Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 January 20

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< January 19 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 21 >
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 20

edit

00:55, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Adamplevinson

edit

I am being told that by a reviewer that we should only cite 5-7 of Kaminski's book? Why? I checked the Wikipedia pages for two of my other favorite historians: Richard Brookhiser and Joseph Ellis. Brookhiser's page lists 17 books. Ellis' page lists 14 books.

I would be happy to add links to all of Kaminski's books, in addition to listing them. Would this be worthwhile? We could also add the ISBN number, as is the case for other historians?

Thanks Adamplevinson (talk) 00:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer is referring to WP:THREE. Only the three best sources should be added to an article for each claim. This is also true for the external links. Eternal Shadow Talk 01:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamplevinson: because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and articles are meant to provide summarised information about a subject, in this case highlights of their noteworthy output, not a comprehensive catalogue of everything they ever wrote. A hypothetical point, but: wouldn't you agree that it's clearer and more effective to list the 2-3 works someone is famous for, and mention that they also wrote 30+ others, rather than list all 38 works, among which the 2-3 notable ones get lost? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:26, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Raulitoy

edit

Any help on how this page approve Raulitoy (talk) 01:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Raulitoy: as it says in the decline notice, you need to provide significant coverage, directly of the subject, in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. (You should also see WP:REFB for advice on referencing.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:09, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Youprayteas

edit

I have seen very little villages and towns with absloutely no significancy and only one reference having articles, why is it not possible for my article which has four sources and plenty of information about the neighborhood to be accepted? It makes no sense to me. Youprayteas (talk) 06:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Youprayteas: never mind what other articles you may have seen, that's not how we assess new drafts (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). The relevant notability guideline here is WP:GEOLAND, and judging by the fact that you describe this (somewhat opaquely) as a 'neighbourhood', it seems the 2nd bullet point applies. That tells you what you need to do to demonstrate notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: The infobox classifies this as a 'municipality', but I don't think that's correct; presumably Kadıköy is the actual municipality? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed this issue. I understand that I must not compare my article with others, but how is it possible that articles with very limited references and villages with no significancy (Beyyazı, Işıklar, Yağcılar, Yeşilyurt and MANY MANY more, perhaps over 200 articles like this) can be accepted? Who accepted these and when and why not mine? Youprayteas (talk) 06:39, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Youprayteas: there are 6.7m+ articles in the English-language Wikipedia, and they came about in many different ways. Not every article was 'accepted': some are so old that they pre-date the AfC review process entirely; others may have been published by users with sufficient permissions to publish directly; others still may have simply slipped through the proverbial net.
If you have found articles that you don't think meet our notability guidelines, you're welcome to improve them, or if this cannot be done, initiate deletion proceedings.
Also worth noting that what you describe as "significancy" may not necessarily translate to notability (Wikipedia's core requirement for inclusion in the encyclopaedia), or vice versa. Again, I would refer you to WP:GEOLAND, which sets out the applicable standard; or alternatively to WP:GNG, which applies to pretty much any topic.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I submitted my draft again. I added government sources for the population and the neighborhood classifications. Hopefully this time it will be accepted but if not I will keep improving it until it does. Youprayteas (talk) 07:13, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noting also this conversation on my Talk. User_talk:Star_Mississippi#I_have_fixed_the_issues_you_told_me. It may just be a case of WP:NOPAGE. Star Mississippi 16:46, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why can’t it be just a WP:PERMA? Youprayteas (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because they still must meet notability guidelines, which the draft does not as of yet.
    Please read the advice you have been given here, on my Talk and in the draft to either improve the article (and re-submit it) or edit the mainspace. Star Mississippi 19:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have seven sources, 3 of them are government sources for population and division inside of Turkey. The other 4 are travel blogs and news sites “neutral about the topic”. I gave information about 4 popular places in the neighborhood. 7 sources are well enough for a stub article which its purpose is to be a stub anyway. Youprayteas (talk) 19:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Neither government sources nor travel blogs are appropriate sources.
    @DoubleGrazing and I have linked the information that you need to read and @KylieTastic provided information when they declined your draft as well. You are welcome to resubmit the draft, but please read WP:NOPAGE, WP:SIRS (which applies beyond organizations) and WP:GEOLAND to understand the issues otherwise it's very likely that another editor will also decline the draft. Rather than focusing on a new article, which is one of the hardest things, you can edit reliably sourced information to the main article. I'm not sure what your resistance is. Star Mississippi 19:42, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have read all three. WP:GEOLAND says if it is populated, it is significant. Caddebostan has a population of over 21000. I'm pretty tired of this conversation though and I didn't see anything about travel blogs (second-hand independent sources). The government resources are purely for the population and legality of the neighborhood. Youprayteas (talk) 06:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Youprayteas: with respect, you may have read GEOLAND, but it's not clear that you've understood it. It clearly says that populated places with legal recognition are typically presumed (=/= are) notable; whereas those without legal recognition need to satisfy WP:GNG. The latter is expressly stated to include unofficial neighborhoods, which yours may (or may not – TBD) be. You can't just cherry-pick those bits of the guideline that suit your purposes, you need to consider every aspect of them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have 15 sources, some blogs, some news sites, some government sources now. I have improved my article drastically as I said. I literally added the government database for neighborhoods and districts. Youprayteas (talk) 08:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    PS: see Template:Kadıköy District Youprayteas (talk) 09:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, I improved my article drastically. Is it possible for you to give feedback? Youprayteas (talk) 07:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I copy edited it lightly. Your English is not at all a problem, those were just stylistic for what we'd say as native speakers. Someone will review in due time. Star Mississippi 15:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your help. Are the issues resolved, by the way? I tried to add as many sources as I could find that, are at some level, reliable. I also added a lot of extra information about the neighborhood to show that it is notable. I sourced some databases that classify Caddebostan as a neighborhood. Youprayteas (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

08:07, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Far mousa

edit

Hi, why my post has been declined due to tone, while this page with same stone and structure exists on wiki: Noon (company). Kindly suggest what other data I need to provide to add Cartlow to Wiki knowledgebase Far mousa (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is blatant advertising, see other crap exists and WP:SOLUTIONS. Theroadislong (talk) 08:40, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far mousa Also note that the Noon article has been nominated for deletion, it is almost certainly a poor example to use. Are you employed by Cartlow? 331dot (talk) 08:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Far mousa, Wikipedia is not a knowledge base. It is an encyclopedia, a significantly different concept. Cullen328 (talk) 08:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:12, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Ferdinando at Transfeero

edit

Dear Team,

I request help on getting this draft approved: I am writing the article as I've been tasked this (I am currently employed in the company)

I'm trying to follow the guidelines as best as I am able, however the latest draft was rejected due to lack of notability.

May you be help with that?

The company is legit and currently existing and in business, however there are not many independent sources talking about us. Ferdinando at Transfeero (talk) 11:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been deleted as "unambiguous advertising or promotion". Please read WP:BOSS, and show it to your boss. ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:22, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Harry XBastien

edit

requesting for a Feedbaack Harry XBastien (talk) 11:22, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft does not have a single cited source. It cannot be accepted as a Wikipedia article in this form.
  • First find sources, which are reliably published, completely unconnected with the team, and contain significant coverage of the team.
  • If you can't find these, then you'll know that the team does not meet Wikiepdia's criteria for notability, and not to spend any more time on it.
  • If you can, write an article based on what those sources say. You can add a little uncontroversial factual information from non-independent sources (which you should still cite), but the bulk of the article shoud be a summary of what those indpendent commentators have published.
ColinFine (talk) 14:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:23, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Harry XBastien

edit

how can I publish an article without references or source because there's no article about the article? and I want to create this page so there can be an article or future references about the page? Harry XBastien (talk) 14:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harry XBastien If there are no sources, you cannot create the article. No way out of that Mach61 (talk) 16:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:15, 20 January 2024 review of submission by Holyhootenany

edit

I would like help citing an episode of a tv show. 

Holyhootenany (talk) 21:15, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_January_20&oldid=1199457693"