Editing
Eurovision Wiki:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
{{/header}} __NEWSECTIONLINK__ [[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed|{{PAGENAME}}]] {{skip to top and bottom}} [[Category:Pages that should not be manually archived]] [[Category:WikiProject Articles for creation]] [[Category:Wikipedia help forums|Articles for creation: Help Desk]] <!-- LEAVE YOUR MESSAGE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE --> __TOC__ {{Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2026 March 12}} = March 13 = == 07:22, 13 March 2026 review of submission by Kitmajo == {{Lafc|username=Kitmajo|ts=07:22, 13 March 2026|draft=Draft:Spamtoipia}} why I don't understand why I didn't meet the standard to publish my page [[User:Kitmajo|Kitmajo]] ([[User talk:Kitmajo|talk]]) 07:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC) : {{u|Kitmajo}}, if you are asking about [[Draft:Spamtoipia]], it is complete nonsense and utterly inappropriate for an encyclopedia. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 07:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC) == 09:53, 13 March 2026 review of submission by KPeters89 == {{Lafc|username=KPeters89|ts=09:53, 13 March 2026|draft=Draft:Clayton_Industries}} Beings fully rejected by reason "still reads like" feels very opinionated. [[User:KPeters89|KPeters89]] ([[User talk:KPeters89|talk]]) 09:53, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :You have just told of the routine business activities and offerings of the company. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of [[WP:ORG|a notable company]]. "Significant coverage" is critical analysis and commentary as to what is viewed as important/significant/influential about the company. :If you are associated with this company, that must be disclosed, please see your user talk page. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 10:54, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :Did you or did you not use AI as part of your workflow in creating this draft? Whether @[[User:Pythoncoder|Pythoncoder]] rejection is 'opinionated' or not doesn't matter if they're correct, because it is in fact [[WP:NEWLLM|not allowed]] to create drafts/articles using AI. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 11:53, 13 March 2026 (UTC) == 10:24, 13 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-75122-3 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-75122-3|ts=10:24, 13 March 2026|draft=Draft:Rare_Cancers_Bill}} Hi, the reviewer feedback suggests I have incorrectly formatted citations; however, I'm not quite sure what they mean by this/how a correctly formatted citation should look. Would you be able to explain in more detail, and/or provide an example of what a correctly formatted citation would look like? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/~2026-75122-3|~2026-75122-3]] ([[User talk:~2026-75122-3|talk]]) 10:24, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :Please see [[WP:REFB|Referencing for beginners]]. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 10:50, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :Also be aware of promotional tone. Sentences like {{tq|the bill is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to move away from a one-size-fits-all oncology model.}} are not encyclopedically acceptable even when tacked onto a [[WP:WEASEL|weasel statement]] like {{tq|Supporters argue that...}}. Such fawning praise would need to be quoted to someone specific. I would also advise you create an account here; because you're a paid editor, it would make it much easier for us to track your contributions. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 11:51, 13 March 2026 (UTC) == 13:31, 13 March 2026 review of submission by TammarieSheamus == {{Lafc|username=TammarieSheamus|ts=13:31, 13 March 2026|draft=Draft:International_College_of_Craniomandibular_Orthopedics}} I'm new to this. My draft was returned asking me to "needs references/ has bare refs". I want to fix it. There are words highlighted in blue (I thought that was a just a hotline to a direct reference ie.in Wikipedia) and others in purple. Is it the purple ones I need to work on before resubmission or both blue and purple? Another editor said not to resubmit it until everything is fixed. What does the blue highlight mean? What does the purple highlight mean? [[User:TammarieSheamus|TammarieSheamus]] ([[User talk:TammarieSheamus|talk]]) 13:31, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :Purple links are ones you've clicked before. When they say you need to fix your bare references, they mean that your references need to be formatted with citation templates rather than just being bare URLs like your 6th reference. Your references also need to be structured as footnotes to the reference list (like you've done in the lead) not as external links in square brackets (like you've done in the "Governance structure" section) :Please see [[Help:Referencing for beginners]] for a guide to properly referencing. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 19:22, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:TammarieSheamus|TammarieSheamus]]. As is often the case when inexperienced editors try to write a Wikipedia article, you have not understood what a Wikipedia article should be. A Wikipedia article should be a [[WP:Neutral point of view|neutral summary]] of what the [[WP:DUEWEIGHT|majority of people]] who are [[WP:Independent sources|wholly unconnected]] with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in [[WP:Reliable sources|reliable publications]], (see [[WP:Golden rule|Golden rule]]) and not much else. [[WP:No original research|What you know]] (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be [[WP:Verifiability|verified]] from a reliable published source. :Almost nothing written, published, or based on the words of, anybody associated with the College is relevant to this article. Nearly all of your sources cited should be wholly independent of the College, and contain significant coverage of the college specifically (not just people or projects associated with it). See [[WP:golden rule|golden rule]] for the criteria most of the sources should meet. :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 [[WP:verifiability|verifiability]], [[WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view]], [[WP:42|reliable, independent sources]], and [[WP:notability|notability]], and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the [[WP:BRD|Bold, Revert, Discuss]] cycle), then you might be ready to read [[WP:your first article|your first article]] carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 22:07, 13 March 2026 (UTC) == 23:58, 13 March 2026 review of submission by Leswinters == {{Lafc|username=Leswinters|ts=23:58, 13 March 2026|draft=Draft:Eddie_9V}} They are placed on Sirius XM on rotation. You can look them up on the Sirius website. This qualifies as notable per your number 11 in the listing of what makes someone notable enough for an article. Therefore, I have satisfied the reason of denial so, why isn’t the Eddie 9V article published? [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 23:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC) :{{tq|This qualifies as notable per your number 11 in the listing of what makes someone notable enough for an article.}} Which 'listing' are you referring to? [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 00:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::The listing for what makes a notable musician [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 01:28, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::[[Wikipedia:Notability (music)]] [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 01:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::And which of the references in your draft prove that they are on Sirius XM's rotation? [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 01:31, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::They release their playlists but they do not release articles about what they play for anyone. I can send you screenshots or links to the playlist pages but this would not be a source cited for an article as NO national radio station does that. So, how am I supposed to do that? The notability for a musician page does not say this needs to be cited, it just needs to be to be considered notable. I assume that means the people reviewing need to actually do due diligence and look these things up instead of denying for a reason that doesn’t exist. https://xmplaylist.com/station/thespectrum/track/NVRD-PBTP#google_vignette ::::https://xmplaylist.com/station/thespectrum/track/CFSV-AI78 ::::https://xmplaylist.com/station/bbkingsbluesville/track/ZTQ5-9YMS [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 01:48, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::It quite plainly says at the top of [[WP:Notability (music)]] that {{tq|To meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true.}} If your claim is that the band is notable because they meet criterion 11, you have to demonstrate within the article that they meet criterion 11; i.e., that they are in Sirius XM's rotation. The links to xmplaylist seem to merely show that those songs have been recently played, and not necessarily that they're in a regular rotation. I could be wrong, of course, but if that's what you're hinging the claim to notability on then you might want to find something clearer. :::::It should also be noted that {{tq|meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept.}} Or included, in this case. Even if notability can be presumed based on NMUSIC 11, your article doesn't contain much else of substance about the band. There's no critical analysis of their work or their style, just some brief discussion about their history and then a bare discography list (which appears to be AI generated; in no small part because the AI seems to have thought that Eddie 9V is a person, referring to them as "he" and saying that the discography "reflects [their] evolution as an artist") with no source for that analysis or any further elaboration. If this band is notable, then somebody must have written something about them other than "They exist and here's how they met." It's your responsibility as the article creator to find those sources and include the information they contain to actually create a substantial article. :::::If you're now thinking "well, shit, that sounds like a lot of work.", you'd be correct. Writing an article is one of the most complex tasks on Wikipedia, and you've chosen to undertake it as a brand new editor with no other experience under your belt; which inevitably leads to you running into these kinds of issues because you don't have a robust understanding of our requirements. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 02:06, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::I included an article from Rolling Stone! They don’t write articles about people that aren’t notable. That is in the citations. ::::::Are you kidding me? Do you know what I’ve accomplished in my life. This does not seem like a lot of work now. I don’t appreciate you speaking to me this way and will report you for abuse. [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:16, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::Yes, I can see the Rolling Stones article in your references. However, first of all it's a review of one of their songs and not [[WP:SIGCOV|significant coverage]] of the band themselves, and secondly the only information you've actually cited to this source in your draft are the words "Brothers Lane and Brooks Kelly". [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 02:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::::I was told previously to add in references even though I didn’t cite them. I argued against that as I was never able to publish doing that and they said to do it to establish notoriety. [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::Saying "[[WP:DONTYOUKNOWWHOIAM|don't you know who I am?]]" is not something that generally produces the results you think it will on Wikipedia. We don't care about what you've accomplished in your life, all that matters is what you are doing on Wikipedia. - [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] <sub>[[User talk:The Bushranger|<span style="color: maroon;">One ping only</span>]]</sub> 04:45, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::My attorney said he can get involved if they are only posting articles by people that work more for them. That’s discrimination. [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:19, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::You should know that [[WP:Legal threats|legal threats]] are grounds for your account to be immediately blocked; you should rescind this immediately. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 02:23, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::::You cussed at me and wrote a very aggressively harassing response. I am pretty sure you cat do that either. [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::::*cant [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::::@[[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]], Athanelar did not "cuss" at you, and their response was perfectly civil. They did use the word 'shit', most likely to indicate surprise in the response they're imagining from the reader; they were not using it to denigrate either you or your writing. :::::::::Can you please clarify what you mean by {{tq|if they are only posting articles by people that work more for them}}? [[User:Meadowlark|Meadowlark]] ([[User talk:Meadowlark|talk]]) 03:31, 14 March 2026 (UTC) :::::::::Please retract your legal threat, there is already a [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents|AN/I]] discussion against you. [[User:EditorShane3456|shane]] [[User talk: EditorShane3456|(talk to me if you want!)]] 04:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::There was absolutely no AI used for this. I am old school, I don’t use AI for anything. [[User:Leswinters|Leswinters]] ([[User talk:Leswinters|talk]]) 02:40, 14 March 2026 (UTC) = 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/~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:~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/~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:~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/~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:~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/~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:~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/~2026-15909-89|~2026-15909-89]] ([[User talk:~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) = March 15 = == 04:48, 15 March 2026 review of submission by LongTeng82 == {{Lafc|username=LongTeng82|ts=04:48, 15 March 2026|draft=Draft:Rising_Dragon_School}} Hello, I am seeking guidance regarding my draft article Draft:Rising Dragon School, which was recently declined with the comment that it is not adequately supported by reliable sources. The draft currently cites coverage from China Daily, China Central Television (CCTV), Sohu News, and Europe Times, which all independently discuss the school. I asked for clarification on the draft talk page but have not yet received a response. Could someone please advise whether the issue relates to the type of sources, the number of sources, or how the sources are used within the article? I would like to improve the draft appropriately before resubmitting. Thank you for any guidance. [[User:LongTeng82|LongTeng82]] ([[User talk:LongTeng82|talk]]) 04:48, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :The reviewer was blocked as a sockpuppet account, so I have un-reviewed it. It is now waiting for review again. :Regarding your question about sources, see [[WP:Golden Rule]] to understand the kind of sources required. Ideally a reviewer likes to see at least three sources that ''each'' meet ''all'' the golden-rule criteria. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :@[[User:LongTeng82|LongTeng82]] - apologies for the slight hiccup in the review process. I don't know the details of that, but I've given a more detailed set of responses than I would normally give in order to assist you. Basically ditch AI, it's definitely not your friend, and look for rock solid significant coverage of the school as institution, rather than Scott giving interviews. I have to say I think it's unlikely that can be met, typically this sort of school won't get over the notability hurdle, some universities struggle! [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 09:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC) ::Hello ChrysGalley, ::Thanks for such a detailed response, I appreciate the guidance. ::You are correct that I used an AI tool to help polish the wording and grammar of the draft. My intention was simply to improve the clarity of the writing rather than generate content, but I understand the concern and I will rewrite the article myself to ensure it reflects Wikipedia’s expected tone and style. ::Regarding the sources, I understand your point about the distinction between coverage of the school as an institution and interviews focused on Scott Bird. Looking again at the sources, it does appear that much of the media coverage discusses Scott Bird personally and his work in China rather than the school alone. ::In that case, would it potentially be better to create a biography article about Scott Bird instead? Several of the sources focus on his background and journey training and teaching martial arts in China. There is also earlier independent coverage from the Solihull Times in the UK from the 1990s relating to his martial arts career. ::If that would be a more suitable approach under Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, I would be grateful for your advice on whether pursuing a biography article first would make more sense. ::Thank you again for your time and assistance. [[User:LongTeng82|LongTeng82]] ([[User talk:LongTeng82|talk]]) 10:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :::@[[User:LongTeng82|LongTeng82]] It's just a simple question: does that subject, any subject, have 3 rock solid secondary, truly independent, sources, with significant coverage per [[WP:42]]? If so, summarise those 3 sources, don't do [[WP:BACKWARDS]]. So if SB meets that then you can certainly consider it. Forget LLM, we can edit out dodgy grammar and spelling mistakes in seconds, but LLM takes hours to unravel. However writing about yourself is (a) hard to impossible, I don't have the skill-set to do it (b) strongly discouraged under [[WP:FAQAS]]. Fixing, improving, repairing, sourcing existing Wikipedia articles will not get you many thank yous, but is a much more creditable thing to do. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 11:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:41, 15 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-16311-81 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-16311-81|ts=05:41, 15 March 2026|draft=Draft:Jitendra_Singh_Nimod}} Why not any wikipedia page about Jitendra Singh Nimod even he is a well known Web Developer. Many writers wrote about him. [[Special:Contributions/~2026-16311-81|~2026-16311-81]] ([[User talk:~2026-16311-81|talk]]) 05:41, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :There were ''zero'' sources cited in that draft. If "many writers wrote about him" then those writers should be cited. :We also don't accept LLM-generated drafts. :The draft has been '''rejected''', which means it '''will not''' be considered further. Full stop. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:50, 15 March 2026 (UTC) == 07:38, 15 March 2026 review of submission by Youssuhhh == {{Lafc|username=Youssuhhh|ts=07:38, 15 March 2026|draft=User:Youssuhhh/sandbox}} The subject is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. If you can fix this please [[User:Youssuhhh|Youssuhhh]] ([[User talk:Youssuhhh|talk]]) 07:38, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :@[[User:Youssuhhh|Youssuhhh]]: I asked you already yesterday, why do you keep submitting a blank page? We have actual drafts to review, you know. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 07:42, 15 March 2026 (UTC) ::The content appears to be misplaced here [[User:Youssuhhh]]. [[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]] ([[User talk:Theroadislong|talk]]) 07:50, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :::Which has since been deleted under G11. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 10:58, 15 March 2026 (UTC) == 09:06, 15 March 2026 review of submission by Devolver789 == {{Lafc|username=Devolver789|ts=09:06, 15 March 2026|draft=Draft:Brookhaven_RP}} I significantly updated the draft page and even became aware if both the sources and the formatting of the draft have met Wikipedia's standards and policies. [[User:Devolver789|MrDevolver]] ([[User talk:Devolver789|talk]]) 09:06, 15 March 2026 (UTC) :The draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered for inclusion anymore. The only way to reverse this would be to appeal to the rejecting reviewer, @[[User:Zxcvbnm|Zxcvbnm]], directly. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 10:51, 15 March 2026 (UTC) ::Alright then [[User:Devolver789|MrDevolver]] ([[User talk:Devolver789|talk]]) 10:56, 15 March 2026 (UTC) = March 16 = == 02:09, 16 March 2026 review of submission by GRGURJAR == {{Lafc|username=GRGURJAR|ts=02:09, 16 March 2026|draft=Mridul Tiwari}} I have created the Wikipedia page of Mridul Tiwari on the basis of all the news pages and it is based on all the facts, there is nothing wrong in it. [[User:GRGURJAR|GRGURJAR]] ([[User talk:GRGURJAR|talk]]) 02:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :[[Draft:Mridul Tiwari]] has been rejected and will not be considered for inclusion unless the rejecting reviewer, @[[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]], can be convinced to overturn their rejection. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 02:42, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == Draft review request – Kissa Court Kachehari Ka == Hello, I would appreciate some guidance from WikiProject Film editors regarding [[Draft:Kissa Court Kachehari Ka]]. The film was released on 13 March 2026 and the draft now includes coverage and critical reviews from several publications such as [[The Times of India]], [[India TV]], [[News18]], [[Lokmat]], [[Jansatta]] and ''Film Information'' by [[Komal Nahta]]. The draft has already been submitted for AfC review. Since the film has now been released and reviews have been published, I was wondering if any editor from the project could kindly take a look and suggest improvements or help with review. Thank you. [[User:Sadda 022|Sadda 022]] ([[User talk:Sadda 022|talk]]) 09:22, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :You have submitted it for a review; we don't do reviews on demand(because then everyone would demand a speedy review) so asking for a review does not speed this volunteer driven process. If you want to communicate with the Film Project, please communicate with it directly. :Also, if you have no conflict of interest with the film, you are free to place it into the encyclopedia yourself with the 'Move' function(though its inadvisable unless you have had drafts accepted in the past). [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 09:28, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 10:56, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Charles 091 == {{Lafc|username=Charles 091|ts=10:56, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Little_Alchemy_2}} I’m requesting assistance because I need to find reliable sources. [[User:Charles 091|Charles 091]] ([[User talk:Charles 091|talk]]) 10:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :You are not likely to find anyone willing to help co-edit here at the AFC helpdesk. In addition, with small games like this, if you can't find significant secondary coverage at a cursory search, it's not likely to present itself. The vast majority of video games, just like the vast majority of things in the world in general, are not notable by Wikipedia standards and do not need a standalone article here. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 11:43, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 10:57, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Elektra Techno Labs Pvt Ltd == {{Lafc|username=Elektra Techno Labs Pvt Ltd|ts=10:57, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Manoj_Vasudev}} what are the reason of rejection [[User:Elektra Techno Labs Pvt Ltd|Elektra Techno Labs Pvt Ltd]] ([[User talk:Elektra Techno Labs Pvt Ltd|talk]]) 10:57, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :The draft was declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the draft process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. Declined means that it may be resubmitted. The reason for declining it was left by the reviewer. Do you have a more specific question about it? [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 12:54, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 12:00, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Jarxdanthony == {{Lafc|username=Jarxdanthony|ts=12:00, 16 March 2026|draft=Jarxd Anthony}} Hello, could someone please move my sandbox at User:Jarxdanthony/sandbox to Draft:Jarxd Anthony (page title: Jarxd Anthony) so I can submit it for review? Thank you! [[User:Jarxdanthony|Jarxdanthony]] ([[User talk:Jarxdanthony|talk]]) 12:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :@[[User:Jarxdanthony|Jarxdanthony]]: no, but I have declined and deleted it. Please do not write about yourself, and whatever you do, do not ''promote'' yourself. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 12:03, 16 March 2026 (UTC) ::ok, sorry I didn't know, So who can write about me🤦🏽🤦🏽🤦🏽 [[User:Jarxdanthony|Jarxdanthony]] ([[User talk:Jarxdanthony|talk]]) 12:33, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :::The news, professional critics, something like that. Once others who are not associated with you write about you, there would then be things to summarize in an article about you. If you want to tell about yourself, that's exactly what social media is for. :::Please see [[WP:PROUD]]; there are good reasons to not want an article. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 12:53, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :PS: Please don't start multiple threads at once. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 12:04, 16 March 2026 (UTC) ::ok thank you [[User:Jarxdanthony|Jarxdanthony]] ([[User talk:Jarxdanthony|talk]]) 12:59, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 13:30, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Writersdesk2022 == {{Lafc|username=Writersdesk2022|ts=13:30, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Tobias_Kaspar}} what can I do so my work was not for nothing and this Draft is being accepted? [[User:Writersdesk2022|Writersdesk2022]] ([[User talk:Writersdesk2022|talk]]) 13:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :Rejection means it's the end of the line for the draft, at least for the time being. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 14:59, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 13:59, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Kainoa Cortez == {{Lafc|username=Kainoa Cortez|ts=13:59, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Kainoa_Cortez}} How do I make my article meet the Wikipedia criteria? [[User:Kainoa Cortez|Kainoa Cortez]] ([[User talk:Kainoa Cortez|talk]]) 13:59, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :You are not [[WP:GNG|notable]] in Wikipedia terms, your draft has zero independent reliable sources, it has been rejected there is nothing you can do except wait until reliable sources have covered you in significant detail and then wait until somebody entirely unconnected to you decides to write an article based on those sources. [[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]] ([[User talk:Theroadislong|talk]]) 14:14, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 14:18, 16 March 2026 review of submission by FilmViewer05 == {{Lafc|username=FilmViewer05|ts=14:18, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Chiraiya}} Why was my submission declined? Can you please help? [[User:FilmViewer05|FilmViewer05]] ([[User talk:FilmViewer05|talk]]) 14:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :The reviewer linked to [[WP:TOOSOON]]; it is too soon for an article about this unreleased film. Please see [[WP:NFF|the notability guidelines for unreleased films]]; in short, there must be something particularly notable about the production of the film itself for it to merit an article before its release. You just have routine information about the film. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 14:58, 16 March 2026 (UTC) == 22:04, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Brianbram == {{Lafc|username=Brianbram|ts=22:04, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:Jonathan_Baylis}} Hi. I'm not an experienced submitter, and I really need your help in understanding why this entry got rejected a second time and how I can modify it for approval. The subject seems to meet the criteria for inclusion, and the references in this revised entry are correct, I think. What am I doing wrong? I would like the entry to be successful. The subject has been publishing his indy autobiographical comic series for more than a decade, and is an Eisner Award nominee. Any advice you could provide is greatly appreciated. Thanks for the advice. [[User:Brianbram|brianbram]] ([[User talk:Brianbram|talk]]) 22:04, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :The reason it was declined is precisely because in the reviewer's opinion it does not meet the criteria for inclusion. Relevant information is in the decline notice, and you can always ask @[[User:MCE89|MCE89]] (the declining reviewer) if you need further clarification. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 02:32, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 23:56, 16 March 2026 review of submission by Wikiman2230 == {{Lafc|username=Wikiman2230|ts=23:56, 16 March 2026|draft=Draft:East_German_–_Molossian_War}} Requesting for my draft to be lifted from a rejection to a decline. I was originally going to edit on this further and improve the draft more. [[User:Wikiman2230|<span style="color:red;">'''Wikiman'''</span>]] ([[User talk: Wikiman2230|talk]]) 23:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC) :If you can present three independent, reliable sources, per [[WP:42]] which give significant coverage of this conflict (as opposed to statues, islands in the sun, assorted dead dictators and what-not) then I may be receptive. I wouldn't want you to get your hopes too high though. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 00:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :I'm fairly sure this "conflict" is discussed on the micronation's article as well as that of its leader. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 01:00, 17 March 2026 (UTC) = March 17 = == 01:09, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Rickypriv == {{Lafc|username=Rickypriv|ts=01:09, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:The_Battalion_Drum_and_Bugle_Corps}} Keeps getting denied due to music repertoire. [[User:Rickypriv|Rickypriv]] ([[User talk:Rickypriv|talk]]) 01:09, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :The decline notice on that page mentions nothing whatsoever about music repertoire. The article has been declined because the draft is currently completely lacking references. See [[WP:Verifiability]] and [[Help:Referencing for beginners]]. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 03:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:51, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Noushad shereef == {{Lafc|username=Noushad shereef|ts=05:51, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Noushad_Shereef}} does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion [[User:Noushad shereef|Noushad shereef]] ([[User talk:Noushad shereef|talk]]) 05:51, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :Yes. Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves, please read the [[WP:AUTO|autobiography policy]]. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 07:39, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:55, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Dhanyalal26 == {{Lafc|username=Dhanyalal26|ts=05:55, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Shibu Prabhakar}} I made an article about Shibu Prabhakar. I know him very well. because he is my husband. And the team rejected the article? Can you help me to publish the article? [[User:Dhanyalal26|Dhanyalal26]] ([[User talk:Dhanyalal26|talk]]) 05:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :{{u|Dhanyalal26}} I fixed your header so it links to your draft as intended; the full title is needed. However, it was generated by an AI and has been deleted. We want you to write in your own words without using an AI. It's best if you don't attempt to write about your husband and allow an article to develop in the usual way, when an independent editor takes note of coverage of the topic and chooses to write about it, summarizing what that coverage says. Know that [[WP:PROUD|an article is not necessarily something to desire]]; there are good reasons to not want one. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 07:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 06:06, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury == {{Lafc|username=Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury|ts=06:06, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Mamatamayee_Choudhury}} how can it be published? [[User:Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury|Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury]] ([[User talk:Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury|talk]]) 06:06, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :{{ping|Dr. Mamatamayee Choudhury}} '''This draft has been rejected and will not be considered further.''' We [[WP:NOT#RESUME|don't host curricula vitae]] and you [[WP:Notability|cite]] [[WP:BLP|zero]] [[WP:Reliable sources|sources]]. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[User:Jéské Couriano/AG|threads]] [[User:Jéské Couriano/Decode|critiques]]</small></sup> 06:19, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 08:47, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Infinityeditor == {{Lafc|username=Infinityeditor|ts=08:47, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Arun_Ajikumar}} I have made this article reliable and honest as possible. What change does i need to do in this. [[User:Infinityeditor|Infinityeditor]] ([[User talk:Infinityeditor|talk]]) 08:47, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :He seems to be more than "a friend of a friend", as you took a picture of him where he posed for you. :The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. You have not shown that he is [[WP:NACTOR|a notable actor]]. Please see the messages left by reviewers. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 08:50, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::I dont have any personal connection with him.He is a friend of my friend and i just know him as his friend, so im not connected with him. [[User:Infinityeditor|Infinityeditor]] ([[User talk:Infinityeditor|talk]]) 08:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::You're connected enough to meet with him to get him to pose for a picture for you. Was he aware it was for Wikipedia? Did he direct any of your editing? [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 09:20, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::::I get why you might think that, but it’s not really the case. I just happened to take a photo of him it doesn’t mean I have any close personal or professional connection with him. ::::He didn’t know the photo might be used for Wikipedia, and he hasn’t been involved in writing or editing the article at all. Everything I wrote was based only on publicly available information, and I tried to keep it neutral. ::::He hasn’t guided or influenced any part of the content. [[User:Infinityeditor|Infinityeditor]] ([[User talk:Infinityeditor|talk]]) 09:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::::That's not what you told Thilsebatti. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thilsebatti&oldid=1302132901] You told him Ajikumar "personally asked me" to create a draft. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 09:29, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::::All I'm looking for is honesty. Where I live, "friend of a friend" would not include something like this, taking a picture and editing at their request. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 09:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 12:15, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Renfluence PC == {{Lafc|username=Renfluence PC|ts=12:15, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Renfluence_Wikipedia_Page}} Our page got rejected. What must change for it to be approved? [[User:Renfluence PC|Renfluence PC]] ([[User talk:Renfluence PC|talk]]) 12:15, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :It was blatant promotion and has been deleted. :You disclosed a conflict of interest on the draft; if you are an employee, you must mame the stricter [[WP:PAID|paid editing disclosure]] instead, ideally on your user page. :Please read [[WP:YESPROMO]] and [[WP:BOSS]]; Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell about themselves. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 12:29, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 14:42, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Revelly == {{Lafc|username=Revelly|ts=14:42, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Gole_number_system}} I want to understand what areas can be improved for this article to get published [[User:Revelly|Revelly]] ([[User talk:Revelly|talk]]) 14:42, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :@[[User:Revelly|Revelly]]: Wikipedia does not publish original research, nor is it a place for you to tell the world about your ideas. When the only source you're citing is a paper you've authored, and in particular when you're describing the subject as a "proposed" system, it is blatantly obvious that the subject is not notable, at least not yet. Once it has been discussed by multiple independent and reliable sources, you can then summarise what they have said, cite them as references, and you might be in with a chance, not before. -- [[User:DoubleGrazing|DoubleGrazing]] ([[User talk:DoubleGrazing|talk]]) 14:46, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 16:05, 17 March 2026 review of submission by AltaiAdygea122 == {{Lafc|username=AltaiAdygea122|ts=16:05, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:GGG64}} i want the page [[User:AltaiAdygea122|AltaiAdygea122]] ([[User talk:AltaiAdygea122|talk]]) 16:05, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :I'm afraid that what Wikipedia wants is something very different from what you appear to want, @[[User:AltaiAdygea122|AltaiAdygea122]]. Please see [[WP:your first article|your first article]]. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 16:16, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 16:19, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Newmyths == {{Lafc|username=Newmyths|ts=16:19, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Stryker_McGuire}} Hi there. I am trying to improve and expand the currently inadequate WKP entry on the London-based, American journalist Stryker McGuire (a living person). I recently submitted my expanded and improved draft of this article for approval, but it was declined with two lines of feedback from an account which is a confirmed SockPuppet who, it seems, didn’t even realize that there is already an existing WKP article on this subject. Regardless, I have tried to address the reviewer's concerns and improve the article by adding more sources commenting on the subject’s writings, in addition to referencing articles written by the subject. Most often, I am linking to articles written by the subject for the sake of the biographical information the sources (all reputable news organizations) provide. The subject is a political & cultural commentator, and so it’s difficult to summarize the significance of his writings without linking to his own articles. I would truly appreciate any feedback, the more specific the better, concerning the problems relating to my draft since I still hope to re-submit it for approval. Here’s the existing entry: [[Stryker McGuire]] …& here’s my proposed rewrite: [[Draft:Stryker McGuire]] [[User:Newmyths|Newmyths]] ([[User talk:Newmyths|talk]]) 16:19, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :{{u|Newmyths}} The whole url is not needed when linking, just <nowiki>[[Stryker McGuire]]</nowiki>. :Rewrites are not done via this process. As the article is not protected, you are free to place your text in the article yourself; but you would likely be quickly reverted. You only have one source. Wikipedia articles summarize what independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] have chosen on their own to say about the topic. You are incorrect; a Wikipedia article should not reference someone's own work, it should summarize what is said about the work. If you have no independent sources, there can be no article. It is true that journalists don't often write about each other unless one is [[Tom Brokaw]] or [[Walter Cronkite]], but they don't get a pass on the independent and [[WP:V|verifiability]] requirements. :I suggest that you propose small, incremental changes, not a wholesale rewrite. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 16:56, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :@[[User:Newmyths|Newmyths]] This rewrite is, to be blunt, a complete mess. It's promotional in tone, full of [[MOS:OVERLINK|overlinking]] and [[WP:REFBOMB|refbombing]], the lead is overlong, contains citations, and even contains information which is not actually present in the body of the article (the lead should summarise the content in the article; there's a mention of a story about 'Cool Britannia' which has three sources of its own (again, see the fact that the lead should not contain citations) but is never actually mentioned in the body of the article.) :Rather than outright reverting it to the pre-rewritten version it I'm going to take a scythe to it and cut out the most problematic parts. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 21:36, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::In fact, I am going to revert it to the pre-rewritten version, because there are also blatant source to text discrepancies. The claim that {{tq|For more than three decades between 1978 and 2009, he was a writer and editor at Newsweek}} is sourced to an article that makes no mention of either of those dates, nor of his position at Newsweek; its only mention of his career is that {{tq|McGuire has worked for Newsweek for more than 20 years.}} [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 21:40, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::Athanelar, I apologize for not better understanding WKP editing conventions and for my misguided attempt to improve the currently inadequate article. At the time of your reversion, I was attempting to remove primary sources on account of the article's "excessive reliance" on them (e.g https://www.thedailybeast.com/author/stryker-mcguire/ , which does confirm the fact in question - that McGuire worked for Newsweek for 30 years); hence the source to text discrepancy. To clarify, I am not actually connected to the subject but admire his work and had hoped to make a valuable contribution to an online institution I value. Obviously, I failed but thank you for clarifying why. [[User:Newmyths|Newmyths]] ([[User talk:Newmyths|talk]]) 23:00, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::::You haven't 'failed,' I encourage you to work on the rewrite some more at [[Draft:Stryker McGuire]] being aware of the feedback I've given. It is certainly true that the article as it stands is in need of a rewrite. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 23:12, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 17:44, 17 March 2026 review of submission by 21stcenturycoelacanth == {{Lafc|username=21stcenturycoelacanth|ts=17:44, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Aoi Sangoshou}} Hi all. I'm looking for advice as to how best to cite this particular site. It's Melon's official site for music chart rankings in Korea. See this link: https://www.melon.com/chart/search/index.htm For example, Aoi Sangoshou peaked at number 3 on the J-Pop chart the week of July 15th. I can view this information by selecting 'Weekly Chart' in the table in the link, '2024', 'July', '07.15-07.21', and 'J-Pop'. It's quite easy to use if you translate the page using Google Translate or similar. The trouble is finding a permanent link to this information, because if you copy the link to this page, it just shows the chart index page, not the information you've inputted. If I was to cite a chart ranking using this site, how would I go about it? Just link to the search index? I wouldn't be sure how to go about saving an archive/snapshot of the site with that information visible either. I'd be grateful for any advice. [[User:21stcenturycoelacanth|21stcenturycoelacanth]] ([[User talk:21stcenturycoelacanth|talk]]) 17:44, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :Before you get to the final page you're looking for, can you right click on the link and select "open page in new tab"? That might open a page with the correct link on it. :Right now the page you linked is not operational for me, as if the site is down. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:44, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 19:17, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Noushad shereef == {{Lafc|username=Noushad shereef|ts=19:17, 17 March 2026|draft=Draft:Noushad_Shereef}} If you can, please edit and set [[User:Noushad shereef|Noushad shereef]] ([[User talk:Noushad shereef|talk]]) 19:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :We don't do co-editing here at this help desk; your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place for people to write about themselves, please read the [[WP:AUTO|autobiography policy]]. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:24, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == 19:28, 17 March 2026 review of submission by Gpsinggh == {{Lafc|username=Gpsinggh|ts=19:28, 17 March 2026|draft=User:Gpsinggh/sandbox}} Why my draft declined? [[User:Gpsinggh|Gpsinggh]] ([[User talk:Gpsinggh|talk]]) 19:28, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :{{u|Gpsinggh}} Your draft is actually in your sandbox, I fixed your header. There is already an article at [[Sukhvinder Singh (cricketer)]] and you have edited it. Why are you attempting to submit a draft about the same person? [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:32, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :I see now. You edited the article and replaced it with your draft. Please review the [[WP:BLP|Biographies of Living Persons policy]]; every fact about a person that potentially could be challenged needs a [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]; you only had one source. You don't need to submit a draft, you can just edit the article- but you need sources, we need to know where you are getting your information. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::Sukhvinder Singh is related to me, and I am creating this article on his behalf. Another article about him was previously created by a different editor. However, the editor has been repeatedly removing the content I added. Therefore, I created a new draft to include the correct information. My intention is to ensure that the article contains accurate and complete details. [[User:Gpsinggh|Gpsinggh]] ([[User talk:Gpsinggh|talk]]) 19:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::{{u|Gpsinggh}} You should disclose a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] on your user page. :::Instead of using the draft process, you should use the [[WP:ER|edit request process]] to propose edits on the article talk page(the [[WP:ERW|edit request wizard]] can facilitate this). You should propose incremental changes, one or two small changes at a time, to increase the chances a volunteer will review your request; large changes or wholesale rewrites take more time to review and reduce the chances a volunteer will look at them. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:43, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::I would also suggest that you read [[WP:PROUD|why an article is not necessarily desirable]] for someone(and show it to your relative); there are good reasons to not want one. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:44, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::::@[[User:331dot|331dot]]Thanks, I appreciate. [[User:Gpsinggh|Gpsinggh]] ([[User talk:Gpsinggh|talk]]) 19:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :::@[[User:Gpsinggh|Gpsinggh]] Your changes to the article [[Sukhvinder Singh (cricketer)]] were reverted because they are not properly referenced to reliable sources. [[WP:V|Verifiability]] is a core content policy on Wikipedia, and is all the more important for [[WP:BLP|biographies of living persons]]. All of the information you add must be referenced to a reliable source. Please see [[Help:Referencing for beginners]] for guidance. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 21:24, 17 March 2026 (UTC) == Seeking feedback on Draft:Anu Shah — biography of Indian-American entrepreneur == Hello. I recently submitted Draft:Anu Shah for review. The draft is a biography of Anu Shah, an Indian-American entrepreneur and technology executive who has held roles at Amazon and Meta Platforms. The draft has 18 citations from independent sources including Bloomberg, University of Leeds, CNBC Africa, TEDx University of Leeds, e27, DealStreetAsia, and others. I would appreciate any feedback on: 1. Whether the sourcing is sufficient to establish notability 2. Any areas that could be strengthened before review 3. Estimated likelihood of acceptance The draft can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anu_Shah Thank you for your time. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> [[User:BusinessProfileEditor|BusinessProfileEditor]] ([[User talk:BusinessProfileEditor|talk]]) 19:50, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :You have submitted it; we don't do pre-review reviews. Please allow the process to play out. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 19:58, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :{{ping|BusinessProfileEditor}} Let's test that hypothesis. :* https://www.kearney.com/about/alumni/alumni-profiles/article/-/insights/anu-shah doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Interview. :* https://www.bwdisrupt.com/article/the-gujarati-woman-who-broke-free-to-set-up-efi-hub-125933 doesn't help for [[WP:N|eligibility]] ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Interview. :* https://www.asian-voice.com/Finance/UK%27s-Acorn-Capital-takes-over-startup-incubator-EFI-Hub doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:SIGCOV|too sparse]]). Direct quotes, no discussion of Shah. :* I can't assess https://www.dealstreetasia.com/stories/incubator-efi-hub-pe-sale-105090 (walled). :* https://e27.co/with-2-successful-business-exits-this-ex-ceo-of-rocket-internet-sea-is-now-championing-gender-parity-in-startup-world-20200218/ seems okay. :* https://www.onlinemarketplaces.com/articles/us-based-hr-tech-startup-resume-ranks-to-raise-10m-for-se-asia-expansion/ doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:RSCONTEXT|wrong subject]]). This wouldn't help for Acorn Capital, either ([[WP:CORPDEPTH|routine coverage]]). :* We can't use https://www.cnbcafrica.com/tag/anu-shah ([[WP:SPS|no editorial oversight]]). We don't cite search results of any sort. :* https://www.cnbcafrica.com/2020/opinion-can-india-replace-china-as-the-manufacturing-and-tech-hub doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Shah wrote this. :* https://www.bwdisrupt.com/article/efi-hub-raising-funds-to-empower-entrepreneurs-in-ways-vcs-dontwont-153976 doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Shah clearly wrote this. :* https://e27.co/user/thetalklane/ doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Author description from an outlet she writes for. :* We can't use https://www.achieversshowcase.com/class-of-2023 ([[WP:SIGCOV|too sparse]]). Contentless list of award winners. :* We can't use https://images.forbesindia.com/media/supplement_pdf/march-april-marquee.pdf ([[WP:SPS|no editorial oversight]]). Quoth the disclaimer on the table of contents: {{tq|The respective... individuals are solely responsible for the accuracy and contents of their own articles.[...]Forbes India journalists were not involved in producing this supplement.}} :* https://www.asiabiztoday.com/2018/05/04/business-success-is-about-keeping-emotions-at-bay/ doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Shah wrote this. :* https://www.bloomberg.com/news/audio/2018-03-01/women-in-tech-wait-for-men-to-push-them-that-should-change doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Interview. :* https://www.cnbcafrica.com/media/6122115883001/anu-shah-of-efi-hub-on-how-new-entrepreneurship-initiative-can-help-spur-gender-parity-in-africa doesn't help for eligibility ([[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). Interview. :* We can't use TED talks ([[WP:SPS|no editorial oversight]], [[WP:PRIMARY|connexion to subject]]). :You have a single usable source. This is [[WP:BLP|fatal]] for the draft. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[User:Jéské Couriano/AG|threads]] [[User:Jéské Couriano/Decode|critiques]]</small></sup> 20:18, 17 March 2026 (UTC) :Also, @[[User:BusinessProfileEditor|BusinessProfileEditor]] your username implies you may be editing in return for payment. If so, you need to follow the disclosure instructions at [[WP:PAID]]. Please respond to this question before you edit any further, or your account may be blocked on suspicion of undisclosed paid editing. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 21:21, 17 March 2026 (UTC) ::They did curiously [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft_talk:Anu_Shah&diff=prev&oldid=1344010434 disclose that they don't have a COI] and are not paid, which leads me to think the opposite. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 21:39, 17 March 2026 (UTC) = March 18 = == Request for second review — Draft:Presolv360 == My draft [[Draft:Presolv360]] has been declined three times by the same reviewer with identical template feedback. I have rewritten the draft significantly each time per WP:NPOV, WP:YFA, and WP:RS guidance. I am a disclosed paid editor per WP:PAID on [[User:Legalwiki123]]. I would appreciate a second reviewer looking at the current draft and pointing to specific sentences that remain promotional, as the same generic feedback has been given three times without specific examples. [[User:Legalwiki123|Legalwiki123]] ([[User talk:Legalwiki123|talk]]) 04:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :There have been two reviewers, not the same one all three times. Did you actually read the links in the feedback you have been given? :It is evident that this wasn't written by you, but by an AI, given the name dropping of sources and formatting features. That isn't permitted; see [[WP:NEWLLM]]. The draft also cites ''Times of India'' multiple times, which isn't considered a trusted source on Wikipedia; see [[WP:TIMESOFINDIA]]. :The publicity purpose is evident from going into unnecessary detail about [[WP:CORPROUTINE]] business activities, and unduly emphasizing services and founders. :Finally, as a paid editor, you are being paid to learn the rules here without help from unpaid volunteers, whose donated time is far more valuable than yours. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:Legalwiki123|Legalwiki123]] :Would you expect to take on a new task in your work without first getting the requisite training? (Writing for Wikipedia is very different from any other kind of writing that I've encountered). :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 [[WP:verifiability|verifiability]], [[WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view]], [[WP:42|reliable, independent sources]], and [[WP:notability|notability]], and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the [[WP:BRD|Bold, Revert, Discuss]] cycle), then you might be ready to read [[WP:your first article|your first article]] carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 12:08, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:07, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Anchlrbh == {{Lafc|username=Anchlrbh|ts=05:07, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Abhishek_Bhardwaj}} Hey, Can you tell me why you rejected this? This person is working in theatres from last 8, 9 years and have done many advertisements for Fair & Gold cream,Road safety with Amitabh Bachchan,Many ads for mobile phones with Farhan Akhtar,in 2024 he was in Apne Ram documentry by Priydarshan. Now Worked in Bhoot Bangla in Upcoming bollywood big film. I have references in 50+ newspapers. So now where is the mistake? [[User:Anchlrbh|Anchlrbh]] ([[User talk:Anchlrbh|talk]]) 05:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :The draft failed to demonstrate notability as defined in [[WP:NACTOR]]. If you can make a strong case for notability, you may appeal to the reviewer who rejected the draft to re-open it for improvement and resubmission. Right now you cite only two sources, and in a biography of a living person, every assertion you make about the person needs to be verifiable by a reliable source. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:22, 18 March 2026 (UTC) ::Ok So, please revive this draft. I will add more references [[User:Anchlrbh|Anchlrbh]] ([[User talk:Anchlrbh|talk]]) 05:25, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :::Please pay attention to what I wrote. I am not the reviewer who rejected it. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:26, 18 March 2026 (UTC) ::::Then why you are texting for this? I think You rejected this. [[User:Anchlrbh|Anchlrbh]] ([[User talk:Anchlrbh|talk]]) 05:34, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :::::You asked a question on a help page. I and many other people monitor this page and answer questions. That's why. If you want to ask the reviewer a question, then use the reviewer's talk page. :::::Can you not read the reviewer's name in the rejection notice? {{U|Theroadislong}} rejected it. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC) ::::::I have removed my rejection, please add more sources, read [[WP:REFB]] and re-submit when you think they pass the criteria ay [[WP:NACTOR]]. [[User:Theroadislong|Theroadislong]] ([[User talk:Theroadislong|talk]]) 07:41, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :::::{{u|Ahnchlrbh}} This help desk is monitored by many people, not just the reviewer of your draft. If you intended to communicate with just them, you should do that on their personal user talk page. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 08:11, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:20, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Mouadh.jaber == {{Lafc|username=Mouadh.jaber|ts=05:20, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Mouadh_Jaber}} Could you advise me what how to publish biography [[User:Mouadh.jaber|Mouadh.jaber]] ([[User talk:Mouadh.jaber|talk]]) 05:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :This is a [[resume]], not a biographical encyclopedic article. May I suggest you publish it on [https://www.linkedin.com/ LinkedIn] instead. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 05:23, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :You can't publish it. It was '''rejected''', which means it will not be considered further. And, it has been deleted because its existence was purely for publicity purposes, which is prohibited on Wikipedia. :Please answer: Exactly ''why'' do you want an article about yourself? Vanity? Publicity? Search engine optimization? Job search? 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 week, 5 years from now, or after you are dead, shouldn't matter to you in the least. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 05:25, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 08:23, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Lots3000 == {{Lafc|username=Lots3000|ts=08:23, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Mats Haugen}} Hi, I have submitted a draft about a Norwegian musician (member of Circus Maximus) with multiple sources (NRK, LouderSound). I would appreciate a review when possible. Thank you! [[User:Lots3000|Lots3000]] ([[User talk:Lots3000|talk]]) 08:23, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :You have already submitted it for a review, so it will be reviewed at some point; there's no need for a separate request for a review. I would advise you to continue improving it while it's in the queue as I think it's very unlikely to be accepted in its current state. The vast majority of the sources are interviews, which can't establish notability, the few independent sources are reviews talk very little about Mats Haugen directly, and there's poor direct sourcing of much of the prose in the article. [[User:CoffeeCrumbs|CoffeeCrumbs]] ([[User talk:CoffeeCrumbs|talk]]) 08:39, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:Lots3000|Lots3000]]. :A Wikipedia article should be a [[WP:Neutral point of view|neutral summary]] of what the [[WP:DUEWEIGHT|majority of people]] who are [[WP:Independent sources|wholly unconnected]] with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in [[WP:Reliable sources|reliable publications]], (see [[WP:Golden rule|Golden rule]]) and not much else. [[WP:No original research|What you know]] (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be [[WP:Verifiability|verified]] from a reliable published source. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 12:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 08:57, 18 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-16958-57 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-16958-57|ts=08:57, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Beck_Martin}} I am requesting assistance with my draft article, Draft:Beck_Martin. I would appreciate feedback on whether the topic meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines and advice on improving the article’s structure, sourcing, and overall quality. If there are any specific issues preventing the draft from being accepted, I would be grateful for guidance on how to address them. [[Special:Contributions/~2026-16958-57|~2026-16958-57]] ([[User talk:~2026-16958-57|talk]]) 08:57, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Firstly @[[User:~2026-16958-57|~2026-16958-57]] - it's best not to use LLM, including when liaising with other editors. Secondly at the time I rejected it, and despite multiple previous declines, the YouTube and Amazon source were once again presented in the draft, which made me feel you were not taking previous review advice into consideration. They have now gone, which is good, and what you need to do now is look very carefully at [[WP:MUSICBIO]] and check that the notability criteria works for the subject AND that you have really solid sourcing for it. This list is for music albums but you may find it helpful in this context: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources]]. If you are the subject then you need to declare it on your talk page (you have probably logged out of your account here), but it's then hard/impossible/strongly discouraged to do, see [[WP:FAQAS]]. But first of all, read the advice already given on your draft to understand the previous draft's problems. It's not easy doing article. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 11:48, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 09:07, 18 March 2026 review of submission by DineshKumarDelhi == {{Lafc|username=DineshKumarDelhi|ts=09:07, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Surya_Sonal_Singh}} "I am a new editor and I need guidance on the rejection of [[Draft:Surya Sonal Singh]]. I have addressed the previous concerns regarding AI-style phrasing by manually rewriting the entire text in simple language. Additionally, I have now included a significant, independent secondary source from News24 (a major national news outlet in India), which provides in-depth coverage of the subject's environmental activism and 'Surya Model' of digital outreach. I would like to know if this new evidence meets the WP:NPOL or WP:BIO criteria, or if further specific improvements are required." [[User:DineshKumarDelhi|dinesh kumar]] ([[User talk:DineshKumarDelhi|talk]]) 09:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :He does not meet [[WP:NPOLITICIAN]] as he does not hold elective office or has not won election to elective office. You wrote that "Singh is known for his work in environment and wildlife protection in the Palamu area" but there is very little indication of this in the draft; you mention a film and a speech but give no indication that those things were particularly influential in public policy or led to widespread public awareness cited to him personally. I agree it's the end of the line for this draft, sorry. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 09:14, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Vapid phrases like "received attention in the media" clearly indicates that the AI slop hasn't been cleaned up. The draft has been rejected, so it won't be considered further. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 00:16, 19 March 2026 (UTC) == 11:54, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Creative ssr == {{Lafc|username=Creative ssr|ts=11:54, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Sher_Singh_(novelist)}} Hello, I have created a draft article about an Indian author, but it has been declined three times due to concerns about notability and reliable sources. I have added references from newspapers such as Dainik Bhaskar and Rajasthan Patrika, along with some other media coverage. However, I understand that the current sources may not be considered sufficient. Could you please guide me on: 1. What type of sources would be considered strong enough for notability in this case? 2. Whether regional newspaper coverage is sufficient, or if national-level sources are required? 3. How I can improve the draft to meet Wikipedia’s guidelines for biographies? Thank you for your time and guidance. [[User:Creative ssr|Creative ssr]] ([[User talk:Creative ssr|talk]]) 11:54, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:Creative ssr|Creative ssr]]. :Please see [[WP:golden rule|golden rule]] for information about the kinds of sources that are required. :Your user name suggests that you may be professionally involved in PR: if this is the case, please note that [[WP:paid editors|paid editors]] '''must''' make a formal declaration of that status. :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 [[WP:verifiability|verifiability]], [[WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view]], [[WP:42|reliable, independent sources]], and [[WP:notability|notability]], and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the [[WP:BRD|Bold, Revert, Discuss]] cycle), then you might be ready to read [[WP:your first article|your first article]] carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 12:23, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 12:33, 18 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-17235-55 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-17235-55|ts=12:33, 18 March 2026|draft=}} I have no idea why there’s an issue with this article, first it was removed because there isn’t enough sources but then after adding more it was removed again. What is wrong with it? It’s a blockbuster film that is going to be released in a couple days and already has the trailer out. [[Special:Contributions/~2026-17235-55|~2026-17235-55]] ([[User talk:~2026-17235-55|talk]]) 12:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :I think you edited while logged out, and you did not provide the title of the draft. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 12:40, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:~2026-17235-55|~2026-17235-55]]. :Has there been reliable, independent material published, going into detail about the film? If not, then it is probably [[WP:TOOSOON]]. (Note that neither brief mentions, nor articles based on press-releases or interviews, will count towards that). [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 14:25, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 14:07, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Editormed4445354 == {{Lafc|username=Editormed4445354|ts=14:07, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Mourad_Karami}} Hello i just want some advice or an editor to edit my draft because i have over 9 media coverage in it but it still declined thank you [[User:Editormed4445354|Editormed4445354]] ([[User talk:Editormed4445354|talk]]) 14:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Your article has been rejected, and will not be considered for inclusion unless you can convince the rejecting reviewer to overturn that decision. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 22:51, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 14:08, 18 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-17102-59 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-17102-59|ts=14:08, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Heather_Chirtea}} Can you identify which sources are not considered valid or significant? Can you tell me which sections or phrases to rewrite? What copyright issues are violated? I've cited public sources. Thank you [[Special:Contributions/~2026-17102-59|~2026-17102-59]] ([[User talk:~2026-17102-59|talk]]) 14:08, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :I'm not seeing how she's notable; she owns a particular vehicle and goes around the country promoting it. That might be relevant to the vehicle itself([[Pivotal BlackFly]]) and could be used to expand that article instead. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 15:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :I don't see copyright issues being flagged. The possibility of copyright issues is just part of the description of some of the issues related to LLM usage. :In this case, the article was clearly written by an LLM. It's the same formal-but-stilted style, with some of the favorite go-to phrases of LLMs, and the strange tendency of LLMs futilely making a Wikipedia article to, rather than describe the coverage in sources, talk about the existence of sources saying something. The whole article is problematic; I'm not taking a position on whether this individual is notable, but this article would need to be [[WP:TNT]]'ed and written properly without the use of LLMs to be taken into consideration. [[User:CoffeeCrumbs|CoffeeCrumbs]] ([[User talk:CoffeeCrumbs|talk]]) 15:23, 18 March 2026 (UTC) ::It's been TNT'd. Now we'll see if it can be created properly the second time around. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 00:14, 19 March 2026 (UTC) == 14:53, 18 March 2026 review of submission by ~2026-17024-10 == {{Lafc|username=~2026-17024-10|ts=14:53, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:Sam_Lewis}} how can i get this published it got labeled LLM generated. i put it in one to format [[Special:Contributions/~2026-17024-10|~2026-17024-10]] ([[User talk:~2026-17024-10|talk]]) 14:53, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :I can see that LLM was used in an acceptable way, however the article would still be unacceptable as the sourcing does not indicate they meet the criteria of [[WP:GNG]] or [[WP:MUSICBIO]]. The Opry profile and his own site have zero value as they are not independent, nor are tour listings or interviews. We need to see published stories about him from people not connected to him. [[User:Mcmatter|McMatter]] <sup>([[User talk:Mcmatter|talk]])</sup>/<sub>([[Special:Contributions/Mcmatter|contrib]])</sub> 15:01, 18 March 2026 (UTC) == 15:56, 18 March 2026 review of submission by Music Article Creator == {{Lafc|username=Music Article Creator|ts=15:56, 18 March 2026|draft=Draft:T. S. Nandakumar}} Hi, I have submitted a draft on T. S. Nandakumar (Carnatic percussionist). The draft includes coverage from Sruti Magazine, The Times of India, Bhavan’s Journal, and other independent sources. I would appreciate a review when possible. Thank you. [[User:Music Article Creator|Music Article Creator]] ([[User talk:Music Article Creator|talk]]) 15:56, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :It's not necessary to submit and then ask for a review; your draft is submitted and pending. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 17:06, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Declined as evidently AI generated. Rewrite from scratch as a [[WP:SUMMARY|summary]] of the information in your sources. [[User:Athanelar|Athanelar]] ([[User talk:Athanelar|talk]]) 22:08, 18 March 2026 (UTC) :Times of India is not considered a trustworthy source. LLM chatbots seem to love citing it, however. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] (who / me) <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 23:19, 18 March 2026 (UTC) = March 19 = == 02:46, 19 March 2026 review of submission by HarshBharti556 == {{Lafc|username=HarshBharti556|ts=02:46, 19 March 2026|draft=Draft:Harsh_Bharti_kickboxing}} Can you help me how I be more professional [[User:HarshBharti556|HarshBharti556]] ([[User talk:HarshBharti556|talk]]) 02:46, 19 March 2026 (UTC) :For one, you need to disclose your [[WP:COI]] with this article immediately, before doing ''anything'' else. See [[WP:DISCLOSE]] for guidance on how to do this. :As for the draft itself, for an article about Harsh Bharti to exist, you need to have ''significant'' coverage ''of'' Harsh Barti, in sources that are both ''reliable'' and ''independent''. Just a list of kickboxing results does not demonstrate this is a notable athlete. Every fact about Bharti ought to have a citation to a reliable and independent source of that information. [[User:CoffeeCrumbs|CoffeeCrumbs]] ([[User talk:CoffeeCrumbs|talk]]) 05:03, 19 March 2026 (UTC) == 05:27, 19 March 2026 review of submission by Anisha at Increff == {{Lafc|username=Anisha at Increff|ts=05:27, 19 March 2026|draft=Draft:Increff}} Why the page was rejected? [[User:Anisha at Increff|Anisha at Increff]] ([[User talk:Anisha at Increff|talk]]) 05:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC) :What part of the reviewer's feedback do you not understand? It would be a good idea for you to click on all the blue links within that feedback and read what they lead to. :I am not a reviewer, but having read the draft myself, I cannot see anything in it, summarised from independent third parties writing about the subject, that suggest anything [[WP:NORG|Noteworthy]] about the subject company. Routine business operations like fund raising and executive personnel changes do not contribute to encyclopedic notability, nor do mere descriptions of what the company does. :Wikipedia has little use for what a company says about ''itself'', only in what other unconnected third-party [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|Reliable sources]] have said about it at some length (rather than just passing mentions or list entries). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/~2026-76101-8|~2026-76101-8]] ([[User talk:~2026-76101-8|talk]]) 05:50, 19 March 2026 (UTC) :{{u|Anisha at Increff}} I suggest that you read [[WP:BOSS]], and show it to your superiors and colleagues; most company representatives fail in their efforts to force the issue of creating an article about their company instead of allowing one to organically develop the usual way, when an independent editor takes note of significant coverage in independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] and chooses to write about the topic, summarizing what those sources say. Company representatives, especially without prior editing experience, have great difficulty doing that, as they myust set aside what they know about their own company and all materials it puts out, as well as all reporting of routine business activities(like commencing operations, raising capital, acquiring competitors). [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 08:18, 19 March 2026 (UTC) ::Hey i am very new to this can you explain in simple [[User:Anisha at Increff|Anisha at Increff]] ([[User talk:Anisha at Increff|talk]]) 10:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC) == 09:53, 19 March 2026 review of submission by Jakob Øverland == {{Lafc|username=Jakob Øverland|ts=09:53, 19 March 2026|draft=Draft:Martin_Villhelm_Kroken_Viksøy}} Hi, I’m new to Wikipedia and was wondering why my draft was rejected, and what changes are needed to make it suitable for publication. Thank you for your help. [[User:Jakob Øverland|Jakob Øverland]] ([[User talk:Jakob Øverland|talk]]) 09:53, 19 March 2026 (UTC) :Hello, @[[User:Jakob Øverland|Jakob Øverland]]. :A Wikipedia article should be a [[WP:Neutral point of view|neutral summary]] of what the [[WP:DUEWEIGHT|majority of people]] who are [[WP:Independent sources|wholly unconnected]] with the subject have independently chosen to publish about the subject in [[WP:Reliable sources|reliable publications]], (see [[WP:Golden rule|Golden rule]]) and not much else. [[WP:No original research|What you know]] (or anybody else knows) about the subject is not relevant except where it can be [[WP:Verifiability|verified]] from a reliable published source. :Your draft does not resemble that description in any way. :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 [[WP:verifiability|verifiability]], [[WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view]], [[WP:42|reliable, independent sources]], and [[WP:notability|notability]], and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the [[WP:BRD|Bold, Revert, Discuss]] cycle), then you might be ready to read [[WP:your first article|your first article]] carefully, and try creating a draft. If you don't follow this advice but try to create an article without this preparation, you are likely to have a frustrating and disappointing experience with Wikipedia. [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 10:04, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Eurovision Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Eurovision Wiki:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Pages included on this page:
Eurovision Wiki:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2026 March 12
(
edit
)
Eurovision Wiki:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/header
(
edit
)
Template:AfC comment
(
edit
)
Template:Encodefirst
(
edit
)
Template:Lafc
(
edit
)
Template:Ping
(
edit
)
Template:Reply to
(
edit
)
Template:Skip to top and bottom
(
edit
)
Template:Talk quote inline
(
edit
)
Template:Talk quote inline/styles.css
(
edit
)
Template:Tq
(
edit
)
Template:Trim
(
edit
)
Template:U
(
edit
)
Template:User link
(
edit
)
Module:Check for unknown parameters
(
edit
)
Module:MultiReplace
(
edit
)
Module:Reply to
(
edit
)
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Project page
Discussion
English
Views
Read
Edit source
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Page information