Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2024 June 30

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< June 29 << May | June | Jul >> July 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.


June 30

edit

01:27, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Deven Reddy10

edit

I created a wiki page for an Indian National highway called "National Highway 930P". But I named the page as Dev Reddy instead of "National Highway 930P". I think publishing of the page got rejected due to that error. Now I want to republish the same page by changing the title name as ""National Highway 930P" instead of "Dev Reddy" could someone help me on this ? Thank you Deven Reddy10 (talk) 01:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deven Reddy10. The current title of a draft has no impact on its review. AFC reviewers know how to give an accepted article its proper title. Draft:Dev Reddy has not been rejected. It has been declined instead, which is a very different thing. So, forget about the current name of the draft and instead focus on improving the draft as recommended by the reviewers. Pay close attention to their comments. Cullen328 (talk) 03:49, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

01:35, 30 June 2024 review of submission by WikiPhil012

edit

I cannot resubmit my draft. 

WikiPhil012 (talk) 01:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, WikiPhil012. Your draft has been resubmitted but is unlikely to be accepted. It is very poorly referenced and needs major improvement. Cullen328 (talk) 03:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. WikiPhil012 (talk) 02:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

04:09, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Quote Veteran

edit

It says to be qualified there needs to be multiple published sources that are in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent, though my submission was denied. But the reviewer said The Hill and NYT, which is multiple, so I'm confused. Quote Veteran (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Quote Veteran: we normally require three such sources; hence why the reviewer said this is "close to showing notability". -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DoubleGrazing: I have added another profile from Delaware Today. There was also a well-done profile from the Post. It says you are a new page reviewer, would you mind reviewing it? Thanks in advance. Quote Veteran (talk) 19:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quote Veteran: looks like another reviewer got there first, while I was catching some ZZZs. :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:22, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, thanks for the help. Will make sure to add all the sources I can next time. Quote Veteran (talk) 03:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

06:04, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Jasonkumarlopchan

edit

Hello, I have posted all the reference articles that covered the news about our film. But my submission is being denied. Please help ? Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 06:04, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasonkumarlopchan: there isn't much we can do to help. If you don't have evidence that the film is notable, then this draft cannot be accepted.
You have been asked twice already to disclose your conflict of interest. Please do so as your very next edit. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
what kind of evidence are we talking about ? Could you help me please ? I have already listed out media articles related to the movie as well as the IMDB page of the movie. Help please ? Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 06:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: the kind of evidence which is described in the decline notice, that has now been posted three times on top of the draft. Have you read any of it? We're looking for something to show that the film satisfies either the WP:NFILM or WP:GNG guidelines. Your draft cites precisely three sources: IMDB, which is completely useless, and two pre-release publicity pieces; none of these contribute anything towards notability.
And one more time: please disclose your conflict of interest now, I'd rather not have to ask again. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oh Okay. I'm a media journalist here in Nepal and I came upon a screening of this movie and I quite loved it. The movie was really grounded as one can tell they're a massive independent makers. The movie is also the first ever Nepali movie to be shot entirely on Iphone. So, its kind of an achievement for our Nepali Cinema landscape. My only interest is to provide information about this movie to the people out there and help it reach world wide audiences as well. Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 06:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: are you trying to say you have no connection to this film? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do. But I'm doing this on my own. Not under their influence or for some financial gain. I'm just doing it for the love of movies and to expand the landscape of our Nepali cinema. Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 06:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: "I do" what – you do have a connection to this film? Like, might you be the Jason Lopchan that the draft says wrote, directed and edited this film? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is the first time I've tried wikipedia. I opened this account and tried to write out about the movie just to help out the team and the movie. I told you I'm a local media journalist in Nepal. You might think I'm doing it financial gain but no it's simply just as I told you above. These guys are new in the film making line of Nepal. I just want to help them grow. I provided you with information regarding media articles, I know you said they are pre release publicity pieces but the movie hasn't releases so what am I supposed to provide you ? Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 07:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: I still don't know what your relationship with this subject is. Maybe someone else can better interpret your evasive comments and get to the bottom of this.
If you don't have evidence that the film is notable, then it's probably not notable. That's pretty much the long and the short of it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are film-makers and I'm a media personnel. That's the relationship. And I have been asking you the same question, what evidence should I provide you ? Can you be specific ? cause it looks like to me that you want it to be not notable. Everyone here in Nepal knows about the movie and I'm only trying to get in on wiki hoping people outside notice as well. What exact evidence should I provide about a movie that hasn't been released yet ? Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 07:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: "Hasn't been released yet" is the start and end of your problems. Unless there's something wildly unusual about the production (i.e. deaths or legal issues) it's highly unlikely a film that hasn't been released yet gets an article simply because the sources that would be available are all the usual personnel and marketeering crap that every movie and their set dog gets. You're better off waiting until the film releases and gets professional reviews; we can cite those to build an article. Wikipedia is a lagging indicator by design, and our readers both understand this and get torqued off when an article seems to be trying to advertize to them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see. Thank you for your explanation. This is the explanation I was hoping to get from @DoubleGrazing. I have already gone through the guidelines but I was having trouble which is why I came to help desk. I was hoping to get it clear instead of referring me to the notability guidelines link. Anyways, hope you do better job at helping others than you did to me. Be clear and help others instead of trying to sound cocky. Thank you @Jéské Couriano again for your reply and helping out. Jasonkumarlopchan (talk) 07:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jasonkumarlopchan It's hard to judge tone from text on a screen. Trying to sound clear and consise is easy to confuse with cockiness. Please assume people are trying to help you. 331dot (talk) 14:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that your experience is very common for new editors of Wikipedia who attempt the challenging task of creating a new article before they have spent time learning the necessary skills. Writing for an encyclopaedia is very different from journalism.
I always advise new editors to not even think about creating a new article until they have spent a few weeks or months improving existing articles, and learning about how Wikipedia works. Once they have an understanding of fundamental concepts such as verifiability, reliable sources, independent sources, neutral point of view, and notability, then is the time to read your first article carefully, and try creating an article. If they try before that, they are likely to have the same frustrating experience as you are having. ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: I have already explained that you need to show evidence that the film meets either of the relevant notability guidelines, WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. Consistently throughout this process these have been pointed out to you, and yet you're still here asking what sort of evidence is needed. You will need to read and understand these guidelines yourself, I cannot understand them for you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jasonkumarlopchan: See WP:Upcoming films for advice.Surprised that shortcut didn't exist till now! Once it gets released next month and professional reviews come in, we shall reconsider. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 18:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

15:55, 30 June 2024 review of submission by 2600:1700:2540:B700:B9AD:9FE8:29D7:50EA

edit

Hi there, my draft was denied in March. I have corrected the external links but it hasn't been reviewed. Help please 2600:1700:2540:B700:B9AD:9FE8:29D7:50EA (talk) 15:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You still have significant portions of uncited text. This is not acceptable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Declined with rationale. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A big part of the exhibitions of this artist do not have an online source that can be cited because they took place when there very little or none online presence. I removed the ones that I couldn't cite however there are many more that I could cite with reliable sources. Please reconsider. 2600:1700:2540:B700:F594:3704:3F9B:D72E (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We accept offline sources, if cited with enough information to look them up in a library or offline archive.
  • For magazines or newspapers we use {{cite magazine}}/{{cite news}} and require the outlet name, the edition (i.e. 1 Jan 1924), the article title, the article byline, and the page(s) the article is on;
  • For books we use {{cite book}} and require the title, author, year of publication, publisher, page(s) being cited, and either the ISBN or OCLC#.
—Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to look at this huge list of exhibitions. Does it add value to the artist's notability or is it just a large list. Generally we select the most significant, where the reference is about the artist. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And we have a strong preference for independent sources. If the only published material you can find about a particular exhibition comes from the artist, or the gallery, so no independent commentator has noted it, then Wikipedia is probably not interested in that exhibition either. ColinFine (talk) 21:14, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added in a newspaper article for draft for the tv show Crying Down the Lane Matthew John Drummond (talk) 16:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17:44, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Tscharschmidt

edit

I would be grateful for help addressing the question of adequate references. It would be helpful to have specific examples of the deficiencies. For the revised March 2024 version, I added references documenting Granoff’s contributions from primary, secondary and tertiary sources, including textbooks, peer-reviewed scientific articles and review articles in scientific journals; also PDF downloaded from websites of International organizations such as the American Society of Microbiology and Medical Schools. Thanks very much Tscharschmidt (talk) 17:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tscharschmidt I view the subject's notability as proven. I am about to accept this draft. Improvements may be made later. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tscharschmidt   Accepted. Please try to allow the community to edit this to its hearts content. We father articles, we do not mother them. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

18:00, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Elise9876

edit

Hi Help Desk! Hope you are well. I am working on a Wikipedia entry on the late activist, organizer, and editor Joan Gibbs. Gibbs received obituaries in New York's Amsterdam News and Gay City News and the national publications Gay USA and thebody.com, an HIV/AIDS publication. Her work has been documented by several academics. I would be grateful for any advice about what additional kind of articles or coverage would prove notability. Thanks! Best, Elise Harris Elise9876 (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elise9876 put simply:
For a living or recently deceased person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
Your objective may surprise you. It is simply to show that Gibbs passes WP:BIO for acceptance. Embellishments may come later 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I will work on locating more secondary sources that are recognized by Wikipedia. Elise9876 (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

19:32, 30 June 2024 review of submission by Quote Veteran

edit

I'm here again sorry because I don't get why this was declined. DoubleGrazing said three good sources are usually necessary for approval, and yet this article with multiple sources on a well-known historical foundation was rejected. Quote Veteran (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Quote Veteran I would like to hear from @SafariScribe who declined it, since I view it as a potentially valid stub article. I don't want to jump I and accept it because I value their opinion. As reviewers we are entitled to have different opinions; we are human, after all. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Well another person noted that an independent source was needed for a claim, so I've added two sources for that. NYT is surely go-to. Quote Veteran (talk) 19:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quote Veteran I suggest you resubmit it since you have added material 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've done so, shall I resubmit my article on the BB Foundation? Quote Veteran (talk) 20:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quote Veteran   Accepted. I have no comment to make on the BB Foundation, save that you should use mature judgement. I have not examined it. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Timtrent. I was about doing that but found out it has been moved. @Quote Veteran, thanks for your contributions too. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 21:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SafariScribe I didn't wish to pre-empt you, but the additions were compelling. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. That's not a problem. Once more, I appreciate the help. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

23:28, 30 June 2024 review of submission by 2605:59C8:302E:4910:81CE:1536:5AC6:28C7

edit

How can I find better sources for this? 2605:59C8:302E:4910:81CE:1536:5AC6:28C7 (talk) 23:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By research. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2024_June_30&oldid=1232857024"