June 8[edit]

• Reality180 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:YoungHoon Kim (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The sources of all information in this document are clearly identified. There are many worse articles on wikipedia, but few are more factual than this. This document should be adopted because it was written based on facts confirmed by solid data. Reality180 (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reality180: this draft has been rejected and won't therefore be considered further. Repeated resubmission without any attempt to improve the draft is disruptive and will eventually result in rejection. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reality180 The presence or content of an article is not compared to that of other articles that themselves may be inappropriate and just not addressed yet by a volunteer, see other stuff exists. If there are "worse articles", please help us take action on them by identifying them so we are aware of them. 331dot (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Minejob (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Harsh Vashishtha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why this page got reject please explain me and tell me the reasons so I can make them good in future. Minejob (talk) 07:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Minejob: because there is nothing to suggest you are notable. We don't host personal 'profiles' etc., for that you need to go to the likes of LinkedIn. We are an encyclopaedia, and publish articles on subjects with encyclopaedic merit. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Stephen Ini (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Yusuf Buba Yakub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please are news publications reliable sources to cite on an article about a politician? I really need the help of an experienced wikipedia editor. Stephen Ini (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephen Ini: some are, some aren't. Fox News (sic) is not considered reliable for political or scientific topics. Daily Mail is not considered reliable for anything, and yet they would probably see themselves as a 'news publication'. RT is also not considered reliable, although whether they even think themselves that they are a 'news publication', I don't know. You can find out more about what we do and don't consider reliable at WP:RS and WP:RSP. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help, however, is there a list of news sources reliable for Nigeria, because there are quite a number of News publication platforms in Nigeria that are considered verified and reliable but may not be considered same on wikipedia, I really need a proper guidance to articulate my draft submission in order to get it approved.

I am not a paid editor, I am a new editor learning how to become an experienced contributor for Nigerian informations because I realized there are not many persons interested in publishing Nigerian information for free. Stephen Ini (talk) 13:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephen Ini: I'm not aware of anyone maintaining a list of reliable Nigerian sources, although you may want to ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria where they will no doubt know better. The problem is that even if a particular publication is generally considered reliable, an individual article may still have problems, such as being sponsored content or based on a press release.

The problem with your draft is that most of the content is unreferenced, which is unacceptable in an article on a living person. So even if your sources are reliable (which I can't comment on, as I haven't looked), they're not cited enough to support the draft contents. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help, this would help me make improvement in my journey through wikipedia. I will check on the wiki project Nigeria and also make changes to my references and citations with reliable sources for my article. However, I have made some effort in editing my draft and I would appreciate if you help me check out the improvement made so far. Thank You. Stephen Ini (talk) 18:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that each source that you are wanting to use to demonstrate notability must meet three criteria: not just being a reliable source, but also being completely independent of the subject, and containing significant coverage of him.

So if a reliable source publishes an article based on a press release, that will not count; and if it mentions the subject's name in an article, but says little or nothing about him, that will not count. See WP:42 for more. ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, I appreciate your assistance. What about cases where the government mentions the person in a presidential press release? Stephen Ini (talk) 09:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sonu Deka 2010 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Janam Raj (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How to publish this article? What I have to do to published this article on Wikipedia. Any editing? Sonu Deka 2010 (talk) 14:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sonu Deka 2010: this draft has been rejected, as it provides no evidence of notability and is effectively unreferenced. It will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I need the reasons why my article is deleted. It had valid source and links. And i'm an independent filmmaker from india. Someone did speedy deletion on my article, which i completely disagree with the action that put upon. Please do check, I'm sure this is wrong. SachiAkhil93 (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your draft Draft:Janam Raj has not been deleted, but it has been rejected, because after three attempts you have not managed to adduce any sources which establish that Raj met Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

In order to establish notability, your draft would need to cite (not just list at the end, but give proper bibliographic information which would allow a reader to find the source and verify the information) several sources each of which was reliably published|, independent of the subject, and contained significant coverage of the subject. Not one of the links you put at the end is independent of Raj.

Absolutely the first question to ask when considering writing a Wikipedia article about somebody, is "Where have people wholly unconnected with the subject chosen to write at some lenght about them, and been published somewhere reliable, such as a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher?"

If the answer is "nowhere", then give up: this person does not meet Wikipedia's definition of "notable".

If there are several such sources, the next step is to forget everything you know about the subject, and write a summary of what those independent sources say.

As for your user page, that is what has been deleted, as containing material unrelated to Wikipedia's purposes. As I am not an admin, I can't look at the deleted page and see what it said. ColinFine (talk) 20:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• SachiAkhil93 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • User:SachiAkhil93/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I need the reasons why my article is deleted. It had valid source and links. And i'm an independent filmmaker from india. Someone did speedy deletion on my article, which i completely disagree with the action that put upon. Please do check, I'm sure this is wrong. SachiAkhil93 (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SachiAkhil93: no, it is not wrong. You shouldn't be writing about yourself in the first place, see WP:AUTOBIO. And when you submit an autobio draft with no evidence of notability, and then resubmit the same again without any improvement on that front, that's when you cross the border into self-promotion. This is why your draft was declined, and subsequently deleted. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• VineethVaraprasad (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Vineeth Varaprasad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Need to delete this draft VineethVaraprasad (talk) 16:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done by Deb '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 23:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 109.151.77.86 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Kittyhawk Aerodrome (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

HI

Not sure what I am missing - I have looed at other similar aerodromes and they have v few references

please advise 109.151.77.86 (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This draft has no references, only some external links.

Per WP:NBUILD, we would need to see significant coverage in multiple sources meeting the WP:GNG standard. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, many articles on Wikipedia that have only a few references were created when the Wiki was new and the standards were looser. We're always trying to find and improve or remove those old articles, so if you saw any then please feel free to link them here so someone can help clean them up!

Your draft has now been rejected, so this may be the end of the line for it. If you are able to find at least three suitable sources and can incorporate them into the draft (make sure to cite them appropriately!) then you could leave a message on the talk page of the reviewer who rejected the draft, asking them whether they would be willing to look it over again. Keep in mind you should only do this once, so make sure your draft is at a good standard first!

Use the featured articles at WikiProject Architecture for some articles you could base yours on; Featured Articles are considered to be some of our very best, so they're a much better guide than random aerodrome articles. Good luck and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• VineethVaraprasad (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • User:VineethVaraprasad/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

what was missing in the article ? VineethVaraprasad (talk) 18:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answer...any evidence of notability. Theroadislong (talk) 18:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• VineethVaraprasad (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • User:VineethVaraprasad/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

already many reference added, what can i do to publish this page VineethVaraprasad (talk) 19:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised The Times of India is NOT a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 20:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• VineethVaraprasad (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • User:VineethVaraprasad/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

give me advice what was missing VineethVaraprasad (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. You have been advised above. Thanks. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I am not making an error. Wasn't you that requested the deletion per [1]. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]