Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 November 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< November 29 << Oct | November | Dec >> December 1 >
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.


November 30

[edit]

02:35, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Jhrtvunbyhhf

[edit]

im A FAMOUS roblox playwe Jhrtvunbyhhf (talk) 02:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. That doesn't make you notable though. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talkcontribs) 02:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02:36, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Jhrtvunbyhhf

[edit]

I'm a roblox plauer, @Dinogold4 i need help, now green avater Jhrtvunbyhhf (talk) 02:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jhrtvunbyhhf You were already told no. Being a "famous" Roblox player does not make you notable enough to have a Wikipedia page. Not to mention the undeclared WP:COI. Sandcat555 (talk) 04:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

03:02, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Rosebabysu

[edit]

Can anyone help me check whether the draft I submitted can be passed? I have revised it many times. Thank you very much. Rosebabysu (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosebabysu That is what the next review will tell you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 04:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's time to pull the plug on this draft, the sources simply aren't there, and to somehow magic notability out of thin air is a big ask. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:25, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Sujithsubash

[edit]

The information provided is genuine and it is of importance. The references given are also from reliable sources including research journals published by the government departments. Declaration of conflict of Interest: The Arya Vaidya Pharmacy (Coimbatore) Limited was the parent company of my previous employer. But this has nothing to do with the entry nor I am receving any payments from them for doing this entry. Sujithsubash (talk) 06:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sujithsubash: whether a journal of research in a pseudoscience can be truly reliable is debatable, I guess, but regardless of that, most of the draft content is unreferenced. We need to see where the information comes from, so that it can be verified and assessed.
The draft is also overly promotional, with peacocky terms like "prestigious" and "most esteemed", and expressions like "epitomises the pinnacle of intellectual achievement" and "remarkable contributions to the field, particularly in uplifting Ayurveda". Your job is merely to describe the subject, not to praise or 'sell' it in any way. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazingthe aspect of 'psedoscience' is very subjective and that is not the content here. These are the journals published by the Government of India and not by any 'psedo-body' or 'psedo-authors'. Those expressions like 'epitomises the pinnacle of intellectual acheivement' and 'remarkable contributions to the field, particularly in uplifting Ayurveda' was translation of what the award is by the National Daily in Malayalam. If that is the problem can you help me how can this be reworded. It was not my words and there is no item being 'sold' here. This award also is not available for 'purchase'. Disclosure: The awarding body was parent company of my previous employer and information in this is verifyable. I am not being paid for making this article. Please help to sort this constructively. Sujithsubash (talk) 06:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sujithsubash: if those peacocky expressions were direct quotations, then they must be indicated as such with quotation marks, and supported with clear inline citations to the sources where they originated. Which was very much part of my point (and that of the reviewer): inadequate referencing makes it impossible for the reader to know where most of this information is coming from. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you help me to understand how a print only newpaper article should be referred here? It is pure ignorance of how to do. If you can guide to some reference on this referencing of print newspapers, please guide. Thank you, in advance. Sujithsubash (talk) 07:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sujithsubash: Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Examples explains this in some detail, and you can use the template Cite news for the citation itself – scroll down to "Usage", copy a template, and enter the information about the article you are citing. --bonadea contributions talk 12:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:41, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Ridgeman12

[edit]

This isn’t a fake Wikipedia for no reason, there actually is a streamer named Trod who has a dog named Remi. This is not a fake character. Ridgeman12 (talk) 06:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ridgeman12: sure. I have a dog, too. She's not a fake character, either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

12:47, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Thenfactor

[edit]

I need assistance please as I have written a wholly unbiased, not promoting the artist and the 50 sources included within the Rick Beerhorst page are tested as independent of the artist, having done over a week's work of research on testing those sources. John Yau Art critic who has independently written of Rick Beerhorst the painter for 35 years, has been included with the article to give the article Wikipedia tested impartiality. Can someone please review the prejudice that is being given to this article, in order to have the painter substantiated and placed within Wikipedia which is his rightful place. Thenfactor (talk) 12:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

55 sources is a lot, @Thenfactor. You have some major Wikipedia:Citation overkill - does the first line really need nine sources!?
I don't think many volunteer reviewers are going to want to go into 55 sources to assess each, so give us three and only three of the strongest sources you have, to make the job for the reviewer easier. Each of the three sources should meet this criteria of being independent, significant coverage, and from reliable places. qcne (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am taking on board on these advices and I thank you very much for your input. Thenfactor (talk) 18:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

13:48, 30 November 2024 review of submission by GwnftLight

[edit]

I need help in editing my article GwnftLight (talk) 13:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @GwnftLight, the draft has now been rejected and so will not be considered further. qcne (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14:46, 30 November 2024 review of submission by GwnftLight

[edit]

I'm finding it difficult to create a new article GwnftLight (talk) 14:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GwnftLight: are you trying to create another draft on the same subject? Because that wouldn't be a good idea. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I tried editing based on the comments received but the submission was not responsive GwnftLight (talk) 15:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GwnftLight: this subject is clearly not notable, there is no point in creating another draft on it. Please find another subject to write about. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also finding it difficult to create a new draft on another subject entirely GwnftLight (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It kept redirecting me to the rejected draft GwnftLight (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GwnftLight: you can create a subpage in your personal space, you just have to give it a unique name, like User:GwnftLight/sandbox2 or User:GwnftLight/newdraft, etc.
Or you can go to WP:YFA and use the article creation wizard there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks GwnftLight (talk) 17:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:29, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Brazbiog

[edit]

This is my first article. I'd appreciate any feedback to improve the current draft. Brazbiog (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Brazbiog: you've submitted the draft, so you will get feedback (of sorts) when a reviewer gets around to assessing it. Superficial glance suggests everything looks okay. Can't say more than that, as we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! That makes sense, sorry for overstepping. Brazbiog (talk) 15:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Brazbiog: no problem at all, no harm in asking. ;) DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 03:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21:36, 30 November 2024 review of submission by 70.15.62.238

[edit]

Hupmapskhpugas 70.15.62.238 (talk) 21:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted as nonsense. 331dot (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:36, 30 November 2024 review of submission by Jazzman6500

[edit]


Article rejected, assistance requested I recently submitted this article but it was rejected. Any help please:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Society_of_St._John Jazzman6500 (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazzman6500 I fixed your post to provide a link to your draft as intended. 331dot (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted.
It reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Please review the decline message, and the policies linked to therein. 331dot (talk) 23:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]