Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 May 5

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation‎ | Help desk‎ | Archives
Help desk
< May 4 << Apr | May | Jun >> May 6 >
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.


May 5

edit

05:48, 5 May 2024 review of submission by 2601:589:4300:3E61:A571:99F7:A0FD:8EF3

edit

Hello. I am creating a page for a graphic designer with a notable 50 year career. How do I create it without using his website biography. [1]2601:589:4300:3E61:A571:99F7:A0FD:8EF3 (talk) 05:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that someone is notable isn't enough, you need to provide evidence of this. They need to satisfy either the general WP:GNG or the special WP:ARTIST guideline. Both require independent and reliable sources; the person's own website is not enough. If that's the only source you have, then you need to search further, and if more and better sources still cannot be found then notability cannot be established.
That said, this draft has been submitted and is awaiting review, so you will find out in due course whether it has been accepted, and if not, why not. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
As far as I can see, not one of the sources in the current version of the draft meets the triple criterion of being reliably published (blogs are not), being entirely independent of Kretzchmar, and containing significant coverage of him: see WP:42 for more about those criteria,.
The very first step in writing an article is to find those reliable, independent, substantial sources, because if you can't find them, then there is no point in spending any more time and effort on this article. ColinFine (talk) 21:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.hubertart.net/chapters-projects

06:54, 5 May 2024 review of submission by SouthPole5423

edit

There is a problem with Wikipedia's reviewing system. When I write something a little incorrectly, the admins delete the page in 2 seconds, when I put an enormous amount of effort on an article, it doesn't even get looked over! I know that there are thousands of articles posted for review, but it is very irritating. So if you could please take a look at the article, it will be much appreciated, thank you. SouthPole5423 (talk) 06:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SouthPole5423: we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk; the draft has been submitted and will be reviewed when someone picks it up.
And no pages are deleted for something written "a little incorrectly". Or if you have evidence to the contrary, take it up through appropriate channels. (Spam is deleted on sight, but that's a different matter.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your draft Draft:Kishor Alo was deleted as blatant promotion. Yes, we do delete blatant promotion when identified. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

07:36, 5 May 2024 review of submission by Drxhemant

edit

it has been edited...Now kindly approve it

Thank You with regards Drxhemant (talk) 07:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Drxhemant: as explained already (and please don't start a new thread with each comment, just add to the previous one), your promotional autobio draft has been rejected, which means that it will not be considered further. You are also starting to veer dangerously close to the definition of promotion-only account, which may result in sanctioning. My advice, therefore, is to stop now, and focus on editing non-contentious topics in a non-promotional manner only. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Drxhemant Please see WP:NOTWEBHOST. I suggest you place your biography on LinkedIn. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Drxhemant Your sandbox has been deleted, Please do not seek to re-create it. Wikipedia is not for you to promote yourself. If you happen to be notable then someone else will document this 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 08:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

09:03, 5 May 2024 review of submission by 117.252.146.24

edit

Why the article was rejected 117.252.146.24 (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it isn't suitable for publishing. If you're providing advice for sales people, please note that Wikipedia does not publish how-to-guides or instruction manuals, etc. If you're instead writing about the term or neologism 'sales blunder', you would need to show that it is notable in its own right, which wasn't shown in this draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

11:47, 5 May 2024 review of submission by RobertoDelgado07

edit

i was wondering if there was anything missing from my article that wasn´t good enough for me to get the wikipedia page so i can add it, and also i was told that i wrote the article in spanish, does that have anything to do with the decline? is it very relevant? if advised by you i will reedit the article on the spanish wikipedia and resubmit, do you recommend me to do so? RobertoDelgado07 (talk) 11:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RobertoDelgado07: first and foremost, it is in Spanish, whereas this is the English-language version of Wikipedia and we can therefore only accept content in English.
Secondly, there was no evidence that you are notable in the Wikipedia sense of the word.
And in any case, you shouldn't be writing about yourself in the first place; see WP:AUTOBIO.
HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right, I'm not quite sure how this works. I think Wikipedia is an incredible platform to be a part of, due to its notoriety and the growth potential and reach it can offer my brand. As an independent content creator, I'm doing what I can to figure things out and manage myself on social media and handle everything on my own. I apologize in advance for the lack of professionalism. As I mentioned earlier, I'm handling things alone, so I have very little knowledge of how these things work. Nonetheless, thank you very much for your time and recommendations. If God permits it in the future and things are done right, it would be an honor for me to be part of Wikipedia. RobertoDelgado07 (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RobertoDelgado07 I apologize for being frank, but Wikipedia has zero interest in helping you to promote your brand. Wikipedia is not a form of social media. Our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about a topic, not what it wants to say about itself. 331dot (talk) 12:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:00, 5 May 2024 review of submission by 182.182.127.226

edit

Hey there, I want to work on this draft and then submit it for WP: Articles for creation. Kindly guide how can I submit it once I add citations in it? 182.182.127.226 (talk) 14:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting a rejected draft will involve speaking to the reviewer to convince them that enough has fundamentally changed about the draft to warrant its being resubmitted(as opposed to purely cosmetic changes/additions). In this case the reviewer is still active so they will be able to weigh in. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your advice.182.182.127.226 (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:56, 5 May 2024 review of submission by NikolaiVektovich

edit

I drafted this out of the remains of an older draft, but I'm unsure about it. I have sources, yet I'm not sure if including the explicit description of songs from the sources would meet WP:NOT. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:44, 5 May 2024 review of submission by GalacticalCosmics

edit

Is there a way to completely delete the draft? I'm not going to work on it anymore. It was declined even though it has for citations than players like Callan Rydz so I'd rather not waste my time working on it.

Kind regards, GalacticalCosmics (talk) 18:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to delete it, you can just leave it, and it will get deleted after nobody has touched it for six months. But, if you want to, since nobody but you has made significant contributions to it, you can put {{db-author}} (including the double curly brackets) at the top, and an admin will come along and delete it. ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

my article seems to have been removed. What do I do and how to extract the content?

edit

Hey people, my article seems to have been removed. What do I do and how to extract the content please? Max Elliott1 (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which article do you mean? ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the one that's removed ))(( 95.158.42.217 (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do you expect anybody to be able to find any information about it if you won't tell us what it was called? ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Karry G - that's the name of the page 95.158.42.214 (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean Draft:Karry G? ColinFine (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! 95.158.42.214 (talk) 20:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please only edit while logged in.
To find your contributions you should use the "Contributions" link at the top of any page while you are logged in. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20:09, 5 May 2024 review of submission by OrganizationTheory

edit

Hi all! Looking for some advice. This draft was declined with the reason that the subject of the article didn't meet notability guidelines for academics/professors (WP:NPROF). But, as early as the first line, the article draft demonstrates using reliable sources that the professor is an endowed and named chair at Stony Brook University, which is a R1 university (the classification for universities with very high research output) and thus clearly meets notability Criterion 5. As the WP:NPROF page notes, only one notability criterion is needed for a professor to merit an article (although I do note other criteria on the talk page of the draft). So I'm not sure what to make of the reason for rejection. Any advice on how to proceed? Thanks in advance! OrganizationTheory (talk) 20:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OrganizationTheory: I agree, the named chair would seem to satisfy WP:NACADEMIC #5. I've marked a few things that require citations, but otherwise this should be good to go. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic! Thank you so much for your prompt and very helpful response. I made all the changes you noted including moving the article to the appropriate name. How would you recommend I go about getting it published? Should I just resubmit or is there a quicker process now that an editor has looked it all over and ensured it meets academic notability criteria?
Updated link: Draft:Sthaneshwar Timalsina OrganizationTheory (talk) 19:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22:35, 5 May 2024 review of submission by WXSharkius

edit

My page was not accepted for submission. I don't know what is wrong with it? WXSharkius (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WXSharkius: You created a draft for a fictional tornado that you made up. That kind of thing is unsuitable for Wikipedia. I left a message of your talk page for a better place to work on that kind of thing. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thank you. I was just curious, why is that so bad? WXSharkius (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WXSharkius: As the message says, it's contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Articles on this site are to be about well-documented topics that are Notable and verifiable. This would include real things and well-known fictional entities, but not stuff that random people just dreamt up. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WXSharkius: you write about a completely made-up topic in an encyclopaedia, and you need to ask "why is that so bad?" Seriously? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_May_5&oldid=1223420192"