Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2020 October 22
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < October 21 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 23 > |
| 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. |
October 22[edit]
- MEEM WEAVER (talk · contribs)
Hi I got a message on my user talk page saying my new draft article needs more reliable sources, can someone on here review it and give more specifics please. I don't know whether to expand with new information but there isn't a lot of information on the band out there and I don't know where else to get info from besides Allmusic. I have always considered Allmusic a pretty reputable site, they have editors there who know music and the other page I cited was written by one of the band members in their biography section on their profile. The page is Draft:Numbs I hope this link works. Thanks in advance
MEEM WEAVER (talk) 01:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @MEEM WEAVER: Hi Meem, thanks for editing on Wikipedia and creating a new article. Please note that I am not a reviewer, so I understand if you want information from another editor.
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources is a great place to find sources for music articles. These are sources and websites that the Wikipedia community have determined as reliable sources, and AllMusic is included on the list. You can also go to WP:RS/PS but these are general sources like newspapers and might not have information about the band.
- Please be aware that the article also needs to prove that Numbs is notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. I suggest looking at WP:BAND and WP:GNG and make sure the article fulfils our notability criteria, as I am not sure if the draft fulfils that criteria at the moment. Let me know if you have any questions! Z1720 (talk) 15:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
09:11:42, 22 October 2020 review of draft by Oficialtowhid[edit]
Review these articles -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ashish_Chanchlani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nischay_Malhan
Oficialtowhid (talk) 09:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Real — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.232.236.45 (talk) 12:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- The draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. What is your connexion to the editors who were behind Ashish Chanchlani and Ashish A. Chanchlani? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 14:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
13:12:30, 22 October 2020 review of submission by Sudhindra Athreya[edit]
Additional details added for the young talent.
Sudhindra Athreya (talk) 13:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You haven't changed a single thing since the last time I looked at it, and as such it still violates our biographical policies. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
14:30:44, 22 October 2020 review of submission by Pratsmusings[edit]
- Pratsmusings (talk · contribs)
Please guide me on how to get the page accepted.
Pratsmusings (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Moot as draft is deleted and user has been shown the door. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 14:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
15:32:51, 22 October 2020 review of submission by Leon M-Zack[edit]
- Leon M-Zack (talk · contribs)
Leon M-Zack (talk) 15:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Leon M-Zack: It appears that you have (attempted to) write an article about yourself. While autobiographys are not strictly forbidden, they are strongely discouraged. Pleasse be aware that a Wikipedia article about yourself may not nessesarely be desireable. This article does not meet WP:BLP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
It was declined due to NPOV problems; specifically, that it reads like an essay. I need help correcting this; specifically, how should the causes and impacts be summarized neutrally? I'm pretty sure this topic is notable.
–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @LaundryPizza03: Hi, thanks for submitting a new article on a difficult topic. I am not an expert on writing articles about sociological phenomenons like this and I am not a reviewer in this section. However, I hope my thoughts can point you in the right direction and I'll understand if you seek additional comments from a more experienced editor. I reviewed the draft and my thoughts are posted below:
- My first concern is there is only one expert quoted in the "Causes" section of the article. Wikipedia articles should avoid WP:UNDUE by having various points of view. If only one expert is quoted, it is hard to maintain a NPOV. I would also suggest researching the effects of this phenomenon and including lots of expert opinions.
- For the "By Country" section, I think there is too much emphasis on events of this phenomenon instead of describing what this is. Although examples help explain a topic, the overreliance of examples causes the article to feel like an essay. I would only include an event if an expert in a reliable source uses it to explain this phenomenon. Instead, include more information from experts about what it is and what it does.
- The article seems to rely on information from the US, causing a WP:BIAS to occur. Since Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, we need to consider global perspectives. However, investigating this phenomenon in different parts of the world is probably too big a task and it might be better to change the name of the article to "Racially motivated emergency calls in the United States" (or something similar).
- I hope these comments help point you in the right direction. Wikipedia has some WP:FA about other sociological phenomenons, including Birthday-number effect, Digital media use and mental health and Same-sex marriage in Spain. These show great examples of how other editors maintained NPOV in controversial topics. Thanks again for tackling such a difficult topic and feel free to comment below or post to my talk page if you have any additional questions or comments. Z1720 (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
17:00:27, 22 October 2020 review of submission by Maciek X[edit]
Hello, my draft was checked and I canceled the categories before publishing how I understand from the comments, is it all, and should I wait now for publishing? Thanks in advance for your feedback!
Maciek X (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Maciek X: Pages in draft namespace dont belong into categories for content space pages. Therefore, a bot has correctly converted the categorisations of the pages into links. It is unnessesary to remove them all together. I will readd them now. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Dear Reviewer,
I made significant changes and resubmitted my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Guo_Shiyou. I was told that it would take 3 months for the second review. Is there a way to get feedback a little sooner? The first review pointed out that I needed reliable sources. I added several sources such as Baidu which is China's Wikipedia. I also added links to people who reviewed the works of the historian I wrote about. All the reviewers I mentioned are Chinese academics who have a solid reputation. All the works are published in reputable journals by reputable publishers. Mr. Guo's works have not yet been translated into English but he has readers in American universities and institutions on China studies. I modeled my draft on a wikipedia article on Mr. Guo's fellow historian in China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zi_Zhongyun. Any advice to improve my draft is appreciated.
Stoptosmellroses (talk) 18:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
My draft has been declined several times and since my last changes I did not get any answer. This has been nearly 6 months now. I fear the draft to be moved. Lagardet (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Lagardet: I'm not sure what answer you were looking to get. It looks like here you asked a rhetorical question in the body of your edit summary, which would not allow anybody to respond to you. We usually discuss things on talk pages. I see you've recently resubmitted the draft, so perhaps you'll receive feedback in due time. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
20:35:23, 22 October 2020 review of draft by JimZBrewer[edit]
- JimZBrewer (talk · contribs)
The article Draft: David A. Deitch was declined on Aug. 1 by Editor Eternal Shadow. I understand that there are many articles to review, but it has now been nearly three months since I resubmitted and it has not been re-reviewed. Is there some way I can expedite the process?
JimZBrewer (talk) 20:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
21:54:31, 22 October 2020 review of draft by R2T2M[edit]
Thank you for providing an avenue for the AfC help desk. I have recently submitted Draft:Air_Squared for review and have received a "reads more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia" rejection. While I understand this is not the place to argue what should or should not be removed before resubmission, I am concerned that there were no details provided in the rejection. Specifically, apart from an external link to Air Squared's website in the Infobox and a link to Air Squared's Youtube channel, 26 of the 27 references meet Wikipedia's range of independent, reliable, published sources. If the concern in notability, other MOXIE partners including Ceramatec, Inc are represented on Wikipedia and I would argue that the commercial space industry should be represented on Wikipedia.
May I ask if the best course of action would be to edit the draft to make it read more like an encyclopedia article regardless of feedback or should I reach out to the user who provided the rejection for further details? Thank you for your time and support, my apologies for being unfamiliar in submitting my first Wikipedia article. R2T2M (talk) 21:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)R2T2M
R2T2M (talk) 21:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- If someone says your draft reads like an ad, it has very little, if anything, to do with the sources and everything with how the article itself is written. Sourcing is where you get your facts, neutrality is how you are supposed to present them. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 22:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)