Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 December 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 12 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 14 >
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 13

[edit]

00:26:15, 13 December 2024 review of draft by Susan Hackett

[edit]


Susan Hackett (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to add find my title page for my article: Laura C. Gentile, renowned figure in the sports and marketing industry

Susan Hackett, your draft is located at User:Susan Hackett/sandbox. It has a promotional tone in violation of the Neutral point of view, a core content policy, and must be rewritten to comply. Cullen328 (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think I toned it down. thank you. Susan Hackett (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Susan Hackett you need to tone it down more. There are still peacocky words such as groundbreaking platform, Her vision to amplify, crucial in adapting, etc. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 04:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Susan Hackett, your draft is exceptionally poorly referenced. Every substantive assertion requires a reference to a reliable source that verifies that assertion. So, when you write that she was Born in 1972 in Oceanside, NY, you need to provide a reference to a published reliable source verifying that. When you write that she was earning accolades in high school, you need to provide a reference to a published reliable source discussing her "accolades". And so on with every other assertion that you make. You have many inappropriate External links in the body of the draft article. Almost all of then should be removed. Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Susan Hackett. Like most editors who plunge into the challenging task of trying to create an article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works, you have written your draft Backwards.
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) 16:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

05:29, 13 December 2024 review of submission by Ravi Venkatraman

[edit]

May I open a page for me with my name and after page is created can I post credits Ravi Venkatraman (talk) 05:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravi Venkatraman I'm not sure what you mean by post credits, but we cannot accept blank drafts. Also note that you are strongly discouaged from writing about yourself. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:36, 13 December 2024 review of submission by 2001:FB1:E3:9902:3859:44D5:E5BE:12E2

[edit]

T0829 13De mber/12/2024reviewot Sbmissionby2001F13.E39902385944D55EBE12E2 edit 

2001:FB1:E3:9902:3859:44D5:E5BE:12E2 (talk) 08:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please unscramble that – do you have a question you'd like to ask? (And is it about a draft or the drafting process, as opposed to an existing article?) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:58, 13 December 2024 review of submission by 145.224.95.51

[edit]

Is this worth of persuing or we should abondon it. If it is please advise how we can best do it. 145.224.95.51 (talk) 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no further prospect of changing the draft to address the concerns given, it's not worth pursuing. It will be deleted after six months of inactivity, or you can place {{db-user}} on the draft to request its deletion faster. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:18, 13 December 2024 review of submission by Sophie.hampson

[edit]

Hi

I recently submitted a page on Bransby Horses, but it was rejected by Wikipedia as it read like an ad. It stated that I needed to have a range of sources from independent and reliable publications and not from the charity itself. But not one of my sources links back to the charity's website and every single one is an external source, so I'm really confused how Wikipedia have come to this conclusion.

Please could you advise on how I fix this. Sophie.hampson (talk) 12:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sophie.hampson: just to explain, the draft was declined for informal or non-neutral language, and I think it does have a vaguely promotional feel to it. (Also, information like opening hours and cost of entry is absolutely not needed and quite inappropriate for an encyclopaedia article.)
Where the decline notice mentions independent sources, it means (among other things) that when you say things like "their experts also take part in external events and contribute to the global research community on equine health", this must come from an independent source, you cannot call their people "experts" or contributors to global research, and neither can they themselves, that makes it just peacock language.
I haven't looked at the sources in detail, but it's also possible that some of them regurgitate what someone from the charity has said (eg. in an interview) or written (eg. in a press statement), in which case although superficially the source looks independent, the ultimate source is actually the charity itself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:44, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Thank you for this feedback. This has really helped :) Sophie.hampson (talk) 14:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:39, 13 December 2024 review of submission by RHAMGA

[edit]

How to show the notability of the subject?

I have made a submission for adding a page, but it has been rejected due to the fact that the primary sources do not establish notability. Other UK based bodies that are related to the Guild currently have their own page, including:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Antiquarian_Horological_Society https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Worshipful_Company_of_Clockmakers https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/British_Horological_Institute

The Guild was established in 1907 and has a larger membership that 2 of those 3 bodies. The British Horological Institute's (BHI) page only has sources that are from their own website, and so it is unclear why the notability for the Guild is being rejected, but not for the BHI.

I am happy to make any necessary changes, but having read the notes from Wikipedia on the subject, I am not clear what I need to do. Thanks RHAMGA (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RHAMGA: it doesn't matter whether other comparable organisations have articles in Wikipedia, that is the so-called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, which is a fallacy. We don't assess drafts by comparison to existing articles, but rather by reference to the applicable policies and guidelines. Organisations must establish notability per WP:ORG, which requires significant coverage in multiple (3+) secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent of the subject and of each other. Your draft cites almost exclusively primary sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, many thanks for clarifying that; I'll make the suggested changes. I appreciate what you're saying about past articles and that as standards have changed they may not be up to current levels - and so I shouldn't try and compare with them. RHAMGA (talk) 13:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out those woefully undersourced articles. I have tagged two of them with their shortcomings: the third was already tagged. I suspect that suitable source to establish notability do not exist for any of the three, but I have no interest in searching for such sources. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:57, 13 December 2024 review of submission by Untitledwriter17

[edit]

please tell me what is the problem so that I can resolve it Untitledwriter17 (talk) 15:57, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer left you a message as to what the reason was. Do you have questions about it? 331dot (talk) 15:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Untitledwriter17: apart from the fact that you're not notable, you shouldn't be writing about yourself in the first place. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:52, 13 December 2024 review of submission by Fryeng1990

[edit]

Soccer team Fryeng1990 (talk) 23:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fryeng1990 "soccer team" isn't a question, and the draft has been rejected as a blank submission. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 05:33, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_December_13&oldid=1263848913"