Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2021 August 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 22 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 24 >
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.


August 23

[edit]

05:07:40, 23 August 2021 review of submission by Syedshawar

[edit]

Syedshawar (talk) 05:07, 23 August 2021 (UTC)syed shawar[reply]

Syedshawar I've removed your draft copy; it is linked to above so posting it here is unnecessary. You don't ask a question, but the draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. You in essence posted the person's resume- a Wikipedia article should not just tell what someone has done, but summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:12:26, 23 August 2021 review of draft by Arief Salim

[edit]


I have submitted a Wikipedia draft and received the same reply as to why it was rejected - namely concerning the lack of notability of the subject and independent references. Thus, I have searched and added additional independent references and sources to increase the notability of the subject but to no success.

As such, could I ask for clarification if there is a quantitative definition of notability (for e.g. how many independent references, how is a subject defined as notable quantitatively)?

Thank you beforehand!

Arief Salim (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arief Salim The definition of a notable person is written here. Most reviewers look for at least three high-quality independent reliable sources, rather than a large number of low-quality sources. You've cited the specific points of information given, but that's not actually what is being looked for- a Wikipedia article should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own say about a person, not sources that just tell what they have done but that go in depth about the person. Interviews, brief mentions, routine announcements, and other primary sources do not establish notability.
If you are associated with this person, please review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 07:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

06:28:52, 23 August 2021 review of submission by Srineshreddi

[edit]


Srineshreddi (talk) 06:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09:57:04, 23 August 2021 review of draft by Sonamchoe

[edit]


Sonamchoe (talk) 09:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC) How do I create a Wikipedia page in Tibetan language?[reply]

You do so at the Tibetian language Wikipedia, which can be reached as https://bo.wikipedia.org. Please note that the tibetian language Wikipedia is a seperate project with seperate rules and (possibly) a different configuration (for example, the draft namespace might not be a thing there) Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14:50:05, 23 August 2021 review of submission by Hgrbz

[edit]

I understand that this article doesn't qualify for the "significant coverage" but this open-source repository solution, Hyku is part of Samvera family and Samvera has a similar article at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Samvera. More or less, I used the same structure. If this doesn't qualify to be an individual article, do you think i can/should expand the Samvera article with this information? This is a community driven, community owned open-source software and we as a community want to make sure that information about Hyku is available for Wikipedia readers. Thanks for your patience with my questions.

Hgrbz (talk) 14:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't have the sources for a standalone article and it's possible to include the information in another, relevant article with sources, by all means do so. Note that we do not believe in notability-by-osmosis. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 14:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

17:35:37, 23 August 2021 review of draft by Henri Grace

[edit]


Henri Grace (talk) 17:35, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! - trying make sure all references are good. as requested I removed all discogs, kept allmusic for credit references, removed french wikipedia.

Please advise

17:41:36, 23 August 2021 review of draft by Nowshintabassumshayon

[edit]


Because the published book is very famous in Bangladesh and it a an important book on film criticism category.

Nowshintabassumshayon (talk) 17:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nowshintabassumshayon. You can find more advice about how to write an article about a book at Wikipedia:WikiProject Books. --Worldbruce (talk) 12:33, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19:16:18, 23 August 2021 review of submission by Evergreen2020

[edit]


I am trying to submit a page for Rokt and wanted to check if following references would work or not. I have been told that I only need three.

First if from Australian Financial Review [1]. It talks about the evaluation bit but also discusses what company does and makes a comment on journey of the IPO:

Backed by local funds TDM Growth Partners (which lead the company’s $US80 million funding round last year and also its previous $US48 million round) and Paul Bassat’s Square Peg Capital, Rokt’s technology allows companies to promote goods of other retailers and service providers by allowing them to sell personalised offers for complementary products after a customer has completed a transaction.

If you buy tickets to a sporting match, you might see an offer appear after the transaction for a discount on nearby parking, for example. A long-rumoured IPO hopeful, ROKT had been considering listing as early as late 2021, but these plans have been pushed back to mid 2023. It is considering the ASX, or a US exchange.

The second is from The Wall Street Journal [2]. There is a good amount of discussion on how the technology of Rokt works and more.

Rokt’s technology enables such cross-selling and upselling efforts based on a client’s existing commercial relationships. It collects a technology fee from clients in the process. It also operates a marketplace to connect different businesses and vendors—including integrating payment and shipping providers—from which it takes a cut of the transaction.

The third one from Lexology [3] on the whole patent controversy. There are many other sources that has covered this journey of losing the patent fight but I feel this explains the whole thing greatly.

Please help. I am trying to go through proper channels as per the policy and not spam here and hoping to receive help with out any prejudices. That's why, I had also added the whole controversy where Rokt actually lost. If my intention was to simply promote the company and spam, I would have never included that. Thank you.

Some more references [4], [5], [6].


Evergreen2020 (talk) 19:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The valuation - and any other sources discussing the funding - are a nonstarter. Rounds of funding are routine news as far as businesses are concerned. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 06:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

20:06:11, 23 August 2021 review of draft by PumpkinMonkey

[edit]


How do I edit the opening section of my draft? There's no edit source button. Thanks for any help you can give.

PumpkinMonkey (talk) 20:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PumpkinMonkey, do you see a button in the top right corner of the page that says "edit source"? It should be next to "read" and "view history". Let me know if that doesn't work. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure enough. There it is, plain as day. Thanks, EW

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2021_August_23&oldid=1041343083"