Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2018 November 8

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< November 7 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 9 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


November 8

edit

01:31:27, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Anirudh 2057

edit


Anirudh 2057 (talk) 01:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

08:18:09, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Allbaze

edit


Allbaze (talk) 08:18, 8 November 2018 (UTC) Why Does My Submission Keep Getting Rejected On Wikipedia?[reply]

Hello, welcome to the AFCHD.
  • Draft:Tosin Bee - rejected due to references not being inline with WP:CITE (click that WP:CITE link for more, your referencing techniques are not within policy) and because Tosin Bee (by the sources that your provided) isn't deemed notable enough to be accepted (and some of the sources are primary). The sources you provided don't show enough coverage (ie paragraph or more in each source) in enough reliable sources to show notability (see WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG). If you provide three or more sources independent of Tosin Bee from newspapers, books, magazines, journals (more than passing mentions) it will be accepted. If you have further help ask here some more or see the Teahouse. Thank you for reaching out. JC7V-talk 08:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:09:01, 8 November 2018 review of draft by BellaAw

edit


Hello, I have made some substantial changes to the above draft following previous failed submissions by other users. However, it was declined again. The following comments were left on the page as being the main reasons why it was rejected this time:

  •   Comment: This draft appears to have been reference-bombed with non-independent and low-quality sources.See previous notes.
  • This is now improved. Some low-quality and non-independent sources are gone and I left references that comes from well known websites and mention the subject (and support facts) very well. 81.153.208.126 (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment: The subject appears to be best known for Spears Magazine, but Spears Magazine doesn't have an article of its own and so would not seem to be notable. Other than that, notability is not inherited from his father or anyone else.
  • Spear's Magazine does have an article of its own - it is now linked to the subject. 81.153.208.126 (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With all the improvements, does the article meet WP:GNG? BellaAw (talk) 10:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:31:08, 8 November 2018 review of submission by TroopyGirl

edit

Hello, I'd just like some clarity about how I prove notability of my subject. Richard Lawson has founded and run many charitable foundations which have given millions of pounds away to charity. Notability seems to require sources to be cited but humanitarians rarely seek publicity for their work. He is referenced in charitable records for the charity's he's involved with but this isn't counted in the notability judgement. To try to boost notability, I have added a section about his career as a powerboat racer, for which I have many newspaper references and media coverage but this doesn't seem to be enough. Is it simply that individuals who work within small charities just aren't notable enough to warrant inclusion or do you see something I could do to help? Secondly, if he simply doesn't fit the notability criteria, I have been reading about the possibility of merging his page with another. His charity the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation already has its own Wiki page - can I merge him into that somehow, allowing his page I've written to exist as a link from the JDF page - if so, how do I do that? Many thanks TroopyGirl TroopyGirl (talk) 10:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the subject is not well known enough to have got the substantial coverage that Wikipedia notability insists on. You could include information about his charity work in the article about his charity if it is relevant. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

12:02:13, 8 November 2018 review of draft by Mega.lk90

edit


Mega.lk90 (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Raptor and Lift&Oil someconcert they join together. It's not copy.

15:35:15, 8 November 2018 review of submission by ACCH

edit

I wrote when it started and who was currently top of the table (Lyon); the only source I managed to find was Lyon's web-site. There's no reason to think that Lyon would have got the League table on their web-site wrong to make Lyon look better, so it could hardly be classed as a biased source, so what's the problem with it? ACCH (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lyons own website badly fails the requirement for multiple sources independent to the subject. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:09:04, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Sparkling peach

edit


Sparkling peach (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


I am trying to create an article. Despite me having many sources that are not directly from the subject's personal bio (therefore a variety of sources about the person), my article keeps getting rejected. How can I prevent that from occurring? Sparkling peach (talk)Sparkling peach

Sparkling peach (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If he is a full-tenured professor at the University of Mississippi, then he should be suitable for an article. I have passed the review. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Full tenured does not mean he meets WP:PROF but he might. Legacypac (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:36:25, 8 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Demographichistorian

edit


It has been 2 ,months since i submitted my article and it still has not been reviewed . It says the maximum waiting time for an article to be reviewed is 2 months .

Demographichistorian (talk) 16:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • If I reviewed your article it would not be to approve it. I expect the main reason it has been waiting so long is the dire formatting, consider fixing the images, putting references after the end punctuation of a sentence, and using {{quote}} for quotes. The main reason for not accepting it would be the general impression I get that the subject is already covered in other articles, or should be covered in other articles. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17:56:49, 8 November 2018 review of draft by David Colquhoun

edit


I have been told by Missvain that I do not cite enough sources. I'm not sure what this means. I've written only a few Wikipedia entries, so I'd appreciate a couple of examples of what's lacking a source. I didn't have this problem with writing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Wilson_(mathematician).

Also, David Eppstein said that the references to papers are not sufficiently selective. Again, I don't understand what this means. Have I cited too many papers?

David Colquhoun (talk) 17:56, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • More sources should be self explanatory, every sentence should have a citation after it. You can use named references to use the same reference for several sentence. You will have to ask David Eppstein about being selective, I don't really know. I have approved it and you can improve it in mainspace. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I believe he means there are too many papers listed. We don't list everything someone ever did, instead we list important stuff they did. Legacypac (talk) 19:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Page has been accepted but the entire Early life part has no sources. Legacypac (talk) 20:05, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20:17:52, 8 November 2018 review of draft by Mehdichitsaz

edit


My submission got declined and I am wondering to know the reason. Mehdichitsaz (talk) 20:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mehdichitsaz, thanks for reaching out, your submisison was declined for not meeting any of these criteria (from the WP:NBAND page):

Shortcuts WP:BAND WP:MUSICBIO Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.

  • Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1]
  • This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:
  • Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3]
  • Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
  • Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.
  • Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.
  • Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
  • Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4]
  • Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
  • Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.[note 5] This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.)
  • Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
  • Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
  • Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition.
  • Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).
  • Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
  • Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.

You need sources that show Chi2am is notable via newspapers, book etc independent of the subject (and more than in passing) If you need further help, ask again or see the Teahouse. See Macklemore's article for the type of sources you need. JC7V-talk 20:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2018_November_8&oldid=868736463"