74.118.237.170 (talk) Requesting assistance regarding Draft:Connex_One |
Requesting assistance regarding Wanna know the reason of declination |
||
Line 473: | Line 473: | ||
Would it be possible to get some advice or assistance in removing the rejection on this page please? [[Special:Contributions/74.118.237.170|74.118.237.170]] ([[User talk:74.118.237.170|talk]]) 09:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC) |
Would it be possible to get some advice or assistance in removing the rejection on this page please? [[Special:Contributions/74.118.237.170|74.118.237.170]] ([[User talk:74.118.237.170|talk]]) 09:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
== 09:53, 16 October 2023 review of submission by 익명의 4인 == |
|||
{{Lafc|username=익명의 4인|ts=09:53, 16 October 2023|draft=Wanna know the reason of declination}} |
|||
Below is the reason for declination of my draft. |
|||
Could you kindly let me know what could be great actions to pass my draft in details? |
|||
----- Reason of declination ----- |
|||
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: |
|||
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements) |
|||
reliable |
|||
secondary |
|||
strictly independent of the subject |
|||
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. [[User:익명의 4인|익명의 4인]] ([[User talk:익명의 4인|talk]]) 09:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:53, 16 October 2023
Main page | Talk page | Submissions Category — List (sorting) | Showcase | Participants Apply — By subject | Reviewing instructions | Help desk | Backlog drives |
- This page is only for questions about article submissions—are you in the right place?
- For questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse.
- For unrelated questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
- Create a draft via Article wizard or request an article at requested articles.
- Do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page.
- Watch out for scammers! If someone contacts you saying that they can get your draft published for payment, they are trying to scam you. Report such attempts here.
Ask a new question Please check back often for answers. |
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions |
---|
October 10
01:37, 10 October 2023 review of submission by KingTheD
How can I improve this draft? Any feedback is appreciated. KingTheD (talk) 01:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @KingTheD: you need to show that this person is notable according to at least one of the guidelines. Not only that, you also must show that he is noteworthy; show us some reason why he should be included in a global encyclopaedia, because at the moment the draft describes a Mr Everyman, IMO. Wikipedia is not a biographical database where the mere existence is enough to warrant inclusion. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:55, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
01:53, 10 October 2023 review of submission by HollyNaylor
- HollyNaylor (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Huang Dejian ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Please could anyone help me with this? I received the feedback: "Please remove the external links from the body" and the submission was declined because of this. Which part of the body section should I remove the links from? Is it the very first section at the top of the page? Thank you HollyNaylor (talk) 01:53, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @HollyNaylor the reviewer happens to be talking about any link in the article that redirects to a different site other than Wikipedia. Kline • talk to me! • contribs 03:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
06:32, 10 October 2023 review of submission by TheTinySpeck
- TheTinySpeck (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Naveen Mu ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hiii! I am in the process of creating a Wikipedia page for a friend who is a film director, and there's an upcoming project in the works. I've included all the essential links to establish his notability, including his IMDb page for one of his films. Your assistance in publishing the page would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much for your help! TheTinySpeck (talk) 06:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @TheTinySpeck: the first thing you need to do is declare your conflict of interest (COI), given that you're writing about an acquaintance of yours.
- After that, please review relevant notability guidelines, at least WP:GNG and WP:NDIRECTOR. You need to show that the subject meets one or both of these. Notability is established by sources, and you currently only cite one source, IMDb, which is not considered reliable, and therefore adds nothing to either notability or even basic verifiability.
- You also need to remove all the inline external links from the draft, as these are not allowed. You can convert them to citations where relevant.
- After all that, you're welcome to resubmit the draft, and it will be reviewed again in due course. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
09:08, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Aman2936
The reason behind why a page is declined? Aman Prabhakar (talk) 09:08, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Aman2936 I fixed your link(it was missing the "Draft:") The reason for the decline was left by the reviewer. Do you have a question about it specifically?
- If you are associated with this company, you must read conflict of interest. If you are compensated by this company for any purpose, the Terms of Use require you to make a paid edtiing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
12:59, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Pakistan7246
- Pakistan7246 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Sab Ka Ramzan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I Need help to add References Pakistan7246 (talk) 12:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Pakistan7246: I'd say you rather need help with adding the appropriate number of useful references – please see WP:REFBOMB. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes You Are Absolutley right I need help with adding the appropriate number of useful references but can u help me Pakistan7246 (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Pakistan7246: find 3-5 sources that meet the WP:GNG standard (= reliable and independent secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject), and summarise what they have said; then cite each source against the information it has provided. This way you should end up with no more than a couple of citations against any one statement, while ensuring that every material statement is cited. There really is no reason why a statement like
"Its first kalam featured Faysal Qureshi along with Waseem Badami & Farhan Ali Waris in a special appearance"
would need 17 citations against it. Take out all the flaky sources, leave only the strongest ones that are also solid enough to establish notability. Job's a good 'un. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)- alright thank you @DoubleGrazing for your tips i will do what you said but like how much refernences do i need Pakistan7246 (talk) 13:27, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Pakistan7246: I don't know how many you need, depends on the content. You need 3+ sources to establish notability per WP:GNG. You need a citation or at most two to support each material statement and anything potentially contentious. Beyond that, it's one of those 'how long is a piece of string' questions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @DoubleGrazing I Delted all the references on The Draft Draft:Farhan Ali Waris and added New True references can u please check it and see if u can publish it to the article mainspace? Pakistan7246 (talk) 16:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Pakistan7246: I don't know how many you need, depends on the content. You need 3+ sources to establish notability per WP:GNG. You need a citation or at most two to support each material statement and anything potentially contentious. Beyond that, it's one of those 'how long is a piece of string' questions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- alright thank you @DoubleGrazing for your tips i will do what you said but like how much refernences do i need Pakistan7246 (talk) 13:27, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Pakistan7246: find 3-5 sources that meet the WP:GNG standard (= reliable and independent secondary sources with significant coverage of the subject), and summarise what they have said; then cite each source against the information it has provided. This way you should end up with no more than a couple of citations against any one statement, while ensuring that every material statement is cited. There really is no reason why a statement like
- Yes You Are Absolutley right I need help with adding the appropriate number of useful references but can u help me Pakistan7246 (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
13:05, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Vsharmavs
- Vsharmavs (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Vinod Sharma Digital Marketer ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Can you guide me what did I do mistake on my page ? Vsharmavs (talk) 13:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Vsharmavs: Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a social media platform; if you wish to tell the world about yourself, try the likes of LinkedIn or Facebook. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Vsharmavs You need to add more references so it can be a good draft Pakistan7246 (talk) 13:29, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- No, @Pakistan7246, don't give poor advice. You don't need more references you need quality references. A few reliable, independent, secondary references are far better than 20 poor quality ones. Qcne (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
13:28, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Mragoplay123
- Mragoplay123 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Monro ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hey, could I get more feedback about what specifically needs to be improved in this Monro article?
Thanks Mragoplay123 (talk) 13:28, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- On thing is that the last few references are just URLs. You should add a title, the date, the publisher, and the author of the article if you can find it. KingTheD (talk) 23:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
14:43, 10 October 2023 review of submission by 5txzk
I don't understand the reason given for rejection. "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified." Please look at the submitted draft for Charles Robert O'Dell and advise me how to correct the draft. 5txzk (talk) 14:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @5txzk It's fine. The issues are minor and can be fixed in normal editing. Please resubmit and I'll accept it. Sorry about this. -- asilvering (talk) 20:22, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
14:52, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Siddsantham
- Siddsantham (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Sermon (band) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi, please help me understand why my article submission has been declined. Sermon is a critically acclaimed new band which tours across Europe and North America, and they have released two albums already, both of which have received press coverage (and rave reviews) from music review outlets. I believe they do deserve a page of their own due to their contributions to heavy music. (I do apologize if I have broken Wikipedia rules with my submission, I am truly new to this process.) Siddsantham (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Siddsantham: this draft was declined (and BTW, I've restored the earlier decline template, as this must stay with the draft until it is accepted) for failing to show notability: the sources are insufficient to meet the WP:GNG standard, and there is no evidence that the band is notable per WP:BAND, either. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
14:55, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Cinefilm
Can someone help me? I've been working on this page for months, but I always get rejected. It's not right! I love wikipedia, and I trust that I support it very much, quietly, but I support it. I would like to create other pages, but if they don't accept me on this one, I think I'll throw in the towel. It's not fair because there are pages accepted without funds, why? Cinefilm (talk) 14:55, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Cinefilm: what does
"there are pages accepted without funds"
mean? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC) - @Cinefilm: this draft has been declined five times for lack of evidence for notability; that probably tells us that the subject simply is not notable enough to warrant inclusion. In addition, the referencing is inadquate, as it lacks inline citations.
- Other than that, I'm not sure what more I can tell you, or quite what your question is? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:42, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
15:24, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Stuoop1dstoodant124342
- Stuoop1dstoodant124342 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Francis Granger Middle School ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I don't know how to make an article. I went here for my middle school years and feel as if there should be an article about it Stuoop1dstoodant124342 (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Stuoop1dstoodant124342: schools need to demonstrate notability, which means citing multiple independent and reliable secondary sources that have covered them in significant extent. In practice, most schools would fail this test. (Note that many school articles do exist, but they mostly predate this notability requirement.) If the school isn't independently notable, then usually the title would be redirected to an article on the school district or similar higher-level unit. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:36, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
16:40, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Tosonotti
- Tosonotti (talk · contribs) ()
- WellTax - Help for article ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi. How can I modify this article in order to get it approved?
WellTax is a leading international accountancy firm with offices in London, United Kingdom, and Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The company specializes in providing a wide range of accounting, advisory and tax services to clients across various industries.
Established in 2015, the company specializes in providing a wide range of tax-related services to individuals and businesses worldwide. Nowadays, the company has a capillary network of customers, suppliers and partners and counts more than 10 employees spread between the two offices of London a Dubai.
History
WellTax was founded in London in 2015. The firm initially started as a local accounting practice in the United Kingdom and in 2023 expanded its operations to the United Arab Emirates.
For the first three years of its existence, the company was called Wallace & Partners and only in 2018 the name was changed to the current one of WellTax.
In October 2023, WellTax revealed a new logo, which represents an evolution towards a more modern and dynamic approach to tax advice. The new logo embodies the company’s dedication to agile tax advice and listening to clients' needs.
Services and Industries
WellTax offers a comprehensive suite of financial and accounting services, including:
- Accountancy: WellTax provides comprehensive financial management, bookkeeping, and reporting services.
- Business & Corporate Tax: The company offers strategic tax planning and compliance services to optimise its clients’ tax position and unlock valuable opportunities.
- Governance: From legal entity formation to company secretarial duties, WellTax works to ensure that every organisation is compliant and well-managed.
- International: Cross-border business solutions and strategic guidance in multiple jurisdictions.
- Payments & Payroll: Simplify payroll processing and streamline payment systems with efficient solutions tailored to its clients’ needs.
- Private clients: WellTax’s personalised services cater to the unique financial needs of individuals, helping them to achieve their personal goals.
The industries in which the company specialises are: Arts & Media; Charities & Not for Profit; Education; Energy & Resources; Engineering & Manufacturing; Financial Services; Hospitality & Leisure; Property & Construction; Retail & Wholesale; Technology.
Clients
WellTax serves a diverse clientele that includes multinational corporations, SMEs, non-profit organizations, and individuals.
Partnerships
WellTax can count on numerous partnerships around the world, including but not limited to The Italian Chamber of Commerce and Industry for the UK, Spanish Chamber of Commerce in the United Kingdom, Italian Industry & Commerce Office in the UAE, UK Confederation by Confassociazioni and Spectrum Accounting. Tosonotti (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- I doubt that you can, it is just blatant advertising totally unsuitable for an encyclopaedia and has been tagged for speedy deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
19:38, 10 October 2023 review of submission by RaghThink02
- RaghThink02 (talk · contribs) ()
- User:RaghThink02/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I have used all the references that I had but i do not know why it is still not getting approved. RaghThink02 (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- If that is all the references that you have, this company does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. Two of your references are to the company website, and the other is an annoucement of a location opening. You must instead summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about this company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
20:11, 10 October 2023 review of submission by KMRN55
Could you please help me with this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Simply_Fixable. Can you explain what is missing in the article for confirmation KMRN55 (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Please read the comments left by reviewers, as well as the content at the links they left. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
20:14, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Rusty5231B
- Rusty5231B (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Goods and services not related to manufacturing ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Followed link to non-existent article from indirect procurement was prompted to create article. Created basic article. Was reverted to draft for not having the right citations. Added citations and was quickly rejected again. Now, asking for help with this article or to have link removed. Rusty5231B (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Rusty5231B. I think the topic might work as an article, but you've gone about it the wrong way. You've created an overview of this topic and then provided loads of sources and examples that seem fairly irrelevant to the actual topic. Instead, find a few sources that define, discuss, and analyse the topic and then paraphrase them in your own words. That should make up the content of your draft. I imagine it'll only need to be a few paragraphs long. Hope that helps. Qcne (talk) 16:15, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- The recommended changes have been made. How can I get this draft considered for an article again? Rusty5231B (talk) 01:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Rusty5231B, that's certainly better. However still not quite there. We don't have Conclusion sections on Wikipedia articles like this- just merge the text into the main body. You're also missing a References heading. Remove all the bolding in the body of the text too.
- My biggest issue is that the two sources you provide define tertiary sectors, not "Goods and services not related to manufacturing" - the two sources don't even seem to mention it. You need a source that actually defines what its meant by "Goods and services not related to manufacturing" and provides a bit of discussion. Qcne (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- The recommended changes have been made. How can I get this draft considered for an article again? Rusty5231B (talk) 01:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
20:23, 10 October 2023 review of submission by Syed7246
should I add more references to this article Syed7246 (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- All of your sources are associated with this show. This article must summarize what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about it. For shows, that usually means reviews by professional reviewers. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
October 11
07:58, 11 October 2023 review of submission by 85.14.12.200
- 85.14.12.200 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Daniel Ranchev ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I need help to publish the article 85.14.12.200 (talk) 07:58, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There is nothing more than can be done. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
08:23, 11 October 2023 review of submission by 197.156.107.175
- 197.156.107.175 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Andres Gach Gatluak Wechkuoth ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
May you help me Editing that Article ?
I have been struggling to get it done 197.156.107.175 (talk) 08:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There is no more that can be done; no amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. 331dot (talk) 08:33, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
08:44, 11 October 2023 review of submission by Therealmuller
- Therealmuller (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:UK Stamp Duty Land Tax ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am confused on why this article is not approved. It is neutral, and it is valuable information like an encyclopedia. The last comment I got was unhelpful and curt stating merely that there is no chance this would be published. I am trying to contribute here. Therealmuller (talk) 08:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. Your draft was written as an essay of original research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Wikipedia article summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
10:17, 11 October 2023 review of submission by Mlr91
I am not quite sure, how I can improve the references? This Wiki page is for an independent organization which rely on funding. Please advise. Mlr91 (talk) 10:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Mlr91: the references are all to the organisation's own website. We're not interested in what the organisation says about themselves. We need to see what others (as in, independent and reliable secondary sources) have said. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
13:53, 11 October 2023 review of submission by GonetotheDawgs
- GonetotheDawgs (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Minrose Gwin ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This is my first submission, and I'm trying to figure out how to put additional information in a box underneath the photo on the right. It would contain a brief list about the subject including occupation, genres, awards. Thanks for your help! GonetotheDawgs (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @GonetotheDawgs. I think you want an infobox! I'd recommend using the WP:VISUALEDITOR which will allow you to generate an infobox easily. Click the + symbol, then Template and then try using Infobox person. You can then select various fields.
- More info at Help:VisualEditor#Editing_templates. Qcne (talk) 16:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Note that having or not having an infobox will have no effect on whether or not the draft is accepted. Far more useful will be to improve the referencing: see WP:REFB for how to format them better, and note that very little should be referenced from her own website, as Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
16:46, 11 October 2023 review of submission by 148.77.46.178
- 148.77.46.178 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Kevin Anton ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi. This page for Kevin Anton was declined. The trailer for his latest movie came out today and he is listed in the cast in many of the articles from MSN to Yahoo. He is also listed as a member of the cast on the Iron Claw Movie Wiki page and one of the only few on the list without a live link to his own WIki page. Can you recommend any edits that will get this page approved? Any help greatly appreciated!! Thank you! 148.77.46.178 (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- Being listed in the credits isn't what establishes notability. You would need to show that the subject satisfies either the WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR notability guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- We don't have pages here, we have articles. His roles seem to be very minor and it will be difficult for you to show that he meets WP:NACTOR. 331dot (talk) 16:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
17:06, 11 October 2023 review of submission by SkillsNoLogic
- SkillsNoLogic (talk · contribs) ()
- User:SkillsNoLogic/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
why i feel like my oppionposn and feeil SkillsNoLogic (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SkillsNoLogic: I'm sorry to say, your so-called question makes no more sense than your so-called article draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
October 12
00:00, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Halima Shehu
- Halima Shehu (talk · contribs) ()
- User:Halima Shehu/sandbox/Hajiya Halima Shehu ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
How can i get this page approved on time and published as it is urgent. Halima Shehu (talk) 00:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Why is it so urgent. KingTheD (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- First of all a Wikipedia article is not a source, so you have to remove it as a reference. You also need to add links to other Wikipedia articles, and it appears your writing about yourself, which you have to disclose. KingTheD (talk) 02:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
06:16, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Xxitswx
May I know exact place or line that need to be amend? Xxitswx (talk) 06:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Xxitswx: there is no one "exact place or line", the draft fails to demonstrate notability, which is a question of sources. It is also purely promotional in tone and content, and for that reason I am requesting that it is deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
11:59, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Aaa1993
hello can you help me understand how to get this article approved? the references used were all reliable Aaa1993 (talk) 11:59, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Aaa1993: there is currently no evidence that the subject is notable; you need to show that she passes either the WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC notability standard. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- PS: Or, I suppose, WP:ENTERTAINER. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
12:58, 12 October 2023 review of submission by 188.39.160.186
- 188.39.160.186 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Hallway club ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
wasn't accepted 188.39.160.186 (talk) 12:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Correct a club that was started 6 days ago is hardly likely to have gained enough coverage in reliable independent sources to warrant an article. Theroadislong (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
13:18, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Esemih0109
- Esemih0109 (talk · contribs) ()
- Article rejected ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello! I’d like to ask if anyone can explain why exactly my article was rejected. I’ve not completely understood why. You can find it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Doulant
Thank you! Esemih0109 (talk) 13:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Esemih0109: because while we do have articles on various hoaxes and fictional topics, such topics must meet our usual notability criteria, which this doesn't provide any evidence of. Wikipedia is also not a place to write about something you just WP:MADEUP. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a web host, your draft had zero indication that the topic was notable. Theroadislong (talk) 13:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
13:32, 12 October 2023 review of submission by TNM101
- TNM101 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:JSS International School ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I can't seem to find any reliable sources for my article. It keeps getting declined. Can someone help me please? TNM101 (talk) 13:32, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @TNM101: the onus is very much on the draft creator(s) to support their draft with appropriate and sufficient sources, that's not something we here at the help desk would do. If you're unable to find such sources, that probably tells us that the subject is not notable enough to include in Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
13:38, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Readyarticles
- Readyarticles (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Richard Pis ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
i submit review of my draft may i know why you declined that please tell me or is there any content which you found wrong please tell us. Readyarticles (talk) 13:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Readyarticles: the draft is unreferenced; there are long lists of external links (which are not allowed), but no citations (which are required). See WP:REFB for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
13:40, 12 October 2023 review of submission by 188.39.160.186
- 188.39.160.186 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Hallway club ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Give us a wikipedia please, hallway club is very official and should be in wikipedia as we are inclined to move into a different website if you cannot grant us this. Many people will be interested in the club due to it's rising numbers, and you will miss out on lots of money per click. 188.39.160.186 (talk) 13:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- This draft has been rejected and is pending deletion. If you wish to tell the world about your club, you very much should try a different website, as Wikipedia is not the right place for that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- You misused the term "Wikipedia". "Wikipedia" refers to this entire website which is composed of articles. Organizations do not "have a Wikipedia", Wikipedia has articles about them. 331dot (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
18:18, 12 October 2023 review of submission by 121.46.85.79
- 121.46.85.79 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The article draft is getting declined again and again due to sources. Please help me . 121.46.85.79 (talk) 18:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have rejected your article, which means it will not be considered further. Your article was meandering and full of claims that broke our strict neutrality policy. Your sources were insufficient to establish the statements you made were true. Qcne (talk) 18:20, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please explain? Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- As all the information i published were taken from the the books and and the official websites. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- What is even more embarrassing to the respect of this ancient warrior tribe is that 6 north Indian states have included Regars/Raigars in their SC list..., Members of the Regar/Raigar community have excelled in many fields of politics, bureaucracy, business, and more..., Regars/Raigars must re-establish their identity as Kshatriyas to honor their history by leaving their SC reservation... < are all examples of completely unacceptable statements for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia does not pose questions to the reader, does not make value judgements, and should be neutral.
- You only actually have three sources as you have duplicated each of them. One goes to the homepage of a random blog, one is a malformed link, and the other doesn't work for me. Qcne (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay so can i make a new article by correcting these questions and keep the statements neutral? And put the sources correctly? Will it be acceptable after that?
- also option of resubmit edit is not showing please help me with that Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321 you cannot re-submit as I have rejected the draft. If you feel you can write a proper draft, please ping me on my User Talk Page and I will have another look at it.
- I would ask you to scrutinise carefully the following before you start:
- - WP:VERIFY
- - WP:NOTABILITY
- - WP:NPOV
- - WP:MOS Qcne (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have edited the article please check it Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 08:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Honeysingh1234321. This has gotten a bit complicated now, as you've also submitted
- Draft:Rehgars_/_Regar which seems to be a duplicate of the submission Draft:Regar_Raghuvanshi_Kshatriya.
- However, Robert McClenom was correct to point out we have an article on this group at Regar. They seem to be the same group? Is there a reason you cannot improve the already existing Regar article instead? Qcne (talk) 09:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have edited the article please check it Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 08:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- User:Honeysingh1234321, it's rejected a few times now not "because of sources", but because the sources are not acceptable, they are not footnoted, and the writing is poor and not neutral. Above, Qcne indicates what is wrong with the sources--you can't just ignore that. Well, I guess you can, and you keep doing it, with a predictable result. https://raigar.net/ is not an acceptable (reliable) source, and that general link to the opening page of the website does not contribute anything useful to properly referencing the article. Drmies (talk) 22:55, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
18:25, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Syamsatyatvm
- Syamsatyatvm (talk · contribs) ()
- Arjun S Kulathingal ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
why the account will regected Syamsatyatvm (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Syamsatyatvm Did you bother to read my decline notice? Do you have specific questions about it? Qcne (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
18:30, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Honeysingh1234321
- Honeysingh1234321 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The article draft is getting declined again and again due to sources. Please help me . This Article is about a caste in India whose information is not present on the internet. Can you please explain? As all the information i published were taken from the books and the official websites. Can you please help me how can i cite the source correct way. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 18:30, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have answered your question above, do not make new topics. Qcne (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
19:43, 12 October 2023 review of submission by MWG.Raph
I want to delete this page, I need to refine my references so that I have more definite evidence on the subject. Please delete this page entirely, as it is viewable by the public. When we're ready to resubmit with new, updated references, a whole new page will be done. Thank you MWG.Raph (talk) 19:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Who is we? User accounts are strictly single person use. Theroadislong (talk) 19:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
19:46, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Honeysingh1234321
- Honeysingh1234321 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Please give me the reason why it is violating your policy? Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 19:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- It has been clearly explained above numerous times. Please WP:DROPTHESTICK. Theroadislong (talk) 19:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay so can i make a new article by correcting these questions and keep the statements neutral? And put the sources correctly? Will it be acceptable after that?
- also option of resubmit edit is not showing please help me with that
- Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Your draft was rejected there is no option to re-submit. Theroadislong (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321 please do not make new topics when you already have an active thread. I am repeating what I told you above:
- You cannot re-submit as I have rejected the draft. If you feel you can write a proper draft, please ping me on my User Talk Page and I will have another look at it.
- I would ask you to scrutinise carefully the following before you start:
- - WP:VERIFY
- - WP:NOTABILITY
- - WP:NPOV
- - WP:MOS
- Qcne (talk) 19:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay thankyou so much
- surely i will 121.46.85.79 (talk) 19:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
21:23, 12 October 2023 review of submission by Totallyred78
- Totallyred78 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Naperville Community Television ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I recently received a submission declined notification on this article, and I would appreciate more specific direction on the changes needed to make it eligible for publication. For your consideration, I respectfully offer a response to the feedback given to me and would welcome your support in instructing me on how to make the edits necessary to be published. 1) "I'm kinda unimpressed with the fluffy nature of their sourcing." Chicago Tribune and Daily Herald are listed by Wikipedia as credible. Local independent media outlets - the Naperville Sun, Naperville Magazine, and Patch.com - were also used. Each of these sources is reporting news about Naperville Community Television that is most probably "lifestyle" section-oriented, but the nature of this public access television station is to provide information of public interest to their community. This station is not intended to be a hard-hitting, investigative reporting resource. From these sources, I extracted factual information to represent a neutral point of view about the history and operation of Naperville Community Television. Given that Wikipedia pages exist for many cultural topics and people that might be considered “fluffy” by many, how do I respond to this feedback? 2) "Documentaries" and "Awards" are not sections that are encyclopedic." I believed the "Documentaries" and "Awards" listings would support the notability claim and used independent, credible sources to reference them. Does this section need to be rewritten or eliminated and would that meet the criteria for publication? 3) "The show list needs to be trimmed down. It has a ways to go." These programs physically exist. Current programs can be viewed online through the station's website and on YouTube and Vimeo. Past programming can be viewed on YouTube and Vimeo. I also reviewed other Wikipedia pages for public access television stations (for example, BronxNet, Queens Public Television, Tri-Valley Community Television) and using these and other examples as a base, improved upon verification for the shows listed by adding independent, credible sources to reference them. How do I respond to this critique - do I eliminate this section or, preferably, what additional edits need to be made? My experience in producing this article for consideration for publication has given me additional respect for what Wikipedia is and its standards and I want to abide by them. Please help me make the changes necessary to edit this article to achieve publication.
Totallyred78 (talk) 21:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
October 13
03:14, 13 October 2023 review of submission by JoshJeg247
- JoshJeg247 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Ademola Ojo Emmanuel ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The submission was rejected. Kindly help with suggestions on how to improve it to Wikipedia's acceptable standard. JoshJeg247 (talk) 03:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- @JoshJeg247: precisely because it was rejected, which means the draft cannot be submitted again, there is nothing to improve. Suggest you leave it and find something else to write about. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:27, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
08:31, 13 October 2023 review of submission by Abialic
- Abialic (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Mary Hanney Secondary School ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I need assistance to resubmit this article in the right format. Abialic (talk) 08:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Abialic The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. There is nothing more that can be done. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
19:49, 13 October 2023 review of submission by MoreSteamer
- MoreSteamer (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:EngineRoom ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi, My page I submitted got rejected. I was wondering if there's anything I can do in particular to make it more acceptable? Or it is just the lack of references? Thank you, Jennifer MoreSteamer (talk) 19:49, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- MoreSteamer I fixed your post to provide a link to your draft(you had "Page Rejection" there instead).
- I see that you claimed the image of the logo as your own personal work; this would mean that you personally designed the logo and want to make it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution(which could include, for example, printing it on clothing and selling it). Did you design the logo? Logos are typically uploaded under "fair use" rules to this Wikipedia directly(which new accounts cannot do themselves, but may use WP:FFU)/
- Wikipedia is not a place to tell about a productand what it does- a Wikipedia article(not the broader term "page") must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the product, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. For products, that usually means summarizing reviews from professional reviewers. 331dot (talk) 20:02, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, thank you! MoreSteamer (talk) 20:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- MoreSteamer Please answer the question about the logo. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I did not it design myself. It is a logo of my company's, so I suppose it would qualify for the fair use? I thought the draft wasn't being published anyway? MoreSteamer (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- MoreSteamer The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that a draft may be resubmitted.
- You must immediately request deletion of the logo from Commons; Commons only hosts "free" images in terms of copyright. Unless your company wants to make the logo of its product avaiable for anyone to use for any purpose(I wouldn't if I were the company), it needs to be uploaded to this Wikipedia locally(see WP:FFU) under fair use rules. This does carry some restrictions(fair use images cannot be in drafts).
- Images are not relevant to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. You don't need to worry about images until the draft is accepted. 331dot (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, great, thank you for the explanation. I appreciate your help. I will request deletion. MoreSteamer (talk) 20:41, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I did not it design myself. It is a logo of my company's, so I suppose it would qualify for the fair use? I thought the draft wasn't being published anyway? MoreSteamer (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- MoreSteamer Please answer the question about the logo. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- OK, thank you! MoreSteamer (talk) 20:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
October 14
02:23, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Michallauren91882
- Michallauren91882 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Zanan Ahmad ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Could you please provide guidance and support in ensuring the accurate implementation of these edits on the Wikipedia page? Michallauren91882 (talk) 02:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Michallauren91882: can you be more specific, please; what support do you need?
- The first thing that you will need to do is to support the draft contents with proper referencing, using inline citations and footnotes. See WP:REFB and WP:ILC for advice. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
05:32, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Gyalten.jigdrel
- Gyalten.jigdrel (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Geshe Gyalten ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello!
Thank you for agreeing to help. I would like to ask whether the notability of Gyalten Khen Rinpoche is sufficiently attested to by the fact that he
1. Is the spiritual director of Awakening Vajra International (www.awakeningvajrainternational.org), a network of dharma centers that are active in a number of educational, spiritual, and charitable projects.
2. Is the abbott of Lama Gaun Tashi Rabten Monastery in Nepal (link has been added in the opening section of this draft (http://lamagaunmonastery.org/)
3. Is the main student of Kyabje Choden Rinpoche (Wiki-page exists) and is entrusted with the preservation of the educational and spiritual legacy of his successor Tenzin Gyalten. He was the leading figure in the search for the legitimate successor of Kyabje Chöden Rinpoche.
4. Has been awarded an award by the Mayor of San Jose (CA), USA, in recognition of "his work and deep dedication for teaching the Buddha-Dharma in California and worldwide" (image uploaded)
Also, as for the issue of the neutrality of view, I would like to ask which elements would need to be reconfigured so that the upload will be successful, since all pertinent information has been disclosed on my contributor's profile (especially that I have not received any funds etc. for any contribution made to this article) and, as far as I understand, the issue has been cleared.
Thank you so much for your help, since I have been writing on this draft for nearly 5 years now ... :-) Gyalten.jigdrel (talk) 05:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Gyalten.jigdrel: the short answer is no, none of the above points establish notability. Also, the referencing of this draft is insufficient for the purposes of both notability and verifiability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Dear DoubleGrazing,
- Thank you for your message. Could you explain maybe somewhat more elaborately why being the spiritual director of an international network of associated Buddhist Centres does not establish sufficient notability that deserves a Wikipedia-page entry?
- He is a public persona with a large following of students, and I wonder by what metric he would not be notable enough to deserve a reference on Wikipedia. Gyalten.jigdrel (talk) 10:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Merely being a public figure does not guarantee that someone is notable as Wikipedia defines notability for people. None of your sources are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of him. His organization's website is not an independent source, and anything sourced to it should be removed. We want to know what sources wholly independent of him choose on their own to say about him. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for getting back to me.
- In fact, I would like to point out that it is not correct that "none of your sources are independent reliable sources", since references 1, 11, and 12, constituting nearly 25% of the total number of references, are references to materials on completely unaffiliated institutions, e.g. the Kringellocken Kloster in Potsdam, Germany (https://www.kringellocken-kloster.de/).
- Could you give us a benchmark, (e.g. a minimum of 33% or 50% etc.) of sources that have to hail from outside the individual's own organization?
- Thank you for your help in this. Much appreciated. Gyalten.jigdrel (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- There isn't a certain percentage, because it isn't that primary sources are disallowed, but that they do not establish notability. Most reviewers look for at least three sources with significant coverage to be summarized in order to accept a draft. Reference 1 says "public lecture"; that is just him speaking and is not an independent source. 11 is a gallery of images from a monastery that hosted him(if I understand it correctly) which isn't independent. 12 also seems to just document an event he is involved with.
- We are looking for independent reliable sources that offer significant coverage of this man, not just documentation of his activities, but sources that describe what makes him important/significant/influential as a person, in order to meet WP:BIO.
- Large sections of the draft are entirely unsourced, such as most information about his background 331dot (talk) 18:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Merely being a public figure does not guarantee that someone is notable as Wikipedia defines notability for people. None of your sources are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of him. His organization's website is not an independent source, and anything sourced to it should be removed. We want to know what sources wholly independent of him choose on their own to say about him. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
07:14, 14 October 2023 review of submission by 103.147.87.19
- 103.147.87.19 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Muhammad Hassaan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Lack of Significant Coverage: Mention that the topic or article lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Explain that there are only passing mentions or that the sources do not provide substantial information about the subject.
Independent Sources: Highlight the absence of independent, secondary sources. Emphasize that the existing sources might not be independent of the subject, which is a key criterion for notability.
Importance: Explain the importance of the topic and why it should be included in Wikipedia. Make a case for its relevance and significance, and how it contributes to the broader knowledge base.
Encourage Improvement: Express your willingness to work on improving the article or finding additional, reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
Request Guidance: Ask for guidance from experienced Wikipedia editors or volunteers on how to address the notability issues and improve the article's quality.
Be Respectful: Maintain a respectful and polite tone in your request for assistance, as this can help foster a positive response from the Wikipedia community. 103.147.87.19 (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- You don't ask a question, but this draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:12, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
08:10, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Honeysingh1234321
- Honeysingh1234321 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hey I have made the changes. Can you please check and help me?
Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 08:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321: we don't provide on-demand reviews here at the help desk. Besides, as this draft has been rejected, your only way forward is to appeal directly to the reviewer who rejected it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:13, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321 have replied to you above, no need to make topics on my Talk Page and again here. Qcne (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Qcne,
- Thank you for taking the time to review my Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya . I understand the importance of reliable sources, and I've made an effort to include them where possible.
- The article is about the caste which original history is mentioned in this article. I have cited all the valid ancient pdfs and books where these information is mentioned which I believe to be a reliable source. Could you please provide more specific feedback regarding which areas or statements in the draft you found lacking in reliable sources?
- I would make more improvements if required. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 09:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321 I'll just copy what I stated above:
- Hi @Honeysingh1234321. This has gotten a bit complicated now, as you've also submitted
- Draft:Rehgars_/_Regar which seems to be a duplicate of the submission Draft:Regar_Raghuvanshi_Kshatriya.
- However, Robert McClenom was correct to point out we have an article on this group at Regar. They seem to be the same group? Is there a reason you cannot improve the already existing Regar article instead?
- Qcne (talk) 09:56, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Qcne
- I’m new to wikipedia. I by mistakenly submitted same two pages Draft:Rehgars / Regar / Draft:Regar Raghuvanshi Kshatriya
- The information mentioned on the article Regar is not correct about the community.
- For which I have already given the proof / reliable sources on the talk page of Regar but nothing happened.
- On the article Regar, the community has been categorised under different community which is wrong information.
- “Raigar caste is not related to Chamar/Jatav Raigar / Rehgars caste (Artisans) comes under Class V Artisans and belongs to group 11 mentioned on page 197. Whereas Chamar is a separate caste belongs to Class VII. Leather Workers and the Lower Village Menials ( page 199) Reliable sources Page 196, Class V Artisans, GROUP 11. Salt and Lime Workers(Page 197) , Rehgars, General Report on the Census of India, 1891” https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ 2. Page 199, Class VII, Leather workers and the Lower menials, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/
- The only reason I have created a new article, which is getting rejected again and again
- please guide me. It would be really helpful Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 10:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- ? Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 10:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Honeysingh1234321 If you discussed proposed changes to Regar and they have not been accepted, you can't circumvent that by creating a separate article. There can only be one article about this topic. As noted at Talk:Regar, you need to provide independent reliable sources. If you have no such sources, your proposed edits cannot be on Wikipedia.
- Castes in India is a designated contentious topic, meaning that is has its own special rules. I will notify you of these on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 12:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I have already provided reliable sources.
- I have given the evidence from government census list.
- The article Regar page is not replying nor they are editing.
- what should I do? Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Your sources do not appear to support the content? Theroadislong (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- What type of sources does wikipedia need to support any valid information?
- please help me Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 16:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ones that support the content for instance this [1] doesn't appear to mention Regar? Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Theroadislong @Theroadislong
- Thankyou for replying. My source Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 16:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Theroadislong
- @Theroadislong
- Thankyou for replying. This source [2] clearly mention Regar (Rehgar)
- on page 197 under Class V Artisans in Group 11(Salt and Lime workers) as Rehgar.
- Whereas , Chamar is mentioned in Class VII on page 199. which means both are different group of people and different community and doesn’t belong to each other. Regar (Rehgar) is not related to chamar.
- This wrong information is mentioned on article Regar. I am unable to edit article Regar.
- please kindly check the above details.
- Regar and Rehgars, both are same.
- Please let me know what more reiable source, I need to present
- It would be really helpful Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321: just to say that this help desk is for issues arising from the AfC review process and/or drafts undergoing review. If it is the case that your draft duplicates a topic already in the main space, then your draft can not be accepted, as already explained, and that is the end of the matter as far as AfC is concerned. If, beyond that, you have general questions about Wikipedia, may I suggest that you pose them at the general Help desk or the Teahouse? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ones that support the content for instance this [1] doesn't appear to mention Regar? Theroadislong (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Your sources do not appear to support the content? Theroadislong (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Honeysingh1234321 I'll just copy what I stated above:
- @Honeysingh1234321 have replied to you above, no need to make topics on my Talk Page and again here. Qcne (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
17:42, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Divourie
I am trying to post about tranzpotter (me) and it dont work at all, i only get error messages whene im trying to post it publicly on Wikipedia. Divourie (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Divourie. I have rejected your draft. You have shown no evidence you meet the strict WP:NMUSICIAN criteria. Wikipedia is not a way to promote yourself or your music, and only musicians who pass that criteria may have an article written about them. Qcne (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- The two following criteria matter for this ensemble, the rest of the rules are materialistic, this ensemble doesn’t qualify as “notable” (because record sales is not why they are notable. Seattle KEXP is a renowned public nonprofit arguably experts in music, anyone they pick for a live set has achieved notoriety amongst *music experts*:
- > Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a circular manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g., musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.)
- Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. Skyefleming (talk) 00:14, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
23:00, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Skyefleming
- Skyefleming (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Polyrhythmics (Band) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I suspect the topic did not qualify for a page due to my lack of experience with writing articles. The thing I was considering for additional qualification *based on their musical work and skill level paying expert tribute to unique world music genres that aren’t mainstream*. Just because “world music” doesn’t sell as many records doesn’t make it unimportant and it is capable of achieving notoriety within the communities where those genres are appreciated but only if the artists are *experts*and their “stylings” are “expert level” to other experts of that music genre. Wiki has not been told to see funk or afrobeat as “important” enough to be tag projects but maybe they should be, there’s definitely enough notoriety and art there?! Whether commercial markets see a given art as valuable and relevant should not be the main determining factor for the relevance of expert level *artist musicians*. There’s possibly a way of qualifying a group of subject matter experts on an art topic I am not finding, curious about that. From a neutral standpoint these people are *experts* in the tag areas I chose, I thought that would be relevant for qualifying as well but the general rejection was for references so it’s perhaps I just made a newbie mistake formatting something?! Skyefleming (talk) 23:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- The first thing you have to do is format the references correctly, right now they’re just links. KingTheD (talk) 00:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- You also need to have more than three very short paragraphs KingTheD (talk) 00:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Skyefleming. The criteria for inclusion when it comes to musical artists is at WP:NMUSIC. Your sources do not yet prove this band has met that criteria. Your sources are...
- 1) An interview
- 2) An interview
- 3) An advert Qcne (talk) 13:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
23:07, 14 October 2023 review of submission by Knowledgebomb5000
- Knowledgebomb5000 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Colette Park (photographer) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello. I was attempting to create an article, however it was declined due to the citations not being appropriate. However, the citations do support the statements about the person that the article is about. How can this be resolved?
Knowledgebomb5000 (talk) 23:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- You have documented her work and her views on herself, but the main purpose of a Wikipedia article is to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, WP:NARTIST. That usually entails something like independent, unsolicited reviews of her or her work. 331dot (talk) 00:16, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
October 15
02:18, 15 October 2023 review of submission by Samchristie05
- Samchristie05 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Del Shannon Sings Hank Williams ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
i need a assistance Samchristie05 (talk) 02:18, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- The first reference says “404 Error: This page did not load properly” so fix that and you’re also going to need more than two references KingTheD (talk) 04:27, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
02:32, 15 October 2023 review of submission by DaRealSupaPablo
- DaRealSupaPablo (talk · contribs) ()
- User:DaRealSupaPablo/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
why did i not get accepted
DaRealSupaPablo (talk) 02:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Because it had been sources KingTheD (talk) 04:20, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- @DaRealSupaPablo: Wikipedia is not a place to promote your creations or to write about things you made up. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:47, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
02:57, 15 October 2023 review of submission by Midwesterngal
- Midwesterngal (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Matt Weinhold ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This has been sitting in draft for 2 months after re-working and adding additional resources that should be more substantial, along with an additional credit that has since aired since this whole thing started. I've double and triple checked tags to improve the odds of "speedy review" We're up to 10 sources, including some that required premium access to link to in order to provide "more substantive" material from archives. Midwesterngal (talk) 02:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- You need add wiki project tags to get it reviewed faster. There’s a button for it above edit resources. KingTheD (talk) 04:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- No, adding Wikiproject tags is unlikely to get it reviewed any faster. They will bring the draft to the attention of project members, and it's possible that some of those have reviewing rights, and it's possible that one of them might decide to review it, but that's about it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:42, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Midwesterngal Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 09:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- I don't have any particular need - other than there are smaller things I could continue to add, but I am not sure if they're going to help or not. I'm perplexed by the "line" that seems to exist for "notable" in terms of being famous enough. This is a particularly long career and looking at individuals that have won the linked comedy contests and who have wiki pages, it seems that having had a single random comedy special in the heydey of Comedy Central vs. being mentioned in multiple places on Wikipedia already for writing/hosting and several additional long-standing projects (including credited writing on major properties) gets to be rather muddied.
- I am just trying to figure out how much more I should add - this was getting reviewed faster a few months ago vs. now, so that's also why I was wondering if I should do more. Midwesterngal (talk) 15:52, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- What is your question, @Midwesterngal?
- As it states on the top of the draft,
"Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,444 pending submissions waiting for review."
-- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
10:26, 15 October 2023 review of submission by Mehedi wikibio
- Mehedi wikibio (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:S M Jahid Hasan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
He is one of the notable people in Mathbaria Upazila. It would be nice to see it reviewed again. I started contributing to Wikipedia a few days ago. This was my first registration. If you reject, then our hope is broken.
Tell me what to do without rejecting?
And how can I make it acceptable?
I will update it if necessary Mehedi wikibio (talk) 10:26, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Mehedi wikibio: this draft was rejected because the subject isn't notable enough to warrant inclusion, and there is nothing you can do to make a non-notable subject notable. My advice is to review the concept of notability, and especially the main notability guideline WP:GNG, so that you understand better what is required. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Is there a reliable source?
- For example, he has an Amazon author page, which has many books. If he wasn't an author, would his name appear on the Amazon ebook author page?
- A writer is not a remarkable person?
- As a newbie, please do a little review without surprising me. Mehedi wikibio (talk) 10:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- He may be a remarkable person but the quality of my writing did not make him remarkable.
- Please help me to update it Mehedi wikibio (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- As noted, there is nothing further that can be done. You will need to find another topic to edit about. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- I've read wp:gng and I don't understand why my registration was canceled even though the sources I provided are fairly reliable. I am getting frustrated by doing this without helping newbies on Vaire, I have been researching this registration for 2 months now. Now since this register is written by me there are many other registers which we update regularly same will update this too no problem bro. Wikipedia has many registers that have registered articles with only one or two invalid sources. And I gave my 10 sources and still it didn't work. And you have not done that means it will not happen. If this is the case, how do we move forward?
- Take a look at us Mehedi wikibio (talk) 11:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- (Blocked.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- As noted, there is nothing further that can be done. You will need to find another topic to edit about. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
12:52, 15 October 2023 review of submission by 185.76.176.85
- 185.76.176.85 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Hussein Saleh ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
My wikipedia has been deleted 185.76.176.85 (talk) 12:52, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- You (probably) don't have a "wikipedia". You appear to have created a draft for a Wikipedia article, which has been rejected, not deleted. Although saying that, now that I've looked at it, I will request that it is deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- PS: Nah, on second thoughts, having seen the deletion etc. history of it, I won't bother requesting speedy. Just to say, though, that you're very close to getting blocked, so my advice to you is to stop trying to publish self-promo articles (such as they are), as this will not be allowed. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
17:07, 15 October 2023 review of submission by LoLBruh
I would like to request the assistance of others, as I do not have much experience in creating Wikipedia pages, and feel it would be very difficult to create one mostly by myself.
Thanks! LoLBruh (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @LoLBruh. At the moment there is not any evidence that Molly passes our strict WP:NACTOR criteria or even the WP:NBASIC criteria, which means there can not be an article at this time. I've Googled her and can find a few interviews, but it is mostly trivial mentions of her in cast announcements which simply isn't enough to base a Wikipedia article on.
- Perhaps if Molly progresses in her career and she receives significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources, then you can try again with this draft? Qcne (talk) 17:51, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
18:12, 15 October 2023 review of submission by Cedric.plab
- Cedric.plab (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Graphique Kagi ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hello, (I m a newby in wikipedia) i did a mistake when submitting "Draft:Graphique_Kagi" which was intended to be a translation in french of the original "Kagi Chart" page in english. A reviewer named Phuzion suggested me to move it to french wikipedia. I haven t been able to find a way to do so. Could you help me ? Cedric.plab (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Cedric.plab: you need to go to the French-language Wikipedia and submit it there. Each language version is completely separate, and we cannot 'migrate' content from one to another. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
18:42, 15 October 2023 review of submission by Black0kamHenry
- Black0kamHenry (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Jules Sherred ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I need a bit of help, please. This article was rejected because of, not enough independent sources. Fair! I didn't include multiple sources for a lot of the content because I wrongly assumed it would be redundant. And a couple sources misgender for Sherred, so I excluded those, too. My question: would including those multiple sources for the same sentences/paragraphs fix the issues? How do we deal with sources that misgender the subject? Black0kamHenry (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
- The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning here, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that a draft may be resubmitted.
- See MOS:GENDERID for guidance on how to handle gender for a transgendered person.
- You don't necessarily need multiple sources, you need to summarize the independent sources- sources that are associated with the person shouldn't be used ro establish notability. 331dot (talk) 22:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
October 16
00:46, 16 October 2023 review of submission by Pasarqa
En español y me obligan hacer mención en inglés. No hay discusión que Mauro Yanez Pasarella fue el antiguo director de la policía Técnica Judicial de Venezuela pero los censores siguen privando a Mauro Yanez Pasarella como un personaje público de la historia contemporánea de Venezuela. Requiero una revisión con todo respeto de expertos de Wikipedia en español. Pasarqa (talk) 00:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
00:58, 16 October 2023 review of submission by WalrusThePriest
- WalrusThePriest (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Tayleroid (band) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Article rejected Yoo, my article on my band Tayleroid (on most music streaming services) was just rejected. Just wondering some of the reasons why could be? WalrusThePriest (talk) 00:58, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- I fixed your post to properly display a link to your draft. The reason for the rejection was given by the reviewer; "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." This means that you did not show that your band meets the definition of a notable band. You should declare a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 01:10, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- You provided no independent reliable sources. An article must summarize such sources, it isn't for the subject to tell about itself. 331dot (talk) 01:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
05:07, 16 October 2023 review of submission by Paulmat77700
- Paulmat77700 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:E.I. Cherian ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
My draft declined due to references, please let me know what i need to do to get this published. Paulmat77700 (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Paulmat77700: your so-called references aren't actually references, they're just words. Have a look at a few articles, so you see what references are, and check out WP:REFB for advice on how to create them. You then need to make sure that your sources meet the WP:GNG standard for notability, as this is the actual reason why your draft was declined. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
09:49, 16 October 2023 review of submission by 74.118.237.170
- 74.118.237.170 (talk · contribs) ()
- Draft:Connex One ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Hi there,
Would it be possible to get some advice or assistance in removing the rejection on this page please? 74.118.237.170 (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
09:53, 16 October 2023 review of submission by 익명의 4인
- 익명의 4인 (talk · contribs) ()
- Wanna know the reason of declination ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Below is the reason for declination of my draft. Could you kindly let me know what could be great actions to pass my draft in details?
Reason of declination -----
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements) reliable secondary strictly independent of the subject Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. 익명의 4인 (talk) 09:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)