Editing Eurovision Wiki:Teahouse (section)

== Question on draft ==

Hi! I would like to know how I could improve my [[Draft:All Bodo Students' Union|draft]] because it was declined for lacking criteria for inclusion. I had used 18 references which included independent articles, research papers, recognised newspapers, and one official government notice. Out of these, I had used only 3 dependent sources to explain the organisation's '''founding date''' and ''' internal structure''' because: 

# Members know their organisation better. 
# I could not find any exclusive coverage on the matter.

Other than these 3 particular sources, I had tried my best to find the most reliable sources. I would be extremely grateful if someone could identify the faults in my draft. Thank you. [[User:Unbreakablerodent|Unbreakablerodent]] ([[User talk:Unbreakablerodent|talk]]) 19:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

:@[[User:Unbreakablerodent|Unbreakablerodent]] You’re right, members often do know their organization better, but you know what they also know as a consequence? What said organization wants the public to know about them. That’s why you can’t use dependent sources. See [[WP:INDEPENDENT]] for more info. Cheers, <span style="font-family: Sans; padding: 2px 3px 1px 3px;">[[User:Shadestar474|<span style="color: #AB60FF">Shadestar474</span>]] (they/he) [[User talk:Shadestar474|<span style="color: #4A46FF"><sup>(talk)</sup></span>]]</span> 20:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
::I know the consequences very well. But there are no disputes on founding date and internal structure either. It was the only source. I cannot leave an article ''bare'' because it lacks a date, can I? Also, I did not use any dependent source to articulate the organisation's contribution, which should be the primary subject of the topic. 
::Non-independent sources are allowed under certain circumstances but it seems to me that the reviewer only looked into the first few lines of the draft. [[Wikipedia:Independent sources|WP:INDEPENDENT]] itself says:
::''However, uncontroversial statements for which the information logically comes from the subject, such as "Big Company has 15,000 employees", does not require WP:INTEXT attribution; in fact, in-text attribution in such cases could improperly cast undue doubt on the statement.'' [[User:Unbreakablerodent|Unbreakablerodent]] ([[User talk:Unbreakablerodent|talk]]) 20:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Unbreakablerodent|Unbreakablerodent]], you are right that it is fine that to use the organization as a reference for facts. However, to have an article the organization must be already well-known as shown by having several references that are, at the some time, reliably published, in-depth, and completely independent of the organization. The message explaining the decline is not saying that all references must be independent, only those you are using to show that the organization is well-known enough to have an article. [[User:StarryGrandma|StarryGrandma]] ([[User talk:StarryGrandma|talk]]) 21:15, 17 March 2026 (UTC)