Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 February 16

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< February 15 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 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.


February 16

edit

03:24, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Stikipedia

edit

This submission was declined. According to the notability criteria for books, it should meet the standard:

The book has been the subject[1] of two or more non-trivial[2] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.[3] This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists,[4] and reviews.

I have cited two or more independent published works of which the book in question was the subject.

Please advise. Thank you Stikipedia (talk) 03:24, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stikipedia. Your draft currently has three references. The first is a Google Books listing which is of no value in establishing the notability of the book. I recommend that you get rid of it. The Cafe Racer reference is an interview with the author and is not an independent source and therefore it does not contribute to notability. The Ultimate Motorcycling reference is better. That publication is already widely cited in motorcycling articles. You need several really good references, not just one. Cullen328 (talk) 08:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's helpful. Thank you. Stikipedia (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:18, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Jabril tatum

edit

I can't find where I need to type my article. can you aid me? Jabril tatum (talk) 04:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editing to promote non-notable YouTube channels is contrary to policy. Cullen328 (talk) 07:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:22, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Skhousad

edit

what could qualify for publication as this is a credentialed certified individual? Skhousad (talk) 04:22, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Blocked for spamming.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:45, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:29, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Gulafshasheikh

edit 
I am from shivalik college. why my page is deleted? Gulafshasheikh (talk) 07:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft was overtly promotional and unreferenced. It did not resemble an encyclopedia article in any way. Cullen328 (talk) 07:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:00, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Wikidragonrider

edit

Hi, I have a doubt like I have written the journey of the entrepreneur from start to end. So why is it in speedy deletion Wikidragonrider (talk) 08:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikidragonrider: this draft was entirely promotional, and has been accordingly deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information Wikidragonrider (talk) 08:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikidragonrider, please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:31, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Ojaskedar00

edit

Help me how to get this page approved Ojaskedar00 (talk) 08:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By proving notability via WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Qcne (talk) 09:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:05, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Rafik.hannachi

edit

I would like to know what can I improve in terms of sources, because they are from big news publications in the GCC region. In addition, I lost the option to edit and send for review, it seems like the editors are not aware about other sources from other regions outside the US and Europe. Also, how can you disclose the type of work that you are doing. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 12:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rafik.hannachi: this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further.
You also must disclose your paid-editing status (see WP:PAID), which has been requested but so far not responded to.
You also should not create multiple user accounts, please see WP:SOCK. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There should be another way instead of not considering it further, I am asking for guidance on how and where to disclose so I can follow the guidelines. If you think you cannot help with this, then I will reach out to Wikimedia council concerning the issue, so please let me know. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 12:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rafik.hannachi: what guidance do you need? The instructions for disclosing your paid-editing status have been posted on your talk page, but you've chosen to ignore them.
Or are you asking for advice on how to disclose your use of multiple user accounts, perhaps? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have disclosed what you asked when checking online how to do it, can you let me know how I can send it for review again please, for the multiple accounts, I assumed it was an issue with account setting please advice on how I can take it further. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 12:53, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly waiting for your reply. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 13:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rafik.hannachi Looking at the last entry with content there is still no evidence this company merits a Wikipedia article at this time. Qcne (talk) 13:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article talks about the first Media Hub to ever exist in the MENA region currently changing the Media landscape in the region, I have removed this part form the article so it does not sound promotional. What would you advice to proof it's merits. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 13:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot make notability up from thin air. It might simply be too soon for an article about this company to exist on Wikipedia. If the sources do not exist that prove notability, then there can be no article at this time. Qcne (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please let me know what prove notability, because the company was also awarded the Broadcast pro Innovative project of the year 2023, which is a highly renowned award in the GCC region that so many broadcast companies take part of. Thank you in advance. Rafik.hannachi (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To see our notability criteria, please read WP:NORG closely. Qcne (talk) 13:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:08, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Kico1983

edit

Hi.

I tried to write this article, it got rejected few times and I edited it every time.

Can you check is it now good to be published?

Thank you. Kico1983 (talk) 12:08, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kico1983: we don't provide on-demand reviews here at the help desk; you have resubmitted this draft, and it will be reviewed in due course when a reviewer comes across it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I'm new in all this. Thank you very much for quick response.
Best regards. Kico1983 (talk) 12:12, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:47, 16 February 2024 review of submission by 2003:E7:673D:700:313E:53B1:1A64:4959

edit

Can anybody help me? What exactly do I need for this page? All references are independent reportings - official reports form the Berlinale, OFDB, screendaily and an atricle written by the TAZ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Tageszeitung) - I do not really know what is wrong with that? 2003:E7:673D:700:313E:53B1:1A64:4959 (talk) 13:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only one of your seven references - the TAZ article - even approaches meeting the triple criterion of being a reliable source, being wholly independent of the subject, and containing significant coverage of the subject. The others are all either from Tromanale, or no more than listing or mentions. Please see WP:CSMN ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And why is not the official Berlinale Website or the OFDB a reliable reference? 2003:E7:6724:B00:60BC:35A4:824:A9EF (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
is it better to remove all reference except the TAZ article? So there is one references, but this references is reliable Tromaggot (talk) 08:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16:59, 16 February 2024 review of submission by Avlesfirebees

edit

how to submit my article to review and help to publish Avlesfirebees (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is blank. If you intended to have text there, it isn't. 331dot (talk) 17:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to be writing your draft BACKWARDS. First find the reliable independent sources with substantial coverage of her, then forget everything you know about the subject and write a summary of what the sources say.
I have added a header which will allow you to submit your draft for review. But there is no point in doing so until you have adequate sources. Your current citations merely mention her without saying anything about her. ColinFine (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:19, 16 February 2024 review of submission by SyedAshharImam

edit

i don't know how to format correctly SyedAshharImam (talk) 19:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link Draft:Zaki Ahmad. Please read WP:YFA and WP:MOS. Theroadislong (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft Draft:Zaki Ahmad is not an encyclopaedia article, but a CV, which lists no independent sources at all.
New editors who plunge straight into the challenging task of creating a new article, without having learnt or practised any of the skills and procedures of Wikipedia, often have a frustrating and disappointing time. Imagine taking up a new sport, and the next day entering a major competition: not only will you not succeed, you will likely not even understand any criticism from experienced players.
I always advise new editors to put aside any idea of creating a new article, and spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles. Once they have learnt something about topics such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, then they can study your first article and see how to go about creating a new article. (If they see a need - I have been editing for eighteen years, and made over 24 000 edits, but I have only ever created half a dozen articles). ColinFine (talk) 22:38, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_February_16&oldid=1209453017"