Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 August 3

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< August 2 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 4 >
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 3

edit

02:44, 3 August 2024 review of submission by Brentonlons

edit

I don't know what is required. I first used a link to the Boom Boom album's info & artwork on discogs and was told Discogs is NOT a reliable/acceptable reference. Then added references from the book Boogie Man and still was not accepted. Brentonlons (talk) 02:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Brentonlons: what is required is that you demonstrate notability, either by citing multiple sources that meet the WP:GNG standard, or by showing (with reliable evidence) how this album satisfies one or more of the seven criteria in the WP:NALBUM guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:47, 3 August 2024 review of submission by Magistracraig

edit

I responded to the reviewer in talk about why the Etruscan art and archaeological evidence for the god the unique culture of the Etruscans called "Memnun" is not the same God as the Greeks (and Romans) called Μέμνων/ Memnon in their art. Etruscan art and culture predates that the Romans and is distinct from that of Greek culture. In addition there are plenty wikipedia pages for Etruscan gods - including Memnun's mother (called Eos in Greek, called Aurora in Latin) and called Thesan in Etruscan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesan. Etruscan knowledge is very limited so why would Wikipedia limit knowledge even further when distinct archeological evidence exists? I'm sure just thinking that Memnun is a typo for Memnon which is a bit superficial from a research/information perspective. :) Magistracraig (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magistracraig: you don't really ask a question, as such – was there something you wanted help with?
To my entirely non-expert eye it seems there is at least an overlap between your draft and the Memnon article, so that decline wasn't an unreasonable one, IMO. Is there a reason why salient content from your draft couldn't be merged into the existing article? That article could do with some further work in any case, and this seems like an opportunity to do that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DoubleGrazing - I am simply asking for a review of the newly submitted page because yes, there is a misunderstanding based on a knowledge base of ETRUSCAN and not GREEK mythology. No judgement because I am learning too.
At first when I noted Memnun in research I also thought it was a typo but then I learned that the Etruscan culture has it's own extensive history and collection of artifacts. There are plenty of other Etruscan mythology pages, artifacts and valid research which I added an updated. IMHO it seems that someone just quickly made a non expert decision. I tried to provide Wikipedia with a lot of research and support. I'm a credentialed high school teacher (in various states). I understanding the need to back up statements with evidence and I have- not sure why this is such a big deal as there is already an Etruscan page about Thesan (who the Greeks called Eos) but not son who she is regularly depicted in art with. It would be like Wikipedia approving a page about "Miriam" but not "Moses" in Judeo-Christian texts.
The Etruscans were there own people and it's just simply something Wikipedia editors should not flag based on their own historical, art history, linguistic knowledge (which the original reviewer even wrote!) Magistracraig (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing - Just so this page can be approved:
This is what the reviewer understood about the reviewer's own knowledge of an entire culture, collection of artifacts and mythological tradition: "I don't know enough about the mythology to understand, but is this the same myth as Memnon?" The answer is sort-of - like is Coke- Pepsi-Tab? Is Burger King the exact same as McDonalds? -Sort -of... Magistracraig (talk) 14:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Magistracraig: okay, well, you have resubmitted the draft, so it will be reviewed again at some point; we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk.
I certainly don't feel qualified to comment on the matter. I can flag it up on the WikiProject Mythology talk page, in case anyone there cares to opine. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:44, 3 August 2024 review of submission by Mysteriouslucifer

edit

Can I get a help to edit it so I can learn how to keep my articles neutral. It would be benefitting me in the future articles if any of the mentor can guide me through this Mysteriouslucifer (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a released film, you need to establish that the film meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable film. That's typically done with reviews from professional reviewers or other coverage beyond routine coverage/announcements(like release dates, casting, announcing the commencement of production, etc.). 331dot (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mysteriouslucifer: this draft was declined (at least in part) for being promotional.

"Mera Baba Nanak is not just a film; it's a heartfelt journey that encapsulates the essence of faith and family ties. Set against the backdrop of Punjab, this Punjabi cinematic gem weaves together a poignant family drama, where the central theme revolves around the enduring power of belief in the teachings of Baba Nanak. Through its narrative, the film explores the intricate dynamics of familial relationships while celebrating the spiritual legacy that resonates deeply with audiences. Film promises to be a captivating ode to faith, love, and the timeless wisdom that guides generations."

I trust it's clear from that choice excerpt why that was?
Your job is to describe the subject, not to 'sell' it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:44, 3 August 2024 review of submission by Aurodea108

edit

My draft was rejected because I had cited a FInd A Grave entry as the source of the birth and death dates in this biography of a deceased person, Josephine Semmes. (I read the photo of the headstone there, and did not reference any user-edited text.) I am not able to find any obituaries. I also went through the Wikipedia Library link to search Ancestry.com, which did not have any record of Semmes either. If I simply delete the dates and the reference to Find A Grave, can I resubmit? In the meantime I also added information to the draft from an additional secondary source (a journal article). Aurodea108 (talk) 18:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aurodea108: no, your draft was declined (not 'rejected') for lack of notability. The comment about Findagrave was just that; an additional comment. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I have added additional information from the additional secondary source, that should clarify notability. However, before resubmitting, should I also delete the Find A Grave entry and the information sourced from it? Aurodea108 (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:06, 3 August 2024 review of submission by Takeru Watanabe

edit

Hello! Recently, user Safari Scribe declined my Draft:Mara-Daria Cojocaru. I asked Safari Scribe for advice in order to optimise the article but they didn't get back to me yet. The reason given for declining the draft was the following: "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject." My problem is that I can't find any peacock words or phrases in the draft that conflict with a neutral point of view. Also, I can't identify passages not encyclopedic. I have already written several articles for the English Wikipedia and never got a similar negative feedback concerning my writing or tone. Therefore I'm quite surprised about this evaluation of my work. Actually, I tend to think that there has been some kind of mistake or mix-up. Anyway, I would be glad if you could help me out and give me some advice. Best, Takeru Watanabe (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Takeru Watanabe: I've read through your draft, and TBH, I can't find anything wrong with the text, either. Normally at this point I would ping the reviewer for comments, but as you've already approached them and haven't heard back, there's probably no point. The draft seems fine to me, so I'll just go ahead and accept it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @DoubleGrazing! Thank you very much for reading through my draft and for helping me out! Best, Takeru Watanabe (talk) 12:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_August_3&oldid=1239390821"