Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
Reviewing instructions
Helper script
Help deskBacklog drives
Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
  • Bona fide reviewers at Articles for Creation will never contact or solicit anyone for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, please post on this help desk page.
Click here to ask a new question.

A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions


November 8[edit]

01:31:27, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Anirudh 2057[edit]

Anirudh 2057 (talk) 01:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

08:18:09, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Allbaze[edit]

Allbaze (talk) 08:18, 8 November 2018 (UTC) Why Does My Submission Keep Getting Rejected On Wikipedia?

Hello, welcome to the AFCHD.
  • Draft:Tosin Bee - rejected due to references not being inline with WP:CITE (click that WP:CITE link for more, your referencing techniques are not within policy) and because Tosin Bee (by the sources that your provided) isn't deemed notable enough to be accepted (and some of the sources are primary). The sources you provided don't show enough coverage (ie paragraph or more in each source) in enough reliable sources to show notability (see WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG). If you provide three or more sources independent of Tosin Bee from newspapers, books, magazines, journals (more than passing mentions) it will be accepted. If you have further help ask here some more or see the Teahouse. Thank you for reaching out. JC7V-talk 08:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

10:09:01, 8 November 2018 review of draft by BellaAw[edit]

Hello, I have made some substantial changes to the above draft following previous failed submissions by other users. However, it was declined again. The following comments were left on the page as being the main reasons why it was rejected this time:

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: This draft appears to have been reference-bombed with non-independent and low-quality sources.See previous notes.

  • This is now improved. Some low-quality and non-independent sources are gone and I left references that comes from well known websites and mention the subject (and support facts) very well. (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: The subject appears to be best known for Spears Magazine, but Spears Magazine doesn't have an article of its own and so would not seem to be notable. Other than that, notability is not inherited from his father or anyone else.

With all the improvements, does the article meet WP:GNG? BellaAw (talk) 10:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

10:31:08, 8 November 2018 review of submission by TroopyGirl[edit]

Hello, I'd just like some clarity about how I prove notability of my subject. Richard Lawson has founded and run many charitable foundations which have given millions of pounds away to charity. Notability seems to require sources to be cited but humanitarians rarely seek publicity for their work. He is referenced in charitable records for the charity's he's involved with but this isn't counted in the notability judgement. To try to boost notability, I have added a section about his career as a powerboat racer, for which I have many newspaper references and media coverage but this doesn't seem to be enough. Is it simply that individuals who work within small charities just aren't notable enough to warrant inclusion or do you see something I could do to help? Secondly, if he simply doesn't fit the notability criteria, I have been reading about the possibility of merging his page with another. His charity the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation already has its own Wiki page - can I merge him into that somehow, allowing his page I've written to exist as a link from the JDF page - if so, how do I do that? Many thanks TroopyGirl TroopyGirl (talk) 10:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

  • I think the subject is not well known enough to have got the substantial coverage that Wikipedia notability insists on. You could include information about his charity work in the article about his charity if it is relevant. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

12:02:13, 8 November 2018 review of draft by Mega.lk90[edit]

Mega.lk90 (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Raptor and Lift&Oil someconcert they join together. It's not copy.

  • Declined due to lack of sources. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

15:35:15, 8 November 2018 review of submission by ACCH[edit]

I wrote when it started and who was currently top of the table (Lyon); the only source I managed to find was Lyon's web-site. There's no reason to think that Lyon would have got the League table on their web-site wrong to make Lyon look better, so it could hardly be classed as a biased source, so what's the problem with it? ACCH (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Lyons own website badly fails the requirement for multiple sources independent to the subject. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

16:09:04, 8 November 2018 review of submission by Sparkling peach[edit]

Sparkling peach (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I am trying to create an article. Despite me having many sources that are not directly from the subject's personal bio (therefore a variety of sources about the person), my article keeps getting rejected. How can I prevent that from occurring? Sparkling peach (talk)Sparkling peach

Sparkling peach (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

If he is a full-tenured professor at the University of Mississippi, then he should be suitable for an article. I have passed the review. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Full tenured does not mean he meets WP:PROF but he might. Legacypac (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:36:25, 8 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Demographichistorian[edit]

It has been 2 ,months since i submitted my article and it still has not been reviewed . It says the maximum waiting time for an article to be reviewed is 2 months .

Demographichistorian (talk) 16:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

  • If I reviewed your article it would not be to approve it. I expect the main reason it has been waiting so long is the dire formatting, consider fixing the images, putting references after the end punctuation of a sentence, and using {{quote}} for quotes. The main reason for not accepting it would be the general impression I get that the subject is already covered in other articles, or should be covered in other articles. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 17:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

17:56:49, 8 November 2018 review of draft by David Colquhoun[edit]

I have been told by Missvain that I do not cite enough sources. I'm not sure what this means. I've written only a few Wikipedia entries, so I'd appreciate a couple of examples of what's lacking a source. I didn't have this problem with writing

Also, David Eppstein said that the references to papers are not sufficiently selective. Again, I don't understand what this means. Have I cited too many papers?

David Colquhoun (talk) 17:56, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

  • More sources should be self explanatory, every sentence should have a citation after it. You can use named references to use the same reference for several sentence. You will have to ask David Eppstein about being selective, I don't really know. I have approved it and you can improve it in mainspace. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I believe he means there are too many papers listed. We don't list everything someone ever did, instead we list important stuff they did. Legacypac (talk) 19:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Page has been accepted but the entire Early life part has no sources. Legacypac (talk) 20:05, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

20:17:52, 8 November 2018 review of draft by Mehdichitsaz[edit]

My submission got declined and I am wondering to know the reason. Mehdichitsaz (talk) 20:17, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey Mehdichitsaz, thanks for reaching out, your submisison was declined for not meeting any of these criteria (from the WP:NBAND page):

Shortcuts WP:BAND WP:MUSICBIO Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.

  • Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1]
  • This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries[note 2] except for the following:
  • Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.[note 3]
  • Works consisting merely of trivial coverage, such as articles that simply report performance dates, release information or track listings, or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
  • Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases.
  • Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.
  • Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
  • Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4]
  • Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).
  • Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.[note 5] This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.)
  • Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
  • Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award.
  • Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition.
  • Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).
  • Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.
  • Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.

You need sources that show Chi2am is notable via newspapers, book etc independent of the subject (and more than in passing) If you need further help, ask again or see the Teahouse. See Macklemore's article for the type of sources you need. JC7V-talk 20:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

November 9[edit]

08:37:35, 9 November 2018 review of submission by Yousafsaeed1990[edit]

I am requesting re-consideration because this topic is not contrary to wikipedia. It is because most of the people are searching this keyword on wikipedia and there is no information about such a big company on wikipedia already. It is a big name in Asian Scholarships companys and i think its inclusion in wikipedia will be accepted. Yousafsaeed1990 (talk) 08:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is not a platform to improve your search engine results. Hence no. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:38, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

09:31:57, 9 November 2018 review of submission by Erogzi[edit]

I'd like to understand better why it was rejected so that I can improve it. Erogzi (talk) 09:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

They are asking for more reliable sources coming from high quality websites. I found some and put them in place. (talk) 10:34, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I can see you added a link but also fixed a link? What link was that? Are there sources there that are considered 'unreliable'? And can you explain why his photo was removed? Erogzi (talk) 12:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Erogzi (talkcontribs) 11:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Many sources are considered unreliable or not independent, notably, any blog, the subjects own website. For more information read WP:RS. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

ok, thanks, yes I understand. But the amazon, blog and own website links are under 'external links' not 'references' - so that's ok, right? I am working on more text and links for the main bio. Can you also explain why the photo was removed - it had the necessary permission from the photographer. Do I also need to link to the photographer's website? Erogzi (talk) 14:07, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Photo permissions are dealt with a Commons. At AfC we generally don't worry about photos. Legacypac (talk) 14:11, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • As a general rule I discourage external links because nothing says "advertising problem" more than lists of ecommerce platforms. External links are allowed, not required. I tend to consider them more as a further reading type section, consider if the reader really wants the links. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:54, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. So why did the first editor in this thread today add a link to Amazon? And they added various other links. Erogzi (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

15:17:24, 9 November 2018 review of draft by Curnews[edit]

Would like to check my draft before re-submission. Curnews (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

The article just looks like part of India_national_football_team#Players. No lead, no prose, only two references. I would not approve it. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 15:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

17:35:49, 9 November 2018 review of draft by Maungst[edit]

Hi, can you please give me more specific information on why this article was rejected?

Maungst (talk) 17:35, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

It looks exactly like what one might write up on a website advertising Youth America Grand Prix. Legacypac (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

19:40:51, 9 November 2018 review of draft by Aniblab7[edit]

I cannot send my article for review! The following appears: This user has made a public declaration indicating that they have a conflict of interest with regard to the following Wikipedia article(s): Florian Graf (Artist). How can I proceed?

Aniblab7 (talk) 19:40, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Edit the page and put {{subst:submit}} on it, with the brackets exactly like that. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 20:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 20:57:10, 9 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Wikijames1[edit]

I redid my item. But I'm not sure if this is ok. I don't want to resubmit it again and waste the time of the reviewer. I need someone to look it over. The revision is in my sandbox. (I did not understand about the Draft.)

Wikijames1 (talk) 20:57, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it is what Wikipedia needs. There is already an article on Prime numbers. A table of the numbers themselves is not an article. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

23:09:17, 9 November 2018 review of draft by Cotidianus[edit]

1. I seemingly do not have the right "permission" to upload a photograph to this draft Wikipedia page. Nothing tells me how to obtain that permission however. Please would you explain?

2. I cannot see how to indent text - only how to create a bulleted or numbered list. It must be possible...

Many thanks

Cotidianus (talk) 23:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

  • You take the photo yourself and then have permission as the owner. If you want to use a photo you didn't take yourself, you have to find the owner of the photo and ask them to upload the photo. Photos are owned by the photographer unless they sell their copyright, which is not the same as selling a physical or digital copy of a photo, which does not come with it's copyright that the original photographer keeps.
You do not indent text in articles, to indent text as I am here;
Use colons at the beginning of a new line.
If you need any more help feel free to ask. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 23:31, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

November 10[edit]

11:13:15, 10 November 2018 review of draft by Fish trace[edit]

Fish trace (talk) 11:13, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is not a webhost for your user guide. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:45:43, 10 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Demographichistorian[edit]

My article was submitted over 2 months ago ( which is the maximum review period ) . Could someone review it or approve it . it is called draft:Greek atrocities in Macedonia and Thrace Demographichistorian (talk) 14:45, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

14:50:34, 10 November 2018 review of draft by Curnews[edit]

Draft rejected for no reference.Have added the reference.Would like to know whether the article looks good now for re-submission.

Curnews (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

17:05:15, 10 November 2018 review of draft by Alvanhholmes[edit]

I have submitted my draft for review, but I don understand he instruction: Reviewer tools Warning: This page should probably be moved to the Draft namespace.

When I clicked on Move to Draft spaces I came to a page which I didn't understand and which scared me. As it appeared to ask me to rename my article, and I don't know what the Draft space is in relation to my submission.

I would also like to start a draft on a new article, and don't know how to do that.

Thank you Alvanhholmes (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Alvanhholmes (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

  • The article looked good so I approved it. You need to work on your citation skills, otherwise good job. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

17:07:06, 10 November 2018 review of submission by ReaIestTruth[edit]

I'm just wondering, have i submitted my article properly? ReaIestTruth (talk) 17:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

  • You have submitted it correctly. Someone will review it in due course. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, would you be able to move it to draft as well, as it says i don't have perms to do it ReaIestTruth (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Will do Legacypac (talk) 18:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Cheers mate. much appreciated ReaIestTruth (talk) 18:35, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Sent to MfD. sorry Legacypac (talk) 20:55, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 20:25:08, 10 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by HoustonProbate[edit]

Is there a way to appeal the decision of non-notability?

This is going to apply to all four articles I created, and I request the comments be consolidated: Draft:Jerry Simoneaux, Draft:Michael Newman (judge), Draft:Jason Cox and Draft:James S. Horwitz.

On Tuesday, Harris County Texas elected new probate judges, and I wished to create pages for them.

Judges in Texas are elected, partisan politicians, and these judges have 4.7 Million constituents. That is more constituents than 26 governors, 52 Senators and all 435 members of the House. More than Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, John Bel Edwards, Tom Cotton, Gary Johnson, Jacky Rosen, Joe Manchin, Bernie Sanders and many others.

Judges elected from constituencies of nearly 5 million people are not constantly in the news, but seldom are state legislators. Still legislators are notable, because of the immense power they yield. The same goes for these public officials.

HoustonProbate (talk) 20:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

EDIT: I looked up y'alls' guideposts, and these judges are very obviously notable. Wikipedia:Notability_(law)#Judges.

These are high courts, as defined by your own standards, No. 4 (Superior Courts). These courts can also set binding precedent (No. 2).

These judges' jurisdiction do not extent to the whole of a state, but as noted, Harris County Texas is larger than 26 different states.

"If a judge, on account of the judicial office he holds, ranks higher in his country's official system of precedence than persons who have received an honour that satisfies criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO rank, on account of that honour, in that system of precedence, then that judge is notable." <-- The County Treasurer Orlando Sanchez (politician) ranks lower on the official system of precedence.

HoustonProbate (talk) 20:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Houston, I'm afraid you're probably going to lose this one. Sanchez' article may not belong here; and in any case, the United States does not have "honours" and official systems of precedence like the Brits do; that passage you quote is for countries like the U.K. that do have these things in a way we Yanks do not. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:48, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
It makes no reference to the aristocracy. It says "order of precedence." The United States does, in fact, have one. States and localities have informal ones as well. And in any case, the policy appears to encourage writing about jurists with massive jurisdictions, the same as state legislators. I fail to see any compelling reason these people are not notable. HoustonProbate (talk) 20:54, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Harris county is not the whole of a country, state or province. The notability guidelines are defined entirely on artificial constructs of area and population is not considered, the leader of a state in a small country with 20,000 inhabitants is treated as being notable and the leader of a county with 5 million inhabitants is not. Additionally there is no way you are going to convince anyone here that a probate court is equivalent to a high court. I would go on, but I suspect you are some kind of lawyer and the argument would be fruitless. If you really want to, you could publish one yourself and then see what the community says at AfD. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
My suggestion also is to remember AfC is voluntary. Legacypac (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

22:10:44, 10 November 2018 review of submission by[edit]

I Put a Reference there and this should be accepted . (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC) (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Neither the sport nor the country is specified, thus there is insufficient context to even know what the article is about. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
It's basketball and the footer has links to annual articles from the 1930's to last year. It needs work but this will be started by someone. I approved and expect it will be quickly improved. Legacypac (talk) 22:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Even I know that The semifinals and the championship will be held at Madison Square Garden on April 2-4 in New York City means America. You could also have followed the link to the 2019 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament in the first sentence... — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

23:30:14, 10 November 2018 review of submission by[edit]

Can you fix the reference on the 2019 National Invitational Tournament Article Because I tried on the help desk article because I Got an error cause it didn't respond can you fix it please. (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC) (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I fixed it. Thank you for reaching out. Have a great day. Feel free to ask for more help in the future if you need it JC7V-talk 23:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

November 11[edit]

08:51:25, 11 November 2018 review of submission by KarenRutter[edit]

KarenRutter (talk) 08:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Good day, MY article on IFWEA - International Federation of Workers' Education Asssociations has been accepted by Wikipedia. What steps do I know need to take t make it "live" - I am not sure. Best regards, Karen

You do not need to do anything now. Once a new page reviewer marked your page as patrolled, the page will be indexed by search engines. The reviewer may also leave you a message about how to improve the article or nominating it for deletion. Abelmoschus Esculentus 09:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:15:41, 11 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by RealityTVfanatic[edit]

hi, I need help with citation so this article will get published. I am looking less for advice and more for someone to help on editing this so it's worthy for publication by wikipedia:

RealityTVfanatic (talk) 09:15, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

RealityTVfanatic, Hey thanks for reaching out and for your draft. See WP:REFB to help you. It will show you what you need in terms of gathering the right sources. You need about 3 or 4 'good sources' (independent, from newspapers, books ,magazines and a paragraph or more about the subject) for it to be accepted. Good luck and if you need further help, ask here again or on my talk page and Ill be glad to further assist you. cheers.

JC7V-talk 09:18, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

HI, can someone help me editing this article so it can be resubmitted RealityTVfanatic (talk) 11:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Editing the article is not the issue. The problem is the subject is only known for one role. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:27, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

13:37:11, 11 November 2018 review of submission by Robinaugustine10[edit]

Robinaugustine10 (talk) 13:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

23:47:05, 11 November 2018 review of submission by Wbucklew[edit]

I didn't realize that all the links I provided were redirects from the charity website, that was a mistake, I have corrected them all so that they are direct to the third party, of which there are over 40 listed from all the major news agencies, newspapers, etc. Previous reviewers have indicated that the accomplishments were substantial enough to warrant inclusion, the whole natin was following him, so a lot of time was spent writing this in fact based format. I hope this meets your expectations, thanks fo your patience, its all very new to me. Wbucklew (talk) 23:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Bill Bucklew. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 01:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

November 12[edit]

04:18:53, 12 November 2018 review of submission by Farooqahmadbhat[edit]

What is your question? Legacypac (talk) 05:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I processed all but one of these pages. Declined most, CSD'd one, and accepted the village. Legacypac (talk) 06:05, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Sir, I object your decision. You have only declined quality and notable pages. I do not believe that some Wikipedia administrators review our articles so poorly. Farooqahmadbhat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:15, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Bro, Would you please give your opinion on the declined drafts? Drafts are being discussed here on Legacypac's (talk page) -------------- Farooqahmadbhat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:56, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

There appears to be various fragmented discussions already, and an email in my inbox, I could reply in various places but I will just outline my thoughts here. You can refer to my comment by linking to it elsewhere if you want.

  • Junaid Azim Mattu as the Mayor of Srinagar is not presumed notable under WP:NPOL. Politicians that don't meet that guideline are hard to prove notable and will need more than a short stub.
  • Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Tina Dabi will decide the fate of Tina Dabi. As the title has already be create protected in mainspace I suspect COI or paid editing in the past on that subject.
  • Peer Ki Gali is notable, as noted by Legacypac the article is closely paraphrased and needs to be rewritten slightly to avoid copyright issues, this is a prose issue. Check [1] and [2].
  • Bufliaz has been approved.
  • Rafia Rahim and Mehak Zubair are low profile radio presenters, to have the articles accepted you need to expand the articles and add more references to show why they are significant.

I hope this helps. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

10:22:32, 12 November 2018 review of submission by BridgeScript[edit]

I would like to get a second opinion on a declined draft. Here is the discussion we had with the reviewer who suggested getting a second opinion: User_talk:BridgeScript

BridgeScript (talk) 10:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

  • The topic is not notable due to there being insufficient references to pass WP:NCORP. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:43, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

How do you mean "pass"? Can you point out those references that do not "pass"? BridgeScript (talk) 10:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

  • The notability guideline is like a test applied to the article to see if it passes the minimum standard for inclusion. You need at minimum two or three times as many similar references, or at least two substantial articles in national news in addition to the references already in the article to pass. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the info. BridgeScript (talk) 10:58, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

11:58:02, 12 November 2018 review of draft by Laurel Brunner[edit]

Laurel Brunner (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

What should I do to get this article posted? I keep trying and get no help at all and am confused by all the options of nonspecific guidance. I am sure I am not as clever as everyone else on here, but I am doing my best.

Can someone tell me what more do I need to show that this topic is notable? Why it has been referred to as “garbage“ (which is hardly an objective statement, given that it is only a short text)? Why is submitting updates in response to objections considered worthy of deletion?

I am new to this whole process so I think a little constructive support is not an unreasonable expectation. Here is the text I propose as a new article topic, along with its supporting external references. Please could someone tell me what is wrong with it, and how I fix it. Thank you.

Extended content

Xeikon Xeikon was founded by Lucien de Schamphelaere in 1988 to develop a digital colour printing press. In 1993 the company introduced its technology at an international trade show. Indigo, now HP Indigo, also introduced a digital colour printing press at this show. Together these two companies established a new printing method and revolutionised the printing industrythe principles of which have been widely followed leading to new applications for print, such as photobooks.

References & Sources "". The New York Times. March 20, 1996: COMPANY NEWS; XEIKON A.D.R.'S SURGE ON FIRST DAY OF TRADING Intro: The American depository receipts of Xeikon N.V., a Belgian maker of digital printing systems, surged 34 percent yesterday in their first day of trading. The company, which is seeking to capture part of the short-run color printing market, sold 6.4 million A.D.R.'s at $15 each to raise $96 million.

"" The New York Times. April 29, 1996. Xerox Is Offering a New Category of Color Printer Hoping to find a color-printing niche with machines that sell for about $200,000 each, the Xerox Corporation has introduced its Docu-color printer, which can transform electronic files into full color pages at a rate of 40 sheets a minute. (…) For the most demanding color-printing customers, even faster machines with better quality are available in the $350,000 to $400,000 price range. The AM DCP-1, Agfa Chromapress and IBM 3170, all of which use a print engine made by Xeikon of Belgium, and the Indigo E-Print 1000 each print up to 70 pages a minute.

"presse-archiv/artikel/FAZ/20000129/agfa-digitaldruck-geht-an-xeikon/FR220000129311326.html" Frankfurter Allgemeine. January 29, 2000. Agfa-Digitaldruck geht an Xeikon (‘Agfa Digital Printing goes to Xeikon’) Das Geschäftsfeld Digitale Drucksysteme soll an die auf diesem Gebiet zu den international führenden Anbietern gehörende Xeikon N.V. verkauft werden. Im Gegenzug werde Agfa-Gevaert weitere an der amerikanischen Nasdaq notierte Xeikon-Aktien erhalten und damit die Beteiligung an diesem Unternehmen von 20,1 Prozent auf höchstens 25,5 Prozent aufstocken.

"" De Standaard. January 30, 2002. De neergang van Xeikon (‘Xeikon’s fall’) Timeline of Xeikon’s rise and fall since its 1996 Nasdaq listing

"" De Tijd, June 23, 1993. George Soros spoils Agfa’s world premiere De Hongaars-Amerikaanse spekulant George Soros en Benny Landa bederven de Vlaamse wereldprimeur van Agfa-dochter Xeikon uit Mortsel.

"" De Tijd, June 24, 1993. Flanders can match Silicon Valley’s high tech Met de ontwikkeling van de eerste digitale kleurendrukpers bewijzen we in Vlaanderen even goed te zijn als de high-tech bedrijven in Silicon Valley. Het is dus ook mogelijk in Vlaanderen', stelt Xeikon-voorzitter Lucien De Schamphelaere.

"" The Guardian, May 3, 2012. Rivals launch a printing revolution that could be as significant as Gutenberg Landa and Xeikon to unveil new inkjet and toner technology at drupa exhibition in Düsseldorf This week will see the launch of a revolution in printing that may turn out to be as significant as the invention of the Gutenberg printing press - if entrepreneurs and analysts are to be believed.

</ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref> </ref></ref></ref>
<source lang="trac wiki">
<source lang="trac wiki"></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref> </ref>

Laurel Brunner (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

  • We don't want the topic and you keep trying to force us to accept it. That is not very nice. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

16:45:29, 12 November 2018 review of draft by DalyceKelley[edit]

DalyceKelley (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, please change my draft article title from DJ Bay Bay to just Bay Bay when reviewed as I have learned he is referred to as just Bay Bay aka Bay Bay The Ambassador. Thank you.

20:24:47, 12 November 2018 review of submission by Rmilnes[edit]

This is a page describing a branded technology. Is it at all possible to get a page on a branded technology published? There are unique elements to the technology. In principle there is no generic description for the technology other than by reference to the brand name. The original draft is extremely rich in clinical references, as well as the pros and cons of other technologies.

Rmilnes (talk) 20:24, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

See the helpful guidence on the draft. Legacypac (talk) 20:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

November 13[edit]

01:52:28, 13 November 2018 review of draft by 01:52:28, 13 November 2018 review of submission[edit]

I am requesting help because I do not believe this submission was correctly reviewed.

First, the reviewer notes that the submission lacks significant coverage in reliable, published sources. However, the article includes THREE references to an article specifically about SALMA OKONKWO, published by on 7/31/18 (see link: The article was written by sr. reporter Chloe Sorvino but published by Other sources footnoted in the submission include PETROL WORLD, a global subscription-based b2b magazine covering the petroleum industry, and MODERN GHANA, a recognized news site for the country of Ghana. As required, all of these publications are independent of Ms. Okonkwo and I believe meet the rest of your criteria for outside sources.

Second, when this article was first submitted in Fall, 2017, it met the objectivity requirement (as reviewed by the first reviewer), and the text has not changed, except with the addition of several facts not available in 2017 so we are confused by the note that it reads like an advertisement. Every fact is presented clearly and without editorial remarks. Adjectives are minimal and used only when necessary. The timeline is correct and straightforward. There is no subjective text or opinion.

Therefore, I would appreciate a new objective review as soon as possible. Thank you. (talk) 01:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

The Forbes article is a solid start, but no matter how many times it is cited, it's still a single source. None of the other cited sources add anything significant about Okonkwo. If three articles independently and over a period of time went as deeply into the topic as the Forbes one, there would be no problem with notability. As it stands, however, I too would decline the draft.
Note that just because reviewers of the earlier Draft:Salma Okonkwo didn't mention notability when they declined it doesn't mean it hasn't always been one of the problems with the topic.
Much of the draft, such as the entire "other activities" section, cites no sources for its statements or misrepresents the sources. That can make it seem promotional. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

09:33:55, 13 November 2018 review of submission by KarenRutter[edit]

KarenRutter (talk) 09:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Good day, I have been told that my Articles for Creation: International Federation of Workers' Education Associations (IFWEA) has been accepted at Articles for Creation. What further steps must I take to have the article made live? Please can you guide me? Best regards, Karen

KarenRutter (talk) 09:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

International Federation of Workers’ Education Associations has been published and is live. You do not need to do anything more. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

12:27:52, 13 November 2018 review of submission by Agatanowa[edit]

Hi a added my own work on wiki article and reciewved message it will be deleted, this is my own work. It exist also on another page where i added it myself. wiki assumes it was copied and copywight vandalised because of its apperance on another www. This is a mistake. Dont selete my photo please. Agatanowa (talk) 12:27, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and follow the instructions. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 13:47, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
@Agatanowa: (ec) If you are referring to photographs c:File:Agata Nowa by Tucki.jpg and c:File:Nowa, 2018.jpg, they are not on Wikipedia, but on Wikimedia Commons, and any discussion of them should take place there. If you are Agata Nowa, then unless you used a self-timer or selfie stick, it's highly unlikely that any photograph of you is your own work - you were not the photographer, and it's the photographer who holds the copyright.
This help desk is the place to ask questions about Draft:Agata Nowa. Keep in mind that Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:05:26, 13 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Sabinablum[edit]

Hi, my article has been deleted for copyrighted content, but I don't get it because I put all the source where the information was from. Do I need the artist permission to use information from the artist's web site?. Also, can I have pls back my article so I can adjust it and improve it?

Sabinablum (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Which draft are you referring to? Abelmoschus Esculentus 14:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
@Abelmoschus Esculentus: It is Draft:Jacob Gils. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh thanks. Yes you may use sources, but you cannot direct copy and paste from it and form an article. That's a copyvio and may lead to a block. Abelmoschus Esculentus 14:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
You may not have the page restored. You may rewrite the page in your own words. Legacypac (talk) 14:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

14:36:59, 13 November 2018 review of submission by MostafaAdelSaf[edit]

I recently submitted a draft (Ahmed Farid) and it was rejected then reviewed and accepted. When I search on google for the name of the article, it doesn't show normal wikipedia, it shows something called Everybodywiki! I'd like to know what's wrong, please. MostafaAdelSaf (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

New pages go through New Page Patrol (a review process) before being indexed by search engines. NPP may take several months. Wikipedia is free to reuse, and other websites republish our articles, which is what you are seeing. Legacypac (talk) 14:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It can take up to 90 days for a new article to show up on Google. What you are seeing is a "mirror site" that copies Wikipedia content. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

15:07:54, 13 November 2018 review of draft by Glazaunders[edit]

I am concerned that this article may not be coming from a neutral tone still. I revised the article to try to change all the language to neutral, but I want an independent user to tell me if there are still any problematic phrases, and if so, what they are. Glazaunders (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

You should not be writing about yourself/family members. Follow WP:COI if you insist on doing this. Legacypac (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:22:56, 13 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Passion d[edit]

Hi there,

I have submitted an article but it was not accepted the first time. Therefore, I have had it revised and resubmitted. However, it is taking quite a bit of time to get back a response/notification as to whether it has been accepted or not.

Can you please let me know what the reason might be or how long it normally takes to get back an answer.

I would appreciate your reply.

Many thanks.

Passion d (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Passion d, Good job taking the advice and applying it to fixing the draft. It can take up to 7 weeks for review but it can usually be a lot shorter. In the mean time you can keep fixing your draft up to ensure it passes GNG. If you have anymore questions you can ask me or other AFCR. Good luck. JC7V (talk) 19:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 19:27:58, 13 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by[edit]

Can you create the 2019 NCAA Division I Baseball season article please because they I Put 5 References on it and move it from the draft page to the Article Page please. (talk) 19:27, 13 November 2018 (UTC) (talk) 19:27, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

For the third time. No. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 19:39, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
@ even though you got a no, you can still improve existing articles on baseball topics and if you need questions on how, see the Teahouse or Help Desk and people there will be more than happy to assist you. JC7V (talk) 19:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

20:03:39, 13 November 2018 review of draft by Phuebi[edit]

Hi, I didn't create the page "V.League_Division_1_Women's". There are some things wrong with it that I don't know how to fix. Eg., the league is divided into Eastern and Western Conferences. So the "League table/Standings" Area is wrong. I don't know how to fix that by making a new table. Also, the standings change every time a game is played so how can you reference that?

I don't know or care anything about the stadiums. Can that be "commented out" without removing it so that the person who did create it can continue with it?

Whose responsibility is it to update the match scores all the time? I can't commit to it.

This article was rejected for lack of sources so I added some. How do I know if it's good enough.

btw - V.League Division 1 Women's is a sub-category of V.League (Japan) <>. That article is therefore misleading. Not sourced very well.

Have a great day!

ps - you instruct to "MAKE SURE TO CLICK THE "Save page" BUTTON BELOW OR YOUR REQUEST WILL BE LOST!!!" but I don't see any SAVE PAGE button

Phuebi (talk) 20:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Phuebi Greetings to you. See below
  1. Table - if you want to learn about inserting/creating a table, pls see Help:Table for instructions.
  2. Reference/Sources - independent, WP:Reliable (secondary) sources are used to for referencing content/info added. Homepage, user generated content site, sources associated with the subject, etc are considered primary sources and are not reliable/independent.
  3. Update/adding/deleting content - Draft articles and articles in main space have NO owner in Wikipedia; however the creator of the article is recorded in the page. For such any ::#:editor can add the info as long as proper reference is provided.
  4. Save the edit - when an editor has finished their edit and click "publish changes" on the top right corner of the page, a "Save your changes" window will appear. Enter a brief summary edit info on the rectangular box and click "publish changes" on the top right of the window. When you have done that, that means you have save your edit. Hope this help. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

20:08:22, 13 November 2018 review of draft by Anna.nicklin[edit]

I struggle with adding a company logo correctly, and with the right copy right permissions. As a company we own the rights, but it seems I may have uploaded under the wrong template or space or with insufficient credentials. Is there a guide specifically for company pages assets like adding logo to a Infobox? Anna.nicklin (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Page deleted as Spam G11 Legacypac (talk) 06:46, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

21:20:53, 13 November 2018 review of submission by JoIIygreen[edit]

I would like a re-review of my article for Heart to Heart Counseling Center. I was basing the information off of the content which was listed on their website. I have since removed all of the content that was deemed to be promotional (pretty much everything about their products and services) and left only the history of the counseling center and Doug Weiss.

I feel like this article is necessary to the completion of Wikipedia because Doug Weiss already has a wiki page, so this page would complete his bio about where he works.

Please let me know what you think of the revised article. Thank you.

JoIIygreen (talk) 21:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

JoIIygreen Good day. Pls note each article need to meet the notability requirement and the content is support by independent, reliable (secondary) sources in significant coverage in order to merit a page in Wikipedia and not inherit by association. Secondly, the sources you provided are not secondary sources but primary and they can NOT demonstrate the notability of notability of an organisation. Lastly, Wikipedia can NOT be the source - pls see WP:CIRCULAR. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:37, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
CASSIOPEIA Thanks for your feedback. I updated the sources again to credible, primary sources like, Daystar TV, 7NEWS, and the Colorado Springs Independent. Is that enough? I was using this Wiki article here (AASECT) as a reference and don't see how mine is much different. JoIIygreen (talk) 23:53, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
JoIIygreen First of all, pls read again what determine a primary source vs secondary source. Secondly what you provided are secondary sources but pls note the sources need to talk about the subject( Heart to Heart Counseling Center) in length and in depth and note merely passing mentioned. You sources do not talk about he subject. Thirdly, sources involved interview with the subject /associated with the subject are considered primary source and can NOT be use to demonstrate the subject notability due to the sources are not independent. The page can not be accepted to Wikipedia main space as its fails to meet the notability guidlines. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

22:21:02, 13 November 2018 review of draft by Jdriboflavin[edit]

Hi – I'm a contributor to the open source software project referenced in this article. It looks like the article was submitted originally by someone affiliated with a commercial entity, and then that commercial entity was confused with the open source software project itself.

It looks like the article has been stripped of those references and now points to a bunch of reliable non-commercial sources that talk about the project. But it seemed like a good idea for someone without a COI to review this before it is submitted.

Thank you.

Jdriboflavin (talk) 22:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Even non-commercial projects need to pass the notability guidelines. And I am not convinced this one does. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

November 14[edit]

08:00:00, 14 November 2018 review of submission by KarenRutter[edit]

KarenRutter (talk) 08:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Good day, I was told by one of the WIki editors that my article International Federation of Workers' Education Associations was accepted, and that I did not have to do anything more. I can see the article here:

But if I do a search for the title, it does not appear. Is it actually live yet? What else do I need to do?

Best regards, Karen KarenRutter (talk) 08:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi KarenRutter if you mean an external search such as Google, it can take a while for new articles to be indexed. We have no influence on how and when the Google crawlers do their thing. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi KarenRutter, I could able to find in google search HERE. If you cant find it, then do wait for a few days and check it again. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:15, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

12:53:23, 14 November 2018 review of draft by NoDramaLama[edit]

NoDramaLama (talk) 12:53, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I need help, please. I have submitted my article a few times, each time updating it as requested with additional links and references, but I keep getting rejected. Can someone pretty please help me to understand what kind of links are needed? I have viewed similar articles about similar companies and have tried to use the same kinds of links, but with no luck so far. I have updated it again with more links and references. Please, could someone assist? Thanks so much.

NoDramaLama Greetings. I have a quick look but have not time to review the article so please note below
  1. Wikipedia can NOT be the source - see WP:CIRCULAR, so pls removed as source
  2. Sources needed are reliable secondary (such as from major newspaper). Source from interview, home page, press releases, sources associated with the subject, user generate sources and etc are primary and/ or not independent, kindly remove sources.
  3. Please check on the blue texts in the grey panel on the draft article to learn further what is secondary reliable sources.
  4. Pls remove all the directors info in the draft.
  5. Organisation (subject) need to meet the notability of an organisation to merit a page in Wikipedia. Pls read. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk)

15:50:22, 14 November 2018 review of submission by Farooqahmadbhat[edit]

Changes have been made originally. Please give your opinions.

16:29:21, 14 November 2018 review of draft by Maclang99[edit]

Maclang99 (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I would need some help concerning the submission of my first article draft. After my last exchanges with User:Maclang99 pasted below, my article is still waiting to be reviewed. In the meantime I would like to know if there is anything I can do to improve it. Furthermore I see the duplicate created by mistake still exists, the second one has not been deleted yet. Thank you for your help. --Maclang99 (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2018 (UTC)Maclang99

Sandbox - submission for review Dear Robert McClenon, As you have notified it, I have submitted twice the same article (Richard Castelli) for review. I did it by mistake. The reason is that my article being not in the Sandbox anymore, and nowhere else?, I thought it had been lost. So I published it again. I am a new user and I am not very familiar with Wikipedia procedures yet, sorry. You can proceed to delete the second one. Can you tell me where I can find the first again if I need to update it? Thank you, --Maclang99 (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Maclang99

User:Maclang99 - There are two copies of your draft, at Draft:Richard Castelli and User:Maclang99/sandbox. In my opinion, neither of them is ready to go into article space. Do you have an affiliation with Richard Castelli? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC) Hi, Thank you for your fast and kind reply. Since you notified a possible COI, I would like to confirm that I have no affiliation with this personality, but having visited several of the exhibitions he curated and appreciating well the artists, he produces, I thought it would be interesting to find his biography on wikipedia as it does not exist yet. If my first article is approved this time, I would like to continue and propose a series dedicated to a number of living people from the arts and entertainment, especially those affiliated with science-art-technology. I would be grateful if you could give me your advices on what to modify so that the article could be admissible. Thank you in advance, --Maclang99 (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)Maclang99

  • To delete the duplicate draft simply place a {{db-g7}} template on it. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:42, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

20:20:18, 14 November 2018 review of submission by[edit]

We keep being told that this reads as an infomercial but it should be read as a bio. This individual in religious Jewish circles is a high profile convert. It needs editing and submission as a relevant individual. 3 more events will be added shortly. (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

  • It has been rejected. If you think adding more content will make a difference you should do that. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

21:36:17, 14 November 2018 review of draft by Ilmchal12410[edit]

Ilmchal12410 (talk) 21:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC) Hello, Because of potential COI with my submitting this article myself, I'm considering allowing someone else to submit the article. Can another person submit the same article while my original article is in the Articles for Creation Sandbox? Do I need to delete it first? Please advise. Thank you, Ilmchal12410 (talk) 21:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

  • You can wait and someone else without a COI may write about the subject. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

November 15[edit]

08:16:29, 15 November 2018 review of draft by Angcorwut[edit]

Can I ask the team to review my updated submission if it merits approval, I adjusted the content accordingto the feedback left by the editors

Thanks! Cor Angcorwut (talk) 08:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)angcorwut

Angcorwut (talk) 08:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)