Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2024 December 20
Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< December 19 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 21 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
December 20
drafts of Pakistani dramas
should add second drafts from redirect for Pakistani dramas because i learn about putting reliable soruces by Sunuraju (talk) 13:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, @Sunuraju, I don't understand what you are asking. ColinFine (talk) 13:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- because i learns how to put citation sources today and i need add drafts for paksitani dramas for citation sources Sunuraju (talk) 14:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- because of sockpupprt accounts without add ciation sources which dramas wiki pages like Hook are redirected to Ary Digtal Sunuraju (talk) 14:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- because i learns how to put citation sources today and i need add drafts for paksitani dramas for citation sources Sunuraju (talk) 14:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- The target of the redirect can only be changed when the drafts get accepted and published into the mainspace, if that answers your question. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 14:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- See User_talk:Sunuraju. There are several draft articles that were turned down because they were improperly sourced or written like an advertisement. Wikipedia is not IMDb or a similar resource, so all articles about actors, films etc need to meet the general notability guideline.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Ahh, how long I'm waiting for an article review?!!
Help! I'm NOT patient with my article review and I'm tired of waiting for weeks and weeks. What can I do? Gnu779 (talk) 16:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @Gnu779, I find it rude to be impatient with volunteer reviewers who review drafts in their own time. We receive hundreds of new drafts a day for review with a very limited amount of volunteer reviewers. The current wait time is 8 weeks or longer. You can continue to be patient. qcne (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Having had a look at Draft:Hong Jen Yee, it has zero chance of reaching article mainspace at the moment. I could review it and turn it down today, but this wouldn't help much. It is way too short and lacks sourcing, see WP:NPERSON.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Might also be Draft: Pelles C? qcne (talk) 16:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Having had a look at Draft:Hong Jen Yee, it has zero chance of reaching article mainspace at the moment. I could review it and turn it down today, but this wouldn't help much. It is way too short and lacks sourcing, see WP:NPERSON.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Basically there are almost 2,000 articles waiting for review right now, and there aren't many people who look through them. So it's hard to say when drafts get reviewed. It could be a couple minutes or a couple months. Your best bet is just to find another thing to work on for a little while. There are countless tasks that help out Wikipedia if you're looking for more ways to participate. Also make sure that the article you submitted meets the standards generally expected. Each article should have a few good sources about the subject (like newspaper pieces about them or something like that). Thanks for your help in expanding Wikipedia! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think I'm bad at writing articles. Sorry for that but I have big problems with that. Gnu779 (talk) 10:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- An average wait of weeks is actually pretty good, I've seen it as high as 6 months or more. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, dude. It took me over maybe 2 months or something. Gnu779 (talk) 11:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- An average wait of weeks is actually pretty good, I've seen it as high as 6 months or more. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think I'm bad at writing articles. Sorry for that but I have big problems with that. Gnu779 (talk) 10:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Editing a repeatedly-declined AfC draft from scratch?
Hello! I am not actually sure what the correct process is for this. I am a librarian who is killing time at the reference desk reading old Help Desk archives (because I have learned a ton about Wikipedia and its policies by doing so), and I encountered a discussion of Draft:Uman (artist) being repeatedly declined through the AfC process in January of last year. In viewing the draft, I see that it was further declined for the subject's purported lack of notability in July 2024. However, I think this person easily meets general notability guidelines if not WP:ARTIST, having received significant independent coverage (ranging from lengthier profiles to briefer exhibition reviews) from credible publications like CNN (see here), Artnet News (see here), ARTNews (see here), the New York Times Magazine (see here), Artforum (see here), and The New Yorker (see here). The artist also has a major solo show upcoming at a notable art institution, the The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum, that has also received support from the notable Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts.
With all due respect to the folks who reviewed this page through AfC, I acknowledge that the current draft is written to be too complimentary to the subject, but I think that is a separate issue from notability, and if this were not already part of the AfC process, I do not think that I, as an extended confirmed user, would have had any issue creating a NPOV draft and passing NPP based on the subject's notability as documented through the above links. Creating an article for this artist falls directly in my expertise wheelhouse, and I think it is important and helpful to continue to contribute articles about BIPOC and female contemporary artists to the encyclopedia due to their relative lack of coverage.
My question is, because a draft was begun through AfC, do I need to edit the problematic draft that has repeatedly been declined--or can I erase it and start anew? Further, do I need to submit it again through AfC if I can completely redraft it, or can I move it to the mainspace myself--as I have no COI here and do not need help drafting an article, and the WP:AFC page says that "Established users are encouraged to create articles on their own if they do not need support from reviewers."
If this is not the best place to ask, is there a more specific forum for AfC-related issues in which to ask this question? Thank you for your time. Peachseltzer (hello!) 18:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Peachseltzer, the AfC process is entirely optional for competent autoconfirmed editors, and you are significantly more experienced. The draft in question has not had any substantive content edits for nine months, and the editor who created the draft has been inactive since then. I think it would be perfectly acceptable for you to write a policy compliant article from scratch, and just allow the draft to be deleted in due course. Cullen328 (talk) 18:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind and speedy reply @Cullen328! My desk shift is wrapping up now, so I will do just that on Monday. Peachseltzer (hello!) 18:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Peachseltzer: you could start a new article from scratch in you sandbox, or a subpage of your user space. If you are satisfied that notability is met via verification by reliable sources, you can move it to mainspace yourself. Mjroots (talk) 07:02, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind and speedy reply @Cullen328! My desk shift is wrapping up now, so I will do just that on Monday. Peachseltzer (hello!) 18:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
How to properly add annotations to entries in a bibliography?
Many Wikipedia pages have a "Further reading" or "Bibliography" section. They list useful important books that the reader of the article may use to learn more about the topic of the main article. Are there any tools (templates) or best practices for adding annotations, that is, additional information for each entry that would explain what the referenced work is (e.g. a seminal work, a monography or a review), so the reader will have an easier time deciding which book to read?
Many high quality articles on Wikipedia have a dedicated "Bibliography" section. It has various names, such as "Bibliography", "Further reading", "References", "Sources". They can be found on these articles, for example:
- Philosophy
- Existence
- Cynicism (philosophy)
- Humanism
- Eliminative materialism
- DNA
- Metabolism
- Wolf
- Charles Darwin
- Binary search
- Apollo 11
- Archaea
- Ancient Egyptian literature
- Confirmation bias
- Metaphysics
Thanks for any pointers. Regards, Fantastiera (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- "Bibliography" and "Further reading" are not the same thing. Take Philosophy as an example, the "citations" section points out the specific pages of the cited sources, whereas "bibliography" section list out all the books that the entries in "citations" came from. If you click/tap on the link of an entry in "citations", it will bring you to the corresponding book in "bibliography". In that sense, bibliography is a part of the reference, while further reading is not.
- To add citations like those, you'll need to list the sources in a "bibliography" section, then cite specific pages by adding "<ref>(Book title), p.(page number)</ref>" to the part of article where you want to add citations to. See WP:SFN. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 22:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. Unfortunately, this is not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for the proper way to add annotation for entries in a "Further reading" section for the purpose explained above. This is not to link the references. Fantastiera (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- You might find Wikipedia:Further reading helpful. Schazjmd (talk) 22:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- There does not seem to be a standard format. You can follow the instructions at MOS:FURTHER. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. This looks very useful. Fantastiera (talk) 09:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. Unfortunately, this is not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for the proper way to add annotation for entries in a "Further reading" section for the purpose explained above. This is not to link the references. Fantastiera (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Redirects
How do you make a redirect? Yuanmongolempiredynasty (talk) 21:45, 20 December 2024 (UTC)