Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 November 16

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< November 15 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 17 >
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.


November 16

edit

01:45, 16 November 2023 review of submission by TheTechnologyGuru

edit

Hello, I've watched and helped contribute to this page over the last few months or so and though submitted by another wiki user in perhaps somewhat premature form, the article does warrant a page of it's own. Though the given family name of "Discman" is present, that's not really what the system represents at all, if anything, the machine is a multimedia device, comprised of each type of discman from music player, to E-reader. This is mostly due to the systems OS, being part of the CD-I line which is unique in itself and very capable for a portable in the early 90's. See it as almost an early version of what we take for granted today, with phones and tablets.

It might be easy to write off notability for this device, but look deeper and you'll see, it's separate from other machines of the time. I question, if the "Data" Discman has it's own article, why is there no reason for the "Intelligant" Discman to have one?

All I ask is that I can be helped or aided to make this article exist officially on wikipedia and to really give it the writeup it deserves. I'll take the time to find reliable sources that back up it's notability and I've saved a good few articles over the years of research I've dedicated to the device to back it up.

Thank you for reading this and I hope that we can work together to finally publish this article, kind regards, TheTechnologyGuru (talk) 01:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTechnologyGuru: as this draft has now been rejected and won't therefore be considered further, your only route forward is to appeal directly to the reviewer who rejected it. This was rejected because the subject is not considered notable. Notability has nothing to do with whether the gadget was "capable" or "unique" etc., only whether sufficient sources exist which meet the WP:GNG guideline. You say you'll "take the time to find reliable sources that back up it's notability"; I suggest you start with that, and make your case only once you have gathered such sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:39, 16 November 2023 review of submission by Tamizhpraba

edit

Hi, My submission was declined. I would like to clarify that I am not connected to the writer whose profile I tried to create in wikipedia. I am a reader following his works. I created the user name as the writer's for my ease of reference. This is a native language (Tamil) writer and not English.

Would be great if you could help me understand how to improve the article.

Thank you Tamizhpraba (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamizhpraba: first things first, if, as you say, you are not Tamizh Praba, then you certainly should not have the username you do. I don't know what "for my ease of reference" means, but you are creating unnecessary confusion regarding your relationship, if any, with the subject, and this could even be considered impersonation. I suggest you change your username at once.
As for how to improve this draft, it was declined for lack of evidence of notability. You therefore need to either produce evidence that the person objectively meets one of the four criteria in WP:AUTHOR, or cite sources which satisfy teh WP:GNG guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This is helpful. Will do. Tamizhpraba (talk) 12:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is my first attempt at creating an article. It is said in WP Username that "User accounts with few or no edits might not be renamed, as it is quicker and easier to simply create a new account."
Please do suggest if I should request a username change OR create a new account.
Thank you. Tamizhpraba (talk) 14:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

04:48, 16 November 2023 review of submission by MeyyarasanC

edit

It is rejected saying its looks like advert. And I made sure that it is modified multiple times with the neutral point of view. Still getting rejected. MeyyarasanC (talk) 04:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MeyyarasanC: what is your question, please? It is true that this looks like an advert, that's been its main problem since I first laid eyes on it seven months ago, and while it may have been improved in the intervening time, it still is very promotional. Nothing short of a comprehensive rewrite will be enough to cure that, I'm afraid, ideally by someone with no particular 'agenda' with regards to the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have stated all the supportive articles and news regarding what I mentioned in article. And all of them are from third parties which are not handled personally. Still, the article is getting rejected. MeyyarasanC (talk) 08:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MeyyarasanC: I repeat, what is your question? You are just stating that the draft (not yet 'article') is rejected. This is indeed the case. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
The draft has been rejected because of the reason that it is very promotional. My question is, what is promotional in this draft? I only stated facts which are supported by research journals and deleted the lines which may seems like promotional or advertise. Still this draft is not getting forward. So I am not sure where this draft is not doing good. MeyyarasanC (talk) 09:03, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Describing this technology as "affordable and sustainable" is promotional. If you have independent sources that state that on their own about this technology, we need those sources and the text needs to be rewritten to attribute that claim to the sources, and not be in Wikipedia's voice. Saying "treatment technologies require significant attention" is an opinion not relevant to the article. You're trying to talk up this technology, not neutrally summarize what independent sources state about it. In any event, the rejection means that this will not be considered further. Do you work for Indian Technology? 331dot (talk) 09:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I looked into that "affordable" claim. It is supported by two sources, one a gov't form completed by the IIT Madras team, the other an article based on an interview. Both clearly primary sources very close to the subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thank you.
As it is mentioned as primary sources of references. I will rewrite the sentences and get some additional sources for that. If I resubmit the draft, is there a possibility of it to be published?
And I am not getting paid for this. I am research student and currently involving in the research of extension of this technology. I want to write this article as awareness and not in a advertise manner. MeyyarasanC (talk) 09:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MeyyarasanC "Awareness" is advertising. Awareness must already exist for a topic to merit a Wikipedia article, you cannot use Wikipedia to spread awareness. That is the definition of advertising. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But it will ease to someone who wants to know about this technology and science behind it. Through NEWS and others, it has reached enough place. Still it may help someone who wants to read about it in a details. MeyyarasanC (talk) 10:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MeyyarasanC: what it will help is the inventor publicise their technology.
You say you're a research student – would that be at IIT Madras, by any chance? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. That's how I came to know about this. Initially you asked that whether am I getting paid for this or not. I have said the same. This technology is giving life to all the rural people, who are affected by toxic elements in drinking water. Government has taken step forward to implement this technology in the most affected areas. Publishing this as a wikipedia article will give value to both ends. MeyyarasanC (talk) 10:32, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you getting a grade for your work here? 331dot (talk) 10:36, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. MeyyarasanC (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MeyyarasanC: "Initially you asked that whether am I getting paid for this or not" – that isn't quite true, though. On April 17, I posted a query on your user talk page asking if you had any conflict of interest in this topic. It now seems you do, but at the time you didn't respond to that query. As you continued editing, I posted three days later a follow-on query about paid editing, to which you replied saying you weren't getting paid. Again you failed to disclose the fact that you have an external relationship with this subject. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean, I cannot publish any article related to IIT Madras?
Even if it is independent on my own. MeyyarasanC (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MeyyarasanC: it means you must disclose your conflict of interest. Once you do that, you can then submit drafts on such topics to the AfC review process, as long as you write them in a neutral, non-promotional manner.
This matter was queried seven months ago, so it is high time to make that disclosure now. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

06:41, 16 November 2023 review of submission by Masaah

edit

Could you please assist me as I am not sure which specific part needs to be revised? I have modified the tone of the text to be more objective. Masaah (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Masaah: this draft has been declined for lack of evidence of notability. Depending on what you think makes this person notable, you need to demonstrate that they meet either the WP:FILMMAKER or WP:NACADEMIC guidelines, or cite sources which satisfy the WP:GNG one.
Additionally, per WP:BLP, every material statement you make, anything you state that could be considered contentious, and all private personal and family details must be clearly supported by inline citations to reliable sources. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

09:56, 16 November 2023 review of submission by TheFactsChecker

edit

Hi. Maybe you can please help me to understand why Draft:Balla con noi keeps getting rejected? I'm a bit at a loss here at this point. As it is, the movie has almost double the sources compared to most Italian films on the EN namespace. Please take List of 2020 box office number-one films in Italy as an example: Tolo Tolo, Hammamet (film), The Best Years (film) all have fewer sources. I added critical reviews from national newspapers/magazines, not outlines, and from all the major Italian film websites. What am I doing wrong, then? Thank you very much. TheFactsChecker (talk) 09:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheFactsChecker: this draft has been declined, not rejected. It has been declined for lack of evidence of notability. Notability is not measured by the number of sources (beyond the requirement that they are multiple), and certainly not by having "almost double the sources compared to most Italian films". We assess notability not by comparison to other articles that may exist, but to the currently applicable guidelines. You need to demonstrate that this subject is notable either by WP:GNG or WP:NFILM; that's all there is to it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:21, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:43, 16 November 2023 review of submission by My Uttarakhand

edit

Hi, my article is declined it seems. May I please request help on why it is declined, so that I can edit and modify it accordingly? My Uttarakhand (talk) 10:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@My Uttarakhand: it has been declined for the reasons given in the decline notice, in those grey boxes inside the large pink one; namely: there is no evidence that the subject is notable, and the draft is written in a promotional manner. (Additionally, it is lacking inline citations, which are required in articles on living people.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10:57, 16 November 2023 review of submission by My Uttarakhand

edit

My article got declined, please help in understanding what can be the reason and how to edit it as per the requirement. 

My Uttarakhand (talk) 10:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See answer above. Theroadislong (talk) 10:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:17, 16 November 2023 review of submission by PlayChessBetter

edit

Good Morning!

I do not have great experience in Wikipedia so please help me to clarify why my article was rejected :(. Personally I am chess international master for nearly 20 years and great chess fun. In my opinion daily chess is future what can you see following the number of participants (35 000 this year due to limitation). Please also note that chess.com already crossed 100 million users and this site/app is in my opinion fully reliable. Professionally I am python/sql/web developer so of course if necessary I can add more information to this site. But I am not sure if the reason this site was rejected is that article was too short or something else :)

Thank you 

PlayChessBetter (talk) 12:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PlayChessBetter: this draft has been only declined, not rejected, meaning that it can be resubmitted once you have addressed the reason for decline. That reason was lack of evidence of notability. The draft only cites chess.com as a source, and it isn't independent as the competition is hosted on it. For notability per WP:GNG, we need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.-- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the answer
I understand what you mean. In the beginning I was planing to create more wide article 'Daily Chess' (which has of course much more chess and non-chess sources like e.g. nytimes.com, while also some smaller tournament are played on other chess platform) and in this article just include 'Daily Chess Championship' (or create the second one) while it is the main daily chess event. And maybe that was the way I should go. With chess.com there is such a problem they bought everything related to online chess:) including Magnus Carlsen Group and chess24.
So personally I do not know any chess Grand Master who is playing online in other sites (previously sometimes lichess.org was used) and it cause a problem with other sources. Of course I can find tones of articles etc. related to 'Daily Chess Championship' but it is Twitter, Reddit, Discord, YT etc...
I also check other Wikipedia chess articles like e.g. 'Champions Chess Tour' series and here there are some references to other sites but the basis is chess.com and the rest references are just only to have other sources than chess.com (prev also chess24) :)

Just please give me a tip. Should I
a) enrich current article and add more information related to daily chess rules, benefits for players in training etc.
b) create a new article "Daily Chess" and include this event to this new article?
c) try to rename the current one to "Daily Chess" and then enrich it with more data?

Thank you once again for your time
Best Regards PlayChessBetter (talk) 13:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:46, 16 November 2023 review of submission by 168.215.209.186

edit

I need help to understand this ejection 168.215.209.186 (talk) 13:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your text was wholly inappropriate for an encyclopedia and completely unsourced. Please first learn more about Wikipedia before attempting the difficult task of creating a new article. See Your First Article for starters. 331dot (talk) 13:50, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

14:04, 16 November 2023 review of submission by Oannes1

edit

I am ready to write a Chinese version. How can I have it linked to the English 

version? Oannes1 (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oannes1: once the Chinese article is published, you can connect them by creating an interlanguage link (found in the latest skin in the menu Tools > Add interlanguage links). Linking is only possible between published articles, not drafts. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:19, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! Oannes1 (talk) 16:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:14, 16 November 2023 review of submission by 2A01:E0A:90F:4900:BD0C:6A7A:F964:1913

edit

Sorry, I don't fully understand my mistakes. Can you help me? Thank you in advance 

2A01:E0A:90F:4900:BD0C:6A7A:F964:1913 (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are several issues with this draft. The reason it was declined is that the sources do not establish notability per WP:GNG.
There are also no inline citations, which are required in articles on living people. And there are inline external links in the body text, which is not allowed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

16:24, 16 November 2023 review of submission by 201.17.81.57

edit

Can someone tell me specifically what should be changed so that the article is published? 201.17.81.57 (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the reasons that are listed in the red boxes. WP:REFBOMBING the article does not help show notability. I haven't opened all 60+ references to see if the decline was correct but from a quick perusal of the source titles, I am not seeing enough sources about him specifically. There has to be independent, in depth coverage of him specifically. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 16:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:52, 16 November 2023 review of submission by Sophiebran

edit

I disclosed that I have a COI. I am trying to get Movoto.com a Wikipedia page. Movoto.com is a popular real estate search portal- does the same thing as Zillow or Realtor.com. I keep getting denied for COI and quality of sources- I disclosed my COI and feel like the copy on my draft is completely non biased (just the facts of the company) and the sources are legitimate. Is this a hopeless case? What can I do to get this done? Sophiebran (talk) 17:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sophiebran: where does it say that you're being "denied for COI"? According to the decline notices in this draft, it has been declined for lack of evidence of notability. Notability is a core requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia, and it applies whether you've disclosed your COI or not; disclosure does not give one a carte blanche to publish whatever one wants. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:38, 16 November 2023 review of submission by 2603:8000:C100:AD00:BCC4:1998:D4A8:5EF9

edit

Question withdrawn, will revise first. 2603:8000:C100:AD00:BCC4:1998:D4A8:5EF9 (talk) 19:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't view the NY Times source but it looks like you may have a point. Looks like the reviewer left a comment that said "Large sections of this article are unsourced". WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:40, 16 November 2023 review of submission by Chicken water mammoth

edit

What can I do to get this published? Chicken water mammoth (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing. Theroadislong (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20:52, 16 November 2023 review of submission by NSteffen21

edit

Page rejected for not meeting the four standards.

I can only describe why I think the page should exist - as a large MLM with no wikipedia entry there is no centralized unbiased source for people to see when considering joining the company. I hope the page would be a jumping off point for people to do research on its claims and complaints against it so that they can make an informed decision. NSteffen21 (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @NSteffen21. That is absolutely not the purpose of Wikipedia. Please carefully read WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a business directory or a way to promote an organisation. Qcne (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is only for stuff that's already notable. It's not an advertising platform. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, sorry. I'm not attempting to promote. Quite the opposite, as it is a pretty prolific trap people fall into. I apologize that it came off that way. I'll leave it be. NSteffen21 (talk) 16:08, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NSteffen21: disparaging or criticising, if that's what you mean by "quite the opposite" and "for people to do research on its claims and complaints against it so that they can make an informed decision" isn't the purpose of Wikipedia, either. Criticisms can – arguably, even should – be included in articles, as part of balanced coverage, but in most cases that should not be an article's main objective. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

22:06, 16 November 2023 review of submission by MintSpiral

edit

My draft was rejected due to "Not quite enough independent, significant coverage". They have 2 albums released under a major record label, which I thought was sufficient for notability? Does this just mean that I need to add more sources? MintSpiral (talk) 22:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MintSpiral: WP:MUSICBIO #5 requires "two or more albums" (emphasis mine). This artist seems to have released two EPs. Extended play describes an EP as "a musical recording that contains more tracks than a single but fewer than an album" (ditto). I don't know if that's where the problem lies, but I for one tend to disregard EPs because of the specific wording in MUSICBIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After checking the details on EPs, it seems Morris' releases are actually albums and not EPs as they contain 7 tracks each (definitions of EP are defined as containing a maximum of 4-6 tracks). MintSpiral (talk) 11:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Information like "Throughout his career, Morris has maintained a grounded perspective, emphasizing his ordinariness and the attainability of success through dedication and hard work in the music industry" is just promotional fluff ubless it is attributed to a source in the text(not just as a reference)- who thinks this about him?
If you are associated with this musician, that needs to be disclosed, please see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not associated with this musician, and that comment has an associated citation. I’ve rephrased the quotes below.
“Songs come from so many different places,” he says. “Inspiration comes out of nowhere and from every direction.”
If there’s one thing he’d like fans to know about him – it’s that he’s “the most normal human being ever.”
“If I can do this, then anybody that puts their mind to it can do the same thing. Nothing is unrealistic anymore if you work hard and really put your mind to something,” he says. MintSpiral (talk) 09:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

23:13, 16 November 2023 review of submission by 178.204.250.28

edit

Why are the references given not suitable? 178.204.250.28 (talk) 23:13, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_November_16&oldid=1186283091"