Editing Eurovision Wiki:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk (section)

= March 14 =

== 03:19, 14 March 2026 review of submission by ReflectionInTheKoiPond ==
{{Lafc|username=ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ts=03:19, 14 March 2026|draft=Draft:Reflection_in_the_Koi_Pond}}
I am writing to request a review of this draft for Reflection in the Koi Pond. I want to be fully transparent that I am the artist described in the article, and I am aware of Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest (COI) policies.

I have made every effort to maintain a neutral, encyclopedic tone and have avoided promotional language. My goal is to demonstrate notability under the WP:NMUSIC guidelines. Specifically, I have included citations from independent, reliable secondary sources.

I would appreciate feedback on whether the current sourcing is sufficient to establish notability or if the tone needs further adjustment to meet Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you for your time and guidance. [[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]] ([[User talk:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|talk]]) 03:19, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:{{tq|Specifically, I have included citations from independent, reliable secondary sources.}} No, you haven't. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:32, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:Hi @[[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]], and thank you for declaring your conflict of interest here. Please make sure to do so on your userpage - instructions are at [[WP:COIE]]. 
:You have submitted the draft for review, so it's in the review pool now and will be reviewed in due time. We don't do pre-review reviews, as that defeats the purpose of reviews! As the big yellow box at the top of your draft now says, {{tq|Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,895 pending submissions waiting for review.}} You can continue to improve the draft while you wait. I suggest looking for sources and assessing them against [[WP:42]]. You will need three or more sources that meet ''all three'' criteria in WP:42. You will also need to use [[WP:REFB|Referencing for beginners]] to cite those sources. Every statement made in the draft ''must'' be supported by a source cited right after that statement. 
:If you have used AI/LLMs to generate the draft, or to talk to us here, please know that it is not permitted to use AI/LLMs to write drafts and that using AI/LLMs to talk to other editors is heavily discouraged. You'll get much better responses if you use your own words, even if your English isn't perfect. Machines don't understand what we're telling them to do, and will make promises they can't keep. We want to talk to the humans. I wish you good luck in finding some excellent sources, and happy editing. [[User:Meadowlark|Meadowlark]] ([[User talk:Meadowlark|talk]]) 03:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::Hello Meadowlark and Athanelar, thank you both for your detailed feedback and guidance. I understand that my draft currently lacks the required independent, reliable sources and significant coverage needed to demonstrate notability under Wikipedia’s music guidelines.
::I will focus on identifying and adding sources that meet the WP:42 criteria, and ensure every statement in the draft is properly cited. I will also review the guidance on COI declaration and referencing to make sure everything is correctly formatted.
::For clarity, I am not using AI or language models to write the draft or communicate here; all content is my own words.
::I appreciate your time and patience while I work on improving the draft. [[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]] ([[User talk:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|talk]]) 04:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Exactly which criteria of [[WP:MUSICBIO]] do you believe you meet? ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 06:23, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::I work with a Korean recording organization called "6v6 recordings (https://en.namu.wiki/w/6v6%20Recordings)", most of the members in it are on Wikipedia except me, I believe it'd be nice to put all of us on Wikipedia. [[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]] ([[User talk:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|talk]]) 06:31, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::You didn't answer the question. Which criteria of [[WP:MUSICBIO]] do you believe you meet?
:::::Also, en.namu.wiki has nothing to do with Wikipedia.
:::::The only member I see who has an article is [[Brokenteeth]], who apparently meets [[WP:MUSICBIO]] criterion #5. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 06:50, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::I understand the question... At this time, I believe I do not meet the WP:MUSICBIO notability criteria then. I am part of 6v6 Recordings, but my personal career has not yet received coverage or achievements that satisfy Wikipedia’s standards for independent notability. I will continue working on my music and hope to meet these criteria in the future, I apologize for wasting your time. [[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]] ([[User talk:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|talk]]) 06:54, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Oh, I don't mind the conversation. I hope it helped you learn what Wikipedia requires for a music artist. I wish you good fortune in your career.
:::::::In the meantime, feel free to improve other articles (except you should avoid editing articles with which you have a conflict of interest, like [[Brokenteeth]] for example, but instead use [[WP:Edit Request Wizard]] to propose changes). Being a new editor trying to write an article right away is really hard and almost always fails. It's best to try creating a new article when you have more experience. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 07:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Thank you so much! [[User:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|ReflectionInTheKoiPond]] ([[User talk:ReflectionInTheKoiPond|talk]]) 07:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Also, ''why'' do you want an article about yourself on Wikipedia? Is it vanity? Publicity? Search engine optimization? None of those are valid reasons. If you are truly notable, someone will eventually come along and write an article about you. Whether that happens next month, 10 years from now, or after your life has ended, shouldn't matter to you in the least. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 06:25, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

== 05:49, 14 March 2026 review of submission by Dramprabhu ==
{{Lafc|username=Dramprabhu|ts=05:49, 14 March 2026|draft=Draft:Kapilan_Karunanidhi}}
Hi, 
can you assist improve this draft. please  [[User:Dramprabhu|Dramprabhu]] ([[User talk:Dramprabhu|talk]]) 05:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:No. The draft has been '''rejected''', which means stop, don't waste more time on it, do not expect reviewers to waste more time on it, because it will not be considered for further review. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 06:19, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

::{{ping|Dramprabhu}} Creating [[Kabilan Karunanidhi]] right after being told to stop was a completely unacceptable action. [[User:Spiderone|<span style="color: #996600">Spiderone</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Spiderone|<span style="color:brown">(Talk to Spider)</span>]]</sup> 11:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::If you try to bypass the review process again, your account will be blocked. At this time it is apparent that you are clearly [[WP:NOTHERE]] to build an encyclopedia, instead you just want to use it for publicity purposes, which is prohibited. If you cannot become a productive editor for other topics where you don't have a conflict of interest, then Wikipedia isn't a good place for you to spend your time. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 15:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

== 16:02, 14 March 2026 review of submission by Thiagovscoelho ==
{{Lafc|username=Thiagovscoelho|ts=16:02, 14 March 2026|draft=Draft:Monokai}}
This draft seems to be unfairly held up by reviewers. They allege two grounds:
# Lack of sources for notability.
# Being made with AI.

Regarding the first: I'm not sure what kinds of sources can be ''expected'' for something like this (a syntax highlighting color scheme). The [[Solarized]] and [[Dracula_(color_scheme)|Dracula]] articles seem to stand on more or less the same kinds of sources. I think Wikipedia should follow consistent rules, so either those articles should be removed, this one should be admitted, or a difference between them should be clarified.

Regarding the second: I have no idea how the article draft was first made (all I did was add some extra sources). It is in entirely encyclopedic tone and does not violate copyrights. The editor who rejected the current draft highlighted a sentence which is not in any way flawed: it is not unencyclopedic or plagiarized.

Something is wrong here, either with the rejection of this draft or the acceptance of earlier, similar pages. [[User:Thiagovscoelho|Thiagovscoelho]] ([[User talk:Thiagovscoelho|talk]]) 16:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:Every article stands on its own (see [[WP:OTHERSTUFF]]. There are many thousands of articles which aren't necessarily up to the standards of Wikipedia, but nobody has addressed them yet. There are more than seven million articles on English Wikipedia; if we determined notability simply by finding other articles that exist that haven't yet been deleted, it would be a death spiral to the bottom. Your most convincing argument would be ''only'' focusing on the sources in question and how they support the content in ''this'' article. And there's definitely some AI slop in the article. [[User:CoffeeCrumbs|CoffeeCrumbs]] ([[User talk:CoffeeCrumbs|talk]]) 16:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::I don't necessarily want that draft to be published, I mean, I would also be interested in getting those other articles deleted if that were the correct decision. Mostly I wanted clarity and enlightenment and stuff, with respect to the rules. [[User:Thiagovscoelho|Thiagovscoelho]] ([[User talk:Thiagovscoelho|talk]]) 01:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::There are many ways inappropriate content can exist on Wikipedia. That another article exists does not necessarily mean that it was "approved" by anyone. In the very early days of Wikipedia, there was a rush to create articles and many of those were of poor quality and never examined by anyone.  Standards have changed over time, usually getting stricter.  The draft process is relatively new and is not required of all users.
:::You are welcome to identify articles you see that do not meet standards, so action can be taken.  We are only as good as those who choose to help us. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 08:28, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:You need sources, ideally at least three, that satisfy all the criteria in [[WP:42]]. The [[Solarized]] article has such sources, such as a piece in ''Wired'' with in-depth discussion of the color scheme. I don't see any sources in your draft that meet the criteria. [[User:Helpful Raccoon|Helpful Raccoon]] ([[User talk:Helpful Raccoon|talk]]) 19:26, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::Eh, alright. I added more sources and resent the other guy's draft mostly to clarify this. I mean, so ''that's'' why Monokai isn't on Wikipedia, I guess; I hadn't thought that much about "significant coverage" before (since I usually only create articles that are obviously notable). [[User:Thiagovscoelho|Thiagovscoelho]] ([[User talk:Thiagovscoelho|talk]]) 01:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Thiagovscoelho|Thiagovscoelho]] that's right, indeed subjects can be obviously notable, but will not get an article simply because at this stage the notability can't be proven via significant coverage of the subject under [[WP:GNG]]. We often refer people to [[WP:42]] but the GNG text isn't that long and makes it crystal clear this draft isn't (yet) viable.  This draft may be better placed as a section within one of the four subjects named in the lead section. AI, once it is in an article, has an infective quality which is very time-consuming to remove. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 09:39, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

== 16:06, 14 March 2026 review of submission by Youssuhhh ==
{{Lafc|username=Youssuhhh|ts=16:06, 14 March 2026|draft=User:Youssuhhh/sandbox}}
This draft appears to be blank. If you have not written your text yet, please add your content before resubmitting. If you did write the text, it may be hidden by a formatting error. Please check the "Edit" tab to ensure your text is not inside a comment tag.

How i can fix this easily? [[User:Youssuhhh|Youssuhhh]] ([[User talk:Youssuhhh|talk]]) 16:06, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:@[[User:Youssuhhh|Youssuhhh]]: please don't start multiple drafts.
:You can "fix easily" the blankness by adding some content before submitting it. Just out of curiosity, why are you submitting blank drafts? -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 16:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

== 18:27, 14 March 2026 review of submission by Rotar6 ==
{{Lafc|username=Rotar6|ts=18:27, 14 March 2026|draft=Draft:Mahmood_Alam}}
{{AfC comment|1=I am working on improving the draft with additional reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the subject.}} [[User:Rotar6|Rotar6]] ([[User talk:Rotar6|talk]]) 18:27, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:

:Why are you doing that? The draft has been '''rejected''', which means it will '''not''' be considered further. Don't waste your time, and don't waste valuable reviewer time either. If you want to resubmit it, you must appeal to the reviewer who rejected it. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 19:58, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

== 20:11, 14 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-15909-89 ==
{{Lafc|username=~2026-15909-89|ts=20:11, 14 March 2026|draft=Draft:Story_Kitchen}}
To the reviewers who checked this [[Draft:Story Kitchen|draft]] months ago. I understand that topic is not notable and is already included at the page for [[Dmitri M. Johnson]], but I’ve managed to complete most of the history of the company from it’s former side of dj2 Entertainment to the recent company Story Kitchen. I’ve been cleaning up, formatting the paragraphs, and got almost every project scrapped or in production. With that in mind, I would like for the admins to make another proposal to make the page notable if possible. I’ll understand your decision until further notice, but I’ll keep making sure that Story Kitchen’s history is up to date on recent events so far. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-15909-89|&#126;2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-15909-89|talk]]) 20:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

:You should first appeal to the rejecting reviewer on their user talk page, click the word talk next to their username on the draft. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 20:39, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::I did from 11WB but I'll try again for the recent reviewer so far. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-15909-89|&#126;2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-15909-89|talk]]) 20:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:::I am not the rejecting reviewer, that would be @[[User:CNMall41|CNMall41]]. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  22:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Thanks for the ping. I also replied on my talk page. OP agrees the topic is not notable which means no amount of editing will make it such. --[[User:CNMall41|CNMall41]] ([[User talk:CNMall41|talk]]) 04:00, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Thing is, @[[User:CNMall41|CNMall41]] wants me to  disclose my [[WP:COI]] per [[WP:PAID]] on the draft. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-15909-89|&#126;2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-15909-89|talk]]) 19:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::I’m not in it for the money, I just wanna have the page all sorted out for Story Kitchen. I do not work for the company, but only to get the history of how the studio worked on various films from their website including shows like Tomb Raider. So in the safe term, I think I’m more of a [[WP:COI]] than being part of [[WP:PAID]]. I’m doing all I can to gather enough sources and games being adapted into films and television. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-15909-89|&#126;2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-15909-89|talk]]) 19:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::That’s why I also need to make another proposal for it because I’m not sure if it’s gonna work on being on the Wikipedia or not. Still, I’m trying to be up-to-date on everything on the history of dj2 Entertainment/Story Kitchen. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-15909-89|&#126;2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-15909-89|talk]]) 19:38, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::I have answered on my talk page and won't do it in multiple places. The edit history of the pages and your editing pattern indicate a clear COI. I provide instructions on my talk page on how to request edits and make the disclosure. Good luck. --[[User:CNMall41|CNMall41]] ([[User talk:CNMall41|talk]]) 20:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::Should be noted I am no longer an active AfC reviewer or new page patroller. @[[User:~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]], based on the feedback you have received here, it would be best to disclose any conflicts of interest you do have. You've now brought this issue to my talk page, @CNMall41's talk page, and also here. You run the risk of [[WP:FORUMSHOPPING]] by doing this. If the company is notable at any point in the future, an editor without a COI may very well choose to create an article for them. Presently, the draft has been rejected. The reality is that the company doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  20:27, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::{{u|WB11}} We usually ask those seeking to submit a rejected draft after changes to first appeal to the rejecting reviewer to ask that they reconsider the rejection. If you don't wish to be contacted about drafts you rejected, you might want to put that on your user talk page. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 21:36, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::I didn't reject the draft. I declined it prior, please check the draft for confirmation. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  22:05, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::Oops, wires crossed, apologies. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 22:13, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::Not to worry! I have no problem being contacted about declines or reviews I've done. [[User:11WB|<span style="color:#8C6A31; ">11WB</span>]] ([[User talk:11WB|talk]])  22:17, 15 March 2026 (UTC)