Help desk
< June 10	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 12 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation 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.

June 11

01:18:05, 11 June 2018 review of submission by 2601:18A:417F:F6AA:D44B:3DAC:920B:3A34

2601:18A:417F:F6AA:D44B:3DAC:920B:3A34 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

03:51:10, 11 June 2018 review of submission by D4n2016

D4n2016 (talk · contribs)

I added 3 sources and wonder why the user declined the draft, using those 3 sources. D4n2016 (talk) 03:51, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi D4n2016. The sources are routine coverage of a product launch. They seem to be based on the same company announcement or press release. Per WP:ORGCRIT, this sort of source does not demonstrate notability. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:41:02, 11 June 2018 review of submission by 103.233.141.236

103.233.141.236 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Delhi 47 Km (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am connected to Delhi 47 Km as a film publicist, the information shared is right and i have not tried anything which is related as promotions. We as a movie team need this article to be published just for the information about the film. Please help me how this article can be sustained at Wikipedia, your esteemed platform, thanks, your sincerely... 103.233.141.236 (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 103.233.141.236 Welcome t AfC help desk. Wikipedia would only accept sourced content from independent, reliable parties such as newspaper or publications. Since you are connected to the company, you have a conflict of interest which Wikipedia strongly discourage a COI to edit the affected page. If you are the author of this said article Draft:Delhi 47 Km, you need to disclose your affiliation in the article talk page and on your user page. Pls see here on how to disclose your COI. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:36:15, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Vicoaers

Vicoaers (talk · contribs)

I'd like to know how I can improve my article, so it can be accepted. Every time I submit for review, I receive different feedback, which is also always too broad to be able to understand truly what the reviewer meant. If a certain source(s) do not belogn there, let me know. If a sentence reads promotional, please let me know. Keeping me in the dark the whole time is not helping anybody. Vicoaers (talk) 08:36, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for the reasons explained on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:48:01, 11 June 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Purplehearts

Purplehearts (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Courtney Adeleye (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please advise what in the article sounds like an advertisement and how it can be corrected? It is all biographical information and the sources cited are longstanding reputable publications. How can it be made more neutral?

Purplehearts (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Purplehearts. Most of the content (Early life, Foolproof Body, Philanthropy, and Personal life) doesn't come from the cited sources, which makes the draft come across as promotional. More fundamentally, although the cited publications are reputable, the specific pages cited do not help demonstrate Adeleye's notability because they lack independence or depth. Black Enterprise is a primary source interview without independent analysis, it's Adeleye in Adeleye's words. Entrepreneur and InStyle are very brief, and the former is again in Adeleye's own words. Wikipedia is more interested in what other people have to say about her. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:43:12, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Thomas123987

Thomas123987 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:C J George (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi! I am new to Wikipedia editorial, however, I tried creating an article (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:C_J_George). The submission got declined as the reviewer said the references I used were "primary". I would like to contest this that the subject in discussion is a famous business person and the references I provided were all national dailies in India. Agreed, I may have gone to the extreme by using the term "revolutionised" but the references I provided sure doesn't seem primary. Can someone please help in this regard? According to the reviewer, the references were interviews but I would like to ask, why would reputed national dailies choose to cover a story on a person if they don't see that person fit? Also, only part of each of the references I provided are snippets from the interview. Most of the content are claims by the news organisation. When I say National Dailies, these are some of the biggest national dailies in India, and a couple even in the world. I'd like some guidance on this. Thomas123987 17:43, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

20:15:47, 11 June 2018 review of submission by Doncram

Doncram (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!

Doncram (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what all that subst / template stuff above is. This is crazy.

I am an experienced editor, did participate in AFC a bit some years ago.

I have a simple question: how can I add an AFC comment. This is about Draft:A. Warren Gould. There used to be an AFC comment template which was used. It seems I am supposed to click in some tab to add a comment, but despite my having Preferences set to include "Yet another helper AFC whatever" or the like, I see no such tab to click.

--Doncram (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doncram. The way you did the AFC comment is fine for an occassional comment. I took the liberty of reformatting it as if you'd used the AFCH script. Comments via the AFCH script are removed automatically when the draft is accepted. Another alternative would be to use the draft's talk page.

With your preferences set as you described, you should, on draft pages, have a "Review (AFCH)" option near the top of the page, to the right of the watchlist star, probably in a "More" dropdown. If you select Review (AFCH) you'll then get a panel with a large yellow "Comment" button. Being in the "Inactive reviewers" section of the participants list should be sufficient permission. If not, I'm sure someone will correct me. --Worldbruce (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may have to be an Active reviewer. Test it out. Legacypac (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, the "More" dropdown leads to a "Review AFCH" option, and it looks like it should work going forward. --Doncram (talk) 22:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]