Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 November 24
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 23 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 25 > |
| 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 24
[edit]00:22:04, 24 November 2019 review of draft by E-Stylus
[edit]
Thank you for reviewing the above draft. My paid contribution disclosure is noted on the talk page. I'm requesting a re-review as the draft content appears to meet WP:NPOV and is supported by independent, reliable, published sources per WP:NCORP guidelines. Any feedback would be appreciated.
E-Stylus (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- E-Stylus, DGG has reviewed it as PR and advertising content. You would do well to follow his sage advice that he left on the draft. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:52, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- CaptainEek - Thank you for your response. Per my recent comment on the draft page, the feedback appears inconsistent with site guidelines. In turn, would another editor be willing to re-review the original draft independent of the initial review? E-Stylus (talk) 22:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- E-Stylus, You can re-submit it for review, and wait for it to go through the queue. But if you don't make any improvements, its likely it will get denied again. But as another reviewer, I would have given very similar feedback to DGG's. I see the same issues. Its been WP:REFBOMBED, its notability is still borderline, and its overly promotional. This is an article that feels too good to be true. I would recommend you stand back and remember that articles must be neutral not only in wording but in presentation. This article paints the company in a glowing light, as if they're perfect and have done so many good things. But lets remember: its just a company. We, as Wikipedia, aren't in the business of promoting anything. We merely note that companies exist, and note the good and the bad about them. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 23:06, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- CaptainEek - Thank you for your response. Per my recent comment on the draft page, the feedback appears inconsistent with site guidelines. In turn, would another editor be willing to re-review the original draft independent of the initial review? E-Stylus (talk) 22:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
06:09:53, 24 November 2019 review of submission by Splashcordarticles
[edit]This is mainly my first time making an Article, and I wanted to start off small with someone I did not really know but did my full research on.
I do think this person (InScane) is Notable in some way for his actions to the public like his amazing and wonderful support to the people, and his passion to helping and supporting kids/children around the world.
If you have any advice on how I can continue working on this article, and/or what to do and how I could get this article approved. Splash Articles 06:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Splashcordarticles: A youtuber with only 3k subs is just an average person. No special reason for them to have a Wikipedia page. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:53, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
09:53:03, 24 November 2019 review of submission by Rishiviswakarma
[edit]can I link youtube videos of that person as a reference? Rishiviswakarma (talk) 09:53, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Rishiviswakarma: Normally, no. There are a few exceptions, but they aren't likely to apply here. However, if you mean whether such a source would count for the draft to be accepted (i.e. pass notability criteria), then definitely no. We need independent sources. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 12:54, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
12:01:58, 24 November 2019 review of submission by CraigMc1979
[edit]- CraigMc1979 (talk · contribs)
Updated intro to reflect that the Person in question was the First Nigerian to hold a PHD in computer science and the one who then created the subject formally in Nigeria's universities. This later lead to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenike_Osofisan Updated citation to validate awards as per that mentioned by the reviewer. Looking for any additional feedback on how to improve the article for submission.
CraigMc1979 (talk) 12:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- Hi CraigMc1979. All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is a living person. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong. Wikipedia, because it is user-generated, is not a reliable source. The only other source the draft cites is a press release from the Nigeria Computer Society (NCS). It supports very little of the content of the draft. It is a reliable source for the fact that Odeyemi was given an award in a ceremony organized by the NCS, but it doesn't demonstrate that the award is significant or that Odeyemi is notable. Searches of Google Books and Google News found no sources that would prove notability. Absent such sources, I agree with the reviewer, the topic is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
16:03:07, 24 November 2019 review of submission by Ankii luthra
[edit]- Ankii luthra (talk · contribs)
Ankii luthra (talk) 16:03, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- Ankii luthra, You misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. We are not a dating app or a place to find friends or advertise yourself. We are an encyclopedia which hosts factual and notable content. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:55, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
16:04:35, 24 November 2019 review of submission by Bongshomoy
[edit]- Bongshomoy (talk · contribs)
Listvl255 16:04, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- Draft deleted, user sock blocked.Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:56, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
17:29:17, 24 November 2019 review of draft by 193.136.124.131
[edit]I don't understand the motive of the submissions's rejection. Katya Scheinberg, another applied mathematician, has a wiki page. The relevance and impact of Scheinberg's and Vicentes's contributions are similar. In fact both researchers were recipients of the Lagrange's Prize for the same book (they are co-authors of the work).
Can you help pointing the changes that are requested, in order for the re-submission to be accepted? Thank you very much for all your time.
193.136.124.131 (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- Howdy hello! This professor is likely notable if they hold a named chair. However, you need references that support the claims made. You currently have no references. Please see referencing for beginners. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 19:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
21:30:37, 24 November 2019 review of draft by NantucketHistory
[edit]
I have put a lot of work into this article and I am requesting help as I do not know what needs to be done to actually have this become an article & not just a draft. I believe the recent reviewer had some correct commentary, which have now been addressed, but that some commentry was subjective. I really need help!
NantucketHistory (talk) 21:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
- Hi NantucketHistory. If you believe you've addressed the reviewer's concerns, you may click the blue "Resubmit" button on the draft to have it re-evaluated. It's likely that it will be reviewed by a different reviewer, who may have different strengths, and point out different problems. Submission and review is an iterative process. Many aspects of the draft are good, and the next reviewer may decide that any remaining problems are best fixed in mainspace. Expect the page to be edited mercilessly. --Worldbruce (talk) 14:20, 25 November 2019 (UTC)