Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 December 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< December 26 << Nov | December | Jan >> December 28 >
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.


December 27[edit]

Request on 02:06:34, 27 December 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Eyagi[edit]


This article is simply a Japanese to English translation of law and relevant police records. Therefore, there is absolutely no room for personal opinion. What is WP:OR?


Eyagi (talk) 02:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@eyagi: WP:OR, original research, which your entire draft is full of. as such, your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. lettherebedarklight晚安 02:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:39:41, 27 December 2022 review of draft by 185.62.72.176[edit]


Dear sirs, can You explain to me, why I can't publish this page on English language?

This is translate of this page on Croatian language:

https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubravka_Orai%C4%87-Toli%C4%87


185.62.72.176 (talk) 05:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can have this published, if/when the referencing is sufficient to a) establish that the subject is notable, and b) reliably support all the material statements in the draft. Currently, with two sources listed but not cited, neither requirement is met. Please see WP:GNG for the general notability requirement which applies to most subjects. Also see WP:REFB for advice on referencing. Finally, WP:BLP provides information on writing articles on living people.
If, as you say, this is a translation of a hr.wiki article, you must acknowledge that as the source; see WP:HOWTRANS for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:00:37, 27 December 2022 review of submission by LEGENDARY VIP[edit]


LEGENDARY VIP (talk) 06:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@legendary vip: your draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. lettherebedarklight晚安 07:31, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The user's recent edits are not helpful. Darklight, I posted a comment on your talk page. David10244 (talk) 08:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent edits to other articles, I mean. David10244 (talk) 08:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, @Meters and @Bonadea have taken care of the bad edits that I was concerned about. David10244 (talk) 09:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

06:33:38, 27 December 2022 review of submission by ATM622[edit]


ATM622 (talk) 06:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Courtesy link: Draft:Jack Mizzi
@atm622: do you have a question? lettherebedarklight晚安 07:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have a question. Draft:Jack Mizzi had been approved on the 25th December as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ATM622#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation%3A_Jack_Mizzi_has_been_accepted. I understand this was accepted under the Malta category by
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pichemist
Then on the 26th December it was unpublished again. When it was published it was also cleaned and the editor who unpublished it (seemingly through a script) did not read the notes there were from past edits. It now appears that it was submitted for review afresh. Can you please assist? ATM622 (talk) 08:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ATM622: this was indeed re-draftified, as you say. The reviewer who did that (at new page patrol, so in that sense this isn't strictly an AfC matter) felt that there is too much promotional or otherwise inappropriate content, likely related to your conflict of interest in the subject, and that this needs to be removed or rewritten before the article can be accepted into the 'pedia. And yes, it was submitted for AfC review again, to prevent it just languishing in the draft space indefinitely. If you wish to understand the reasons for re-draftification in more detail, you would need to enquire with the reviewer in question (Onel5969). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I should add that this is my interpretation of what happened; Onel5969's may differ. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ATM622 Honestly, at this point, I'm not sure that this is the place to discuss it. There has been an *extensive* discussion on WT:CHESS which I would count as the Subject Matter Experts. (And probably the people who put together the notability criteria WP:NCHESS. I would suggest that you bring up *there* the fact that the coverage of him *is* national since as far as I can tell, Malta is so small that *any* coverage is functionally national. Note, I'm not saying either way as to whether this should be an article, but even if it isn't it is far closer than *most* of what shows up here and you are to be praised for the creation.Naraht (talk) 14:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the encouraging comments. I am writing articles in the Malta space about chess on the Maltese version of Wikipedia. I think that the Maltese editor who published this agrees with notability in Malta. However the other editor that unpublished it gave me valuable tips which I worked upon, so hopefully it will be reconsidered. ATM622 (talk) 15:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
NP. But frankly, you've already gotten the advice that would make sense for here. The structure of the article looks fine the category structure is fine, the primary question is Notability, and so when you are ready, I'd create another section on WT:CHESS and indicate the coverage and specific changes.Naraht (talk) 15:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:28:23, 27 December 2022 review of submission by Elsewhere159[edit]


Elsewhere159 (talk) 08:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Elsewhere159: you don't ask a question, but be advised that this draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing The main image appears at both en:wp and at Commons. I doubt it was "own work" by the uploader, and it probably shouldn't be in both places. What should be done in cases like that? I nom'ed for deletion at Commons (please let me know if that was wrong). David10244 (talk) 09:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:42:53, 27 December 2022 review of submission by 102.164.192.59[edit]


102.164.192.59 (talk) 10:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but this draft was rejected, meaning it's the end of the road for it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't ask a question, but the draft has been officially rejected and will not be considered further. echidnaLives - talk - edits 10:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because i add reliable sources

You haven't. There is still no evidence that this is notable. And in any case, as I mentioned already, this draft has been rejected.
Please don't open a new thread each time, just respond to your earlier one. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10:45:39, 27 December 2022 review of submission by Professor990[edit]

At first, I was surprised when you said that Maya Abdullah is not one of the public figure, and that it is not enough for a person to be beautiful only to be notable. This is a misplaced framing. We have provided you with what you requested from us, in terms of articles, videos and news, all of which have been published on independent sites. so I ask you to re-review and approve, because I have seen many personalities to whom you gave approval and they are similar to what Maya is doing. We only ask for justice. Professor990 (talk) 10:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Professor990: this draft has been rejected (after no fewer than six earlier declines, I might add, and that's just under this specific title) and will therefore not be considered further. This has nothing to do with lack of "justice" or "misplaced framing", and everything to do with lack of evident notability. (As for other articles that may exist, which in your view may set a precedent for publication: they don't. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.) Time to drop this, and find something else to write about. (And PS: please respond to the COI query posted on your talk page already a month ago. Thank you.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Professor990 I would add that just because an article exists, does not mean it was "approved" by anyone. 331dot (talk) 15:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:22:17, 27 December 2022 review of draft by Hoganm01[edit]


I have been helping to create this article for a local credit union near me and I seem to keep running into issues with it coming off as an advertisement. I know it is important that the article be noteworthy, but I guess I just don't know where to turn as I feel that most of the references provided are rather noteworthy. Is this something that you could help point me in the right direction with? The comments I have seen in the reviews have only pointed me to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Primary_criteria which has not really answered my questions.

Thank you!

Hoganm01 (talk) 16:22, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoganm01: TBH, this has a distinctly promotional tone, little if any encyclopaedic value, and generally sounds like something written by the company's marketing team. Speaking of which, what is your connection with the organisation? You have declared (sort of) a COI, but are you being compensated for your work?
The subject may or may not be notable enough for inclusion, but this draft requires considerable further work. For starters, try to rewrite it as if you were the organisation's competitor. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_December_27&oldid=1130991327"