Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 January 13

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< January 12 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 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.


January 13

edit

02:36:06, 13 January 2020 review of draft by Abhuwan

edit


Why its taking so long to get any article reviewed its been 50 days i have submitted an article but hasn't been reviewed yet. Abhuwan (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhuwan: - it's taking a while because there are 3800 submitted drafts (plus dozens each day) and only a few active volunteer reviewers - Wikipedia is a volunteer site, so we can't just make it go quicker. There are, unfortunately, drafts significantly older than your own. Reviewers don't have to work oldest-down, though many do, so the odds of it being reviewed will climb over time

05:32:44, 13 January 2020 rejection of submission by Heartfox

edit

Hello, I have a few questions regarding what happens after a draft submission is rejected that I couldn't find answers to in any article.

  • Can work on it continue?
  • Does it need to be deleted for a new Draft to be created?
  • Can a user request for it to be deleted?

When it becomes notable on February 2 when it begins airing, I'm just wondering what the process is for transferring a rejected draft into the mainspace. It seems like it could be confusing/complicated. Thanks! Hopefully someone can help so it's not caught up in the draft process as rejected forever. Heartfox (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Heartfox. You are free to continue editing the draft, even though it has been rejected. You should continue editing the draft rather than start a fresh copy anywhere else, and should not delete it.
Do you have any kind of conflict of interest with regard to The Masked Singer? If not, and if you're not editing under some form of sanctions, Articles for Creation is an optional process for you. The expert advice you've received is that, more likely than not, Draft:The Masked Singer (American season 3) would fail to survive in mainspace. Most likely it would be merged into The Masked Singer (American TV series). If you choose to ignore that advice, or if the notability of the season changes, then as an autoconfirmed user in good standing, you are free to move the draft to mainspace and let it sink or swim on its merits. The worst that could happen is that it could be deleted. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I will do so when the notability changes. Heartfox (talk) 15:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:21:27, 13 January 2020 review of draft by Arjunsingh5478

edit


Hi, i want to change the name of the article, to Nikhil Kamath. As the name which i had mentioned is my user name. Kindly change that Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 10:21, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Done JTP (talk • contribs) 14:37, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:24:22, 13 January 2020 review of submission by Arjunsingh5478

edit

Need to change the name of the page, to Nikhil Kamath as it's mine User name which is been submitted. Kindly help. Arjunsingh5478 (talk) 10:24, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

10:31:33, 13 January 2020 review of submission by Noreen Ly

edit

I would like to have this reviewed. I am writing for my company. I take wikipedia as a platform to define who are and what we are doing. I have no other intention except that our company will be published. What should I do? Please help me. Noreen Ly (talk) 10:31, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the reviewer. You have not given any sources needed for notability. At this stage, this is simply advertising. In sort, Wikipedia is not a platform to write about your company, this is an encyclopedia, we use third party sourcing. There are many other websites where you can publish such content. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:09, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11:34:57, 13 January 2020 review of draft by The Supermind

edit


My draft has been rejected twice due to citing sources from downloading or advertising contents. Then I removed them and replaced with other one, although the language is Ukrainian. Does it affect the notability of the subject when foreign languages with are cited to the article?

Secondly, I requested the page to move "Kiev day and night". This is the proper name for the series. The Supermind (talk) 11:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed it again. The concern remains the same -- the given sources are not in-depth. I left a further comment on the draft.
The language of the sources doesn't matter.
The titles on English Wikipedia generally follow English proper noun capitalization rules and use title case, as oppose to most Slavic language spelling. That said, the title is not correct anyway -- it should be at least "Kiev at Day and Night" unless there is an official English translation or there are reliable sources in English that have set a precedent for translation. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

12:04:35, 13 January 2020 review of submission by Abhishek.shukla.313

edit


I am wondering which part of my article sounds like an advertisement. As far as I understand, the article is written from a completely neutral point of view, it is giving information about the product in detail. Please let me know so that I can improve. Looking forward to contributing more on Wikipedia. Thanks.

15:35:01, 13 January 2020 review of submission by Slross83

edit

I have marked the draft as paid, to disclose my employer, client and affiliation. The reviewer has marked this draft as not being a notable topic or having enough external sources.

There are many more external media sources that I can include links to. Can I add these in and re-submit for review? Slross83 (talk) 15:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Slross83: Rejection is intended to be final. The subject that you have chosen is not notable (not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia). No amount of editing can fix that. If you had better sources, then those should have been included in the initial draft. But don't just add more low-quality sources, that just looks like citation overkill and will not help the article at all. shoy (reactions) 18:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

15:43:06, 13 January 2020 review of submission by MarkHBrandon

edit


Hey, I'm not requesting a re-review. I just would like some advice on what I need to do in order to get this page published.

Thanks!

MarkHBrandon (talk) 15:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarkHBrandon, I'm afraid that it is very unlikely that this page will be published, as it is literally just an advertisement. Wikipedia does not exist to promote its subjects. If you actually want to get it published, it can't read like an ad, and needs reliable and independent sources. But I don't think such sources exist here. You would need news source or reliable website coverage of it. And most products do not meet that standard. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:26, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


16:02:36, 13 January 2020 review of draft by The Supermind

edit


The review again declined due to insufficient sources that mention the subject. I added some sources for rating section. But it seems the reviewer forget my suggestion for two days.

The Supermind (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3800 pending drafts. On average, it takes many months for a single review, longer for non-English sourcing. I reviewed your draft 3 times, left detailed comments and answered the help desk questions. It still does not have proper sourcing. I will let someone else review. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:35:21, 13 January 2020 review of submission by 103.94.220.69

edit


103.94.220.69 (talk) 16:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for promotion or autobiographies. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


18:47:49, 13 January 2020 review of submission by Eldritcharchivist

edit

Reviewer stated that it was rejected because it was "contrary to the purpose of wikipedia." That statement is in complete ignorance of the several wikipedia pages already in existence of Dungeons & Dragons products specifically lists of modules and campaign settings. this submission adds to the completeness of the Wikipedia subjects on this topic, addressing an obvious gap.

Eldritcharchivist (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eldritcharchivist, Be careful about comparing your article to existing ones. Many of the articles on Wikipedia were created before we began the rigorous Article for Creation process. That means a lot of ...honestly junk articles were created, and many of them have slipped through the cracks. You can read more about the logical fallacies involved in article comparison at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If you provide examples of other such pages, I can give feedback about why they might still exist, or if they should no longer exist.
The reviewer declined your article because it looked like pure promotion, which is against the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not exist to promote its subjects. We only have articles about things that have significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources (think newspapers, books, magazines, quality websites). You did show such coverage in your article, so it just looked like a list of products (which is advertisement, whether or not you intended as such). CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 00:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the user copy-pasted the content into Ravenloft article regardless. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19:43:43, 13 January 2020 review of submission by YawThompson

edit

I will need this correct all errors in order not to repeat them again in my future articles YawThompson (talk) 19:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC) 19:43:43, 13 January 2020 review of draft by YawThompson[reply]



YawThompson (talk) 19:49, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YawThompson, Before writing an article in the future, please first ask here if it is notable. That will save you much headache.
For any article, the subject must first be notable, i.e. have significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources (think newspapers, books, magazines, quality websites). Once you have found enough sources (at least five is a good starting point), then you can start to write the article. It needs to read neutrally and like an encyclopedia article. If you know the person, you should probably not write the article, as that is a conflict of interest. If you've been paid in any way to write an article, you must disclose that by following the steps at WP:PAID
A quick guide to writing new articles can be found here. A longer guide to general editing can be found here. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20:05:33, 13 January 2020 review of submission by MannyPC

edit

I need advice on how can I make an acceptable personal sandbox, please. If someone can edit and make changes on my sandbox or can show me step by step, it would be great. MannyPC (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MannyPC, You have confused your user page User:MannyPC and your sandbox. What you've written in your sandbox should instead go on your user page. The sandbox is to be used to draft new articles from scratch, or otherwise act as a test space. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_January_13&oldid=985274852"