• DcdmeQDm (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:2026 World Surf League (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I really can't tell why this submission was declined. 4 different independent news sources are linked. This is also the single most important event for a major sport. Additionally, the 2025 tour has a wikipedia, as do all previous years, so I don't see why 2026 shouldn't?

How many independent sources would be required to be sufficient? I had assumed 4 news sources would be enough but happy to add more. DcdmeQDm (talk) 00:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia" is the name of this entire website, not its individual parts which are called articles.

The draft does little more than describe the event, there is no indication that it is a notable event as Wikipedia defines one. It may very well be once it occurs and independent sources give it significant coverage. For it to merit an article before it occurs, you would need sources that discuss the coverage and importance of it now(like 2028 Summer Olympics or even 2032 Summer Olympics). You don't have that currently. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of major news sources discussing the upcoming 2026 tour including major changes to the competition system linked. If the 5 articles from 4 news sources are insufficient, would you have an idea of how many news sources are typically required to demonstrate that a topic is sufficiently notable for a wikipedia article? I've already added two more but I'm not sure if that's enough. DcdmeQDm (talk) 00:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the event would best go in an article about the event in general, at least before the specific event merits an article.

There is not a specific number of sources needed to pass this process, but most reviewers look for at least three. But the sources need to show the notability of the topic. Describing the format of the event doesn't do that. 331dot (talk) 01:07, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sonali Nawale (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Jeanne Bender (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello, as i am trying to add references in draft but not understand how and where need to add ,also i want exact that what required in draft

Sonali Nawale (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sonali Nawale: I don't understand the latter part of your question, could you please rephrase?

Regarding referencing, you've already added two citations which are correctly constructed, they're just in the wrong place, at the start of the text. You need to place the citations inline, following the statement which they support, so that it is clear to the reader where each piece of information comes from.

As for what needs to be thus supported, the answer is pretty much everything. So when you say that this person was born on August 13, 1955, where did you get that DOB from? And so on. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2603:6013:9E41:8865:758B:1D03:CF1B:4A2B (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Faygo Baby (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

A wikipedia on Faygo Baby 2603:6013:9E41:8865:758B:1D03:CF1B:4A2B (talk) 05:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a question, but in case you're wanting to know about the progress of Draft:Faygo Baby, that draft has been rejected and will therefore not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dharanishvnd (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Dharanish VND (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

why reject my submission Dharanishvnd (talk) 08:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves, please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merged account (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Correns Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Reviewers, could you please give me some help regarding my sources that I use in the above article? I am quite confused, because most reviewers pointed out that the sources are not reliable, independent, secondary & in-depth. However, except using the official website as source for the president`s history, I can not identify that there is anything not independed (or not secondary or not reliable). The last reviewer pointed out in addition that the sources need in addition "significant coverage". In my understanding, this is the same with "in-depth", but the first referenced book "Company chronicles East Asia" is quite in-depth enough. I start getting the impression that reviewers can`t access to the content of this source and therefore conclude that it is not in-depth enough. Kindly be asked to give me your advice per source, so I understand better which of the source is not adequate. Merged account (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Merged account: with the possible exception of source #1, these are mostly primary sources: #2 is produced in collaboration with JETRO and the German businesses; #3 says it is based on interviews; #4 is Correns itself; and #6 is the US gov't. Meanwhile #5 is a secondary source, yes, but it makes no mention of Correns (that I could find at least). I don't know what #1 is or how independent it is of its subject(s), but even if it fully meets the WP:GNG, it alone isn't enough to satisfy it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:20, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing, thank you very much for your feedback per source! I`ve also read WP:GNG again and understood now that even if the publishing source is independent, interviews with primary sources are still an issue. So I will exchange now most of the sources. Regarding involvement of JETRO, I have a different opinion, since Correns was not a member of this organization at the time when the book was published (and probably it is still the same situation). One additional question: How to enable reviewers to read source 1? It is an antique book and reviewers certainly don`t want to purchase it. Maybe there is a place where I can share a copy of the relevant page(s) without violating copyright law? Same question regarding a purchased report of the Teikoku databank. If it`s behind a paywall, can it be still helpful to use it as reference? Looking forward to your advise! Merged account (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Merged account: RE source #1, I looked up OAV, and it turns out to be Ostasiatischer Verein, or the German Asia-Pacific Business Association. To my mind, this makes that source similar to the JETRO one, #2, ie. not entirely independent. Business associations writing about businesses is a bit like the Bundesliga writing about its constituent teams: they may technically be at an arm's length, but it's not a very long arm.

Sources behind paywalls are acceptable, but it would be helpful if you could treat them effectively as offline sources (see WP:OFFLINE), in the sense of citing them with sufficient detail to give the reviewer a good idea of what the source is and says, and the extent of its coverage. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing: Thank you again for elaborating your review with further details. I really appreciate it a lot and will study WP:Offline now. About OAV: Yes, that is comparable with JETRO. Just, to my knowledge, CORRENS was never a member of OAV. So I believe it is not so much like the Bundesliga example, since there is no dependency on each other. But thanks again, I will point this out in the reference next time. Merged account (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Schaubia (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Trifon Trifonov (astronomer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need to understand why the resources are not enough for the article acceptance. Please assist! Schaubia (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, for example, an entire paragraph of "Research" is unsourced. Everything in the draft should be cited to reliable sources or removed. I also noticed that your draft has a somewhat promotional tone which should probably be fixed, such as "expanding his expertise" "leading figure" "outstanding research", etc. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 13:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Revelly (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Gole number system (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

could you share more details, do you want to add complete details and submit? Revelly (talk) 11:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revelly, I am afraid Wikipedia does not publish original research. qcne (talk) 11:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Hillaryasher (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Ari Chambers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Ari Chambers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi! I’ve been working on submitting a Wikipedia article for Ari Chambers for nearly seven months, and it has once again been declined — this time due to concerns over the reliability of references. I’ve spoken with multiple volunteers via the live chat help desk, and each time I’ve been reassured that the sources I’ve used meet Wikipedia’s standards for reliable references. Ari Chambers is a well-known journalist and on-air talent who regularly reports on the WNBA and women’s sports, currently contributing to ESPN platforms. Given her notability and consistent media presence — especially during the current WNBA season — I believe the article meets Wikipedia’s guidelines for inclusion. I’ve also noticed that other journalists with similar credentials and coverage have existing pages. I’m passionate about helping elevate the visibility of women in sports media, and I would truly appreciate any further guidance or insight into what specific changes need to be made in order for this article to be approved. I’m more than willing to make the necessary edits, but would love some clearer direction. Hillaryasher (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that it was accepted. 331dot (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Kures48 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Sam Bregman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Sam Bregman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, has this submission been fully rejected? can I still submit edits for review? Kures48 (talk) 16:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may continue to edit it; if you are able to fundamentally change the draft to address the concerns of reviewers, you may then appeal to the rejecting reviewer directly and ask them to reconsider. 331dot (talk) 17:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Prettylittleunicorn73 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Template:AfC accept (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Is this legal for the Federal Reserve? Prettylittleunicorn73 (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Prettylittleunicorn73. Do you have a question about drafts on Wikipedia..? qcne (talk) 17:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2405:201:0:6807:F986:DAF2:9FAC:7E14 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Gaadi Number 1760 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

i have been making changes in my wikipedia page but no matter what the draft is being declined can we please get a proper guidance on how do i not make any mistakes and the draft gets accepted 2405:201:0:6807:F986:DAF2:9FAC:7E14 (talk) 17:02, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Usually films meet the notability criteria with reviews by nationally known reputable critics/publications. Sources like press releases (i.e. trailers, teasers, etc.) are primary sources so cannot be used to establish notability. S0091 (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Shvan1 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Serkaut Zeki (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sarkawt Zaki is a prominent figure in Kurdistan and the head of the organizing committee of the PUK . Shvan1 (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Shvan1 It is mandatory that biographic articles of living people have in-line citations that reference every piece of biographic information. Please carefully read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and then follow the tutorial at Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1. This draft cannot be accepted without in-line citations to reliable, published sources. qcne (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ejm-Samson (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Christian Mezas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Trying to increase the visibility for Mr. Mezas as I've seen for other athletes with similar experience and presence. Not sure what the criteria is. I've added more web references. Any guidance would be appreciated. Ejm-Samson (talk) 17:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ejm-Samson. The criteria for sportspeople is at Wikipedia:Notability (sports). But please note that "Trying to increase the visibility" is the definition of promotion which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. qcne (talk) 18:02, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood - my terminology might be incorrect. It's more about a reliable source of truth for all things. Thank you Ejm-Samson (talk) 18:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ejm-Samson I'd recommend having a read of read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and then follow the tutorial at Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1 which will show you how to put citations in-line with the text. qcne (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sliceofretro (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Stadio di Acquaviva (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sources were rejected, but I took them directly from the Clubs page, the owners of the stadium itself. Sliceofretro (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sliceofretro, indeed: that means the sources are not independent of the club. We need sources that are fully independent. See Wikipedia:Independent sources. qcne (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Feodorovnassz (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Princess Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Princess Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hi!! I am curious why the subject I have written about is not notable enough for a wiki page despite the fact other figures like marie of hesse and by rhine have gotten one, which in my personal thought, have the same amount of notablity. Feodorovnassz (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited at Wikipedia, so the fact that she had notable relatives (such as Empress Maria Alexandrovna) does not automatically make Johanna notable. There used to be an article about Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine, but it was deleted after a (well-attended) community discussion, which concluded that there was no information about her to be found in reliable sources, beyond the fact that she existed, and died very young. And that is apparent from your draft as well, I'm afraid. --bonadea contributions talk 19:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

I'm trying to create this Wikipedia entry that was flagged for deletion, but it didn't list criteria for the flagging, so I'm not sure what to improve/change. BabyMomOnline (talk) 20:48, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BabyMomOnline Since you declined your own draft you really ought to know what is wrong with it. The most important thing wrong with it is the AI generated template at the top. Please delete that and place {{subst:submit}} instead. While doing that rewrite all the AI generated elements 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temstime (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Temstime Since you declined your own draft you really ought to know what is wrong with it. The most important thing wrong with it is the AI generated template at the top. Please delete that and place {{subst:submit}} instead. While doing that rewrite all the AI generated elements 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:51, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Temstime The other major thing wromg is that you have wrotten your autobiography, never a wise thing. If you believe that Wikipedia will enhance your reputation please think again. Wikipedia adds no value to you. You must add value to Wikipedia. Passing WP:BIO does that. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:53, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sasschill (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Robert Keating (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Robert Keating (musician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why is this not accepted? I tried to cite as much as I could, and I did cite where I got some information which was from interviews on youtube, but my feedback was that it wasn't valid. Is there anything I can do to improve this? Sasschill (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Did you read the comment @Rusalkii left on your draft? It's pretty well explained there - you don't have sources about Robert Keating that are independent of the band and provide significant coverage of him as an individual. Rusalkii did suggest adding some of the material to the existing page about the band though. Lijil (talk) 04:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]