Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 December 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 11 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 13 >
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.


December 12

[edit]

00:08, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Natiejournalist

[edit]

I submitted the draft a few times now with ALL the cited references inline and with direct links to the footnotes. Still, my last submission was declined because it was "not adequately supported by reliable sources". What does it mean? Can you instruct on how to finally get the draft approved? Thank you! Natiejournalist (talk) 00:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Natiejournalist as this article is about a living person, every statement is expected to be supported by at least one reference. The "Education" and "Career" sections are mostly unsourced. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 00:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:20, 12 December 2024 review of submission by BarComos

[edit]

The input of another editor is requested to confirm or accept the draft mentioned in this discussion: "19:18, 11 December 2024, review of submission by BarComos" with user 331dot. A second opinion is requested to determine the page. It is recommended to review the previous conversation for additional context. ; thanks you :) BarComos (talk) 03:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BarComos, what are you looking for? Are you asking for someone else to review the draft? If so, you can resubmit it - however, I would not do this without paying attention to the feedback given by both Ibjaja055 (in the draft) and 331dot (on this helpdesk). Both are experienced editors and they have given you good advice. If you are asking whether to listen to 331dot, then the answer is yes, you should pay close attention and take their advice. They have gone out of their way to help and given you detailed information that is very relevant to your draft. StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
StartGrammarTimeSorry if I was a bit insistent on this topic, but I just wanted a second opinion. Now that I have it... it stays as it is. (｡•́︿•̀｡) BarComos (talk) 03:57, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:15, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Laffuble

[edit]

I am simply confused on how to use the citation bot. Laffuble (talk) 06:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:16, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Laffuble

[edit]

I am simply confused on how to use the citation bot. Laffuble (talk) 06:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Laffuble Citation bot only fixes formatting issues in references, but there aren't any in the drafts. What would you like the bot to do? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! My sincere apologies I am still new to wiki and did not know.
Thank you. Laffuble (talk) 07:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But, I do have one more question. What does it mean by "Submissions should summarize information in
==>"secondary"<==, reliable sources? Laffuble (talk) 07:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drafts need to demonstrate notability in order to be accepted. Secondary reliable sources establish notability. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks! Laffuble (talk) 07:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:30, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Aarush indus

[edit]

How Do I Take This Page Down?

Aarush Indus Aarush indus (talk) 07:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aarush indus  Done, tagged for deletion per WP:G7. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:11, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Writer Johnc

[edit]

This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (December 2024)

I recently received a notification indicating that I need to report to Wikipedia regarding i work for my employer to create an article about "Orion Land." I would appreciate guidance on where I should report this information and any instructions or guidelines on creating the article content.

Thank you for your assistance. Writer Johnc (talk) 08:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Writer Johnc: the instructions for disclosing your paid-editing status are given in the notice(s) posted on your talk page. Simply put, you need to place the {{Paid}} template, duly filled-in, on your user page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Writer Johnc, thank you for being open. You'll find lots of information at WP:PAID, but the quickest and easiest way to make a disclosure is to place the following on your userpage:

{{paid|employer=Orion Land}}

(if your employer is Orion Land - if not, change 'Orion Land' to the correct name of your employer).

With regards to the content of the draft, your goal is to find sources that show us Orion Land is notable by Wikipedia standards, which are very specific. For a company, the relevant guideline is WP:NCORP. All your sources should meet the triple criteria of WP:42. Sources do not need to be in English, if that helps. Happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I had just place the link "{{paid|employer=Orion Land}}" on the Writer Johnc User page , is it okay for my action ?
And what's the next i need to do? pls advise and guide me , ,many thanks Writer Johnc (talk) 09:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Writer Johnc Forgive me, but aren't you the one being paid to learn? You've made a correct disclosure. You have been given sufficient advice. Now, what comes next is your doing the work. That's why youi are being paid.
We, by contrast, are not being paid. That means we are unlikely to be interested in helping you to be. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:28, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.
That advice applies if anything more strongly to paid editors, since your work is likely to be scrutinised especially carefully. ColinFine (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:40, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Al Dorecl Sina

[edit]

Hello dear Wiki team, why my article is denied???? It's a legit, I just wanted write about a photography company!!! It's not an adult nor scam!!!! Wtf?? Isn't Wikipedia for every things...???? I couldn't even post any pictures on the article 😞 Anyway, Kindly review my article and reconsider it to post it.

Thanks & Best wishes. Al Dorecl Sina (talk) 15:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Al Dorecl Sina: the draft was declined, because it is blank. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:50, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: You also have another draft at Draft:MAHMOOD • iNKSTECHSHUB STUDIO INTERNATIONAL which does have content, but that's not the one you submitted for review.
Does that answer your "Wtf"? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And no, Wikipedia is not for everything. There is criteria for inclusion, called notability. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:23, 12 December 2024 review of submission by Aasiea

[edit]

The editor said that the references were not verifiable and were vague about which one. I'm struggling to pinpoint which one. Aasiea (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Aasiea, have you reviewed the comments made during the previous reviews? There are still large sections of the draft uncited. Further, have you made a new account? I've left a notice on your talk page about using multiple accounts, please review the necessary information there. Thank you, Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:53, 12 December 2024 review of submission by MMM2267257

[edit]

Hello! I struggle to understand why the draft article was rejected. All information is based on the two articles I linked, one of which is an obituary published in a highly reputable journal, and the other a scientific paper.

Do you have suggestions on what needs to be changed for the article to be accepted? MMM2267257 (talk) 20:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One obituary by people who evidently knew him is not an independent source; and neither is an article by him. And normally at least three sources that meet WP:42 are required. The draft either needs to satisfy WP:NPROF or WP:GNG: at present it does neither. ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:29, 12 December 2024 review of submission by A Real Living Person

[edit]

My article here was just declined. This is my first article. It was something about sources and notability. Are my sources not credible? I am I lacking citations in important spots? This band I am writing about isn't giant but they have 190,000 monthly listeners on Spotify and articles written about them so I can't imagine their not notable enough for a Wikipedia page. So, as a new editor, I must've screwed some things up. Any and all help is appreciated. A Real Living Person (talk) 21:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The number of listeners is meaningless in terms of notability. You need to show that they meet at least one aspect of WP:BAND. 331dot (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @A Real Living Person. I'm afraid you are having a very common experience for people who create an account and immediately start trying the very challenging task of creating a new article. Would you enter a major tournament immediately after you took up a sport for the first time?
My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:00, 12 December 2024 review of submission by 17081968DavidNeilHowes86918071

[edit]

Critic needs to read the content!!! 17081968DavidNeilHowes86918071 (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @17081968DavidNeilHowes86918071. No, the reviewer does not need to read the content: you need to read what Wikipedia is not. A Wikipedia article is a summary of what independent reliable sources have said about a subject, and very little else. In particular Wikipedia absolutely does not publish original research. ColinFine (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
17081968DavidNeilHowes86918071, your draft bears no resemblance to an actual encyclopedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_December_12&oldid=1263699305"