Main page

Talk page

Submissions Category — List (sorting)

Showcase

Participants Apply — By subject

Reviewing instructions

Help desk

Backlog drives

Ask a new question Please check back often for answers.

Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

• Apples&oranges1 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • User:Apples&oranges1/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Article Creation for Jay Doctora page. Apples&oranges1 (talk) 05:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Apples&oranges1: that's not a question; did you have one in mind you wanted to ask? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved your draft to Draft:Josef Doctora, and declined it for insufficient sourcing. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Muam7861 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:MUAM ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I want to change my draft name Muam7861 (talk) 07:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Muam7861: I've moved it to Draft:Hudutsuz Sevda. Not that it matters, since drafts are moved to their correct title anyway, if/when they are accepted for publication. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Muam7861: please do not submit the redirect which was left behind when I moved your draft. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:23, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...and don't add redirect templates into content pages, that is not how you move the page or change the title. Please ask for advice, if you don't know how something is done. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Debora at Digital WK (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • User:Debora at Digital WK/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

We would like to understand what else could we do to submit this related content. We don't consider it spam, since we even tried to list competition as an evaluation of the market with reliable sources. we present the company later on the page but we do not use commercial "talk", we just present dates and features. without categorizing them as an ad would. thanks! Debora at Digital WK (talk) 08:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Debora at Digital WK: whether you consider it spam is not really the point; we do, and that's why the draft has been rejected. Rejection means the end of the road.

Going forward, as you're paid to create this content, I'm going to largely leave it for you to figure out how it's done (after all, I don't ask you to do my job for me, right?). I'll give you this one tip, though: Wikipedia articles are based on summaries of what independent and reliable third parties (ideally secondary sources) have said about a subject, not what the subject itself wants to tell the world about itself. See WP:42 and WP:BACKWARD for more on this, and WP:NCORP for the guideline your draft needs to meet. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

I'll also put this standard comment in here: (I know that paid editors often don't want to hear it, but why would you expect to take on a task without appropriate training?) My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• OxygenToxicity (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • User:OxygenToxicity/sandbox ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hey guys, this my first attempt at creating an article. Keen for your advice and what help you can give :) The submission was declined because it was "not adequately supported by reliable sources" and it needs more in-depth, reliable, secondary and independent sources.

The sources I've cited to my understanding meet that criteria. In particular, the main documents from the heritage listing are secondary and independent government sources, thoroughly in-depth, and generally considered to be reliable. I have used one source from the church diocese to show that the building is still in active use, and that's it. What am I missing? Cheers! OxygenToxicity (talk) 09:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OxygenToxicity: actually, the sources don't meet that standard, as they're all primary. However, given that this building is in the heritage register, that probably makes it notable per WP:GEOFEAT. Pinging the reviewer SafariScribe for their comments. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @DoubleGrazing. So documentation such as the heritage assessment is independent, but still considered a primary source? I took it to be secondary because it provided an analysis and evaluation of the building and its history to determine its significance community/state. OxygenToxicity (talk) 09:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OxygenToxicity: gov't and judicial documents are usually primary, yes. I didn't look at these particular ones, I guess it's not inconceivable that they might have included secondary analysis and commentary, in which case it might count as secondary. But the WA gov't is just a single source, so still wouldn't amount to notability per WP:GNG. (Having said which, there may well be other sources out there, whether online or in print, which could satisfy the GNG requirements, so I'm not saying this subject isn't notable.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing Yeah okay, cheers. And thanks for your time, I'm trying to do this all by the book but there's a lot to learn! I'm happy to keep plugging away in the sandbox and will do some more research, and see what @SafariScribe says. OxygenToxicity (talk) 09:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Hzt0208042508415531 tw (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:The Zhao Fuqiang Case ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My submission was rejected triple by a same user, but there were no specific suggestions for improvement. He said that my draft is not neutral. However, this article is originally in Chinese wikipedia and there is no problem in neutrality perspective. I also think so and just translate it honestly. Hzt0208042508415531 tw (talk) 14:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hzt0208042508415531 tw: I don't know what "rejected triple" means, but from the edit history it seems this draft has been declined (not rejected) once, nearly six months ago. If you wish to query that decline, you should probably ask the reviewer directly.

Whether the corresponding article has been accepted into the Chinese-language Wikipedia is immaterial, as every language version is completely separate. To be accepted here, the draft will have to comply with our rules and requirements. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hzt0208042508415531 tw I see it declined once only, looking at the history, with one prior comment, and no work since it was declined.

Please understand that the English Language and the Chinese Language versions of Wikipedia are independent and have different criteria.

First, I think you need a native speaker of English to solve the prose issues, and second use {{Translated page}} to attribute it to the source article 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 11mohammadahmedpk (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Haseeb Ahmed (Director) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hey my page request has been declined what does it mean

11mohammadahmedpk (talk) 16:11, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@11mohammadahmedpk: it means that it hasn't been accepted for publication at this time, because there is no evidence that the subject is notable. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that you are having a very common experience for new editors who plunge straight into the very challenging task of trying to create a new article before they have spent time learning the necessary sklils. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Έλαναφάμε2024 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:GiannisTheCat ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

What went well, what should I do better, please give me some advice so I can resubmit my page and correct it. Έλαναφάμε2024 (talk) 18:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Έλαναφάμε2024: Unfortunately your draft has been rejected and cannot be resubmited. I hate to break it to you but a YouTube channel with 500 subscribers is not going to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines and therefore is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I suggest you try some smaller edits first, like the task center lists, to get a hang of how Wikipedia works before submitting another article. C F A 💬 20:34, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, tell me what I should do better, I understand it doesn’t meet the criteria, but at least tell me how to improve, or find the information yourself.

I do not like when people tell me I’m wrong and don’t point out, I would appreciate if you give me advice. Έλαναφάμε2024 (talk) 08:51, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There simply isn't anything you can do the topic is not notable. see Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Theroadislong (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Έλαναφάμε2024: the earlier comment referred, and in fact linked, to our notability requirements, and more specifically the general notability guideline. I suggest you study that carefully. Every subject must demonstrate notability in order to be accepted for publication here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i understand Έλαναφάμε2024 (talk) 09:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys! I had discussions with others editors about this draft on the help page. Nobody additional left their opinion, so I wanted to ask you. Maybe there are some new editors, with experience with music articles - Draft:Afsheen (musician) J2009j (talk) 20:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user and I had a long dicussion about this on my talk page here.

To @J2009j: Volunteers at the AfC help desk are not going to review your draft. If it is submitted, it has been added to the category of unreviewed drafts and another reviewer will find it eventually. Because of how many there are, it could be days, weeks, or months until that happens, unfortunately. C F A 💬 20:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will waiting, maybe someone knows if we can apply category musician or general notability. J2009j (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Danny8384535 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Lake Butler Bus Crash ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

i added sources but it still said i needed to add them Danny8384535 (talk) 20:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Danny8384535: The topic may be notable (though I suggest you read WP:NEVENT and WP:NOTNEWS), but many of the sources you have listed are not reliable. Findagrave.com is not a reliable source and should be replaced with reliable, secondary sources. C F A 💬 20:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if find a grave isnt reliable, then what obituary website is? find a grave is the only one im aware of Danny8384535 (talk) 14:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of them. The only type of obituary that would be reliable would be those published in independent, reliable sources, like the NYT obituaries. C F A 💬 14:58, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually requested speedy deletion on this, but the request went stale. My concerns are outlined in the comments I left there. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Danny8384535, I encourage you to read WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:BLPCRIME before doing anything else with this article. C F A 💬 15:01, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok ty Danny8384535 (talk) 15:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Brentonlons (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Boom Boom (album) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I don't know what is required. I first used a link to the Boom Boom album's info & artwork on discogs and was told Discogs is NOT a reliable/acceptable reference. Then added references from the book Boogie Man and still was not accepted. Brentonlons (talk) 02:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Brentonlons: what is required is that you demonstrate notability, either by citing multiple sources that meet the WP:GNG standard, or by showing (with reliable evidence) how this album satisfies one or more of the seven criteria in the WP:NALBUM guideline. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Magistracraig (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Memnun ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I responded to the reviewer in talk about why the Etruscan art and archaeological evidence for the god the unique culture of the Etruscans called "Memnun" is not the same God as the Greeks (and Romans) called Μέμνων/ Memnon in their art. Etruscan art and culture predates that the Romans and is distinct from that of Greek culture. In addition there are plenty wikipedia pages for Etruscan gods - including Memnun's mother (called Eos in Greek, called Aurora in Latin) and called Thesan in Etruscan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesan. Etruscan knowledge is very limited so why would Wikipedia limit knowledge even further when distinct archeological evidence exists? I'm sure just thinking that Memnun is a typo for Memnon which is a bit superficial from a research/information perspective. :) Magistracraig (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magistracraig: you don't really ask a question, as such – was there something you wanted help with?

To my entirely non-expert eye it seems there is at least an overlap between your draft and the Memnon article, so that decline wasn't an unreasonable one, IMO. Is there a reason why salient content from your draft couldn't be merged into the existing article? That article could do with some further work in any case, and this seems like an opportunity to do that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @DoubleGrazing - I am simply asking for a review of the newly submitted page because yes, there is a misunderstanding based on a knowledge base of ETRUSCAN and not GREEK mythology. No judgement because I am learning too.

At first when I noted Memnun in research I also thought it was a typo but then I learned that the Etruscan culture has it's own extensive history and collection of artifacts. There are plenty of other Etruscan mythology pages, artifacts and valid research which I added an updated. IMHO it seems that someone just quickly made a non expert decision. I tried to provide Wikipedia with a lot of research and support. I'm a credentialed high school teacher (in various states). I understanding the need to back up statements with evidence and I have- not sure why this is such a big deal as there is already an Etruscan page about Thesan (who the Greeks called Eos) but not son who she is regularly depicted in art with. It would be like Wikipedia approving a page about "Miriam" but not "Moses" in Judeo-Christian texts.

The Etruscans were there own people and it's just simply something Wikipedia editors should not flag based on their own historical, art history, linguistic knowledge (which the original reviewer even wrote!) Magistracraig (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing - Just so this page can be approved:

This is what the reviewer understood about the reviewer's own knowledge of an entire culture, collection of artifacts and mythological tradition: "I don't know enough about the mythology to understand, but is this the same myth as Memnon?" The answer is sort-of - like is Coke- Pepsi-Tab? Is Burger King the exact same as McDonalds? -Sort -of... Magistracraig (talk) 14:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magistracraig: okay, well, you have resubmitted the draft, so it will be reviewed again at some point; we don't do on-demand reviews here at the help desk.

I certainly don't feel qualified to comment on the matter. I can flag it up on the WikiProject Mythology talk page, in case anyone there cares to opine. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Mysteriouslucifer (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Mera Baba Nanak (2023) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can I get a help to edit it so I can learn how to keep my articles neutral. It would be benefitting me in the future articles if any of the mentor can guide me through this Mysteriouslucifer (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a released film, you need to establish that the film meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable film. That's typically done with reviews from professional reviewers or other coverage beyond routine coverage/announcements(like release dates, casting, announcing the commencement of production, etc.). 331dot (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mysteriouslucifer: this draft was declined (at least in part) for being promotional.

"Mera Baba Nanak is not just a film; it's a heartfelt journey that encapsulates the essence of faith and family ties. Set against the backdrop of Punjab, this Punjabi cinematic gem weaves together a poignant family drama, where the central theme revolves around the enduring power of belief in the teachings of Baba Nanak. Through its narrative, the film explores the intricate dynamics of familial relationships while celebrating the spiritual legacy that resonates deeply with audiences. Film promises to be a captivating ode to faith, love, and the timeless wisdom that guides generations."

I trust it's clear from that choice excerpt why that was?

Your job is to describe the subject, not to 'sell' it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Aurodea108 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Josephine Semmes ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My draft was rejected because I had cited a FInd A Grave entry as the source of the birth and death dates in this biography of a deceased person, Josephine Semmes. (I read the photo of the headstone there, and did not reference any user-edited text.) I am not able to find any obituaries. I also went through the Wikipedia Library link to search Ancestry.com, which did not have any record of Semmes either. If I simply delete the dates and the reference to Find A Grave, can I resubmit? In the meantime I also added information to the draft from an additional secondary source (a journal article). Aurodea108 (talk) 18:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aurodea108: no, your draft was declined (not 'rejected') for lack of notability. The comment about Findagrave was just that; an additional comment. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I have added additional information from the additional secondary source, that should clarify notability. However, before resubmitting, should I also delete the Find A Grave entry and the information sourced from it? Aurodea108 (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Takeru Watanabe (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Mara-Daria Cojocaru ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! Recently, user Safari Scribe declined my Draft:Mara-Daria Cojocaru. I asked Safari Scribe for advice in order to optimise the article but they didn't get back to me yet. The reason given for declining the draft was the following: "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject." My problem is that I can't find any peacock words or phrases in the draft that conflict with a neutral point of view. Also, I can't identify passages not encyclopedic. I have already written several articles for the English Wikipedia and never got a similar negative feedback concerning my writing or tone. Therefore I'm quite surprised about this evaluation of my work. Actually, I tend to think that there has been some kind of mistake or mix-up. Anyway, I would be glad if you could help me out and give me some advice. Best, Takeru Watanabe (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Takeru Watanabe: I've read through your draft, and TBH, I can't find anything wrong with the text, either. Normally at this point I would ping the reviewer for comments, but as you've already approached them and haven't heard back, there's probably no point. The draft seems fine to me, so I'll just go ahead and accept it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DoubleGrazing! Thank you very much for reading through my draft and for helping me out! Best, Takeru Watanabe (talk) 12:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The article I made has (booking agent) added to the name. I did not add that, it is wrong. I wanted to change that to (producer or talent producer), but have no idea how to do it. Christopher McDonald (booking agent) I would appreciate your help a lot. It was added by somebody else. Booking agent is a completely different thing from talent booker. J2009j (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for drafts, not completed articles, but see Help:Moving a page for how to rename a page. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 02:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: Your comment brought my attention to the article. It seems his only claim to notability is winning an Emmy, which is not a problem in itself. In the article, however, it claims he "won a daytime Emmy as a Talent Producer and Talent Booker for the "The Kelly Clarkson Show" in 2024", which I wasn't sure was even possible. And sure enough, the citation attached is not only for the 2022 Emmys, but is also for the actor Christopher McDonald, a completely different person, for his role in Hacks. Unless you have some reasonable explanation for this, I will be nominating it for deletion. Also, you seem to have some sort of connection with the subject that you have not disclosed, because his picture has been uploaded as "Your own work" which implies you know him personally. C F A 💬 02:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To the point- won a daytime Emmy as a Talent Producer for the "The Kelly Clarkson Show"- that is possible. I mentioned it is an Emmy in 2024. You added a different year. You can open page 9 https://theemmys.tv/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Daytime-Noms-w-Credits-ao-5-3.pdf It is from 2024. Chris McDonald- talent producer.

Also, he and the actor with the same name - are not the same person. This Christopher McDonald will act in - Superman 2025.

I also disagree- "his only claim to notability is winning an Emmy". He is a talent producer of a multiple famous shows.

I also added for the picture a comment that is is my own work, and that I work in entertainment, and I have pictures of many people I take for events. I was in audience at one of the show episodes, with 100 other people. It is available to everyone. J2009j (talk) 03:25, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: Being a talent producer for multiple shows does astonishingly very little to help for notability, and in fact may be an active hindrance. "Backstage" personnel are far less likely to receive any sort of press relative to the actors themselves. If the Emmy is all you have then writing any article of substance is virtually impossible. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 03:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add anything. That document is the citation you cited to the claim that he won an Emmy as a talent producer in 2024. On page 31 it reads:

Hacks • The One, The Only • HBO/HBO Max • Universal Television in association with Paulilu, First Thought Productions, Fremulon Productions, 3 Arts Entertainment Christopher McDonald as Marty

This Christopher McDonald has never won an Emmy award. He is listed as a minor credit, as a "talent producer", on a show that won an Emmy. Being a "talent producer" on multiple shows does not show notability through any applicable guideline, so they must meet the general notability guideline instead. I see no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to prove that is the case. C F A 💬 03:38, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a minor credit. We had a long discussion somewhere about this. He is the talent producer of all 5 seasons of the Kelly Clarkson. Talent producer bringing all the guest to the show, all the celebrities is not exactly a "Backstage" personnel. I also disagree- "has never won an Emmy award". There are usually a few hundred people working on shows.

Only main figures are listed for awards and nominations. Plus, it is an actor for a major upcoming superhero film. I am personally a comic book fan in the past.

Page 9 https://theemmys.tv/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Daytime-Noms-w-Credits-ao-5-3.pdf If this is not in the article, I'll replace it. J2009j (talk) 03:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can say what you want, but he doesn't meet the general notability guidelines or WP:ANYBIO. He has not won an Emmy. He was a talent producer for an Emmy-awarded show. The other Chris McDonald, on the other hand, would be presumed notable because of his Emmy win as it was actually awarded to him. I assume the reviewer only accepted it because the article claims he won an Emmy award with an incorrect citation attached to it. C F A 💬 03:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: Unless his name specifically is on the Emmy, he cannot be assumed to have won it. And yes, a talent producer is "backstage" personnel, no matter how important they are to the show's operation. (The phrase implies they do practically no work while out in front of the camera, and thus their work and efforts would ultimately not be commented on by reviewers barring egregious faults.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Leemhwiki12 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Justin Kenardy ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there, I have added in references to the Draft article as recommended by Wiki editors and would like to know if the page is now considered suitable for submission. Leemhwiki12 (talk) 04:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Leemhwiki12: we don't provide pre-reviews here at the help desk, you will get a full assessment of your draft when you submit it for another review. If you have a more specific question, you're welcome to ask that, of course. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Leemhwiki12 (talk) 08:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• WikiLoreKeeper (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • How to attach a link to texts within a template? ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need some help to create a wiki entry WikiLoreKeeper (talk) 07:26, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiLoreKeeper: sorry, I'm not sure what you're asking. In any case, this help desk is for drafts undergoing the AfC review process. If you have general questions about how to edit Wikipedia, you can ask them at the Teahouse or Help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Abhiramakella (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Human Kinetics (publisher) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need assistance on this article. Abhiramakella (talk) 10:48, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhiramakella: can you be more specific; what assistance do you need? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can I write this article in a encyclopedia format? Abhiramakella (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Abhiramakella: you need to find a few (3+) sources that meet the WP:GNG standard for notability, and summarise (in your own words, but without any additional commentary or embellishment) what they have said about this subject, citing each source against the information it has provided; see the WP:GOLDENRULE. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 72.92.37.34 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Altron ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How do I improve this page? 72.92.37.34 (talk) 12:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't. This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a little bit harsh. @DoubleGrazing Even your questioning my relationship to the singer. Why is that? If you feel that you do not want us to write here. It's okay. Too direct and not considered further. I was planning to write more about other subjects but since this is how you communicate to other new writers. Then we will not continue. Thank you for your reply. IannaOPM (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has literally been rejected. It cannot be resubmitted. There's no point in writing anything more because there's nothing they can do to get it accepted. C F A 💬 15:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IannaOPM: what does your comment have to do with Draft:Altron? Are you saying you're its author? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:22, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IannaOPM: Even your questioning my relationship to the singer. Unless my eyes very much deceive me, the draft is about a video game developer/publisher (and one that was rejected due to failure to accept reviewers' criticisms). If you have any alternative accounts, I strongly encourage you to identify them here, because what you wrote is otherwise very likely to get you blocked. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:23, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• IannaOPM (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Cye Soriano ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, what else to we need to do to enhance or correct the wikipedia entry? IannaOPM (talk) 13:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IannaOPM: you need to show that the person is notable, either by the general WP:GNG or the special WP:MUSICBIO guideline.

You also need to support the information with reliable sources throughout.

And finally, you must write in a neutral and factual, non-promotional manner.

Who is "we" in your question?

And what is your relationship with this subject? (I've posted a query on your talk page, please read and respond to it.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Im just one of the fans. Writing for the artist. There are sources I have submitted. I appreciate your feedback. I will re-write then. Thank you. IannaOPM (talk) 14:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IannaOPM: you must be a really dedicated fan, given that 100% of your edits have to do with her, and you seem to follow her around taking photos.

And who is "we"? Your question was "what else to we need to do". -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We means im one of the fans. Yes we followed her music. Anyways, if this is not going to continue. It's okay. we will not continue publishing it. IannaOPM (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IannaOPM: I will look at your sources. Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):

• The Business Mirror source needs to be done as an offline cite (using {{cite news}}); it is presently incomplete and missing article title, article byline, and page numbers.
• We can't use https://www.gmanetwork.com/entertainment/showbiznews/news/111872/kelvin-miranda-hannah-precillas-faith-da-silva-other-kapuso-shine-at-5th-philippine-faces-of-success-2024/story (unknown provenance). No byline; who wrote this? (We're sceptical of sources with role/no bylines because they're frequently used to publish content that bypassed the editor's desk.)
• https://pinoynewschannel.com/2023/12/06/ice-is-coming-to-clowns/ is useless for notability (too sparse). Name-drop. As a note, an article that says someone will appear at a future event cannot be used for claims they actually attended, as any number of things can cause someone to no-show (failed riders, injuries, committing pater familicide, etc.)
• We can't use https://www.pinoyaksyonnews.com/cye-soriano-receives-best-awards-2023-recognition-sets-sights-on-musical-legacy-in-2024/ (unknown provenance). Role byline; who wrote this?
• We can't use https://www.pinoyaksyonnews.com/experience-cye-sorianos-angelic-voice-at-flashback-musical-concert-and-5th-ph-faces-of-success-2024/ (unknown provenance). Role byline; who wrote this?

None of your sources are any good. For an article on a living person this is completely unacceptable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Bin Khaleel Bath & Kitchen Suites (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Bin Khaleel Bath & Kitchen Suite ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

why my article got declined? Bin Khaleel Bath & Kitchen Suites (talk) 14:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bin Khaleel Bath & Kitchen Suites: because it's pure advertising, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. And you can expect to be blocked imminently. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Manghrat123 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Abdul Mazid Photo ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Good afternoon to whomever it may concern. I submitted my draft and I made sure to include the appropriate amount of references and speak from an unbiased historical point of view, what is the issue? Manghrat123 (talk) 15:48, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Manghrat123: please don't ask the same question in several places, I've just replied to this on my talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:52, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

k, thanks. Manghrat123 (talk) 15:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• OldPlanetMedia (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Beat Cops (TV pilot) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Beat_Cops_(TV_pilot)

Greetings, I'd like to see if there's anything else I can do to get this Beat Cops pilot entry published. I understand that there's not a ton of in-depth sources available online but it was a project produced for a major network (FOX) and features several well-known actors that were just starting out back in the early 2000s (Benjamin, Seder, Mandvi).

I've added a dozen citations and put a good amount of effort into ensuring the legitimacy and thouroughness of the article. I believe that this will help the entry serve as the main online hub for any future web searches regarding Beat Cops.

Thanks for your time, have a great day! OldPlanetMedia (talk) 16:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We accept offline sources, if properly cited. (For periodicals, use {{cite news}} or {{cite magazine}} and provide the name of the outlet, the edition (i.e. 1 Jan 1923), the article name, the article byline, and the pages the article is on.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OldPlanetMedia: Just a heads up: You're going to get blocked unless you change your username because it represents a company and you are editing promotionally. You have not disclosed your presumably financial relationship with this company either, which is a violation of Wikimedia's terms of use. C F A 💬 16:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And indeed they have been blocked; but their name doesn't show as struck through for me, because their rename request went through about an hour later. --ColinFine (talk) 09:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Mlondon101 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Malcolm Puckering ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This review was denied due to references not being reliable and the subject not being suitable for Wikipedia. He is a magician who has been featured on America's Got Talent season seven, which is even linked to that Wikipedia page where he is listed. He's performed on Penn & Teller and the YouTube video link is included. He's been on other talk shows, which I tried to include before, but were denied, since they aren't his videos. I see other living person biographies using LinkedIn as references for education/work. He gives speeches to troubled youth, drawing inspiration from his youth. His father is a famous Jazz musician, which is linked to another Wikipedia page. What is the problem with current references? I've seen the people who have been included in Category:Living people, and don't buy it that he is not suitable for a Wikipedia page compared to what I see that has already been accepted, with similar references. Malcolm Puckering has a lot of reference sources, many of which are video of him on famous shows, which should count a reliable source, since he's right there performing in front of your very eyes. I'm going to need some definitive reasons for why the page and references aren't acceptable. ? Mlondon101 (talk) 20:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlondon101: Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"), and note that EVERYTHING that a reasonable person could challenge MUST be sourced:

• https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2005/01/02/to-become-a-magician-it-helps-to-be-obsessed/ is okay.
• We can't use https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4kB8yqCKlM (unknown provenance). We can only use YouTube as a source if (1) the video is produced by an outlet we would consider to have editorial oversight (such as The Grauniad) and (2) the video is uploaded to that outlet's verified channel. The subject's own channel - or anything else they control - is also by default useless for notability and for biographical claims.
• We can't use LinkedIn (connexion to subject/no editorial oversight). LinkedIn as a source would only be usable for content no reasonable person could challenge (primarily identity-related claims).
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/09/30/mal-waldron-jazz-piano-grenoble/ is a non-sequitur.

Only one of your sources is any good - fatal for any subject but actively problematic for articles on living persons where the sourcing requirements are much stricter. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlondon101: I can't comment on the first source, because it's not available in my region, but let's give it the benefit of the doubt and assume it's okay. The second source is primary, as is the third, and the fourth one doesn't even mention Puckering. We require 3+ source meeting the WP:GNG standard to establish notability.

Not to mention that articles on living people need to be comprehensively supported by inline citations reliable published sources, whereas your draft is almost entirely unsupported. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 0ctopusKn1ght (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Chaparral High School (Texas) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am attempting to create a new article, but I am struggling with how to place citations into the Infobox school template. 0ctopusKn1ght (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Zeus678 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Cult Never Dies ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, It would be much appreciated if you could help me with this draft submission. I've tried to include the most important secondary sources I could find regarding the topic - they're all either interviews or news stories that relate to the company. All the sources are mainstream heavy metal publications which are reliable and are not self-published press releases or otherwise.

This is an important record label/publisher in the heavy metal world. Similar Wikipedia pages already exist for similar companies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season_of_Mist, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_House, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bazillion_Points) - and they arguably have less reliable secondary sources.

Any help or pointers would be much appreciated. Thanks! Zeus678 (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zeus678: In order for a company to be eligible for an article on Wikipedia, they must meet the notability guidelines for companies. That boils down to having significant coverage of the subject in independent, reliable sources. The references in your draft do not show that those guidelines are met.

• https://www.musicjournalisminsider.com/archive/dayal-patterson-interview/ is a random blog (not reliable)
• https://blabbermouth.net/news/u-k-version-of-official-paradise-lost-biography-to-be-released-in-march only offers a trivial name drop of the subject (not significant)
• https://www.loudersound.com/features/doom-metal-gets-the-super-heavyweight-tome-it-deserves is more trivial mentions
• https://www.bardomethodology.com/articles/2019/12/12/dayal-patterson-cult-never-dies-interview/ is an interview (no significant independent coverage)
• https://www.rocking.gr/rockculture/dayal-patterson/42461 is another interview
• https://ramzine.co.uk/news/black-metal-evolution-of-the-cult-the-definitive-edition/ is about a book, not the publishing house
• https://v13.net/2024/01/dayal-patterson-interview-black-metal-evolution-of-the-cult-book/ is another interview

You need coverage about the company in independent, reliable sources. C F A 💬 20:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Phiestine (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Douglas Rosenberg ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My page was recently declined after submission. I would like to know in which areas the sources can be improved because I cited many reliable sources. Phiestine (talk) 17:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Phiestine: You cannot just slap sources on the end of a paragraph. You need to be citing sources at the spot of the claim, and anything that your sources cannot explicitly support MUST be removed. You have a lot of unsourced content here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Juan Antonio Godoy (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Martin Strauts ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, dates I gave and everything can be checked on the instagram and Facebook profile, from the artists, pictures from events and music discography in every store in the planet. ¿What is wrong? Juan Antonio Godoy (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Juan Antonio Godoy: We can't cite Instagram, Facebook, or any other social media website (no editorial oversight), and anything from the subject themselves is useless for notability and biographical claims (connexion to subject). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok now you can check all pages with info about Martin Strauts verified from another people, Juan Antonio Godoy (talk) 21:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Juan Antonio Godoy: Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):

• We can't cite iTunes/Apple Music (online storefront) or Soundcloud (streaming service).
• We can't use https://www.audiometrica.com/en/record-label/ (website homepage). If this is Strauts' record label, then anything on this domain is useless for notability (connexion to subject).
• We can't use https://spacemedia.uk/stats/artist/6QOOlTkmgdyANY3zGEGWVC/Martin-Strauts (unknown provenance, too sparse). Profile site with uncredited text.
• We can't use https://djpoolrecords.com/beatport-top-100-afro-house-june-2020/ (too sparse). Beatport is not an acceptable chart due to being retailer-specific; see WP:CHARTS for what charts we find acceptable for notability claims.
• I can't assess https://www.woutick.es/evento/57315/entradas-martin-strauts--friends (language barrier), but if this is an events website, those are generally useless for notability and useless for biographical claims (connexion to subject) on account of just regurgitating info the event organisers give them.
• https://www.viralagenda.com/es/events/1448574/martin-strauts-friends is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Events website.
• We can't use https://agenda.hoymalaga.app/event/dj-godoy/_524000a121f2903e1ae5b3315c65be88cc65fa99a8d60a12095fd88057a3357f (too sparse).

None of your sources that I can assess are any good. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 21:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Dmrichards26 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:717 Credit Union ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I've recently started a draft for a local credit union, but as I work to submit it to send to the article space, I'm getting declined.

I've tried looking at other comparable organizations in the List of credit unions in the United States, including those that are objectively less notable, and I struggle to see what their articles have that this one does not. For example, this article.

Would certainly appreciate any advise on how I can work to demonstrate notability for this organization!

Dmrichards26 (talk) 20:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmrichards26: You cannot use the presence, absence, or condition of other, tangentially-related, articles to argue for your own. Anything from the subject themselves is useless for notability (connexion to subject). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jéské - Thanks for the reply! My understanding from reading Wikipedia's pages on primary sources was that they are acceptable for limited use, but as you noted, they are useless for notability. I thought by including numerous secondary sources, I was meeting the notability requirements, and just adding limited additional background through the primary sources.

Are you saying that the primary sources almost count as a negative towards the article, not a neutral, and I should remove them? Dmrichards26 (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmrichards26: That is exactly what I am saying. I would also have a close look at WP:CORPDEPTH and have another look at your sources after doing so. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 20:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Juan Antonio Godoy (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Martin Strauts ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please can you review all the new references? Juan Antonio Godoy (talk) 21:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has now been rejected, and will not be looked at again.

You have not, as far as I can see, got a single independent source.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Dogliepop (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Umarjaum ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I used a reputable sources to cite the draft. Such as dawn news.In case only one reliable reference is enough to be inclusion of article on wikipedia. please explain soi can do on you suggestion,you suggestion matters for me. Dogliepop (talk) 05:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dogliepop: the subject is not notable, time to drop it and move on. And blocked users aren't allowed to edit under any user name, or logged-out. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dogliepop: One source is not enough, and the cites to various useless sources (Wikidata, Google, Discogs, Vasya, YouTube, VeryHappyBirthday, Bandcamp, Amazon, Spotify) would kill the draft even if one source were good. Your Dawn News source doesn't even mention Jaum at all; we do have to actually read the sources in order to properly assess them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 05:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ariyamettakula (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Ariyamettakula ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Edit typo requested. Ariyamettakula (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ariyamettakula: pardon? We don't provide copy editing services here at the help desk, in case that's what you meant. I will decline your draft, though, as it's completely unreferenced, among other problems. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Alexmargate (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:The Tracey Emin Foundation ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, The article was created without 'advertising' in mind. I edited it based on similar organisations, and now, after working on it all day, I find it has been completely deleted. Alexmargate (talk) 13:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexmargate First, if you are associated with this organization, that must be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID(note that "paid editing" includes employment or any form of compensation, even if it isn't money).

It is a poor idea to use any random article as a model, as those too could be inappropriate and you would be unaware of that as a new user. As this is a volunteer project, it is possible for inapprpriate articles to exist, even for years. We can only address what we know about. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those that are considered good articles, which have received community vetting. If you want to help us address inappropriate articles, please identify the ones you have seen for possible action. We need the help.

Regarding your draft, Wikipedia is not a place to just tell about an organization and what it does. Wikipedia articles about organizations must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear 331dot,

Thank you for your feedback regarding my draft article on the Tracey Emin Foundation. I would like to clarify that I am not associated with the foundation. My intention was to contribute to Wikipedia with accurate and neutral information based on reliable and respected sources, such as well-known art publications and leading UK newspapers, excluding tabloids.

I understand the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and would like the opportunity to revise and improve the article. Could the draft be returned to my drafts space rather than being deleted completely? This would allow me to address any issues and ensure the content meets the necessary standards for notability and reliability. Alexmargate (talk) 14:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexmargate You didn't pick this topic at random to edit about. How did you come to edit about it?

The original draft was deleted as unambiguous promotion. I can view it as an admin, and I agree that it was. There is nothing there worth salvaging that could become part of an article. If you want to try again, you should start fresh. We usually recommend that new editors not dive right in to creating new articles- the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia. We usually recommend that they start out editing existing articles, to gain experience and knowledge. Using the new user tutorial helps people as well.

Your sources were just documentation of the existence of the Foundation, and annoucements of its activities- not significant coverage that goes into detail about what the sources/sources see as important/significant/influential about the Foundation- how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Please review the definition carefully. What are the three best sources that you have that provide significant coverage of this organization? 331dot (talk) 15:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Yevvvah (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Yevvvah ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, can you tell me what needs to be changed in my article in order to have it on Wikipedia? Arshak Khachatrian is very famous here in our city and I want to add his information here. Please let me know, thank you! Yevvvah (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The references are all from valid and trustworthy sources, there is no social media link for you to mark it as a promotion. What's wrong? Yevvvah (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yevvvah: This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. You cannot just slap all your sources on the end of the article; they need to be cited at claims within the article itself, specifically ones those sources can explicitly support. This is not negotiable. I will look at your sources shortly. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have cited the refs in the article, all of them are there. Please recheck and come back to me. 🙏 Thanks @Jéské Couriano! Yevvvah (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yevvvah: Refer to my /Decode subpage (linked in my signature as "critiques"):

• https://tumo.org/the-tumo-path-to-disqo is useless for notability (too sparse). Quotes, no discussion of Khachatrian.
• We can't use https://portfolio.tumo.org/nep56xkyg/ (too sparse). Content-free timeline.
• We can't use https://theorg.com/org/wirestock/org-chart/arshak-khachatrian (unknown provenance). Who wrote this?
• We can't use https://www.awwwards.com/jury-member/dreammmr (too sparse) and even if we could it'd be useless for notability (connexion to subject).
• We don't cite Google (no editorial oversight).
• https://boon.am/socio-political/society/generation-xyz-the-big-it-world-and-more/ is useless for notability (connexion to subject). Podcast he spoke on, based on a translated synopsis.

None of your sources are actually usable. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jéské CourianoExcuse me, but your rejection reasons don't make sense. None of the sources was written by Arshak Khachatrian / Khachatryan.

• https://tumo.org/the-tumo-path-to-disqo - this link only is expressing his notability in the article
• https://theorg.com/org/wirestock/org-chart/arshak-khachatrian (unknown provenance). This was written by The Org about overall his experiences and paths. This was again no connection to Arshak.
• He wrote "Getting Started with Polymer" book and is the author of the book, there are million of sources of the book available on Amazon, Ebay, Wallmart or anywhere else. Why is it a problem? It's his book info. https://www.amazon.com/Getting-Started-Polymer-Arshak-Khachatrian/dp/1785889370 https://www.walmart.com/ip/Getting-Started-with-Polymer-Paperback-9781785889370/609825719 https://www.ebay.com/itm/186398313131 https://books.apple.com/ca/book/getting-started-with-polymer/id6443677296
• https://boon.am/socio-political/society/generation-xyz-the-big-it-world-and-more/ how is this connected to him? It's an interview not a podcast, and BoonTV is famous TV channel in Armenia. None of the sources is connected to the subject, because all of the sources are independent and famous organizations in Armenia and worldwide.

Yevvvah (talk) 16:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look: Your draft has been rejected and won't be reviewed again. There's no point in trying to convince people otherwise. You're just wasting time. If you're looking for something else to do, the task center has a list of tasks that you can help with. C F A 💬 16:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yevvvah: all your sources are primary and/or non-independent, and therefore don't contribute towards notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yevvyah, Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yevvvah: You're mis-interpreting what I'm saying.

• Tumo grants no notability because the article merely quotes him and does not actually discuss him. The article is practically a listicle and doesn't really devote any space to anyone mentioned in it.
• TheOrg has no credited author. We're very leery of uncredited articles, or articles credited to a role ("News Desk", etc.) because of how frequently they're used to publish content that bypassed the editor's desk.
• Google only ever regurgitates whatever the publisher says (or in the case of the Knowledge Panel, whatever nonsense they scrape from random, disparate sources) and so nothing Google presents is usable for notability since they don't actually subject it to editorial oversight.
• Interview vs. podcast is a distinction without a difference. Anything Khachatrian writes, says, films, commissions, semaphores, interpretive-dances, etc. is useless for notability by dint of his direct involvement in it. The same applies to anything written, said, filmed, commissioned, semaphored, interpretive-danced, etc. by any entity closely linked to him. You cannot seriously be arguing that an interview of him isn't him speaking about himself.

—Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Yevrowl (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Mark Ginzburg ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Greetings! Please suggest — what else can be improved in this article? Yevrowl (talk) 18:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the messages left by reviewers. 331dot (talk) 19:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• OliveRacc (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Lifesteal SMP ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need help making this page better in general and I have never used Wikipedia before. OliveRacc (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for you to tell the world about your Minecraft server. If independent reliable sources like news reports discuss your server, that would be different. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

If there are no such sources then there cannot be an article. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 112.203.134.153 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Ballad of Margo and Dread ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why did you delete it! The information is correct, and the sources ARE correct! 112.203.134.153 (talk) 03:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is here Draft:Ballad of Margo and Dread. Theroadislong (talk) 03:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know: Fandom, like other wikis, is a type of user-generated content, and thus is not a reliable source or useful for establishing notability. C F A 💬 05:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• AI Thabiso (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Shooting Stars Football Club - Academy ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Show notable external links for my article AI Thabiso (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AI Thabiso With respect, no. Please see WP:BURDEN. If you want it accepted, you do the work. If it passes our criteria it will be accepted. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• VovanAZAZ (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Vincent Leygonie ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The submission of the draft was declined. But this sportperson took part in the Olympics, had an achievement of being the first African to do so, and the draft has an independent reference confirming this (SA Sports Press) VovanAZAZ (talk) 07:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merely appearing in the Olympics is no longer sufficient to be notable as Wikipedia defines notability for people. It was at one point, but is no longer. WP:NSPORT is now just a list of things likely to get a person significant coverage in independent sources. Leygonie must meet the same guidelines as any other person- there must be significant coverage of him in independent reliable sources. If his notability is being the first African to participate in a particular event, you must summarize independent reliable sources that discuss this aspect of him beyond just saying it occurred. 331dot (talk) 08:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 45.117.215.79 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:SkyJumper Trampoline Park ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need help in getting the page approved, I would need detailed help in getting this approved 45.117.215.79 (talk) 08:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your link, the whole url is not needed. If you have an account, log in when posting. What specific help are you seeking? The reviewers left detailed messages, please see these, and the policies linked to therein carefully. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 1967user (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Akira Sawa ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I tried to create a Wikipedia page for Akira Sawa several times, but it was always rejected.

A few times it was a problem of notability.

So, on August 4, I added a page that mentioned his membership in the AAP and his election as a Fellow of the AAAS, which are proof that he is recognized as an excellent scientist in the academic community and his patents. Still, it was rejected because it was considered to be advertisement-like.

The references for his membership in the AAP and his election as a Fellow of the AAAS are the websites of the AAP and the AAAS, which I consider to be reliable sources.

I also got some information about Akira Sawa from the official website of Johns Hopkins University.

All the science papers are those in which Akira Sawa was involved, but they were published in top journals such as Science and Nature, which I think are also reliable publication sources.

I gathered information and wrote it because I thought he should be listed on Wikipedia, but honestly, I don't know what to change and how to change it further.

Please advise if there is any information I should reduce since it seems like an advertisement. Thank you. 1967user (talk) 15:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft is still lacking any reliable, independent, secondary sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Prince kumar 2.0 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Sheela Pandit ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

what is need for creat article of sheela pandit prajapati Prince kumar 2.0 (talk) 16:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NPOLITICIAN for the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 16:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prince kumar 2.0 this is not happening, and you shouldn't keep creating new accounts. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

any othet options Prince kumar 2.0 (talk) 16:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's the option of dropping it...? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can i know what is comes issue in this draft. Prince kumar 2.0 (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This won't be published, because

a) the draft doesn't provide the slightest evidence of notability of any kind;

b) this has been created so many times that the whole issue has become tendentious; and

c) blocked users aren't allowed to edit anyway.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to unblock can you help me please Prince kumar 2.0 (talk) 16:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are indeed blocked, then you must not edit English Wikipedia, under any user account or none until you have had the block lifted. See Guide to appealing blocks. ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• KTnow (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Chris Stark (climate expert) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I tried to create a page for the UK government's new Net Zero czar, appointed relatively recently. My draft was rejected. I work in public policy myself, it feels like a no-brainer to me that Chris Stark should have an article about him on Wikipedia (even prior to his recent appointment). There are many people less high-profile who have a dedicated article.

So I'm trying to ascertain:

i) Is my measure of notability off target? In which case, while I may not agree in principle, I'll just abandon the article. Or

ii) Is it an issue with referencing? I felt the referencing I provided was pretty decent, with a number of credible sources, but would appreciate a steer if not. Is it, for example, that sources like the Carbon Trust and the Climate Change Committee – while credible – are too close to the individual? Is it that sources like Business Green and renewable Energy Magazine – while reasonably well regarded in the industry – are too niche to be deemed credible on Wikipedia?

Any steer would be welcome. Thanks in advance! :-)

@KTnow: the problem is that half your sources are primary, the other half are appointment news (ie. routine business reporting), none of which contributes towards notability. The general notability guideline WP:GNG requires significant coverage, directly of the subject, in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent of the subject. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This helps a lot @DoubleGrazing, thank you. Now I have a sense of what is missing. So if I understand correctly, Carbon Trust and the Climate Change Committee here are considered primary sources. I wasn't aware that appointment news didn't count towards notability. Does that include a source like The Guardian (surely an appointment reported in The Guardian would contribute towards notability?). Are you able to point me to where appointment news is mentioned, I wouldn't mind reading the exact guidance for myself. Thank you, appreciate it! KTnow (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@KTnow: just to say that this draft has now been accepted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:31, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @DoubleGrazing! KTnow (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ninjaboy999096 (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:This page only has 2 links ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

this is not a test it is just a silly thing and it also probably wont be a forgotten one because there is no similar pages to this Ninjaboy999096 (talk) 23:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ninjaboy999096: Is there something specific you need help with? C F A 💬 03:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Rare Crane (talk · contribs) ⁽⁾
  • Draft:Ronnie Haran ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Regarding notability, in the category of entertainers, it says "The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" -- what qualifies as significant here? Haran seems to have taken named roles with dialogue in multiple TV shows and also had a (non-starring) role in a feature film. Does "significant" imply main character or recurring character versus just single-episode appearances?

I can work on finding better sources for the article overall. Rare Crane (talk) 23:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]