Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 August 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 23 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 25 >
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 24

[edit]

00:39, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Anonamistad

[edit]

A page I created for Bulletproof Soul was declined for sourcing and i'm rather surprised as I know they have the sourcing to pass notability standards, considering the quality of publications and a few artists in the group already being on Wikipedia. I would like to know the exact sourcing issue with the references so it can be accepted. They are all independent references, many of which have been used to cite in other Wikipedia pages. The information out there for this is fairly transparent and documented. There are plenty more reputable references to use here. Let me know and i'd be happy to apply more references or more suitable references in any specific place. Anonamistad (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anonamistad: of the 12 sources cited, almost all are of the type "BPS announces X" or "BPS releases Y". These are typically based on publicity materials and therefore not independent, are promotional in tone, and if they provide any significant coverage it's usually of X or Y, rather than (in this case) PBS.
Considering that this outfit has released all of one album, and that barely a month ago, I expect this is just a case of WP:TOOSOON. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:43, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Newlywo

[edit]

My draft got rejected and was said changes and edits werent done. This isnt true and also I placed in the talk page a wide explaintion on the websites. What can be done? Newlywo (talk) 07:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The edit history of the draft clearly shows that it was resubmitted without improvement. If you thought that you did make changes, they did not go through for some reason. It's not necessarily the provenance of the sources themselves that are at issue, but their content. They don't establish that this person meets the definition of a notable creative professional or more broadly a notable person, so the reviewer rejected the draft, meaning that it won't be considered further. If you tried to make changes but they did not go through, your first step is to appeal to the last reviewer directly. 331dot (talk) 07:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Newlywo: you're commenting on your talk page, and before I get a chance to respond, you're already commenting on my talk page, and as soon as I've responded there, I see you're also commenting here; please try to keep it all in one place. This is starting to get tendentious, especially considering the amount of reviewer and help desk time that has already been devoted to this draft. Time to let it go and find something else to write about, IMO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @DoubleGrazing, it seems unfair what you just wrote here. Not everyone knows what to do and knows wiki like you do. Yes I wrote both places since you decided to reject it and I believe this is unjust. This has taken months and months so blaming and attacking me for writing in both places... really?...
Calling me and how I act tendentious.. dont you think this over the top? you didnt address the changes I made which were explaining why the sources I placed are showing his notability! me not changing the draft and providing info on the sources is even more proof of how I am everything but this. The fact that this was declined and rejected and saying this has taken time, well i have nothing to say about this other than this shouldnt be a reason. If you dont want to deal with it, you dont have to, there are more reviewers I believe but rejecting it like that is trying to end the process and not from the right reasons. He is worthy and if he isnt, many of the directors, the award winning one, should be removed as well. Since this is not an option, I ask to unreject it and allowing fresh eyes to look at this and decide. There are more sources and a simpel search in google would show it, I choose very good ones that are rejected since they are in Hebrew I assum and this is why I placed the description of them. Newlywo (talk) 16:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Newlywo: for the last time, I have gone through the citations again, and I still don't see a single source that meets the WP:GNG standard. Here is the blow-by-blow source analysis FYI:
1. Primary source
2. Not about him, but about a film
3. Interview (primary source)
4. No coverage, just links to his films
5. As 4
6. Primary source, written by him
7. As 2 (Amazon is not a valid source in any case)
8. As 2
9. As 2
10. Primary source
11. As 2
12. As 2
13. Primary source
14. Failed, returns 404
15. As 5
16. As 2
17. As 2
18. As 2
19. Primary source; as 4
I also do not find anything in the draft that would make this person obviously notable per WP:FILMMAKER. This describes someone with a few minor films to his name, one of which won an award at a non-notable festival. We're not exactly talking about Fellini or Tarkovsky here.
I therefore see no reason why I should reverse the rejection. I will also not be reviewing this any more.
This draft has been reviewed at least seven times, several of them by me. You have had plenty of opportunity to demonstrate notability, but haven't. It is time to drop the stick and write about something else. We have over 4,000 other drafts to review, we cannot keep reviewing this one draft over and over just because you are unwilling to accept the outcome. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing you are wrong in a few things but it seems you have made up your mind and no metter what will be done, you will not change your mind and not from the right reasons. your text is feels very personal as if this is attacking you. I will look and find what can be done and I will not drop the stick just because you think I should... FYI, the award he won and the festival and the work he has done for KAN11, are HUGE in Israel, maybe not in the US but in Israel no doubt!!! according to the WP:FILMMAKER Zvi is in Israel:
  1. widely cited - as can be seen in the amount of sources.
  2. known for originating a significant new concept - His film was and is a game changer showing Traitements de conversion in film for the first time in primetime.
  3. created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work - again his film
  4. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument - also here his film is exactly that!
There is no need for "bad blood", I am simply trying to give this guy the wiki page he is intitled to.
Thank you. Newlywo (talk) 07:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:23, 24 August 2023 review of submission by 103.214.63.96

[edit]

Hi i dont know why my submission was declined , it was for the general information about the company called B Tank cleaning services , kindly help out for the submission part , Thank you. 103.214.63.96 (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's because the draft is purely promotional, with no indication of notability. Which is also why I've requested that it be deleted. Please note that Wikipedia is not marketing platform for your business, and promotion or advertising is not allowed. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:32, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:31, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Qantas7477

[edit]

this Draft was wrongly denied for "False information" This is for a real micronation and has citations with real information, please help me kindly, Thank you Qantas7477 (talk) 08:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Qantas7477: yeah okay, let's just leave it at that; please don't create more like this. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:43, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Sandsniffer

[edit]

Infobox for the ships information is broken, and I am unable to figure out why. HTML seems fine and I cannot see any visible errors. If someone more versed in source editing could help, it would be greatly appreciated. Sandsniffer (talk) 09:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sandsniffer: I separated the infobox begin tag from the AfC one, that seems to have sorted it out. (This isn't really an AfC matter, but it was an easy fix so I've done it. You may put general editing questions like that to the Teahouse.) Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:01, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Hussein Attariqh Al-Hadi

[edit]

Hussein Attariqh Al-Hadi (حسين طارق الهادي| (RSAF) , also known as the Royal Saudi Air Force, is part of the military forces of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It consists of the Royal Saudi Army, the Royal Saudi Navy, the Royal Saudi Air Force, the Royal Saudi Air Defense, and the Royal Saudi Strategic Missile Force. The King of Saudi Arabia is the Supreme commander-in-chief of all the Military Forces and forms military policy with the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Interior. The five Armed Forces are among eight military forces of Saudi Arabia, with the others including the Royal Saudi National Guard (under the administrative control of the Ministry of National Guard), the Royal Saudi Guard Regiment and the Royal Saudi Border Guards. Hussein Attariqh Al-Hadi (talk) 10:01, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hussein Attariqh Al-Hadi: do you have a question you would like to ask? So far all you've done is copypaste your draft here (please don't do that). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:09, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:47, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Maridl83

[edit]

Would someone be able to review this article again and let me know if it can be moved to the article space, or if anything else is needed? Thank you. Maridl83 (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Maridl83: the article has been resubmitted and is awaiting another review. Please be patient, we have thousands of other pending drafts also. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:51, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Maridl83 (talk) 15:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:27, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Scribendo ergo sum

[edit]

I have recently seen a notification informing me that I could re-submit my edit request for this page, and my previous submission was declined. The message says that my submission was declined due to it not being "adequately supported by reliable sources". I however, can not see what is deemed to be the problematic portion of my draft.

I would like to know exactly what is the issue with my sources, and why their reliability is at question. Please help me on this matter so that I may improve my submission appropriately. Scribendo ergo sum (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Scribendo ergo sum: it's not necessarily that the sources you're citing aren't reliable, but that they don't support the draft sufficiently – for example, the entire long 'Art Works' section has only a single citation (and, as it happens, that is to a non-reliable source, Blogspot). Per WP:BLP, in articles on living people, every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details must be clearly supported by immediate inline citations to reliable published sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: just to clarify, the message you received wasn't saying that you now "could" resubmit, but rather warning you that, as the draft hasn't been edited for five months, it may be deleted in another month or so if you don't edit or resubmit it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:34, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Jxiee

[edit]

I'm wondering why this article was declined. I've added links to news articles about Jeffrey Machno under external links. Jxiee (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jxiee: because it lists all of one source, and even that's not actually cited anywhere. Please see WP:REFB and WP:GNG for advice on referencing and notability, respectively. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:14, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Jxiee

[edit]

I've added a Facebook link with a verified business account Facebook my article keeps getting declined Is the person reviewing this looking at the reference link of what I wrote in the article or just looking at the Facebook URL and just declining it because of that? Is there a way to get a new person to look at this article page rather than the same person thanks. Jxiee (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jxiee: it doesn't matter whose FB account it is, social media is user-generated and therefore not reliable; anyone can, and invariably does, write whatever they want, and there is no editorial oversight involved. Take out those FB cites, and the duplicate one to the Rotary Club, and you're left with nothing to verify the contents, let alone to establish notability. Which is why this has now been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

18:35, 24 August 2023 review of submission by LovelyAngel1004

[edit]

I don't know if I would or wouldn't submit the draft of the article on the TV show Audrey and Friends, but should I do so since I've got enough bytes here? I might still keep this article on the show as a stub and still have the citations needed for the show though because I would say the show is obscure and lost media for over 20 years. LovelyAngel1004 (talk) 18:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LovelyAngel1004: sorry, I'm not quite sure what you're asking, and I certainly don't know what "I've got enough bytes here" means, but just to say that the draft has two references, one to Five's own website, the other the production company's; meanwhile, most of the content is unreferenced. Therefore the draft not only fails on the notability hurdle, it fails on basic verifiability as well. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:45, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. LovelyAngel1004 (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:29, 24 August 2023 review of submission by Mailrecordings

[edit]

Hello, is there anything else I need to do to finish this article? I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks! Mailrecordings (talk) 20:29, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, are you Mr. Nusspaumer? You uploaded the professional image of him but said it was his work. 331dot (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot I believe it is also correct to ask Mailrecordings whether they are "KOKE PHOTOGRAPHY" who are stated in the EXIF at c:File:Martín Nusspaumer Tenor.jpg to be the author, and thus the likely copyright owner. Permissions for that file are handled on Wikimedia Commons, Mailrecordings, not here. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is correct, I'm KOKE PHOTOGRAPHY. I'm sorry about the confusion. Mailrecordings (talk) 22:01, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mailrecordings Thank you. Please read WP:PAID. Is Mr Nusspaumer compensating you in any manner for the creation of this draft/article, please?
Please lodge your ownership of copyright on Wikimedia Commons at c:COM:VRT. Even if the file has been deleted it will be reinstated on receipt pf documentary evidence. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:11, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_August_24&oldid=1172985974"