Ja2007

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jiří Fukač (April 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nagol0929 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jiří Fukač and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Nagol0929 (talk) 13:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ja2007! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Nagol0929 (talk) 13:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, why do you say it is not form reliable sources? As I mentioned now in 2 messages, it is exactly the content of the Czech wiki page of this article about Jiri Fukac. That page was made by Masaryk University, where Prof Fukac worked as professor. All is perfectly true. Th English translation was approved and slihgtly altered in the ending ( explaing Fukacs benefits) by Profesor Michael Beckerman form the NY University, a college to prof Fukac. Kind regards Ja2007 Ja2007 (talk) 14:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia has stricter requirements, in order to demonstrate notability, you will need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles written about them in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. Any article should be based on them alone. Theroadislong (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jiří Fukač (April 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Blaze Wolf was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jiří Fukač and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Ja2007. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks your replies and for the time you are offering me. I am not advanced here, that was obvious to you... but I did my best to provide an English translation of an approved article. It was no problem to do the same on the Danish side. And since my English is not perfect I even let the text to be controlled - as mentioned many times- by a leading us musicologist. After your remarque I managed to find the source, which is "Macek, Petr Výběrová bibliografie prací Jiřího Fukače in: Sborník prací filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity: Studia minora Facultatis philosophicae Universitatis Brunensis. Series musicologica. Brno: Řada hudebněvědná". Vol. (H 38-40). 2006. s. 15-31.

There is no conflict of interests or any kind of advertising for a person who died 20 years ago. It is in the interest of the public to have acces to the right information. Even though I am family related, I should not be refused because of that, as I am in NO way stating any personal views or opinions, just translating facts about professional life and work of prof Fukac.

I do understand and appreciate your strict rules, but sometimes the time would be better used just to help a good case to go further.

I am leaving it, spending a day for nothing...and hoping one day someone finishes the job. In that case you will get exactly the same information about prof Fukac, as I provided - just delayed...

Best regards Ja2007 Ja2007 (talk) 15:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay, if you wish to drop this, that is your decision, of course. Just be aware that if a draft sits there for six months without being edited, it will be automatically deleted.

With regards to the conflict of interest (COI), this does not only arise from 'advertising' or being paid to edit an article. If, for example, Fukač was a friend or a relative of yours, that would create an obvious COI, without any financial or commercial interest being at stake. I noticed that all your edits across different language versions of Wikipedia have to do with this subject, hence why I asked the question. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

My last try.. what is still missing ? I mentioned - and submited a higly reliable source "Macek, Petr Výběrová bibliografie prací Jiřího Fukače in: Sborník prací filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity: Studia minora Facultatis philosophicae Universitatis Brunensis. Series musicologica. Brno: Řada hudebněvědná". Vol. (H 38-40). 2006. s. 15-31.

Why is it not enough? Macek is the leader of musicology department of the Masaryk University in Brno. What else can I do? Why is it good enough for the Czech page and for the Danish page? Thanks Ja2007 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

The general notability guideline requires "multiple" sources. How many is multiple? This isn't actually defined anywhere, but is generally thought to mean three or more, and certainly requires more than just a single source. So what you can and need to do to get this draft accepted is to find additional sources that meet the GNG standard. (Sources also should be cited, not just mentioned, but that is a relatively minor issue which we can work around.)

As for your other question, each language version of Wikipedia is an entirely separate project, with their own rules and guidelines, including for notability. The English-language Wikipedia has higher notability requirements than any other that I've come across, and for that reason it often happens that a subject is accepted into another language version, in this case the Czech and the Danish one, but isn't accepted into the English Wikipedia. Therefore, when planning to translate an article from another language into English, the first thing one needs to do is to check the sources, to ensure that they satisfy the English Wikipedia's notability requirements (or if not, that additional sources can be found, which do), as otherwise one runs the risk of wasting time and effort on a task which bears no fruit in the end. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Here are multiple sources that I found, I hope it helps to verify the article that I provided.

What else can be done? Shall I ask signitures from leading musicologist that can verify the infos?

Have a nice evening and thanks for your effort.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322841584_Music_lexicographer_Jiri_Fukac_and_the_Brno_School_of_Music_Lexicography

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Jiri-Fukac-46380996

https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/display/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000049646?rskey=vs29NO&result=1

https://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/137647

https://books.google.dk/books/about/In_memoriam_on_the_70_birthday_of_Ji%C5%99%C3%AD.html?id=q5WYswEACAAJ&redir_esc=y

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Music-lexicographer-Ji%C5%99%C3%AD-Fuka%C4%8D-and-the-Brno-School-Macek/16666e020f5d5ddfe74c884bfb75ef1dde4ee8a4

https://ebsees.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/all.html?data=21811&title=Das-Bruenner-Opus-musicum

https://beliana.sav.sk/heslo/fukac-jiri

https://www.knihovnazn.cz/referaty/56-osobnosti-regionu/2268-fuka-jii-1936-2002.html

https://kalliope-verbund.info/de/eac?eac.id=131385933

https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm?method=simpleSearch&cqlMode=true&query=idn%3D131385933

http://biography.hiu.cas.cz/Personal/index.php/FUKA%C4%8C_Ji%C5%99%C3%AD_15.1.1936-22.11.2002

https://www.mgg-online.com/article?id=mgg04946&v=1.0&rs=mgg04946

https://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.fd54f008-8974-4b51-abef-3bf828b71c9a

https://books.google.dk/books/about/M%C3%BDtus_a_skute%C4%8Dnost_hudby.html?id=p3NLAAAAYAAJ&redir_esc=y Ja2007 (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Several of these are just different online links to the same paper by Macek, and I don't think that's fully independent of the subject.

Many are just 'capsule profiles', which do not provide significant coverage, and in any case are often taken from some primary source such as publicity materials.

There are also a few links to works authored by Fukač, which isn't the point here: we don't want to see what he has written, we want to see what others have written about him.

All of which is a way of saying that we're not looking for an indiscriminate collection of web pages that happen to mention the Fukač name. We're looking for significant coverage of him, in secondary published sources (newspaper and magazine/journal articles, books, TV and radio programmes) which are independent (ie. not in any way, even indirectly, connected to Fukač) and reliable (ie. have a reputation for editorial oversight and fact-checking). And we need to see three or more of these.

(And you still need to formally disclose your COI, given that you say you are related to Fukač.)

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

This does not make any real sense. Considering how poor many of the articles are in Wikipedia, because half the time the "sources" are just websites... here you have a verified info from a University profesor Macek, you have a list of published works that point to what Fukac was doing, and you still aks for some more things written about him... What should be good enough source, then those who knew him at the University? And where do you find those other witnesses now? And where shoudl have they been publishing about him ? ( it would be anyway stil their views, right?) Do you always ask for list og birth, copy of diplomas for titles, archive documents about employment etc, do you ask for that every time? Beside, things were not published on internet in Fukac's time - and he does not have a webside...

You have a real matter here, list of tituls, works, institutions, birth and death date. Not even that you believe??

As I said, I can get another University professor to write to you. Is New York University professor good enough?

But it seems like loosing time. I almost regret to have been sponsoring wiki in my family, when I see how rigid the system works, without a necessary nuanced approach and true understanding.

My Interest is the interese of truth and just infos, nothing more. No matter how related I might be to anyone. I am above such ' personal' links. This is purely a matter of fact issue.

I can leave it and the world goes on without a notice. But it is disappointing , you missed a chance to provide a precious info to the public and as such you did not serve a good case. Bye. Ja2007 (talk) 11:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I have tried to explain to you that to establish notability we need to see reliable published sources, not letters from some professor. And it's not a question of whether I 'believe' the information in this draft, it's a question of the information needing to be verifiable, and for that we again need to see published sources. If you are unable or unwilling to comply with these core requirements, then we must leave this matter here.

You talk about you having 'lost time'. I am a volunteer here just like you, and I have equally 'lost time' trying to explain to you how the system works, to no avail. If you wish to pursue this matter further, I can only suggest you resubmit your draft, and another reviewer will pick it up in due course (and I will recuse myself from that duty). Best Regards, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:30, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I did resubmit with many more citations, some of them were actually there form the beginning, named as literature. Thanks. Ja2007 (talk) 14:39, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Jiří Fukač has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Jiří Fukač. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Jiří Fukač

Hello, Ja2007. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jiří Fukač, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jiří Fukač (October 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Utopes was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jiří Fukač and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)