn2 (talk • contribs) 09:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abidn2: please read WP:FIRSTARTICLE and Wikipedia:Verifiability and then ask again here if you still have questions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:25:37, 15 January 2019 review of submission by ChristinFrohne

Hey, I am wondering why you declined my article. It would be great if you could explain it a bit more and give me advises about how to change it. Thank you very much ChristinFrohne (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristinFrohne: take a look at User:Joe_Decker/IsThisNotable and WP:SPAM. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:35:18, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Alexpage9650


Firstly, I'd like to request a review for the biography because the biography contains the full details of the prominent Dr.Hisham Safadi which should be granted a page on your website for references from clients. It's a biography that contains all his life achievements and awards and should deserve an approved page here. I also belive the biography is of full quality containing all properties an accurate biography should have. Alexpage9650 (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Alexpage9650 (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BLP. All biographies of living people must include at least one reliable source. I suggest you to add more secondary, reliable sources that are independent of the subject to satisfy WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 14:22, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:13:00, 15 January 2019 review of draft by Lvazq064


Lvazq064 (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon, I have previosuly finished working on the Draft: The Power of Patient Stories, is there anything that I need to do for it to be checked? I tried to add it to "Check your Drafts" but I am not sure how it works. Thank you and have a great day! Lvazq064 (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For User:Lvazq064/sandbox, I Declined your submission since we do not accept blank submissions. For Draft:The Power of Patient Stories, most of the sources are primary sources (which is the book itself) and they are not reliable sources. It needs more secondary, independent sources to show notability. See WP:NBOOK ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 14:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:16:32, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Leonid-luminate

I would like to understand why the submission was rejected. It has absolutely no advertisement content. All claims are verified by references that fully meet the wikipedia referencing policy and only facts are mentioned. Multiple references are provided for each fact. Leonid-luminate (talk) 14:16, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Leonid-luminate#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:08:58, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Horncritic


Article was submitted Dec. 11, 2018, and accepted soon thereafter for publication, but it has not been posted. Could you please let me know when that might happen?

Horncritic (talk) 15:08, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Horncritic: I am not sure what you mean by 'it has not been posted'. The article was accepted on 11 December and been part of Wikipedia since then. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 18:14, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:24:49, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Rorosab


I have checked the Wikipedia tutorial and templates and updated the content of the page and I would like from you to check the updated page and consider publishing it. Rorosab (talk) 17:24, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rorosab: The draft article that you've created about the Softlookup website is not suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and has criteria for which subjects it includes articles about. The relevant criteria in this case can be found at WP:NWEB. Your draft fails those criteria, so the subject will not be accepted for inclusion. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your site. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:29:39, 15 January 2019 review of submission by The Great Yan


The Great Yan (talk) 17:29, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I change my sandbox according to your guideline. Is it good to go?

@The Great Yan: You are welcome to use your sandbox as a place to experiment. However the only content there at the moment is a line of text saying "This is my sandbox Place. I edit in this place to understand more about wikipedia." This is clearly not an article suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:42:17, 15 January 2019 review of submission by DaiPedia2018


Hello, I noticed my article got declined due to suspicion of COI. At first I didn't understand why, but after doing a more thorough research of wording, I realized my mistakes and is already working on a more clinical edit of the text. I can guarantee you, that I have absolutely no personal relationship with Ms.Daiane Sodre and I'm definitely not getting paid to create an article about her. Please let me know how to proceed with the editing and what I have to do. I appreciate all your help! :-) Thank you! DaiPedia2018 (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DaiPedia2018: Please read WP:NMODEL, Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:EXT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DaiPedia2018: hello. While Draft:Daiane_Sodre has not been tagged for having any COI issues, I do remember tagging Draft:Daiane_Sodre (2) with COI and UDP tags. I did this after noticing an image your used in the draft ([1]) was furnished to you my an established photographer; to me, this indicated a possible conflict of interest, as OTRS confirmed at the WMC that the release of the image was legitimate. I asked you about this on your talk page, but never recieved a response to my COI inquest. Some clarification on your part would be welcome, and will impact on how we move forward in this situation.--SamHolt6 @SamHolt6: I already sent the below to you in another place, but since this is all new to me, I'll post the same reply here. Hopefully we'll communicate one way or the other. I apologize for my mistakes, but have read as much as I could about how to communicate on the Talk page. Hopefully it works? First I want to apologize for not responding to your message above. Unfortunately I had a personal problem and have not been online for the past 3-4 weeks :-( Like I wrote in a reply to another person, I have absolutely no personal or professional affiliation with Ms.Daiane Sodre. When I decided to create a WP article about her, I browsed 100's of images to see if I could find a royalty free image to use. Since I didn't find any, I ended up writing to the photographer asking if I could use his image for the article. He responded that the image is from 2012, so since it's an older image he would have no problem with me using it for the article and he gave his authorization. If the image is violating any WP rules, I'll be happy to remove it. Just FYI, I'm also editing the text for it to be more neutral as well I have been researching more about Ms.Daiane Sodre and will add more information to the article as well as source references and links. Again, thank you for your patience and please let me know how to proceed from here. DaiPedia2018 (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:35:51, 15 January 2019 review of draft by Wmwillis3


Hi, I'm trying to get a photo (personal shot) of the biography I submitted, and it was flagged up front- and not allowed to be even reviewed. I own the photo- and have more to help lend credence and help with the article. The owner was my Dad; he's deceased, and I have been providing personal photos of his music days to many authors and publications, and I was accredited "courtesy of Martin Willis", in every one. I understand the copyright/trademark requirements, but these are personal photos (?!?)- yikes...please help if and when you can; the most important part is to get the article posted so it also helps out Bill Black's bio, and a few others. Thanks a lot...and thanks for your support. R, "Wmwillis3" William Willis Wmwillis3 (talk) 19:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wmwillis3: Please read Wikipedia:Uploading images and/or Wikipedia:Wikimedia Commons. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:34, 15 January 2019 review of submission by Johnhoye1

I'm trying set up a page for John Hoye I have published book ISBN info below

'More information in This Day In Music's guild to Iron Maiden by Joe Shoomam ISBN 978-1-9995927-5-2 (page 164 - 167)'

I would think that is sufficient to verify the page for John Hoye, as well as links from an existing page for the band Urchin where John is also cited.

Thank you

Johnhoye1 (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnhoye1: Please read WP:COI, WP:NMUSICIAN, Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:EXT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pink clock Awaiting administrative action Please could an admin compare the draft against the article deleted as a result of this AfD to establish whether it is eligible for WP:G4? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Substantially the same, Curb Safe Charmer – "They rehearsed in the cellar of John’s house or in the back room of Dave Murray's house and on the stage of John’s school" was found in both, for example. Deleted as G4 (created "simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy")/G11. User:Johnhoye1 too, for the same reasons. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:42:08, 15 January 2019 review of draft by Riseupstrategies


We will make changes due to it being declined. But there is one section where we talk about Yuri's parents with no reference. The reason there is no reference is because it was written from a personal source. Will this be a problem?

Thanks!

Riseupstrategies (talk) 20:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Riseupstrategies. Please clarify what you mean by "we". The policy on Wikipedia is "one user—one account". Usernames should not be shared by multiple individuals. If you are close enough to the subject to know things about his family that are not public, you have a conflict of interest, and really shouldn't be writing about him. If you write about him nonetheless, then you should declare the nature of your connection. In any case, Wikipedia articles may contain only information that is verifiable in reliable, published sources, not material from the personal experience of editors. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:56:18, 15 January 2019 review of draft by Siphelele GoodenoughThemba

Just wanted to know why my Article is being deleted

Siphelele GoodenoughThemba (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Siphelele GoodenoughThemba: I have answered your question at the Teahouse. Please see my reply there. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:56, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:30:01, 15 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Gracelandet


I created this draft for which I've been updating and expect to update with additional information over the next couple weeks. I made it a draft to allow others to make contributions if possible. Someone created another page for which I just got an email saying it was being considered for deletion (not this article but the other one Courtney_Hadwin). So I guess I just want to make sure that first, this draft is in fact searchable by others to make contributions and therefore would avoid duplicate drafts for this subject. So my primary concern is someone trying to create another article from scratch for "Courtney Hadwin" rather than updating this draft! Please let me know if I should have taken different steps. Thank You very much!

Gracelandet (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gracelandet: I recommend you await the outcome of the discussion on whether the existing article should be deleted. If the outcome is that it should be kept, you should abandon your draft and improve the existing article in mainspace instead. If the outcome is that it should be deleted, then it is because the Wikipedia editor community considers that she is not a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article and so submitting your draft is unlikely to see it accepted. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


January 16

00:57:40, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Mysoreravindra111

The page created was a non-commercial page by a customer & admirer of the companies product & services. Have also shared relevant citations from reliable national & international sources. But still why was this post has been marked for deletion?

Mysoreravindra111 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:52:09, 16 January 2019 review of draft by SilviaTRE388


SilviaTRE388 (talk) 02:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone has the time- I know you guys are busy- and could help change my page around to make it more 'Wiki' standards I would appreciate it.

I am learning as I go- this is only my second article- but I could sure use the help.

Please feel free to change anything or add anything.

Thank you for your brilliance, your time, work, and patience.

SIl

Request on 04:41:52, 16 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Ginyattri


Why did you reject my article? What were the errors in my article?

Giny Attri VSP 04:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ginyattri. The draft was rejected because it appears to be an advertisement, such as might be written by someone with an undeclared conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:23:08, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Penguinmeadow


Penguinmeadow (talk) 06:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I am wondering why my article was rejected, this was a famed presenter of Sky News Australia, and his work colleagues have their own articles, referring to James Bracey.

Thank You.

Hi Penguinmeadow. The draft was declined because, with a single source that is independent and reliable, it fails to show that the subject meets WP:BIO. It was subsequently rejected because the second reviewer felt that no amount of editing could overcome the problem. I recommend that you set the topic aside for a while. Creating new articles is time consuming, frustrating, and overrated. There are millions of easier and better ways of improving the encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:Community portal for how to help. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:55:30, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Riskyishwar


My Submission of this Draft declined on the basis of WP:NOP and WP:NOR.I cleared the policy WP:NOP but According to reviewer,the draft was based on opinion basis violating the policy WP:NOR.So he told me to add some sources so i added some sources.I asked him for help but he is not responding,may be he is busy in real life.Please tell me,is it looking good or not?Please give me some advice to improve the draft what to keep or delete? Please inform me,When it will be ready to resubmit before asking the reviewer to do so? IshwarTalk 06:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:08:51, 16 January 2019 review of submission by ItsKvrathore


Dear sir this article is for one of the best singer from the soil of pride mewar. he is doing work with zee music. and soon his solo album will be release.Wikipedia is one of the best platform for an artist to establish. ItsKvrathore (talk) 08:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsKvrathore: Wikipedia isn't a place to a promote an artist. WP:NOTPROMO is one of Wikipedia's key principles. Please read WP:NMUSICIAN to understand the criteria that we used to decide whether there should be an article about a particular musician. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:26:56, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Rakeshsharma12345


I think this article should be re-reviewed because the music artist who created the music album is of much importance which is very clear when we search for his name on Google. On searching more than 4000 search results along with a Google-generated knowledge panel are shown up, which proves that the person is "notable" Rakeshsharma12345 (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rakeshsharma12345: No, that's not the way it works. Having lots of hits doesn't make a subject notable. The Wikipedia community has agreed criteria which we use to determine whether a musician is notable. See WP:NMUSICIAN. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:40:39, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Arvindsinghb2s


I am new to Wikipedia and don't know what kind of Content goes well in the platform of information. I ma good in writing Blogs, Articles but this is my first attempt on wikipedia.. Please help me to live this writeup.

Arvindsinghb2s (talk) 09:40, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Arvindsinghb2s: Please start by reading Wikipedia:Your first article. Note that you may not use Wikipedia for WP:PROMOTION. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:23:13, 16 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by RazPalea


Hello there!

I'm writing because I have been struggling in the process of writing my draft for Gerovital Cosmetics.

Let me start off by saying: I am being paid to write this article on Wikipedia and have disclosed it repeatedly during discussions with moderators, as well as on my talk page.

Now, the issue I'm facing is repeated submission denials, the last one being motivated as, to paraphrase, "this article reads like a paid article and tries promoting what is, essentially, a quack product". Now, I have repeatedly rephrased the draft as to eliminate anything that could be interpreted as subjective towards the brand itself. In the last draft I submitted, there was nothing showing bias as far as I can tell, except, perhaps, a "prizes and awards" section. I would really appreciate any tips or indications I could get that can help me get this article to a publishable version.

Thank you in advance! RazPalea (talk)

RazPalea (talk) 12:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@RazPalea: The deletion discussion makes the reasons for the deletion of the draft clear. There's already an article about Gerovital, which you can help improve. Articles have to be written about notable subjects (see WP:NCORP), provide reliable sources (see WP:V and be written from a neutral point of view, per WP:NPOV. Promotion is against Wikipedia's principles; if an article serves only to promote a subject then it doesn't belong here. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:10:10, 16 January 2019 review of submission by BygByrd1


I am the music producer Byg Byrd and I would like to take ownership of the name please?

BygByrd1 (talk) 16:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BygByrd1: please read Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and WP:NMUSICIAN. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:53:30, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Robwward

Hello all,

If possible, I'd like some further feedback on the notability of this article's subject. Having read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), it looks to me as though the cited MailOnline, The IET, TechCrunch, Metro, and Business Insider articles meet the significant/independent/reliable/secondary criteria. Any further guidance on establishing notability would be greatly appreciated.

With thanks,

Robwward (talk) 16:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Robwward: - Hi there. Post you commenting here, your draft was reviewed and rejected. The reviewer declined it as overly advertorial. You can ask the reviewer SamHolt6 if that was his sole decline grounds or if he also felt it failed to satisfy corporate notability
A brief look at the sources does give some issues. Firstly, MailOnline is not particularly trusted as a source - a recent community discussion voted to sustain the general refusal of it as a reliable source. A problem across the other sources is that most of it is the writer saying "FiveAI said this, FiveAI's staff member said this etc". This repackaged content is functionally disregarded for considering notability, so the source only counts if there is sufficient other content within the article. I'm not confident enough to make a specific decision on them without extra analysis.
Worth fixing the known problem while hunting for any other sources that may appear in the interim. Nosebagbear (talk) 19:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:49:59, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Samasaad


Our original draft was rejected by reviewer StraussInTheHouse because it was deemed to be "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia". In short, we were told that it seemed too personal in context and also it seemed to be an original research. It was suggested that we go through and adjust the phrasing to remove any weasel words are suggestive wording. I have gone through and made these adjustments and am hoping that this is more in line with what the reviewer was looking for. Thanks! Samasaad (talk) 18:49, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Samasaad: Can you clarify who you are referring to when you say "we"? JTP (talk • contribs) 19:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Samasaad: I have re-reviewed your draft. It needs a considerable amount of further work before we'd accept it. It still comes across as an an essay. Please read writing better articles which will hopefully help. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:18:04, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Emiliegiguere


Hello,

I'm wondering if you could help me regarding the rejection of my article on Meccaniche Veloci. What elements could I improve? What should I change? Why do you say it looks "promotional"..

Thank you, Emilie --Emiliegiguere (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Emiliegiguere (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Emiliegiguere: This is an advert masquerading as an article. Wikipedia isn't a place for free advertising. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:17:44, 16 January 2019 review of submission by Palisades1


Upon review of the page I submitted I realize it probably isn't ready for publication. I would like to remove my submission for this page. I will need to add category and more info/links. How do I take back my submission? Thanks.


Palisades1 21:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palisades1 (talk • contribs)

@Palisades1: The draft has been returned to the unsubmitted state. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:16, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Crusher123


Because of this:

How do I implement the clean up changes? Crusher123 (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crusher123 (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Crusher123: I've left on your talk page more information about your next step. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:35:18, 16 January 2019 review of draft by Booradley44


Taking over 2 months to review - why?

Booradley44 (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Booradley44: - It hasn't. it was created as a draft and added to AfC on the 12th December - about 5 weeks. That does make it one of our oldest drafts, but nowhere near 2 months. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 17

01:17:07, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Rweinman


Rweinman (talk) 01:17, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Scott, Artist

I am attempting to publish an article for the artist Paul Scott. His works are held in the collections of multiple British and American museums including the Victoria and Albert Museum. He is an authority within his field, but my attempts have been denied.

I am seeking further advice on how to improve the article.

I have been paid by him for website services and do have associations with one of the galleries which represent him.

Thank you for any assistance you may offer.

Best, Rebeccca

03:05:02, 17 January 2019 review of submission by HannaWelch


In regards to my article about Giveaway Club, which was rejected. I would really appreciate some advice, so I don’t start working on articles that may get rejected in the future. What number of sources is considered sufficient to show that the subject is notable enough? I’ve looked at Giveaway Club’s competitors, such as BitsDuJour, and didn’t see that many external sources cited. In fact, with this example, most external links lead to BitsDuJour’s blog or their own press releases. Before starting this article, I looked at other similar web services that have articles about them on Wikipedia (such as here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Deal_of_the_day_services) and thought that Giveaway Club’s notability was similar to those, so it was worth writing about. I would appreciate some guidance on notability criteria and how this particular article could be improved to be included on Wikipedia. I’ve already read through Wikipedia’s guidelines on notability and thought that this subject meets those. It’s a web service (a software giveaway platform), so I go by the Wikipedia:Notability_(web) guidelines, which says that to be notable a website has to meet ONE of the two criteria:

  • The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
  • The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.

My article about Giveaway Club cites six independent sources, at least 3 of which are reputable software review sites that place Giveaway Club among other notable websites (which have their own articles on Wikipedia). I believe six, or even three (if you only include those 3 better known sites), can count as multiple.

If you still find that Giveaway Club doesn’t deserve to have its own article on Wikipedia, can information about it still be included in some other article? The most relevant ones I see would be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giveaway_of_the_Day (the site that is very similar to Giveaway Club) or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deal_of_the_day . Should I do that?

Thanks in advance for your help.

HannaWelch (talk) 03:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HannaWelch. Novice editors are commonly advised to cite at least three independent, reliable, secondary sources that contain significant coverage of the topic.
Wikipedia is forever a work in progress. It contains high quality articles and poor quality articles. The existence of articles that do not meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines does not mean they are welcome. It may simply mean that no one has gotten around to deleting them yet. They are not a good excuse to create more such articles. The essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may help you understand why. If you wish to learn from example articles, be sure to use only Wikipedia's best.
The draft is lacking in both the reliable source and significant coverage departments. Ghacks appears to be the only independent reliable source, and it does not contain signficant coverage.
You may be underestimating how hard it is to meet WP:NWEB. In the past six months, excluding web series and news sites, only 5 articles on websites have been accepted via Articles for creation, and one of those is being considered for deletion. If you want to avoid starting drafts that are likely to be rejected, then avoid writing about extant companies, websites, and products.
I would not include information about Giveaway Club in any other article. The only plausible place would be Auslogics, but it's already tagged for notability, which is often the first step on the road to deletion. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:16:42, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Mathewarfr


I would like to add on the following details to my article DOB 30/May 1967 Spouse : Prof Anut Itthagarun Children : 2 Year active as author : Since 1978 Years active as a film -writer-director- producer -2003 Lives in Gold Coast , Australia

Please also link this article to his film "Punyam Aham "

Mathewarfr (talk) 03:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mathewarfr. This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process. The draft was accepted and published as Raj Nair, so it is no longer within our scope. If you have no connection to the subject, you may edit the article directly. Be sure to cite a reliable, published source for anything you add. If you have a conflicat of interest regarding the subject, then instead of editing the article directly, suggest all changes on Talk:Raj Nair. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:40:39, 17 January 2019 review of draft by Picallin


Why has my article been declined? Kingston is not part of Tradeston. Kingston is a district in its own right - it lies between the districts of Kinning Park to the west and Tradeston to the east.

Picallin (talk) 07:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Picallin. Per WP:GEOLAND, populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to merit a stand alone article. This usually applies to villages, parishes, and municipalities. Populated places without legal recognition, must show significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Larger neighborhoods are usually kept if their names are found to have verifiable widespread usage. Industrial estates, housing developments, unofficial neighborhoods, and smaller suburbs are generally merged to the primary city except when they have their own governments.
The draft cites a single source, a map which shows the name Kingston. That is not significant coverage, and does not show the legal status of the area. It is insufficient information on which to decide whether Kingston should be a separate article or be covered within Glasgow. I recommend that you start by adding a sentence about Kingston to Glasgow (citing a reliable source). If you find several more sources that have more to say about Kingston, then add them to the draft and resubmit it. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07:43:52, 17 January 2019 review of submission by ChristinFrohne

This is the first article I wrote on Wikipedia and when I submitted it, it got declined for sounding too much like an advertisement. I realized that some of my wording was not appropriate and edit it. Before I resubmit it now, it would be awesome if one of you could have a look at it and give me some advises. Thanks in advance ChristinFrohne (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC) ChristinFrohne (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09:17:14, 17 January 2019 review of submission by 27.34.69.18


27.34.69.18 (talk) 09:17, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@27.34.69.18: - the article subject can't demonstrate notability by sourcing itself - these are primary and obviously non-independent. Alexa ranking is also irrelevant. You need multiple reliable secondary sources (e.g. other newspapers) that cover the Mirror itself in detail. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:42:09, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Штрих


Штрих (talk) 13:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


15:23:32, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Engr Echendu Ndubuisi


Engr Echendu Ndubuisi (talk) 15:23, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Engr Echendu Ndubuisi: - I see you've mostly wiped the draft now, but I'll answer to be sure. You didn't provide any sources in the original and thus there was no way for notability to be established. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:31:05, 17 January 2019 review of draft by Wiki KuthiVaiyans

My draft article Submission has been declined saying its not adequately supported by reliable sources. It is a simple small article about a popular online entertainment/content creators group I have cited references only from the official statements from members of this group linked interviews, official YouTube videos, public statements Wiki KuthiVaiyans (talk) 17:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wiki KuthiVaiyans: As you'll see if you read Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability, articles about YouTubers (and groups of YouTubers) are routinely deleted even if they have hundreds of thousands of subscribers. Having lots of subscribers isn't considered to be a measure of notability. You'll need to add references that show that the group has been written about in depth by multiple reliable, independent publications. See WP:GNG. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:05:49, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Datboiguykid


I want to publish this page with new impprovments.

Datboiguykid (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Databoiguykid: - a draft of this nature will never be able to be published, even if improved. Wikipedia is not a textbook - it isn't designed to explain how to do things. There are plenty of articles explaining what negative numbers and pi etc are. Beyond that is not in our remit. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:37:36, 17 January 2019 review of submission by G. Finknottle

I wondered why my draft article didn't get published, it was fully cited etc. What can I do now? G. Finknottle (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@G. Finknottle: I've not read your recent draft (as it has been deleted as a blatant hoax). If it was similar to this edit that you made to Eucharistic miracle then adding factually incorrect information to Wikipedia is a form of WP:VANDALISM and is not welcome here. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 19:30:03, 17 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by BHJ15


So my article Markiezaatskade has been rejected for a lack of references. But it has been translated from another wiki, which in my opinion is a reference in itself. Why is it rejected?

BHJ 19:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BHJ15: It might be your opinion, but that isn't the consensus of editors here on the English Wikipedia. See WP:NOTSOURCE. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:31:23, 17 January 2019 review of submission by Turtleturtle00


Turtleturtle00 (talk) 19:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm trying to create an article for a former NFL player (Greg Williams) that doesn't already exist, however there are already a bunch of other articles with the same name. How would I go about creating a new one?

@Turtleturtle00: - Can I confirm that you don't mean this Greg Williams? If so, then just alter that article directly. If there is a different Greg Williams, who is also an american footballer, then you use an additional clarifier in the brackets. Normally this is a year of birth or nationality, e.g. John Smith (Medal of Honor, born 1854). Does that answer the question? Nosebagbear (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:26:54, 17 January 2019 review of submission by 104.225.241.238


Although I know following the standards outlined in the Notability section on Wikipedia doesn't guarantee submission, I'd like to request a re-review since the publications cited in this article do meet the notability criteria. Citations are from major news outlets and trade magazines - and talk in length about the company (they are not small spots).

If you still feel differently, I ask for advice on where to look for sources.

104.225.241.238 (talk) 21:26, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • @104.225.241.238: - sources have to satisfy 4 main criteria: secondary, reliable, in-depth, independent. Business sources are often ruled out for a variant of the "in-depth" one, which is called WP:CORPDEPTH - which basically rules out coverage that companies have that isn't particularly meaningful for notability. Venture capitalism is a particularly common example.
What is a real killer of your sources, which are generally reputable sources, are that either they aren't in-depth (e.g. LA Times) or they aren't independent, because their company gets some money if items are purchased through a link involved or Bespoke helped write the article (USA today, Business Insider, or Esquire). Nosebagbear (talk) 01:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And toxic marketing language like "men's lifestyle space" and "curated boxes" (you already have "bespoke"; how did you miss "artisanal"?) don't help when trying to assert that this is not an advertisement. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)23:17, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

07:08:22, 18 January 2019 review of submission by Kirtigup


I need to publish this page without any flaws. Kindly help me.

Kirtigup (talk) 07:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kirtigup: Please read WP:NACTOR, WP:NBIO and WP:NPOV. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:00:20, 18 January 2019 review of submission by 111.92.27.219


Mr Abey George has been on the forefront of social causes in Kerala and has made notable contributions to the healthcare and sociual welfare causes. However he is deemed as not noteworthy, a comment, more that two hundred thousand benefactors and many more onlooker may have difficulty accepting. Kindly do advise how to make this article more note worthy, worthy enough to represent the person it is about.111.92.27.219 (talk) 08:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC) 111.92.27.219 (talk) 08:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@111.92.27.219: Please read WP:NBIO. However, I suggest that your draft is actually about Swasthi Foundation rather than Mr George, and should be renamed accordingly. If you do that, you'll need to show how the organisation meets the WP:NORG criteria. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:49, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:51:52, 18 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Verbierfestival


Hello,

We do not understand why our page is not notable enough to be published. The page exists as is in French. Thank you to communicate the changes to us.

Verbierfestival (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Verbierfestival: You said 'our page' but it isn't your page. Please read WP:OWNERSHIP. Then please read WP:NMUSICBIO and WP:NBIO. The existence of an article about them in the French Wikipedia does not automatically mean that there should be an article about them in the English Wikipedia. They are separate projects and have different inclusion criteria. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08:52:39, 18 January 2019 review of submission by BHJ15


I've supported sources for the claims on the page, which were lacking before.BHJ 08:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC) BHJ 08:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted per WP:GEOFEAT on the strength of the first two sources and the further reading. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:59, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:12:07, 18 January 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Verbierfestival


Verbier Festival in an international festival of classical music. The public English-speaker represents 37%. 35% of their media coverage comes from abroad. Learning Programme are taught in English and all the print & web supports are translated. Furthermore, most artists who come at the festival speak English. So it is necessary to have these information in English. The English Wikipedia page for the Verbier Festival exists in English. We don’t understand why this page about the founder is not legitimate to exist too. Thank you for your consideration and your answer.


Verbierfestival (talk) 14:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Verbierfestival. All content added to Wikipedia must be verifiable in reliable, published sources. The draft cites no sources. Compounding that problem, you appear to have an undisclosed conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:36:44, 18 January 2019 review of submission by Accessexpertise


- Article does meet WP:NCORP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)) - Has multiple sources, multiple reliable sources, is inherently notable due to its status as a unicorn, its role in the Armenia-US trade agreement, and its market share in both the US and Canada. Can you please advise me on why it is being rejected on these grounds, when as far as I can see it does meet the requirements.

Accessexpertise (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Accessexpertise. The draft does not meet WP:NCORP.
  • TechCrunch fails WP:ORGIND. As Rhadow writes, "TechCrunch reprints every tech press release that comes across the transom". See RSN archive 221 and RSN archive 246, among many others.
  • Bloomberg #1 is indiscriminate. It attempts to list every company, so it does not help demonstrate the notability of any.
  • ACHRNEWS and Contractor are trade publications. As WP:ORGIND states, "there is a presumption against the use of coverage in trade magazines to establish notability as businesses frequently make use of these publications to increase their visibility."
  • Asbarez is a trivial mention.
  • Crunchbase does not help demonstrate notability. Past discussions have noted a plethora of problems, including user-generated content (not a reliable source), not independent, primary source, and indiscriminate. See RSN archive 218 and RSN archive 252
  • L. A. Biz and The Hustle are regurgitations of this press release, so not independent.
The only independent, reliable, secondary source that contains significant coverage of ServiceTitan is Bloomberg #2. A single such source is not sufficient to demonstrate notability. You assert that it "is inherently notable due to its status as a unicorn, its role in the Armenia-US trade agreement, and its market share in both the US and Canada", but those things do not satisfy any of the notability criteria. See WP:BFAQ#COMPANY for more information. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:32:39, 18 January 2019 review of draft by ImaKnug


I am requesting help on this article because it is my first article. I can also see that it some parts of the article did not end up where I wanted them so, such as the content box and the infobox. I am also seeking a request to improve the article. ImaKnug (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ImaKnug (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 19

02:45:06, 19 January 2019 review of draft by Bablu Baghel


Bablu Baghel 02:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

05:30:24, 19 January 2019 review of submission by Esports.achiever

if we could know the actual reason for our article to be rejected? for your information the article is about Mr India Pritam Chougule and information given is genuine as far as our concern. it can be verified as necessary using the contact details of Mr Pritam chougule given. Thank you Esports.achiever (talk) 05:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Esports.achiever. Draft User:Esports.achiever/sandbox was rejected because the subject is not notable (does not satisfy the inclusion criteria for Wikipedia). --Worldbruce (talk) 06:10, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06:10:02, 19 January 2019 review of submission by 2001:14BB:82:6985:9052:FF3:3ADA:593E


As per the Musician criteria I’ve further added - entries on National charts (three previous albums), one reaches #6 on Physical album chart. - three nominations for Jazz Album of the Year by International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (Finland) - two nationally live broadcasted feature concert under his own name: Finnish National Boradcasting Company YLE and Westdeutscher Rundfunk WDR (Cologne, Germany).

2001:14BB:82:6985:9052:FF3:3ADA:593E (talk) 06:10, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have resubmitted the draft on the strength of the 3 albums charting on the Finnish national chart. It will be reviewed in due course. You can continue to improve it while you wait. For example, external links, links that take the reader away from Wikipedia, are not allowed in the text. There are three in the draft; they should be removed. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:31:58, 19 January 2019 review of submission by 76.89.243.88


The re-edit now includes references and citations.

76.89.243.88 (talk) 20:31, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The piece in The Victoria Advocate is a start, although some reviewers will discount it as an interview in Kelton's small hometown newspaper. All of the other sources are trivial mentions, which do more harm to the draft than good. Replace those five with two sources as deep as, at least as reliable as, and more arms length than The Victoria Advocate, and the draft might have a chance. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:04, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:57:59, 19 January 2019 review of submission by 49.15.234.239


49.15.234.239 (talk) 20:57, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


23:30:04, 19 January 2019 review of draft by Fraction7


I created a page for my movie, VIYCE. It was not biased or inaccurate. You stated that it was a joke or a hoax. It is not either. VIYCE is a real movie. I know because I made it. Please publish the article now. Thank you. Fraction7 (talk) 23:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fraction7. Don't create articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization, or products. Wikipedia is not the place to get the word out about anything. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:41:20, 19 January 2019 review of submission by MarFad92


MarFad92 (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2019 (UTC) It was an accident. I slipped and my keyboard decided to make random sayings. Also perhaps my mouse as well.[reply]

January 20

00:54:38, 20 January 2019 review of submission by Horncritic


Submitted article on Harmonie Ensemble/New York last month. It was accepted. But it doesn't show up on Google as a Wikipedia article. A totally different article submitted by someone else in 2015 in Swedish comes up, but not the new, expanded English version submitted last month.

Horncritic (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Horncritic. When Harmonie Ensemble New York is patrolled (the timing of which you have no control over) it will be released for indexing by search engines. Whether and when search engines actually index it is beyond the control of Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

01:15:11, 20 January 2019 review of draft by Thefriendlyneighbour


I am a first time wikipedia contributor and am writing about the biography of a sport person. I submitted the content and the content was rejected as I do not have any citations. Unfortunately this is the first time someone is writing about it and I am at loss how to find the citations for the details that I have collected. All of the data are collected based directly from the person along with all medals and photographs the person has.

Could you please help me to understand how to make it as a valid wikipedia artile?

Thefriendlyneighbour (talk) 01:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Thefriendlyneighbour: If nothing has been written about the person in any other publications then Wikipedia won't include an article about them. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

02:11:08, 20 January 2019 review of submission by Yungstatic14


Why was my article rejected? Yungstatic14 (talk) 02:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yungstatic14. It was rejected because the subject is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). Twitter is not reliable if someone other than Yung Static is tweeting about him, and is not independent or secondary if Yung Static is tweeting about himself, so either way it does nothing to demonstrate notability. Also, autobiographies are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:39, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:10:55, 20 January 2019 review of draft by Aarshisingh


To whom it may concern,

I just wanted to check if there is any way for this article to go live quickly?

Thank you! Aarshisingh (talk) 03:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aarshisingh: I am confused. You blanked the article and have added a tag asking for the draft to be deleted. Do you want it to be reviewed or deleted? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04:25:19, 20 January 2019 review of draft by Amanda.useta


Amanda.useta (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have done everything I was asked to do why am I getting denied when I have proper permission to use some information and why am I still denied when its corrected thanks God Bless--Amanda.useta (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Amanda.useta: This draft is a mess. I am not sure if you are trying to write an article about the man, or the college, or the church. Which is it? If there's no existing Wikipedia article about the church (I couldn't find one), maybe start there? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12:46:07, 20 January 2019 review of submission by R38R32R10MTAOTT


I want an ReReview because I am adding more info that i know about the subject(s). R38R32R10MTAOTT (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi R38R32R10MTAOTT. A fundamental pillar of Wikipedia is verifiability. The encyclopedia's content summarizes previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, you must be able to cite a reliable source before you may add it. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@R38R32R10MTAOTT: There are several problems with your draft. Firstly, the context of the subject isn't clear, so people not familiar with the subject won't be able to understand it. Secondly, it has grammatical errors and formatting problems such as the random use of capital letters and punctuation. Thirdly, it has no links to other articles so readers cannot easily establish what the terms you've used mean. The fourth and main problem is that there are no references, so people cannot verify that what the article says is accurate. It also means that reviewers cannot tell if what you've written about is a notable subject that should have a place in an encyclopedia. Please do not resubmit the draft unless you can fix all these issues. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:25:49, 20 January 2019 review of draft by Wednesday1331


Hi! I have a friend who wantsto take over working on this article. Can I delete it somehow or turn it over to her?

Wednesday1331 (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wednesday1331: Anyone can edit Wikipedia, so your friend can just go ahead and improve the draft, and then submit it for review when they think it is ready. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:40:43, 20 January 2019 review of submission by Elitedivasindia


Elitedivasindia (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As you have been told, the topic is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, it is just blatant advertising too. Theroadislong (talk) 17:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:05:10, 20 January 2019 review of submission by King Momo42


I would like a re-review on my Banks because I disagree that it was notable enough. This is due to the fact that I, myself was looking for a page about Banks IV in the curiosity of re-creating the cellular automaton in Java. Unfortunately, I was unable to find such a page so after I finished looking through other websites and articles, and re-creating the automaton; I decided to use the information that I had found to create the Banks IV page myself. King Momo42 (talk) 21:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=879374301"