Help desk
< July 30	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	August 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.

July 31

07:27:51, 31 July 2022 review of draft by Maansouz

Maansouz (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Bari FC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Maansouz (talk) 07:27, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maansouz You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 07:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:34:29, 31 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Talkies10

Talkies10 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Payal Radhakrishna (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Not only passing reference she has individual significant coverage [1][2][3][4][5][6] and many more references actor is eligible under WP:ACTOR please have a look

Talkies10 (talk) 09:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Talkies10: this was deleted following an AfD less than a year ago, and since then her career doesn't seem to have progressed further, so you will have an uphill struggle to show sufficient notability now. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Please don't just resubmit a draft without any improvement, that is disrespectful towards the previous reviewer, and not helpful. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing Thanks for your response she is doing many projects Tharagathi Gadhi Daati and many recent articles are also there to show sufficient notability [7] you can check the references. in filmography i have to mention 2 3 projects.. Talkies10 (talk) 09:59, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:55:37, 31 July 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Talkies10

Talkies10 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Prarthana (2018 film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User AngusWOOF has arranged the references request you to kindly re review

Talkies10 (talk) 16:55, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:23:05, 31 July 2022 review of draft by Johnadkison

Johnadkison (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Clitorophallus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My draft for "Clitorphallus" has been denied because it is considered a neologism. The body part is referred to as a penis or clitoris for people without sexual development disorders/variations and as a genital tubercle in embryonic development. It is understandable that some have chosen to use the "clitorophallus" term to recognize that it's the same part of the body and to be inclusive of all individuals. Thus, I believe that this neologism deserves publication. The feedback that I have been provided is "...unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability." Please be more specific about what "substantial" entails. This is not likely a term that will be used in non-academic literature anytime soon, but those who desire to educate themselves should have a reference to understand the term when they come across it. I have provided several citations to independent, reliable and published sources. I would like to understand how much I need and how these sources are not "independent" and/or "reliable." Johnadkison (talk) 19:23, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnadkison: Did you read the comment left behind underneath the decline box by the reviewer? "Please provide more context to this term, I am sure there is more scientific evidence available about the use of this term and its conceptual scope." —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I added more information specifically around the development during the embryonic stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnadkison (talk • contribs) 11:06, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]