Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 August 14

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 13 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 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.


August 14

edit

01:59, 14 August 2023 review of submission by 187.252.200.30

edit

Are the references not enough? Currently they have been added but I don't know if they might be useful. 187.252.200.30 (talk) 01:59, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

02:52, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Adamjmc1213

edit

I don't understand what secondary sources i can add, the governing body is known to be useless and giving out information 

Adamjmc1213 (talk) 02:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamjmc1213: if you cannot find appropriate secondary sources, then it probably isn't possible to have an article on this topic. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

05:58, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Michelecapurso

edit

Cleanup needed to how the citing is done. Hi. My article Draft:Continuity In Education was declined because "Cleanup needed to how the citing is done". I'd appreciate it if someone could explain what type of cleanup needs to be done, and what references are not in order exactly? The feedback does not say this and it is hard for me to organize them without some example and clear directions. Thank you. Michelecapurso (talk) 05:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michelecapurso: not sure, perhaps you need to ask the reviewer directly? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:40, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Michelecapurso I've fixed the formatting of your post so the draft link is in the correct place- we also don't need the whole url so I've fixed that too. It's not entirely clear to me what cleanup is needed- I would also suggest asking the reviewer directly. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thank you very much for your help and suggestions.
Michele Michelecapurso (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:47, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Toby3141

edit

How do I make my article more notable? Toby3141 (talk) 07:47, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can't "make" it notable- No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. This draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 08:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

07:52, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Madeforall1

edit

Greetings I need help and feedback with this article I’ve created, I’ve made relevant changes and citation to only news articles I saw on the web. Madeforall1 (talk) 07:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You've submitted it for a review, a reviewer will eventually conduct a review and leave you feedback. This may take some time, so please be patient. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

08:27, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Arshan alif

edit

why my page was declined? Arshan alif (talk) 08:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would have rejected your draft rather than decline it, there is no evidence that you are notable in Wikipedia terms. This is NOT social media it is an encyclopaedia. Theroadislong (talk) 08:32, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

11:33, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Imanluk

edit

My article has been rejected twice one of the grounds on reliable sources.

However I have been trying very hard to use published sources only for this article. However African and Nigerian history have been mainly oral and not written. This situation made worse with colonisation where whole society fabric were obliterated and the colonial powers forbade traditional rulers engaging in certain activities including producing certain artefacts.

However based on the links you sent me on reliable sources of evidence I see that primary sources like oral interviews and artefacts are acceptable:

'A work on history is not likely to be taken seriously as a scholarship if it only cites secondary sources, as it does not indicate that original research has been done.'(Primary Source)

For this project I carried out extensive research on Prince Aigbogun and everything I wrote are direct quotations from the interviewees who are community leaders who know his story very well. Knowing what I now know, these cover the point made that if he is not named the reference is not likely to be useful. 

Also it states in one of the links that I need only one published source:

• ‘We require the existence of at least one secondary source so that the article can comply with Wikipedia:No original research's requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

May I take these statements as correct and use them to source my article?

Question 2: My referencing has gone wrong and I do not know how to correct it. Please can you help me delete whichever part needs to be deleted.

Question 3: How do I cite oral sources within the text body?

Thank you very much for your help. 


Imanluk (talk) 11:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: The article was not rejected, it was declined. Imanluk (talk) 11:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot use oral sources, sources need to be published. Theroadislong (talk) 11:40, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:28, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Joaopsjardim

edit

I would like to get help, in order to this page about this young prodigy player be posted, since there are other pages with more "irrelevant" players and haven't been denied. Thank you so much for your attention and comprehension Joaopsjardim (talk) 13:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joaopsjardim: you need to cite your sources using inline citations, see WP:REFB and WP:ILC for advice. In articles on living people, every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details such as DOB must be clearly supported by inline citations. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't look to me as if any of your sources meet the criteria in golden rule. Where have people (probably journalists) written at length about her? That is what the article should be based on, almost exclusibely. If there are no such sources, then it is probalby TOOSOON, and she does not currently meet the criteria for WP:notability.
As for other articles existing: we have thousands and thousands of seriously sub-standard articles, most of them created in earlier days when we were not so careful about quality. Since this is a volunteer project, where people work on what they choose, people do not often go back to these and improve or delete them. They are not relevant for evaluating a new article : see OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:28, 14 August 2023 review of submission by WerAnselm

edit

Hello! Sorry, I couldn't manage to link the Itemizations to the appropriate text passage ... can someone do that for me or teach me the way? WerAnselm WerAnselm (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WerAnselm, I think by 'Itemizations' you mean references? If you're using the Visual Editor, see Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/2. It's a fairly straight forward process- when you add the in-line citations a reference list will automatically be generated.
Let us know if that helps? Qcne (talk) 15:39, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15:55, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Aweeryava

edit

Help please post an article official. Thank you Aweeryava (talk) 15:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Aweeryava. You have two unsubmitted drafts, Draft:FxPro Company and Draft:FxPro Group. These appear to be the same draft, but with different titles?
You need to press the Submit the draft for review! button for them to be submitted for review. They are currently not submitted. The wait time for draft article reviews is over 4 months, you will have to be patient.
Do you have a connection with the company in some way? Are you employed by them? If so you must make a paid editing disclosure and a conflict of interest disclosure immediately- failing to do so is a breach of the Wikimedia Terms of Use and can result in a loss of editing privileges.
Let us know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 16:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:58, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Livingstone578

edit

I need help with my article. Livingstone578 (talk) 17:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Livingstone578: this draft has been rejected and is pending deletion as a copyright violation. For future reference, please see WP:CV. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:45, 14 August 2023 review of submission by Silverbow33

edit

Does this organization count as notable?

Was looking through the references and questioned if the page meets the notable criteria. The ones I'm pretty sure are independent, secondary and reliable are: 1, 3, and 7. The big problem with political organizations is that a lot of the articles that they are featured in are not reliable because there is a politicized bias.

I know I submitted it fairly recently, I just don't want to go through the process of getting declined after 4 months because I don't have enough references. I'd rather fix it now before getting reviewed just for the sake of time. Let me know if you could take a look at it, thanks!

Thanks! Silverbow33 (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Silverbow33 You seem to be asking for a pre-review review, which we don't really do here; the best way to get feedback is to wait for a reviewer. Everyone would like their draft to be reviewed quickly, but that's a matter of chance.
I do find it curious that you seem to be questioning the notability of the topic your own draft. Typically one will want to figure that out first.
I can say that bias is not in and of itself a barrier to using a source, as all sources have biases. Unless the source is so biased that it makes things up out of whole cloth, or doesn't do fact checking, a source is generally okay. 331dot (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may find it helpful to look at the List of perennial sources to get an idea of what is generally acceptable as sources. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_August_14&oldid=1171256899"