Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2025 April 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< April 6 << Mar | April | May >> April 8 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


April 7

[edit]

01:18:02, 7 April 2025 review of submission by ByteSpecter

[edit]

Hello! I’m a disclosed team member involved with the Currency.Wiki project and have written a draft article that I believe meets Wikipedia’s guidelines on notability and neutrality.

Because I have a conflict of interest, I’d prefer not to submit the draft myself and would appreciate if a neutral editor could review it and consider submitting on my behalf.

Here is the draft: Draft:Currency.Wiki

The draft includes multiple independent and reliable sources. Any feedback or assistance would be greatly appreciated!

ByteSpecter (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ByteSpecter, the AFC process is generally what is expected for people with a conflict of interest to submit drafts, however I would not submit this as none of the sources are independent, reliable and significant. The first source is their own site, the next 3 are site listing for downloading the various version of the extension, reference 5 is a wiki not considered reliable per WP:USERGENERATED and the last reference is a press release. None of your source are suitable to demonstrate that this extension is notable. See WP:RS and WP:GNG. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 03:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha, appreciate the detailed explanation and your time @McMatter. I understand now why those sources don't meet the reliability and independence criteria. I’ll look into finding better third-party coverage from independent tech sites or news outlets that discuss the extension in more depth. Thanks again for the guidance. ByteSpecter (talk) 05:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

02:02, 7 April 2025 review of submission by TEO-2027

[edit]

Is there a way to check the progress of a review? I would be grateful if you could let me know. Teo-2027 (talk) 02:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Teo-2027: The draft is waiting for review, and I'm afraid there is no way of knowing when the review will happen. The reviewers pick whichever drafts they wish, and all that is known that the draft will be reviewed at some point. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @TEO-2027: again. Your signature above shows your user name incorrectly – the software here makes a difference between capital and small letters. --bonadea contributions talk 09:35, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply.　Sorry for displaying the wrong user name. TEO-2027 (talk) 09:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TEO-2027 You will need to disclose your connection with this person, if you have one, see WP:COI. I see that you took their picture. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

02:37, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Justjourney

[edit]

I added the information from this draft onto French fries as requested by reviewer @Sophisticatedevening (see Special:Diff/1284297478). I am wondering if I can still expand on the article and publish it, as it was declined for "lack of content". Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can resubmit declined drafts for a re-review after you've added/improved on the draft. However, if you don't address the reviewer's notes in your re-submission, it will be quickly declined again. WhoAteMyButter (🌷talk│🌻contribs) 04:30, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

04:58, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Myraa Khattar

[edit]

Hello... This Myraa, I'm (redacted) and published an article, can someone please review it?? It would be an honor to get it published or if someone could make the changes and upload it for me :) thanks Myraa Khattar (talk) 04:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Myraa Khattar I've moved your draft to Draft space, it is now at Draft:Myraa Khattar. Please do not post personal information about yourself in this very public place; please read this page with your parent/guardian or teacher.
I placed the appropriate information on your draft to allow you to submit it. Be aware that writing about yourself is highly discouraged, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also note that no information about the draft process should be given in the draft itself. The draft's edit history does that. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

09:02, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Nivetha Preethi

[edit]

I recently submitted an article draft about Rasta Rita Margarita and Beverage Truck , a company with over 20 years of presence in Catering truck industry. It has been rejected as “contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. I understand that Wikipedia is not for promotion, and I would like to learn how to present this topic in an encyclopedic way Could someone please advise whether this meets notability standards, and if so, how I should properly format and cite the information to meet Wikipedia’s guidelines? Nivetha Preethi (talk) 09:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nivetha Preethi First, if you are associated with this business, that must be disclosed, see conflict of interest and paid editing(which includes employment).
The main purpose of a Wikipedia article is tno neutrally summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability; such as a notable business. Press releases, interviews, brief mentions, annoucements of routine business activities, or other primary sources do not establish notability. There must be significant coverage- coverage that goes beyond just telling what the topic does and involves analysis/commentary about the subject.
I'm skeptical that a food truck business merits an article(the vast majority of businesses do not), but I can't say that definitively as it depends on the coverage in sources. I can say that the sources you provided do not show it, which is why the draft was rejected. That typically means it will not be considered further but if you have sources that you can neutrally summarize(i.e. not language like "the go to option") and show that the business is notable, I suggest that you rewrite the existing draft from scratch(while leaving the rejection notice), then appeal to the rejecting reviewer and ask them to reconsider, 331dot (talk) 09:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10:09, 7 April 2025 review of submission by 46.193.160.178

[edit]

Dear Sir/Madam, Apparently my submission of an article for Ricardo García Herrera has been rejected. I would like to know why to, if possible, solve the necessary issues and get it published. Many thanks 

46.193.160.178 (talk) 10:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor, the draft has been declined, not rejected, which means it may still be resubmitted if improved on. The draft is written in Spanish, and as this is the English Wikipedia, we only accept articles in English. It is also completely unsourced. Articles have to be based on reliable sources. You are welcome to try to publish the page on the Spanish Wikipedia, but you should add sources to the draft first. cyberdog958Talk 11:06, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

11:10, 7 April 2025 review of submission by ThuoMwangi

[edit]

From the listed sources, which one meets the basic criteria? I am quite confused as there are newspaper articles and a paper done by the subject. ThuoMwangi (talk) 11:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ThuoMwangi You need the "Draft:" portion of the title when linking, I've fixed this for you. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you assist me comprehend the referencing aspect? From my understanding, I only needed three secondary sources. ThuoMwangi (talk) 09:37, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Three is not a hard and fast rule, although most reviewers look for at least three to pass this process. Your sources are
  1. an interview, which is not an independent source as it is the person speaking about themselves
  2. a piece written by the subject
  3. the website of an organization which Mr. Karuita serves on the board of that just documents that fact
  4. the website of a different organization that Mr. Karuita serves on
  5. documentation that Mr. Karuita received an award from Queen Elizabeth
  6. his bio on another organization he is associated with
None of these sources are sufficient to establish notability. He may be notable as he received an award from Queen Elizabeth, but you need independent reliable sources that on their own, and not based on materials from him or his associates like an interview, discuss his work that led to the award. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12:24, 7 April 2025 review of submission by 72.22.169.9

[edit]

I request assistance because I am having trouble publishing my Wikipedia Page for a small rural fire district in southern New York. The page was declined due to lack of citations, despite me getting all facts from years of studying the district. Should I Site where I learned it from? 72.22.169.9 (talk) 12:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you need to provide the sources you are using. Please see Referencing for beginners. You need to show that this district is a notable organization. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remember to log in when posting. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:38, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Dmikni

[edit]

I don't understand which parts of the notability policy this article fails to meet. Would it be removing references to John's political website and his LinkedIn that would make it pass? All other sources are from reputable sources e.g. government websites, reputable business organisations. Dmikni (talk) 16:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dmikni Holding local office is insufficient in terms of WP:NPOLITICIAN, nor is merely running for a national legislature(he would need to have won). This means you would need to show that he meets the broader notable person definition.
You took his picture and he posed for you, do you have an association with him? 331dot (talk) 16:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:49, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Mohammad Naim Dahee

[edit]

Why was the draft page I create for the biography of Mohammad Eshaq Faiez was rejected?

Disclosure I am personally acquainted with Mohammad Eshaq Faiez and have written a draft about his biography based on publicly available sources. I have no promotional intent. Mohammad Naim Dahee (talk) 16:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Naim Dahee You need the "Draft:" portion of the title when linking, I fixed this.
The good news is that the draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that the draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted. Please see the reason left by the reviewer. 331dot (talk) 16:56, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

16:50, 7 April 2025 review of submission by RSAStudent25

[edit]

What else I have to do? RSAStudent25 (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RSAStudent25 show with sources how he meets either WP:PROF or WP:NBIO. Being a professor or holding non-legislative position does not confer nobility. In addition tone down the promotional language (see WP:PEACOCK). S0091 (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

18:02, 7 April 2025 review of submission by TamaraChCL

[edit]

Hello, I submitted a draft article about the academic journal Phasis. Greek and Roman Studies and received the message that the draft does not show notability because the references are not sufficient.

Could someone kindly help me understand exactly what is missing? I would be grateful for any guidance about what kind of sources I should add to meet the notability criteria. I have included links to Scopus and the official university page — are these not enough? If not, what kind of independent secondary sources would be acceptable?

Thank you in advance! TamaraChCL (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TamaraChCL journals are tough because the notability guideline they must meet is WP:GNG which requires in-depth coverage about the journal in multiple secondary independent reliable sources. The University is a primary source and not independent and being indexed is not enough as that is not in-depth coverage. The WP:NJOURNAL page linked to in the decline is not an official guideline; it's only an essay so does not hold as much weight. If you are real bored, you can read the arguments by editors at Wikipedia talk:Notability (academic journals) where some editors were trying get consensus to make WP:NJOURNAL an official guideline but were unable to do so. S0091 (talk) 16:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! TamaraChCL (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TamaraChCL Using the whole url in the header breaks the formatting that creates the link; I've fixed this for you. Using the whole url is unnecessary in most cases. 331dot (talk) 17:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:47, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Carly raecyrus

[edit]

I need help distinguishing what is a reliable and independent source. All the information found about the organization has been from blogs, magazines, etc. Are those okay? Carly raecyrus (talk) 19:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Read through the links in the decline as they provide most of the answers to your questions. You might also find Your first article helpful. After reading those, come back if you still have questions. S0091 (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blogs are usually not acceptable as they lack editorial control and fact checking- they just post content without anyone checking it for accuracy. Please see reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

19:52, 7 April 2025 review of submission by TS Megel

[edit]

i need help about editing i have trouble TS Megel (talk) 19:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TS Megel see WP:Your first article. S0091 (talk) 20:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20:01, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Sukhi vale

[edit]

Why not mahroos Siddiquee Nadim accepted in wikipedia? Sukhi vale (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the messages left by reviewers on the draft. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

21:48, 7 April 2025 review of submission by Nvujanic

[edit]

I recently submitted an article for review and understand that the process can take up to three months. I was wondering if there is any way to request an expedited review or if there are any steps I can take to help move the process along Nvujanic (talk) 21:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see it was just declined. If you submit it again, it needs a lot of work as it's currently in a very poor state. The tone of the text is blatantly promotions and the article as a whole is extremely poorly sourced. Sources must be reliable, independent of the subject, and provide significant coverage of the subject. The company's website, Linkedin, and Instagram are not appropriate sources of information, nor are press releases. The only two sources that are even independent link to pages that don't mention JET365, let alone provide independent sourcing of reliable facts. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 01:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

22:20, 7 April 2025 review of submission by 2001:569:7604:A100:20FA:7F4C:3064:566B

[edit]

The draft was declined by someone who says it's a word "definition" and therefore does not belong on wikipedia. However, I really don't understand why they would say that. It is not a word definition it is an encyclopedic account of 4 years of history and work done by a national group all backed up by more than 20 national news stories. So as much as I would like to address this note, I don't know where to begin because I don't understand why this is considered a dictionary entry. Can you offer any advice? 2001:569:7604:A100:20FA:7F4C:3064:566B (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No advice needed - the draft was declined by a blocked user as an act of vandalism. It's been reverted. Sorry about that. -- asilvering (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2025_April_7&oldid=1285316973"