Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Category, Sorting, Feed		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
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


April 9

[edit]

04:30, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Harajaru345tyu

[edit]

nhi ChatGpt se nhi bnaya hai bhai Harajaru345tyu (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harajaru345tyu, this is the English language Wikipedia and all communication should be in English. Why are you writing in Hindi? Cullen328 (talk) 06:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

09:11, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Saluation97

[edit]

Thank you for reviewing my article submission so quickly. I'm sad to read you've declined it at this time. However, I would like to work with Wikipedia's editors to ensure New Blood Pop receives the recognition he deserves as a public figure and artist of note in New Zealand.

Could you please explain to me how to re-phrase the first ref block to not "read like an advert ... to sell his work". I used these two currently published similar Wikipedia articles on other artists to base my phrasing on (Karl Maughan and Andy Warhol)). I tried to be as objective as possible, basing this on facts.

I used shop front websites because they contain Biographical information about the Artist, not because they "sell his work". Are shop fronts illegal to use as Third-party reference material on Wikipedia? Reference 4 is a verified 3rd party source, the New Zealand Medical Council.

References 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 23 are all verifiable secondary sources written by News media journalists in New Zealand, so you did not look very closely at the reference list. I suggest you inspect them closer before brushing off this article under an assumption is page was made to "sell his art", which I find quite an insulting accusation as this took me probably about 40+ hours of research to assemble and compile as I am a great admirer of his art and medical career, as are many people in Aotearoa New Zealand who are proud of New Blood Pop and his community work.

How can I amend the New Blood Pop article to meet the submission standards? My article has much more citations than pages that currently exist on this site, so I really don't see the problem. Saluation97 (talk) 09:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Salutation97 You need the "Draft:" portion of the title when linking, I've fixed this for you.
Please see other stuff exists; each article or draft is judged on its own merits and not based on the presence of other articles that themselves may be inappropriate and just not yet addressed by a volunteer. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those that are classified as good articles.
It's not the volume of sources, it's the quality of sources that is important. There is such a thing as having too many sources. I would suggest focusing on your best sources, likely the ones written by news media, that go into detail about what they see as important/significant/influential about this man and his work, either broadly as a notable person or more narrowly as a notable artist. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10:56, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Kenjide024

[edit]

Can I add his spotify account or the news is not enough? Kenjide024 (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His social media is meaningless towards establishing notability. The only source you have provided is a glowing piece celebrating his birthday, written by an employee of his company. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you are an employee of his company, that must be disclosed according to our Terms of Use, see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:07, 9 April 2025 review of submission by 2.50.141.30

[edit]

Hi, I’d like to ask for some advice on how to get this article approved. Could you please let me know what improvements or changes are needed? 2.50.141.30 (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in when posting. The reviewer left you a message as to what is being looked for. Do you have more specific questions about it? 331dot (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

13:28, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Pkakumba

[edit]

hello 

Pkakumba (talk) 13:28, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you asking a question? If it's about your draft, it contains no sources, and no indication that the subject is notable. I'm not even sure who the article is about since the subject seems to shift from someone with a one-word name Kakumba to a one-word name Wavamunno and back. This article was correctly rejected as being unsuitable for Wikipedia. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 14:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

13:29, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Dayyousnbashid

[edit]

Hi, I recently wrote a counter-draft and submitted it for publication but it was rejected. I think the references seem complete. I was told that there are experienced editors here who can help me. What should I do? Is there anyone who can help? Dayyousnbashid (talk) 13:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dayyousnbashid: We don't cite Instagram or any other form of social media (no editorial oversight), we can't cite website homepages (too sparse and possibly wrong subject), and we don't cite Wikipedia itself (circular reference). No comment on the IranTV source as I can't assess it (language barrier). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What documents are required?
Is a blog listing the biographies of players from Iran's lower leagues sufficient? Dayyousnbashid (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blogs are not considered reliable sources, also we looking for significant coverage not mere listings. Theroadislong (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What should be sent? Dayyousnbashid (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We need reliable sources, sources with a reputation of fact checking and editorial control. This may be different from other versions of Wikipedia like the Farsi Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:29, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Gbrigman

[edit]

Hi, I'm confused about the needing verifiable references. We have citations for everything listed. Thanks Gbrigman (talk) 16:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The references you provided all seem to be associated with the band or are the mere reporting of its activities, not significant coverage of the band in independent reliable sources that shows how the band meets at least one aspect of WP:BAND. 331dot (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gbrigman: Not all sources are created equal. Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
The good sources you do have are drowned by an ocean of chaff. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thanks..Super helpful..appreciate it. Gbrigman (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:07, 9 April 2025 review of submission by Sejal Hota

[edit]

jst to get some idea about how to edit the mistake Sejal Hota (talk) 19:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sejal Hota if you are asking about the error message, I fixed that for you and I also removed unreliable sources that should be used like github, social media, linkedin, etc. I also removed the list of awards in the infobox because none are notable. S0091 (talk) 19:22, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

21:43, 9 April 2025 review of submission by PhilippPhi

[edit]

I am not sure how I would find for a niche technical death metal band "published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself" - would reviews on review sites count? Or music related podcasts?

I compared to the article for Spawn of Possession, which is the precursor band to Retromorphosis and is one of the genre defining bands of technical death metal (I guess thereby fulfilling criterion 7 for notability), but also doesn't seem to show any proof of that. IMO an article on Retromorphosis has relevance for the same reason, being the re-founding of a genre defining band - I just don't know what evidence to present.

Thanks, PhilippPhi (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews of the bands' music would help, if the reviews are written by professional reviewers. Podcasts are not often considered reliable sources, it depends mostly on if the podcast has a reputation of fact checking and editorial control. 331dot (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I managed to add some citations, but it's still a bit of a struggle. I think the more well known one I now added is by No Clean Singing, which however is listed as unreliable by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources, even though the reasoning is a bit vague
PhilippPhi (talk) 21:07, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I found some reference to the band reforming from Spawn of Possession in metal injection and added that to both articles, as that is a reliable source for once :)
Sorry for the double comment, hope you don't feel spammed with notifications
PhilippPhi (talk) 21:25, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PhilippPhi Spawn of Possession is a really bad article with most of the content unsourced, the few sources used are unreliable (it uses MySpace as source for example) and created by someone with a clear conflict of interest. You'll find many articles here with similar issues. Standards have changed which is why it is bad idea to use an existing article as basis for another. Not that you are expected to know this, but just explaining why. If the band is niche as you say, it may not be possible to meet Wikipedia's current notability criteria for bands (WP:NBAND). S0091 (talk) 22:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks for the insight. That article being not a good example actually helps me understand the issue. I'll have a see what I can find in terms of proper sources.
PhilippPhi (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 10

[edit]

00:46, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Nuvirtualis

[edit]


Feedback on recent article? (newbie questions) Hi all, I'm a bit of a Wikipedia newbie and recently took a stab at writing my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aviv_Elor_(Researcher)). It seems the article was rejected by the editor for not meeting any of the academic notability criteria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)), but I thought #2 would be met given their international awards, or are these too outside of Academia? Reviewing the notability criteria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)), is a different category more appropriate? Any suggestions for revision or should I not even pursue a revision? Thank you for your time and feedback Nuvirtualis (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your header to provide a link to your draft as intended(you had other text there, creating a link as if the text was a draft title). The whole url is not needed when linking; just place the title of the target page in double brackets. ([[Draft:Aviv Elor (Researcher)]], for example).
The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted. I would tend to agree with the reviewer, though, that it's probably too soon for an article about this researcher. 331dot (talk) 01:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

05:31, 10 April 2025 review of submission by 24.86.211.12

[edit]

There is significant media coverage, what more is needed? 24.86.211.12 (talk) 05:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources need to be cited inline at the spot of the claim(s) they support. Anything less will lead to a summary decline. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

06:23, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Kschuber98

[edit]

This is the second draft of my article. In the second draft, I included reliable, secondary sources - (newspapers, magazines, independent websites, etc.) and I listed the citations as per the guidelines given. And yes, some of the cited articles are “short, passing mentions,” but other cited articles are very long. Is each citation supposed to be “very long”? (ie, Mansfield won two NEA Jazz Awards, so I just cited his mention in their catalog.) I have additional sources I could include, except for various reasons, I narrowed it down to sixteen in this draft. That really seemed like enough - compared to other similar Wikipedia pages. PS- I have noted that the wording of my first sentence was challenged, and I will change that. But it would be very helpful to know - before re-submitting - if there are other suggestions editors may have in regards to the article and citations. PPS- I also wrote back to the editor “Flat Out” but have not received an answer from him. Thank you for any help you can offer! Kschuber98 (talk) 06:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kschuber98 Though understandable, beware in using other articles as a model or example- these too could be inappropriate and you would be unaware of that as a new user. See other stuff exists. There are many ways inappropriate content can exist, this cannot justify adding more inappropriate content. That another article exists does not mean that it meets current standards(if it ever did). If you want to use other articles as a model, use those that are classified as good articles, which have received community vetting.
Please tell which of the notability criteria for musicians Mr. Mansfield meets; alternatively, he could be a notable creative professional(as a composer) 331dot (talk) 09:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

07:31, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Mamadkoli

[edit]

I have made this article, and its my first article making. I had read every policy and rules about article making, and have submitted it 2 times but it has been rejected two times. Now, Im asking for any administrator or admin or experienced editor to help me in finding the problems. Mostly the main problem being notability. I would appreciate and be thankful for any support on this case. Mamadkoli (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.
You have basically just posted his resume. You need to summarize what independent reliable sources choose to say about him and what makes him a notable person.
You took a picture of this man in his office and he posed for you. What's your connection to him? 331dot (talk) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

08:07, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Maxxw71

[edit]

not entirely sure why this submission keeps getting rejected. Sources are secondary, independent, and in-depth. It's a semi-pro team that plays in the NPSL. Multiple teams in the same league have wikipedia articles of them with barely any sources. Maxxw71 (talk) 08:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maxxw71 It's been declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in this process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.
I don't think the issue is that there is something wrong with the sources, but the sources that you have provided do not establish that this club is a notable organization as Wikipedia defines one. You have just summarized the activities of the club, not significant coverage of the club, coverage that goes into detail about the club. There is also promotional or at least non-neutral language in the draft("winning momentum"; "secured its first two trophies").
What is your connection to the club? You (under your original username) claim to have personally created and personally own the copyright to its logo. 331dot (talk) 09:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see I've talked to you before, apologies. But please speak to the logo. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:02, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Galaxy Accelerator

[edit]

I copied biography of Hendrik van Dam from wikitree and my draft was declined. What should I do for acception of this new article? Galaxy Accelerator (talk) 14:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seemed to be copied verbatim from a copyrighted source, even you got it from elsewhere(I don't know what "wikitree" means or is). 331dot (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: WikiTree is a genealogy wiki. I should note it doesn't use a copyleft licence, so anything taken from there verbatim should be nuked as copyvio. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:09, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Sami ALG4

[edit]

Any way to deal with this? Sami ALG4 (talk) 16:09, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sami ALG4: Get sources that actually discuss Boudjeltia at length rather than just name-drop him, quote him, or otherwise don't discuss him at length. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:35, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Carmouche69

[edit]

hello I want to know if citing direct quotes is permissible. and if the current format of my text (which is very basic and doesn't contain any copyright issues) is good to go for the moment? - mostly i am waiting to see if i need to start all over again. or if this basic format can be published. with revisions + original words later on to add on. Carmouche69 (talk) 16:35, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Carmouche69: You certainly shouldn't be editing this in the first place, so any question on that front is moot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what do you mean? Carmouche69 (talk) 16:51, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the submission per WP:ARBECR. S0091 (talk) 17:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:24, 10 April 2025 review of submission by Swensonia

[edit]

Hi. I've submitted an edited version of this page in hopes of meeting the necessary criteria for publication. Thank you for your previous feedback. Could I please get some feedback on my updated work and be notified regarding acceptance or direction for additional editing? Thank you. Swensonia (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted the draft for review, the reviewer will leave feedback if not accepted. We don't really do pre-review reviews here. 331dot (talk) 23:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20:16, 10 April 2025 review of submission by ScienceOcean

[edit]

Hello! I submitted a draft for my page and was rejected due to lacking "secondary sources". I was wondering if anyone could review my sandbox and explain to me why my sources are not sufficient? Thank you! Sandbox URL: https://w.wiki/BYpH ScienceOcean (talk) 20:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ScienceOcean You need the "Draft:" portion of the title when linking. I've fixed this.
The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.
Your sources are just announcements of this event, not significant coverage that shows how it is a notable event. 331dot (talk) 20:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

21:48:35, 10 April 2025 review of submission by 103.14.72.158

[edit]


103.14.72.158 (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

103.14.72.158, Sadly, I can't help you, because you have not specified a draft. — 🦅White-tailed eagleTalk to the eagleStalking eagle 13:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 11

[edit]

00:08, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Chaibiscuitpodcast

[edit]

Kindly advise me why my article is getting rejected. what are the major issues and how can I resolve them? I have written the biography from my own ad it hasn't been copied from any source still it won't get accepeted. Chaibiscuitpodcast (talk) 00:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaibiscuitpodcast, you are not submitting an article. This is my new sandbox is not an article. If you are trying to use your sandbox, you don't need to submit it to AfC. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 00:23, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So where should I submit it? Chaibiscuitpodcast (talk) 00:48, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaibiscuitpodcast, You don't need to submit it. There is nothing to submit. If you write a draft and want it published, that is what AfC can help you with. Only pages that are meant for the mainspace (what people read) are reviwed by AfC reviewers. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 00:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
can you guide me where should I write a draft? Chaibiscuitpodcast (talk) 00:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaibiscuitpodcast, I will respond on you talk page. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 00:54, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

02:27, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Enigmainkwell

[edit]

No response from reviewer - Request new review for Draft:Configa I submitted a draft article about British hip-hop producer Configa (Draft: Configa), which was rejected with a generic LLM-generation notice. I responded to the reviewer's talk page on April 8, 2025, requesting clarification and addressing their concerns but have not received any response.

I believe my draft meets Wikipedia's standards for neutrality, reliable sourcing, and notability. Every claim is supported by verifiable citations to music publications, official releases, and academic repositories. The subject has collaborated with notable artists like Arrested Development and Chuck D and has published academic work.

Since my request for clarification has gone unanswered for 2 days, I'm requesting a new reviewer who might be more familiar with music articles and hip-hop culture. The current situation is preventing progress on a legitimate article about a notable subject.

Thank you for your assistance. Enigmainkwell (talk) 02:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Enigmainkwell You had a sentence where just the title of the draft should go in the header, I fixed this.
You have resubmitted the draft, the next reviewer will leave you feedback if it is not accepted. Posting here does not speed up the process. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
```
Noted- regarding the header formatting correction. Noted that resubmissions follow standard queue procedures and additional posts don't accelerate review. My concern stemmed from receiving a generic AI-generation rejection without specific feedback identifying problematic sections, despite providing verifiable citations for each claim about this established music producer. I will await the next reviewer's assessment.
~~~~
``` Enigmainkwell (talk) 09:15, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting the comment was not generated by AI- it was a pre-written message. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noted Enigmainkwell (talk) 10:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Enigmainkwell: What is your connection to the person this draft is about? --bonadea contributions talk 14:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

06:02, 11 April 2025 review of submission by SkibidiToiletRiler

[edit]

Please accept it SkibidiToiletRiler (talk) 06:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no draft entitled "German Community"(even a properly linked one like Draft:German Community); the only draft you have written is Draft:V.M, which is a mess of jumbled text. You haven't submitted it yet, but it would be declined- possibly rejected- quickly.
There is already an article on Germans. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm taking that draft to AN/I; it looks like an attempt at computer code. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:42, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

08:45, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Marcos Martín Crespo

[edit]

I am trying to submit a translation from Spanish of the article about Pablo Méndez (poet). I've realized that Wikipedia works differently depending on the language you publish in so I might have done it wrong. When I published the article they told me I lacked reliable sources but there are none in the original. What do I do? Thanks. Marcos Martín Crespo (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos Martín Crespo I fixed your header to provide a link to your draft(the "Draft:" portion is needed).
A Wikipedia article- at least here on the English Wikipedia- must summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. This is an absolute requirement if the topic is a living person, please see the Biographies of Living Persons policy. If you have no sources, there cannot be an article here about the topic. Where are you getting your information if you have no sources? 331dot (talk) 08:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

11:04, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Aone Scientific

[edit]

i want to publish my company send me any suggestion Aone Scientific (talk) 11:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for promotion. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:18, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Wfhtosixfigures

[edit]

I’ve provided resources and edits Wfhtosixfigures (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wfhtosixfigures, that was an overtly promotional and poorly referenced draft that had no resemblance to an encyclopedia article. The draft has been deleted. Cullen328 (talk) 05:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

15:37, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Lrtanny

[edit]

Why was the Wikipedia article I created on Rebecca Bau declined?

How can I get help making the needed corrections? Lrtanny (talk) 15:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lrtanny: What is your connexion to Bau's estate or the Joseph Bau House Museum? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:46, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am a communications consultant working with Clila and Hadasa Bau, the daughters of Rebecca and Joseph Bau. Clila has asked me to create a Wikipedia page for Rebecca and has provided information and photos.. Lrtanny (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lrtanny: Are you aware you are obligated to DISCLOSE this information per our ToU and (in some jurisdictions) covert-advertizing laws? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not aware. I am not a paid employee but only a friend volunteering to help Clila and Hadasa Bau to preserve their father and mother's legacy. I am not compensated in any way. Can I now make edits? I will rewrite Rebecca Bau's info. Can you please restore the draft page so I can rewrite it? The Bau daughter's have given me the photos. What do I need to do to use them?: Lrtanny (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was a copyright violation so would NOT be restored and Wikipedia is NOT a venue to "preserve their father and mother's legacy". Theroadislong (talk) 12:49, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So can I create another version? How do I retrieve this versio Lrtanny (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lrtanny: You can't retrive copyright violating text, but you may create another draft about Bau. Please make sure to disclose your conflict of interest when creating the draft. It's a bit confusing that you first said communications consultant working with Clila and Hadasa Bau, the daughters of Rebecca and Joseph Bau and then that you are not working with them, but are doing this as a friend of the family. Regardless, as long as you are transparent about your conflict of interest and make sure to base everything you write on reliable, independent sources, you are welcome to create a draft and submit it for review. --bonadea contributions talk 13:56, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i am not paid, just a volunteer.
So can I use the content if Clila Bau gives permission or must I rewrite. I have asked Clila to email the permission s email to confirm we have license to the photos. Where do I disclose I am an unpaid volunteer. Lrtanny (talk) 14:09, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
can you explain why the edits I made to the Joseph Bau page yesterday were deleted? Lrtanny (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You may disclose on your user page(User:Lrtanny). If you are saying that you are a communications consultant offering your professional services for free for a friend, I would just disclose what you said on this page, there.
It would be much easier if the person who holds they copyright to the photos just uploads them themselves, then you don't have to take a deep dive into copyright issues. Also know that images are not relevant to the draft process, which only considers the text and sources. Images can wait until the draft is accepted, they are considered an enhancement. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clila will be emailing the permissions email with the photos. How will I know when the photos are approved?
I will try to recreate the Rebecca Bau page when I have a chance. I guess I need to start from scratch since the draft was removed. I don't understand why it couldn't be left as a draft so I could make the edits there..
Unfortunately somebody moved my edits to the Joseph Bau page so now there are errors. Lrtanny (talk) 19:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright violations cannot be restored for legal reasons. 331dot (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is it a violation if the copyright holder gives permission? Just wondering. Lrtanny (talk) 19:29, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The permission must come first. 331dot (talk) 19:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lrtanny: I'm afraid the text on this webpage (which is what was copied, right?) couldn't be used in Wikipedia even if it was released, because it is not written in an encyclopedic tone. It would create a lot more work for you to take the text on that page as your starting point, and rewrite it completely, instead of identifying the most relevant information and write an entirely new text based on that info. In addition, a source that is not wholly independent of the topic should be used very sparingly. --bonadea contributions talk 20:03, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

17:51, 11 April 2025 review of submission by 102.0.2.86

[edit]

The page was deleted from Wikipedia please explain to me how i can rewrite it Thank you. 102.0.2.86 (talk) 17:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it's the end of the line for this topic; it has not been shown that he is notable as Wikipedia uses the word. 331dot (talk) 18:36, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

18:44, 11 April 2025 review of submission by 2001:D08:102A:BB1E:1:1:9941:C36A

[edit]

!!!Hello Mr. Waxworker Welcome to ☠️☠️Death Wikipedia☠️☠️!!!. 2001:D08:102A:BB1E:1:1:9941:C36A (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked by Daniel Case [1]. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 19:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20:27, 11 April 2025 review of submission by Mr.Fact10151

[edit]

Please give me an example of what a formal submission looks like. This article/bio was written with 100% facts, sources, and was not written in any other format other than a neutral standard. Can someone please help me with the writing format? Mr.Fact10151 (talk) 20:27, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.Fact10151 @Gheus who most recently declined the draft might be able to offer more but to me, it reads more like a resume (i.e. "experience") than an encyclopedia article. As for as meeting the notability criteria, at a brief look, the sources appear to be brief mentions or his comments/interviews which is not enough. What we are looking for is in-depth coverage about him by independent reliable sources, not what he says about himself and also a bit broader than local coverage. I'll leave you a message a your talk page providing more information about creating an article that might be helpful. S0091 (talk) 21:13, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, don't cite unreliable sources such as [2], [3], [4]. Gheus (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Mr.Fact10151. A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliable published sources, wholly unconnected with the subject have said about the subject, and very little else. Unreliable sources (such as most things with "-pedia" in their names), sources which originate from the subject, or are clearly based on their words; and sources which have no more than passing mentions of the subject, do not contribute to establishing that the subject is notable ColinFine (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are trying to do a bio page for Mr Namdar, as opposed to an article. Is there a difference in the criteria or in the drafting template I.e. uploading a photo, birthdate, etc. For example, "Rio Ramirez" is an amateur soccer player and has a Wikipedia page, with very little information on it. I'd like to know how we can get Mr. Namdar who has ample information a page up. Mr.Fact10151 (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 12

[edit]

05:45, 12 April 2025 review of submission by PhantasmalCats

[edit]

I would like to rename the article as “Fossilized Wonders.” I had created this article as “Touhou 20” in preparation of any release of the 20th official Touhou Project game; however, only approximately after four hours, news had come out about Touhou 20 out of all odds. As I did not know four hours prior, the game is called “Fossilized Wonders” just as the other Touhou Project game articles are called “Perfect Cherry Blossom” or “Imperishable Night.” Nevertheless, thank you. PhantasmalCats (talk) 05:45, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PhantasmalCats: I see that an article by that name was created by another editor (after your question here) and that you've also edited it, so it looks like the situation is resolved :-) I have declined your draft as a duplicate of an existing article. --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, thank you. PhantasmalCats (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

09:35, 12 April 2025 review of submission by Jaycob river moody

[edit]

I need help I'm making this page for an important person, and it says speedy deletion please fix this... as I'm new Jaycob river moody (talk) 09:35, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]


help me please! I'm making an important page it says speedy deletion as I'm new pls help Jaycob river moody (talk) 09:36, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jaycob river moody Using the whole url in the header breaks the formatting that provides a link, I've fixed this. This page is for asking about drafts; please use the more general Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 09:42, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:44, 12 April 2025 review of submission by Rise2dasky

[edit]

Request to move to Draft namespace

Hello! I'm working on a Wikipedia article about Alin Nedelcu and created the draft in my user sandbox: User:Rise2dasky/sandbox

Since I'm not autoconfirmed, I can't move it to the Draft namespace myself. Could someone please move it to: Draft:Alin Nedelcu

Thank you very much! Rise2dasky (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it. 331dot (talk) 16:59, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

23:52, 12 April 2025 review of submission by Bapatparth

[edit]

I am not sure why the draft is rejected about Dr. Devi Gnyawali. He has done work spanning more than 13000 citations in his field of expertise and have been guiding students at Virginia Tech. He has also been a very important figure in the research of coopetition in Strategic Management. Can I get more information on this, also if I want to get it accepted, what should be added. Bapatparth (talk) 23:52, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bapatparth: as it says in the decline (not 'rejection') notice, this draft was declined because it does not provide sufficient evidence that the subject is notable. I actually think he is notable, especially on account of that named chair he holds, but this claim needs to be clearly referenced. More generally, the draft needs to be better supported by citations: eg. which source gives this person's date of birth, or the name of his wife, etc.? In articles on living people, every material statement as well as any private personal and family details must be clearly supported by inline citations to reliable published sources, or else removed.
What is your relationship with this person? Please read WP:COI, and make the necessary disclosure as instructed there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:04, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 13

[edit]

08:51, 13 April 2025 review of submission by Clenpr

[edit]

I improved this draft. Could you let me know if the article is OK now to move out from Draft or point out any required improvement? Thanks! Clenpr (talk) 08:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clenpr If you want feedback, you should resubmit the draft. Asking for a pre-review review is redundant. I feel like the information in it could go in Liberation Day tariffs#Responses, or that this might already have an article. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Worldwide boycott is not only related to the Trump Tariffs, but as noted in the article the position of Trump in issues like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the attempt to takeover Greenland from Denmark and Elon Musk election interference in Germany. Clenpr (talk) 09:16, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:36, 13 April 2025 review of submission by Tanushrimitra26

[edit]

which citation is not reliable? Tanushrimitra26 (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tanushrimitra26: your draft cites two close primary sources and a blog, while most of the content is entirely unreferenced. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

15:21, 13 April 2025 review of submission by 82.8.141.222

[edit]

New Love (The Doodlebops song) 82.8.141.222 (talk) 15:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question but read the decline messages. I also strongly suggest reading Your first article. S0091 (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:26, 13 April 2025 review of submission by Gurav 1317

[edit]

why my article was declined when wikipedi has other game articles ? Gurav 1317 (talk) 16:26, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gurav 1317: because Draft:Why Unfair Mario is the Ultimate Test of Patience and Skill is not written even remotely as an encyclopaedia article. There is also nothing to suggest that the game is notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:30, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
since this is my first article, would you please let me know what is the encyclopedia way ? and i know the game is not notable that's one reason i wrote about it, its very under rated and not known by many, and i want people to know about it. Gurav 1317 (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gurav 1317 Wikipedia is not the place to do what you want to do. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia simply summarizes what other reliable sources have written about a topic. If no such sources exist, an article is not possible. S0091 (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gurav 1317: notability is a core requirement for any subject to be included in the encyclopaedia. Wikipedia is not a platform to tell the world about something, and certainly not the first one to publish anything.
You can get an idea for how encyclopaedia articles are written by taking a look at existing articles, especially ones rated good. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

17:17, 13 April 2025 review of submission by Matt.ruhstaller

[edit]

I am trying to understand what is missing to have appropriate notability to qualify for a page. This person has significant photo credits and the media coverage of them, including recently by the Hollywood Reporter, covering his photos at award shows.

Can you please help me understand what is missing? When I review other recently approved photographer pages, they have fewer credits, so I am a little confused.

Any pointers are appreciated. Thanks. M (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Matt.ruhstaller: What other recently approved photographer pages? Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
Most of your sources are bad, one is good, and two are borderline-usable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:26, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick response. An example of a page who also has one good source and two borderline ones: Kevin Mazur#
I understand that the coverage does not analyze or reflect on the images, but I felt I should add them because it establishes credit and ownership for the art itself. The photos themselves establish notability for a photographer, in my view. Would a shorter article with basic information (like the one I referenced) have an easier path to approval?
Thanks again for the feedback, I appreciate it. M (talk) 17:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article on Mazur was never submitted as a draft; it was moved into articlespace by the creator, bypassing the review process. WP:NARTIST (our specific eligibility criteria for photographers and creative professionals) doesn't support "Photographer just doing his job" as a criterion; I'd suggest both a shorter article and actually finding much better sources (see if there's anything that specifically discusses/reviews specific photos he's taken). The Hollywood Reporter source is along the lines of what we'd be looking for. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's helpful context.
One more question before I revise: This person has several photos featured on the cover and inside of large music and entertainment magazines and publications. Do those help to establish notability? If so, is there a different way to cite those? M (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Matt.ruhstaller: Not unless those photographs have attracted commentary (i.e. they've been discussed/reviewed in an in-depth source). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:34, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

17:35, 13 April 2025 review of submission by PawsFC-GM

[edit]

I would appreciate some clarification regarding the citation issues with my draft article. Can I confirm which statements need to have citation added or the statement be removed? In the ‘Career’ section there is no citation for the statement about the commission to design a BOAC stand, or designing Coloroll wallpaper. The ‘Early Life’ section doesn’t include citation for the Aga Khan competition. Should these statements be removed if I can’t find citation (I have looked, but not managed to find anything). Wiki guidelines state citation is needed for statements likely to be challenged. I don’t know how likely that is for this article. I have seen similar statements in published articles that don’t include citation to back up the statement. For example, the ‘Biography’ section of the article for John Burningham mentions posters for British Transport (similar to a statement in my article) but the citation doesn’t support this claim. The feedback provided on the 8th April mentions entire sections are unsourced. The ‘Early Life’ and ‘Personal Life’ sections are unsourced, but a lot of articles appear to contain unsourced statements in these sections, with sources unlikely to be available unless the person is particularly famous and the subject of newspaper articles, for example. Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks, Andy. PawsFC-GM (talk) 17:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PawsFC-GM Are you the general manager("GM") of an organization called "PawsFC"?
Yes, if you cannot find a citation for information, it must be removed.
Please see other stuff exists; there are many reasons that there can be inappropriate content in an article, this cannot justify adding more inappropriate content. If you would like to help us, please identify other articles you have seen with unsourced statements(in addition to the one you mention). We're only as good as the people who choose to help us. 331dot (talk) 18:29, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 14

[edit]

02:46, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Calliopewritter

[edit]

my article on the local art gallery page is declined , could u please help me how can I improve the article and resubmit by draft ? many thanks Calliopewritter (talk) 02:46, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calliopewriter You need to provide the "Draft:" portion of the title when linking, I fixed this for you.
You have just documented the existence of the gallery and tell what it does- a Wikipedia article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Please review the message left by the reviewer, and the policies linked to therein. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

04:15, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Mohshinhm

[edit]

I’m reaching out regarding the article about Kamrul Tarafder, which has been stoped for 42 days now under the reason that it was “written to promote his work and organizations,” and that the lead paragraph “isn't even mostly about him.”

I truly respect the guidelines of Wikipedia and the role of administrators in maintaining its quality. I also want to clarify that I’ve responded to this concern on the article’s talk page, and have done my best to address the feedback. However, it seems like each time I try to explain, I have to start from the beginning again with a different admin. I’m not sure if this is a system limitation or if previous conversations are not being seen.

I want to assure you that my intention is not to promote anyone, but to fairly document Mr. Tarafder’s long-standing work and contributions — especially his 20 years of service helping the Filipino people through ASA Philippines. I believe that deserves to be recognized, if not at least considered properly.

If there are still issues with the article, I’d sincerely appreciate any specific guidance so I can improve it. I’m more than willing to work on revisions and follow the right process.

Thank you very much for your time, and for all the work you do for the Wikipedia community. 

Mohshinhm (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mohshinhm: I see a massive issue - swathes of your article are unsourced. This is a nonstarter even if the article weren't written in a hagiographical fashion. And note that both problems plague both drafts. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:31, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Whole thing is written in a promotional tone, pls see WP:NOTADVOCACY and WP:NOTPROMO for your regards that because of the guy's long standing work and contributions, he deserves a wikipedia article. If that were the case, we would have much more articles on military, firefighting and law enforcement compared to the lack of articles we currently have. Your quote "I want to assure you that my intention is not to promote anyone, but to fairly document Mr. Tarafder’s long-standing work and contributions — especially his 20 years of service helping the Filipino people through ASA Philippines. I believe that deserves to be recognized, if not at least considered properly. " contradicts itself, you are saying you do not want to promote someone, but you believe they need to be recognize, i.e. promoting them.
  2. I ran it through an AI checker and the vast majority was AI generated.
  3. It is very, very unsourced.
Thehistorianisaac (talk) 09:29, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10:50, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Cricketnerd99

[edit]

Hi

This draft was recently declined due to lack of reliable sources. My source was the CricketArchive website.

I based my draft on List of Essex List_A cricket_records which is live, and uses the same source.

CricketArchive is a well established site for cricket records, and is used as a source for many cricket based pages on Wikipedia.

I am not sure how to proceed in order to get my draft accepted. Can you offer any suggestions?

Thank you

Phil (Cricketnerd99) Cricketnerd99 (talk) 10:50, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cricketnerd99: you need to cite your sources, it's not enough that some sources may or may not exist somewhere out there. As it stands, this draft is entirely unreferenced. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Ah okay, only now saw that you had in fact attempted to reference this, in a way: you've added inline external links (which aren't actually allowed) into the tables, rather than inline citations (which are very much the preferred method of referencing, and in some cases required). See WP:REFB for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

11:45, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Siddharthbothra

[edit]

Subject: Clarification Note on the Notability and Eligibility of Shri Jaskaran Bothra for Wikipedia Inclusion

Shri Jaskaran Bothra was a highly respected Indian industrialist, philanthropist, and social reformer whose contributions to the fields of rural development, education, and healthcare continue to inspire. His life and work embody the Gandhian principle of trusteeship, using wealth and business as a means to serve the broader community.

In recognition of his national contribution to social service, the Ministry of Communications, Government of India, honoured him posthumously in 2003 with a Special Cover and Postal Cancellation — a prestigious philatelic tribute rarely accorded to individuals and typically reserved for personalities of national significance.

This honour was not symbolic alone; it serves as a verified government-issued acknowledgment of Shri Jaskaran Bothra’s stature as a national personality. The issuance of a Special Cover by India Post is a recognized marker of public importance, often referenced as validation in biographical records and historical documentation.

It is therefore both surprising and unfortunate that a submission related to Shri Bothra was rejected by Wikipedia despite the presence of:

Government recognition through India Post

Continued legacy through a formally registered charitable trust (The Jaskaran Bothra Foundation)

Generational contribution to Indian industry and society through the IQ Group and affiliated ventures

Publicly accessible references and organizational records

Notable social initiatives like the #NamedAfterMom campaign, inspired by the family’s values and carried forward by his grandson, Siddharth Bothra

Given these points, the rejection seems inconsistent with Wikipedia’s guidelines on notability and verifiability, which explicitly accept significant coverage in reliable sources and recognition from official institutions as qualifying criteria.

We humbly request reconsideration of the draft submission for Shri Jaskaran Bothra, or guidance on additional documentation required for inclusion. His contributions, impact, and formal honors clearly reflect the legacy of a personality of national relevance. Siddharthbothra (talk) 11:45, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.
Please clarify who "we" is. Only a single person should have exclusive access to your account. Are you a relative?
The draft is very poorly sourced, or at least the sources have not been properly provided. See Referencing for beginners.
Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about someone and their accomplishments. A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they are a notable person as Wikipedia uses the term. 331dot (talk) 11:52, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:02, 14 April 2025 review of submission by 90.204.74.21

[edit]

I don't know how to write in wikipedia page 90.204.74.21 (talk) 12:02, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You had coding in place to suppress display of your text. It was wholly promotional, however, and is now deleted. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia, and it's even harder with a conflict of interest. As you were editing about your employer, you need to disclose as a paid editor, a Terms of Use requirement(you had made the less strict COI disclosure). This is easier to do with an account, but even if you don't wish to create an account, you must disclose.
Please see WP:BOSS, and have your superiors at your employer read it, too. 331dot (talk) 12:27, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:11, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Nik at Guido Fluri Stiftung

[edit]

Good day, I'm not sure I understand all the reasons for declining the article (written like an advertisement, need for better sources, not just materials produced by the creator). I have made a few changes to the text, which I hope address the concerns about advertising language. For the sources, I used broadcast media (such as SWI swissinfo, 3sat, SRF, Deutsche Welle, BBC) and newspapers. There are no references to self-published material. I would be grateful if you could tell me what else I can do before resubmitting the article. Thanks! Nik at Guido Fluri Foundation (talk) 12:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have posted a nice summary of his activities and background, but that is not solely what we are looking for. A Wikipedia article about a person must 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. "Significant coverage" is that which goes beyond merely telling what the subject does, and goes into detail about what the source sees as important/significant/influential about the person.
Please read WP:BOSS, and if he's aware that you're here, please have Mr. Fluri read it, too. 331dot (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:28, 14 April 2025 review of submission by 25javk

[edit]

Hi, I've revived this page and I'll like to move it to the main article now 25javk (talk) 12:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for review, a reviewer will eventually look at it. Please be patient. While you wait, please disclose your paid editing status on your user page(User:25javk). Please see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked as sock. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

13:12, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Hypothetical Painter

[edit]

I want to know, which section and how many things of this draft have to be edited properly so that I can modify it properly to get this page be published. If the admin or moderator specify the mistakes, it will be very helpful. Please help. Thank You. Hypothetical Painter (talk) 13:12, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Don't use quora as a source
Thehistorianisaac (talk) 13:31, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:28, 14 April 2025 review of submission by Slt523

[edit]

What suggestions would you make to make this article more encyclopedic/fit the appropriate tone of a Wikipedia article? Slt523 (talk) 14:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Slt523 you have resubmitted it so you will get another review. If you are affiliated with Boris Pasche, you need to make the appropriate declaration, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. Based on the history of the draft, it is most likely you are paid and not declaring that is in violation of Wikipedia's Terms of Use. S0091 (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14:58, 14 April 2025 review of submission by 2001:1610:E5:B000:81ED:AD0D:F932:8629

[edit]

I submitted twice an entry and both time has not been accepted but the reasons given are conflicting. Both reviewers agreed on the interest of the subject = 1) they accept that thermodynamic conventions are important, 2) they are not covered anywhere in Wikipedia as a specific topic. However, the first one rejected it because wanted something more factual and then, when strictly following his/her advice, the second reviewer found it "his article is an extremely general narrative with a list of examples". But, when additional material had been included illustrating why the topic is important, not just instances of conventions, it was rejected as 'an opinion piece' by the first reviewer. It's easy to start going around in circles like a hamster on a wheel... Could the reviewers communicate among themselves? 2001:1610:E5:B000:81ED:AD0D:F932:8629 (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes We would both like a Stationed response so we can post the article SkillBeast (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who is we? Also, there is only one decline so not sure where the claim of two is coming from. As stated in the decline, it is an essay, which makes declarations and conclusions, rather than an encyclopedia article which summarizes what reliable sources state, giving WP:DUEWEIGHT to significant views. S0091 (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:48, 14 April 2025 review of submission by SkillBeast

[edit]

What Should I add to this article the medication has something to in he real world and it is dangerous SkillBeast (talk) 19:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SkillBeast Do not create further hoaxes, or you will be blocked. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what your talking about I is not a hoax when the is FACTUAL VIDEO evidence and this is a "Drug/Medication" That is unknown so I'm not going to have a million pieces of evidence SkillBeast (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not reliably sourced, it doesn't belong here, period. All you've provided in sourcing is to say to check out some random person's Youtube page. That is not even close to being an acceptable article, and you should not continue to pursue this page unless you're going to take it far more seriously. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20:04, 14 April 2025 review of submission by 24.60.109.204

[edit]

I appreciate the comments from JWoodwa but I want to explain that I am writing this article as a public service because many visitors are curious about this place and it took me a lot of research just to find out the brief history I've written. I was surprised to find that it even had an active website (which is long out of date). To make a long story short, there are no solid references because the property has been abandoned and nobody is claiming ownership. Would a satellite image from Google Earth help? There is literally nothing else I can find that gives any information about the property other than what I have found. It is of significant interest to Wiki Readers. What can I do to publish it and not have it rejected? 24.60.109.204 (talk) 20:04, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in when posting. If you have no independent reliable sources to summarize in an article about this former resort, it would not merit an article. If you just want to tell the world about it, you should use social media, a personal website, or other forum with less stringent requirements. 331dot (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A Wikipedia article should be a summary of what reliably published independent sources say about a subject, and very little else. If they are no such sources, then no article is possible. Period. ColinFine (talk) 21:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

21:44, 14 April 2025 review of submission by 4rju9

[edit]

Can anyone help me create this article. While i was reading the Kiccha, Udham Singh Nagar article i found that the article doesn't have the person in the notable people so i thought that i could create that article on him as he had been quite famous in the city during 2002-2008.

Can anyone help me create the article on him? I have already cited some of the sources in the article that validates the information presented.

I've got some more sources which can later be used to ad d more details in the article. ─ 4rju9 ♛ (T⚡C) 21:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 15

[edit]

Article Rejection

[edit]

Message:

Hello, and thank you in advance for your time. I recently submitted an article draft to the Articles for Creation process, but it was declined. I would like to better understand the specific reasons for the rejection so that I can make the necessary improvements and resubmit it successfully.

Could someone kindly review my draft and provide feedback on what elements may be missing or not aligned with Wikipedia's notability or sourcing guidelines? I’m committed to learning and would really appreciate any guidance or suggestions you can offer.

Thank you again!

— Aratus Aratus (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: User:Aratus/sandbox
@Aratus: This draft falls into a contentious topic. I would suggest abandoning this draft for now and learn how to edit and source articles outside of a contentious topic. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 01:49, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

01:15, 15 April 2025 review of submission by Jdburlingame

[edit]

Submission has been declined, but this is wrong according to at least three of your basic "notability" criteria: "Has won or been nominated for a major music award" (won one Emmy, nominated for seven more); "Has won first, second, or third place in a major music competition" (several in the classical music field); "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable" (dozens of scores for top TV series including Murder, She Wrote). Please re-consider this, perhaps using another reviewer who read the entire piece and not just the "references." Jdburlingame (talk) 01:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

02:36, 15 April 2025 review of submission by 97.91.80.176

[edit]

Hi! I noticed that CheapPickle, a YouTuber, didn't have a Wikipedia page, so I made one that I thing would work. I noticed someone had tried before but not included basically anything, so I took a crack at it. Does it look good enough? 97.91.80.176 (talk) 02:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No sources, no article, no debate. We can't cite his YT channel (connexion to subject). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 02:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&oldid=1285679226"