Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2019 January 23

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< January 22 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 24 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


January 23

edit

02:18:52, 23 January 2019 review of submission by TiffanyShiuan

edit


TiffanyShiuan (talk) 02:18, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TiffanyShiuan: - as the multiple reviewers have noted, it doesn't meet our tough corporate notability rules. It's not clear either of the sources is sufficiently independent as a general source. The latter one definitely isn't in terms of the article, because the bit of it actually about KKday is mostly the CMO talking - either direct quotes or indirect quotes.
I believe it is probably too soon for this company to have acquired the suitable coverage needed for a wikipedia article Nosebagbear (talk) 10:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03:19:12, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Lori Jo Underhill

edit


Lori Jo Underhill (talk) 03:19, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This draft/sandbox was deleted for copyright infringement Nosebagbear (talk) 10:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:09:14, 23 January 2019 review of draft by Pittsburghmichaels

edit


I want to publish a wikipedia page on Kimber Kable. My first raft was denied by a wikipedia user so I would like help to make the article something that can be published and that is up to Wikipedia standards.

Pittsburghmichaels (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pittsburghmichaels. Wikipedia is not much interested in what Kimber Kable says about themselves. That's what their website is for. So throw away your first draft. The bulk of any draft should come from sources independent of the company. Think books, academic journals, magazines, and newspapers from reputable publishers, Stereophile and The Wall Street Journal, for example. WP:NCORP has more information about which sources help demonstrate notability and which don't. You'll also want a thorough understanding of WP:COI guidelines and the WP:PAID policy. WP:BFAQ#COMPANY may be helpful. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:09, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So I contacted Kimber Kable and asked them for information about their comapny that is not from their website. They sent me a PDF file. Is there a way to upload and cite a PDF file on wikipedia ?

@Pittsburghmichaels: Internal company documents may not be used, sources must be published. Moreover, materials produced by Kimber Kable cannot show that Kimber Kable is notable (is a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article). Do not use information from them except for the most uncontroversial details, like what their address is. The meat of any article must come from independent sources, ones that are arms-length from the company. Most importantly, if you are editing at the company's direction and for any kind of compensation (which includes intangibles such as experience earned through an unpaid internship) then you are in violation of Wikipedia's Terms of Use. I left key information about that on your talk page. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:30:07, 23 January 2019 review of draft by Akiraa20

edit


Hello, I have noticed that the Ryan Hart Wiki page has been rejected with the comment from DGG stating "He does not seem to have come first in any notable tournament". This is completely incorrect and shows a lack of investigation on the reviewers part, Ryan has won 2 Evo championships (the biggest fighting game event in the world) along with countless other wins in large tournaments such as DreamHack series (largest computer festival in the world) along with many other notable events, he is also holds 4 Guinness world records and has accomplished within the Esports scene then the likes of Justin Wong (which has a wiki page). Please can this be checked again but by someone who is willing to read the information present.Akiraa20 (talk) 17:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC) Akiraa20 (talk) 17:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Akiraa20: - to be covered: rudeness, summarising, OTHERSTUFF and thoughts on EVO
Firstly, while nothing you've said is forbidden, unpleasant phrasing is probably not the best way to acquire another willing volunteer (flies, honey, vinegar etc)
As a note, when you've got 200 sources (or indeed, more than about 20), it's probably worth putting the best 4 on the talk page to save reviewers from the world's largest notability scavenger hunt.
That Justin Wong has an article is irrelevant as to this one - it's always possible that one shouldn't etc: if we base articles off others, it means our article quality has to go downwards. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for a better phrasing of the reasoning
I am inclined to think you are right as regards EVO - I can't speak for DreamHack, and the guinness records won't qualify, but it certainly seems a suitably large tournament to satisfy. I don't have enough experience in this field to review it suitably, but it is worth another examination. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:56, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:32:15, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Sportsfan018

edit


Hi, I got a rejection on my submission that the subject was not notable enough for wikipedia. The subject is a popular comic strip by an award winning author. I don't understand what the criteria for "notable" is. The reason i created the article was because I didn't find an article about it in the first place and wanted to contribute. I see all kinds of articles on wikipedia so not sure what makes one more notable over another. I included both primary and secondary sources. I understand not everything needs to be in wikipedia but this is a recognized comic strip by a known award winning author and its a bit disheartening since its my first contribution to wikipedia, i thought i was adding to the body of knowledge about a comic strip i like. Thanks Sportsfan018 (talk) 17:32, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sportsfan018: - hi there. Notability is one of Wikipedia's most complicated areas - it's one of the reasons why we encourage new editors to get some experience elsewhere. For these comments I'm only commenting on notability - there are other reasons for declining a draft, so solving this may or may not be enough to qualify for article-hood.
Wikipedia has different thoughts on notability (which could be crudely summarised as "sufficient secondary source coverage in reliable/independent sources, as well as satisfying certain other restrictions). These rules vary - so an actor has different requirements to a company etc.
Reading all of the policies, in one go, to inform yourself would be enough to make you weep. The comic strip book is the easiest one to identify - Book notability - for this draft, the possible criteria are either 1 (multiple coverage in other sources, such as reviews) or 2 (won a major literary award). For the general comic strips, since they're on a website, are bound by Web notability - these are conveniently identical: enough coverage in other sources or a major award.
This is interesting as the National Cartoonists Society did give a Reuben award to Buni - this could well be considered as a suitable major award. It might be worth going to David.moreno72's talk page and asking him on it.
With regard to your sources, you need to find better ones: both the website itself and the NCS' site are helpful, but can't be used to prove notability because they are primary sources - Wikipedia needs in-depth, secondary, reliable/independent sources (newspapers, books, and some other sites etc).
In short - the draft may pass notability, however they may be other aspects that need to be fixed. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:12, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:49:50, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Alexander Geut

edit


My current draft was declined because the subject seems to be insufficiently notable. Nevertheless, the statement is debatable. iTechArt is a really big company with a pool of almost 1500 engineers. It is well-known among famous enterprises, startups as well as accelerators and incubators. iTechArt has developed products for such famous companies as Convene, ClassPass, Fuze, Zefr, BuildingLink, etc.

I've gone through multiple reviews, as a result, the initial company's description has been reduced to a minimum. It may be the reason why the draft have been declined.

Also, there was a problem with the article's resources as they have been named irrelevant.

Could you please check the earlier versions of the article and help me decide what to include?


Alexander Geut (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexander Geut. I checked the sources cited in every version of Draft:ITechArt , and the coverage of it on Tut.by and Onliner.by. My conclusion is that the company does not meet the English-language Wikipedia's notability guidelines (which are much tougher than they were a year ago), so it is not a suitable subject for an article here. Each language version of Wikipedia operates according to its own policies and guidelines and procedures, set by the community of editors who contribute there. So if you are fluent in Belarusian you could try writing an article for https://be.wiki.x.io. They may have looser inclusion criteria, especially for Belarusian topics. --Worldbruce (talk) 17:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:56:45, 23 January 2019 review of draft by StaringAtTheStars

edit


Hello, I am requesting for a more experienced editor to check all currently used sources (none of the hidden ones, I haven't checked those out for myself) in this draft for verifiability. It would also be much appreciated if someone were to quickly proof the lead section only (the rest of the page is mostly machine-translated which I am currently in the middle of rewriting). Thanks, StaringAtTheStars (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi StaringAtTheStars. I'm not sure you're going to get any nibbles here, where there is a six week backlog of submitted drafts to review, and thus not much time for proofreading, copy editing, rendering second opinions, etc. on unsubmitted drafts. You might be better off asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games or perhaps Wikipedia:WikiProject Magazines. Reviewing just a few of the sources, I find that The Wall Street Transcript verifies the statement where cited. L'Express is a dead link for me. Le Monde is a reliable source, but if it's used to support a direct quote, the language of that quote can't be changed. See WP:NONENG for how to handle it. MCE TV is also a reliable source, but I don't see the date "August 14, 2012" in it, and I'm not sure about the word "dossier". It mentions the July 3, 2012 special issue, the resulting controversy, and talks about the magazine's subsequent clarification/sort-of-apology for using the word "excitant" where it could be understood to mean something that they didn't intend. So there's a bit of a source-text disconnect on that one. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:01:59, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Kaiyu9028

edit

my draft got rejected when it was under review, just want to know why Kaiyu9028 (talk) 19:01, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kaiyu9028. Draft:BFG 50 was rejected and deleted for being a copyright violation of https://modernfirearms.net/en/sniper-rifles/large-caliber-rifles/u-s-a-large-caliber-rifles/serbu-bfg-50-eng/. I've left more information about copyright on your talk page. --Worldbruce (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:22:47, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Johnw28

edit 
I am seeking for an article to be accepted. Name: Blu Leisure as an studio album

Johnw28 (talk) 22:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johnw28. I assume you are talking about User:Johnw28/sandbox. The reliability of singersroom.com has been examined before at the reliable sources noticeboard. In the most recent instance it was described as, "more like a promotional vehicle than a news source". The blurb the draft cites there reads like a press release. The Hype Magazine is not a great source either; it appears to be based solely on the artist's social media posts.
Replace these two sources with three better ones that show the album meets one or more of the notability criteria for albums. The list Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources has suggestions on where to look. Then add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft as described in Template:AFC submission/doc. If you can't show that the album is notable, then Wikipedia shouldn't have a stand alone article about it. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:08:56, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Roberts.meme.circus

edit


Roberts.meme.circus (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hey, so I can see that i was rejected for not having notability. I just want to know exactly what that means on Wikipedia so I can change up my draft, because SuperFly GamingPants is a real channel, created by me, and I need all the advice possible so it can be added to Wikipedia.

Thanks


@Roberts.meme.circus: Hi there. You can see the main Notability page (there are other ones for different subjects - including companies and web content.
The nutshell summary of the page reads:
"Wikipedia articles cover notable topics—those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia. We consider evidence from reliable and independent sources to gauge this attention. The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic should have its own article."
Since you don't include any sources - let alone the need for sources that are: reliable, independent, in-depth & secondary (and several of them) - unsurprisingly the draft was rejected. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:14:52, 23 January 2019 review of submission by Roberts.meme.circus

edit


Roberts.meme.circus (talk) 23:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Also, I was trying to upload pictures to my wiki, but it hasn't worked and the guide doesn't load properly, so i would like some help regarding that too.

Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2019_January_23&oldid=880724301"