Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 July 14
Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< July 13 | << Jun | July | Aug >> | July 15 > |
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. |
July 14
[edit]02:47, 14 July 2024 review of submission by RadioStoryTeller
[edit]I don't want to run afoul of the COI Guidelines, so I'm now reaching out for help in completing Draft:Secrets_of_Harridge_House. I disagree that this article is not suitable or inappropriate for Wikipedia, in that it isn't sufficiently sourced. There are far more sketchy articles currently available on Wikipedia that the same criticism could be applied to. I ask that an experienced Editor help me bring this article to fruition. Please don't be judgmental, as this is my first excursion into creating articles for Wikipedia. Everyone's got to start somewhere, right? Thank you for your time. I look forward to the next steps in this process. RadioStoryTeller (talk) 02:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @RadioStoryTeller: I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but I'll make a few observations in case it helps:
- You need to formally disclose your COI, as instructed in the message on your talk page. It isn't enough to say (assuming you're the one who added that) on the draft page
"I'm Scott Young, a co-creator and co-writer..."
, because that won't stay there for very long, and in any case doesn't tell us which user account it refers to. - I don't think anyone is telling you to
"stop writing on this article"
, only that you must disclose your COI before continuing. - We don't get involved in co-editing here at the help desk, in case that's what you mean by
"ask[ing] that an experienced Editor help me bring this article to fruition"
; that is entirely your responsibility. - As for other sketchy articles on Wikipedia, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. There are indeed many problematic articles among the nearly 7m in the English-language Wikipedia, but that is no reason to create more such problems. All new articles must comply with the currently-applicable policies and guidelines, and that is why we assess drafts in reference to these, and not by comparison to existing articles.
- You need to formally disclose your COI, as instructed in the message on your talk page. It isn't enough to say (assuming you're the one who added that) on the draft page
- HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Entirely promotional, no indication of notability and no independent reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 07:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- RadioStoryTeller If you would like to help us out, please identify these "sketchy" articles you have seen so action can be taken. We're only as good as the people who choose to help us out, and with millions of articles and only thousands if not hundreds of regular editors, we need help in addressing problematic articles. 331dot (talk) 07:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
04:23, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Jan Steinman
[edit]- Jan Steinman (talk · contribs)
How to include sound Jan Steinman (talk) 04:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jan Steinman: not sure what you mean, exactly, but there are two templates (at least) which could be used, {{Listen}} for sidebar content and {{Audio}} for inline audio.
- That said, you don't really need to worry about such nice-to-haves, which don't in any way affect the draft's chances of being accepted. Instead, you should be working towards demonstrating notability, which is a core requirement for publishing, and for which your draft currently shows very little evidence, if any.
- BTW, that list of external links in the 'The Neal Gladstone Radio Show' will need to go, as inline external links not allowed in the article main body text, and in any case such a long list is not appropriate. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Under "To be accepted, a draft should:" the word "notability" does not appear. I have worked hard to satisfy the conditions listed.
- Can you provide me with some guidance on "notability?" Jan Steinman (talk) 07:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- You have one source that documents his death, and has some coverage of him, you need multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of him and shows how he meets the definition of a notable musician or more broadly a notable person.
- The performances section should be removed, it's uncited, and probably should only list performances that merit articles themselves(i.e. like The Eras Tour does for Taylor Swift). 331dot (talk) 07:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jan Steinman: the first bullet point under "to be accepted", which reads
qualifies for a Wikipedia article
, refers to notability, and links to Wikipedia:Notability. And now 331dot has provided you with more specific links to person and musician notability guidelines. Please study those guidelines carefully. - I also need to mention that, as the person has died only a few months ago, this draft almost certainly still comes under our WP:Biographies of living persons policy (see WP:BDP), which requires inline citations to reliable published sources to support any potentially contentious statement and all private personal and family details. Currently most of the draft is unreferenced, and some of the sources cited are user-generated and therefore not considered reliable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jan Steinman Additionally, while we have no reason to doubt the permissions given by his widow, we have no evidence of that permission. Without those permissions being recorded there is a strong probability of deletion. It is essential that permission is sent using the instructions present at any file.
- At present, with this draft decorated with pictures which are pleasant, but add no value, and recordings which are similar, this is more a tribute page than a biography. Please see WP:NOTMEMORIAL and act accordingly 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jan Steinman You have now proven that you can upload sound files.. Ok. However, being able to do something does not mean that you should do it. Wikipedia is not an archive of all of Gladstone's work. This great list will not be acceptable in the article, even if you achieve permission for them. 100% of them have been tagged as requiring permission.
- Please give serious thought to our needs for an article, not a memorial, not an archive. If you wish to memorialise him, please get a website. Wikipedia is not a free web host. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @331dot I have been trying to advise the editor that we are not a repository for a slew of sound files. Regrettably I have only just checked that the draft is not a copyvio. The great majority is. I have redacted what I have found and requested a cv-revdel. There are two copyright warnings on their user talk page. Since they are in reverse chronological to the acts of copyvio I have decided that the second warning should be treated as if it were their first warning. YMMV.
- @Jan Steinman This draft would never have been accepted as written, whether this was a copyright violation or not. WP:NOTREPOSITORY applies as does WP:NOTMEMORIAL. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 06:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
05:39, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Anilbudhamagar2022
[edit]why i could not upload my biography Anilbudhamagar2022 (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Anilbudhamagar2022: a message was posted on your talk page three months ago explaining why autobiographies are not a good idea. And we take an especially dim view of totally unreferenced, purely promotional autobiographies. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- You should upload your biography to social media or a personal website, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a place to summarize what others say about you, not what you say about yourself. 331dot (talk) 07:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
14:22, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Slasher2point1
[edit]Hi, I am trying to get my page for Aly Brier, the wife of Tommy Nelson approved. The issue I keep running into are that the sources are not considered "reliable."
Since her work primarily consists of short films, the coverage is not as easily available as that for feature films. Can you please let me know which websites are causing this holdup when someone goes to review the page or provide suggestions for alternative websites I can used for sources that are considered appropriate?
Thank you for your time, I greatly appreciate it. Slasher2point1 (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Slasher2point1 For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
- Check your references against these tough criteria. No references which pass? No article. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for answering, but again, can you please provide examples of secondary websites that would be approved (2 or 3 websites would be a great starting point)? It's easier if I know what websites are approved and then look up that information there vs. continuously going back and forth between the WP pages and updating the citations only to have it be rejected again Slasher2point1 (talk) 01:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
15:06, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Uryder23
[edit]I’m working on my first Wikipedia page, doing the editing while incorporating input from a couple of other people who have knowledge about the subject, including a descendant of the person.
One of these people (Joe) is an artist, and has offered two related images to make them part of the page. He’s not active on Wikipedia and his technical skills are not strong, so he has asked me to upload the image files. I’ve explained the Commons license to Joe, and he is OK with the terms. But the upload process wants me to claim that I own the work, which I do not.
Do you have any suggestions about how to proceed? If Joe sends me an email documenting his agreement to the CC license, is there some way to use the email to comply with the rules about image uploads?
Thanks Tom Edds
Uryder23 (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Uryder23 Images and technicalities about them, should be discussed on Wikimedia Commons. To save you some trouble please read c:COM:VRT and follow the processes outlined there, 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Tom. I'm afraid that, like many new editors, you have plunged straight into a task that may cause you considerable frustration.
- 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..
- Note that "input from a couple of other people who have knowledge about the subject, including a descendant of the person", other than helping you identify independent sources about Breeze, are of little value, and may even be a hindrance. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
- In fact, if you know people associated with Breeze, you may even have a conflict of interest in writing this - this does not prevent you from doing it, but it can make it even harder, as it is likely to make it hard for you to judge whether your text is sufficiently neutral. ColinFine (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
15:52, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Lucas Pat
[edit]Minor incident submitted the draft for review and may not be notable enough to accept submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 15:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Lucas Pat. Indeed, the draft was rejected as not being notable enough for an article. Did you have a question about the rejection? Qcne (talk) 16:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. Minor incident is rejected, not declined submission. But you need to add references or reliable sources for incidents to accept submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed, that is why it was rejected. I still am not clear if you had a question about the draft, though? Qcne (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- No. Clearly add more reliable sources and references to submit the draft for review, not "non-clear" submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lucas Pat I do not understand what you mean, you are the one who submitted this draft? Why are you telling me to add reliable sources and submit the draft for review? As it has been rejected, it will not be considered. Qcne (talk) 16:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Qcne will help you add reliable sources and references to submit the draft for review but the submission is rejected because topic is not notable enough to accept submission, not to decline submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you are saying, @Lucas Pat. Please re-phrase. Qcne (talk) 16:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Lucas Pat Is English your primary language? It seems like you are using a translator or AI to communicate with us. 331dot (talk) 16:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @331dot Yes. Is Portuguese the second language? Lucas Pat (talk) 17:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Lucas Pat You should edit the Portugese Wikipedia if you cannot communicate with us without using a translator.
- Você deve editar a Wikipédia em português se não conseguir se comunicar conosco sem usar um tradutor. 331dot (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- OK. Joao Rocha likes Portuguese-language Wikipedia because the submission is rejected and the topic is not notable. Lucas Pat (talk) 17:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Portuguese Wikipedia is blocked from editing for 3 days because of vandalism. Lucas Pat (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'd recommend waiting until your block has ended, and continuing there. Qcne (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Qcne Yes. Impossible to edit in Portuguese Wikipedia but possible in English Wikipedia until July 17. Lucas Pat (talk) 18:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- You do not have the language skills to edit the English Wikipedia, please wait until the 17th July. Qcne (talk) 18:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Qcne They are blocked for vandalism on the Portuguese WP 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- You do not have the language skills to edit the English Wikipedia, please wait until the 17th July. Qcne (talk) 18:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Qcne Yes. Impossible to edit in Portuguese Wikipedia but possible in English Wikipedia until July 17. Lucas Pat (talk) 18:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'd recommend waiting until your block has ended, and continuing there. Qcne (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Portuguese Wikipedia is blocked from editing for 3 days because of vandalism. Lucas Pat (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- OK. Joao Rocha likes Portuguese-language Wikipedia because the submission is rejected and the topic is not notable. Lucas Pat (talk) 17:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @331dot Yes. Is Portuguese the second language? Lucas Pat (talk) 17:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Qcne will help you add reliable sources and references to submit the draft for review but the submission is rejected because topic is not notable enough to accept submission, not to decline submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lucas Pat I do not understand what you mean, you are the one who submitted this draft? Why are you telling me to add reliable sources and submit the draft for review? As it has been rejected, it will not be considered. Qcne (talk) 16:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- No. Clearly add more reliable sources and references to submit the draft for review, not "non-clear" submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed, that is why it was rejected. I still am not clear if you had a question about the draft, though? Qcne (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. Minor incident is rejected, not declined submission. But you need to add references or reliable sources for incidents to accept submission. Lucas Pat (talk) 16:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
18:25, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Bdavid1b00
[edit]- Bdavid1b00 (talk · contribs)
The article has been rejected multiple times. I have referenced enough sources
Bdavid1b00 (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Bdavid1b00 there is no indication this person meets our notability criteria. Qcne (talk) 18:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- What is the way forward? Bdavid1b00 (talk) 18:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Try and prove notability by following the instructions at the link above. Qcne (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- What is the way forward? Bdavid1b00 (talk) 18:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
20:13, 14 July 2024 review of submission by Nono19192
[edit]I received feedback that the article needs to be written in a neutral tone of voice. I'd love to get some specific pointers on how to improve the article for it to be approved. Can you please advise what kind of images I am allowed to use in the article? Many thanks in advance Nono19192 (talk) 20:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Nono19192. I will highlight below a list of unacceptable words/phrases. Wikipedia must be written in a strictly neutral point of view.
- been synonymous with elegance, creativity and floral art for over a century
- Through its rich heritage, Lachaume has served and continues to serve a distinguished clientele,
- securing its status as an institution of Parisian sophistication
- visionary florist
- gained recognition for its timeless, elegant and refined style
- highlighting his passion for elevating floristry to a form of art.
- where it continued to prosper, attracting a clientele including European royalty, cultural icons and renown fashion designers
- beginning a new chapter while maintaining its classic decor and commitment to timeless elegance
- illustrating how passion, craftsmanship, and creativity can create a legacy in floral art
- To be blunt, the draft needs deleting and re-writing from scratch. In it's current form it seems to exist only to promote and advertise the business. This is prohibited on Wikipedia.
- Please carefully study both WP:NPOV and WP:PEACOCK.
- Do you, by any chance, have a connection to Lachaume? It seems hard to believe an uninterested bystander would write about a business in such a promotional way. Qcne (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
20:50, 14 July 2024 review of submission by 39.58.232.226
[edit]War 2 39.58.232.226 (talk) 20:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question, but the draft has been rejected and won't be considered further. Qcne (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)