Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 July 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< July 24 << Jun | July | Aug >> July 26 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


July 25[edit]

03:47:27, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Hubdarbrohii[edit]


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 03:47, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03:49:05, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Hubdarbrohii[edit]


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 03:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hubdarbrohii It will not get accepted now because your draft don't includes any source and the draft is a biography of a living person. QiuLiming1 (talk) 03:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

04:32:26, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Liptapp[edit]


Liptapp (talk) 04:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liptapp Please read this. "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use." Please declare your relationship to Puffy Mattress as soon as possible. QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:43, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@QiuLiming1 how can I declare that I don't have any relationship with Puffy Mattress? Liptapp (talk) 06:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Liptapp If you have no relationship, then you have just said so. How did you come to write about Puffy Mattress? You didn't pick it at random to edit about. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot I was planning to pitch the wikipedia page if it gets publish. That's the plan. What will be the best course, I know I'm new in wikipedia if you can help me It will be greatly appreciate. Thanks Liptapp (talk) 08:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Liptapp That doesn't answer my question as to how you came to edit about Puffy Mattress. I don't have much to add beyond what reviewers have already told you- that the draft is a clear advertisement, which tells of the existence of the company and its offerings. That's not what Wikipedia articles are for- a Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage(not a brief mention) have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. This does not include staff interviews, announcements of routine business activities, or the like. 331dot (talk) 08:12, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot to answer your question is I want to target mattress company, like Casper Sleep also I based the Puffy Mattress article on it. If you compare the content they are the same style and approach in terms of writing. Liptapp (talk) 06:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Liptapp That still doesn't answer my question, (I realize you wanted to, but that doesn't explain why) but that's all right. In any event, see other stuff exists as to why it's usually not a good idea to use other articles as a model. If you want to do that, make sure to use articles that are classified as good articles. The Casper article has some similar sourcing issues as your draft, just on a larger scale. Casper was briefly a public company which might add to notability. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot I'm not related whatsoever to Puffy Mattress. I want to pitch the Wikipedia that I created to be compensated in the future. Can you help me with the next step this is my first wikipedia page. I really appreciate if you could help me on things that I need to fix. Thanks Liptapp (talk) 06:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:04:11, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Adithi 5599[edit]


Hi, I submitted my first article on wikipedia and my submission got rejected. the reason they gave me is that my article doesn't have reliable sources to back it up. but I added all the required information and also added reference links. I am looking for your help to help me publish my first article. thank you.

Here is the introduction of my article: VentureStudio is a startup incubator established by Ahmedabad University, a private, non-profit university in Gujarat, India, set up in 2009 by the Ahmedabad Education Society.

Here is the article link in my google drive: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C6am0uc_ht-PpR_e8yzhynrA-smBczEs05MC13rIF94/edit?usp=sharing

Adithi 5599 (talk) 05:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adithi 5599: We never cite Wikipedia, and every other link has nothing about the company worth citing. You need better sources. If you have a connexion to VentureStudio, you are obligated to DISCLOSE that connexion publicly on your userpage. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 05:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05:07:10, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Hubdarbrohii[edit]


Hubdarbrohii (talk) 05:07, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hubdarbrohii: you don't ask a question, but let me just say that your draft has now been rejected for the second time; please do not resubmit it again. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a social media platform or a free web hosting service where you can tell the world about yourself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:54, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08:55:37, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Irfanmehmoodkhan[edit]


Irfanmehmoodkhan (talk) 08:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Irfanmehmoodkhan You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell the world about their own works. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

11:15:03, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Madzengamabaso[edit]

I have updated the draft of Dr. Anele Hammond nee Mngadi, I've only used information that has readily available sources to backup the information provided. Madzengamabaso (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

14:15:19, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Oscarfelix.may[edit]


Oscarfelix.may (talk) 14:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


More basic details have been included about Steuart Padwick and hopefully it is in a more appropriate tone. He continues to create more and more prominent works since the last rejection he has created the UK' first 100% cement free concrete superstruture. This has reduced the carbon footprint of the concrete by over 70% - this is a major step in the path to reducing the carbon footprint in the built environment.

@Oscarfelix.may: There's still not enough about the artist, and the sources about his works are weak. There should be no blogs, press releases or primary sources, such as the link to made.com that you added. I made some improvements but the article draft has been rejected, which means without a major revision with better sources, it will not be considered further. Rejections come when an article is repeatedly resubmitted without the changes that are requested, to not waste future reviewers' time. See WP:NARTIST for artist notability guidelines. I think he's starting to get there with the coverage of his very visible public art, but the sourcing needs to be significantly improved before there will be any further consideration. TechnoTalk (talk) 17:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

17:22:02, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Roarkemoody[edit]


Roarkemoody (talk) 17:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC) I do not know how to correctly add references.[reply]

17:24:17, 25 July 2022 review of submission by Roarkemoody[edit]


Roarkemoody (talk) 17:24, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has been rejected, meaning it won't be considered again. QiuLiming1 (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to create page for a friend. Unsure how to cite

See Help:Referencing for beginners - but note that your sources are pretty much unusable anyway (we don't cite streaming sites, website homepages, or prose interviews). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:02, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

18:45:30, 25 July 2022 review of draft by Transcender.beyond[edit]

Hi Folks, am new and just not sure whether my draft is ok or not: I was requested to provide additional sourcing, I included two sources, but can't understand if those have been rejected too and that's why the page is dead?

thanks

Transcender.beyond (talk) 18:45, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19:08:58, 25 July 2022 review of draft by 2601:18E:C300:5770:9D03:E433:2A17:190A[edit]


2601:18E:C300:5770:9D03:E433:2A17:190A (talk) 19:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Help Desk: I have submitted a query to the dispute resolution group but to my knowledge have not received a reply. Thus, I am writing to you now with my concern about my Leadership-as-Practice entry. First, I would like to say that I have been successful publishing other articles in wikipedia - such as Work Self-Efficacy Inventory and Leaderful Fieldbook (in wikisummaries). Thus, I know how to prepare and write encyclopedic entries. However, in this case, the first reviewer thought the draft to be overly essay-ish in form, and then subsequent reviewers, in particular, Nightenbelle and Rusalkii, have merely carried on this critique without sufficient scrutiny. Thus, the criticism has taken on a life of its own, effectively nullifying any chance for an objective review. It is with this concern that I asked for a dispute resolution. However, as the help desk, perhaps you can take a look at the entry, which has been corrected for style since the initial draft, and determine if you believe it has received a fair hearing. As you know, I believe it has not and that, as a result, Wiki readers have been denied the opportunity to learn about this emerging and potentially vital contribution to the field of leadership. [It is also possible that my concern raises an important criticism about the wiki review process.]

I thank you for your consideration. -Joe Raelin

You have been repeatedly told this looks like an essay. You have repeatedly failed to see the forest for the trees and have continued to submit the same damn research essay. We do not accept essays. We are an encyclopaedia project. Separate from the essay concerns, this is so full of buzzwords that it reads like a badly-drafted corporate memo written by someone whose only reference material was a book of Pointy-Haired-Bossisms. The buzzwords need to go and this needs to be written in much clearer English. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:39, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or, to put it in a much clearer fashion for you: The only problem with the review process here is the editor being incapable of accepting legitimate criticism. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see a bunch of words in that draft, but I sure can't put them together in my head to get any meaning out. Especially the second paragraph of the Ideology section -- but really, the whole article reads like word salad. "Reflective emancipatory processes"? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd expect wording like this from a research essay aimed at higher-education institutes (which can understand the words being used and the context) or investors (who see such words and reach for their bank account information to get it to stop). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 22:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_July_25&oldid=1182202994"