Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2026 June 13
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < June 12 | << May | June | Jul >> | June 14 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
June 13
[edit source]Request for review: Draft:Siju George (substantially revised)
[edit source]Hello. I submitted Draft:Siju George, which was declined on 2 April 2026 by Wisenerd on grounds of insufficient independent sourcing and AI-generated content.
I have substantially revised the draft and resubmitted it on 12 April 2026. The revision:
- Replaced all weak and non-independent sources
- Now cites four independent national publications:
Oman Observer (March 2024), Oman Observer (September 2025), Times of Oman (March 2017), and Muscat Daily (October 2025)
- Removed the infobox and all unsourced personal details
- Was rewritten by a human editor
I understand the queue currently has over 4,400 pending submissions. I am not requesting to jump the queue, but would appreciate if an experienced reviewer could take a look when possible.
Draft link: Draft:Siju George
Thank you. Oman1972 (talk) 06:30, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- You say
Was rewritten by a human editor
. Presumably you were the human editor, so why are you referring to yourself in the third person? Presumably because (also owing to other stylistic indicators) you used an AI to help you write this very comment; which is not exactly a strong indicator that you've removed the AI generated text from your draft. Athanelar (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2026 (UTC)- You are right and I apologise. I am very new to Wikipedia and I used an AI assistant to help me understand the process and draft the submission and the comments. I was told to write it that way and I can see now that was the wrong approach. My brother is Dr. Siju George and I manage his marketing. I should have said that clearly from the beginning. Oman1972 (talk) 10:14, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
08:41, 13 June 2026 review of submission by Pkumardxb
[edit source]MY UPDATES ARE REJECTED KINDLY ADVISE THE REASONS Pkumardxb (talk) 08:41, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- Please don't yell at us(turn off your caps lock). Wikipedia does not host personal essays where the person casually tells about themselves. Please see the autobiography policy. If you want to tell the world about yourself, use social media. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
08:42, 13 June 2026 review of submission by FluteLover1987
[edit source]My draft got declined for including copyrighted material. I removed any text that could sound like taken from the link they mentioned but haven't gotten a reply now for months. I am wondering if i should continue trying to fix it or just leave it be for now. I also put a lot of links because to me that looks more well researched but is it too much? FluteLover1987 (talk) 08:42, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- FluteLover1987 I have fixed your header so it links to your draft as intended; the full title is needed, including the "Draft:" portion.
- Your draft is submitted and pending. You are welcome to continue to edit it if you have additional changes to make. The draft will be reviewed in due course; as noted at the top of your draft, there is a significant backlog for this all volunteer effort. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
08:51, 13 June 2026 review of submission by ~2026-34347-01
[edit source]Why are you rejecting ~2026-34347-01 (talk) 08:51, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- As noted by the reviewer, you have not demonstrated that this church meets the definition of a notable organization. You have no sources; a Wikipedia article needs to summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic, not just merely document the existence of the topic. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
11:10, 13 June 2026 review of submission by Endofworld123
[edit source]Can you help/assist me in practical words and terms, how this draft can be made more in accordance with Wikipedia policy.
I mean can you please assist by specifying the requirements stated in the Wikipedia Guidelines with their applicability in this case, and where exactly this article lacks or fails? Endofworld123 (talk) 11:10, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- Please go through WP:NFF regarding notability of future films. Thilsebatti (talk) 11:28, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- Right. Shall go through it and shall make a request if still there is some need of help.
- Regards and thanjs Endofworld123 (talk) 11:33, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
15:44, 13 June 2026 review of submission by Hudavendigar
[edit source]- Hudavendigar (talk · contribs)
It has been over 3 months since my submission and my second submission after making suggested edits. Is this supposed to take this long? What should I do? I did put much work into this draft. Murat (talk) 15:44, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- 3 months is an average, it can be less, it can be more. 331dot (talk) 01:18, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Hudavendigar, one thing that would probably speed it up is if you linked (in the draft) any sources that are available online. Reviewers need to look at your sources, and being able to click a link is much faster than tracking down books and offline journals. If none of your references are online, that's okay! If you're comfortable with the idea, you could also leave a note on the draft's talk page letting reviewers know you could screenshot/photograph the most relevant page or two from each source. Meadowlark (talk) 09:23, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Did you use an AI to help you write this?
- Even if you clean up the sourcing (and making reviewers hunt for your sources is a sure way to delay the review) it would still not pass due to non-neutral statements in Wikipedia's narrative voice, that are not attributed to any sourcing.
- Examples of subjective or non-neutral prose are "marks an important turning point" (opinion), "he is seen" (by whom?), "one of the leading figures" (opinion), "famous" (opinion), "brutally" (subjective), "Some claim" (who?), "also possible" (speculation), "noteworthy" (opinion). None of this is appropriate writing for an encyclopedia. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 17:57, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Did I use AI? No, maybe I should have, to clean up the prose. I have been editing on and off for the last three months, maybe that is why it lacks fluency. Murat (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- I asked because AI often puts in unsubstantiated puffery like that. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:09, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- Did I use AI? No, maybe I should have, to clean up the prose. I have been editing on and off for the last three months, maybe that is why it lacks fluency. Murat (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. I found many references that are easily available on line. This was a prominent person, many references related to his life and work. Some of his own publication are from early 19th century, not available directly, only by reference. Can not be helped. I will clean up some of the expressions that seem subjective, not sure if that was the problem, no such feedback. Good input. Murat (talk) 18:45, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
16:32, 13 June 2026 review of submission by Redline907
[edit source]- Redline907 (talk · contribs)
can I just list websites that report on Carmela Warfield to show prominence? I have never done this before as I am sure you can tell Redline907 (talk) 16:32, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- Redline907 You need to summarize independent reliable sources with significant coverage of her, not just descriptions of her activities and career. "Significant coverage" is critical analysis and commentary as to what is viewed as important/significant/influential about the topic. Has she had a particular influence on party positions, proposed legislation, or its candidates?
- Writing a new article is one of the most difficult tasks to perform on Wikipedia; I might suggest using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- If you are associated with Warfield or the Alaska Republican Party organization(not merely being a Republican), that needs to be disclosed, see WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
18:36, 13 June 2026 review of submission by Shivam2203
[edit source]- Shivam2203 (talk · contribs)
in this add the sourses, links and refefcences
can you please tell me what is wrong in this artilce which is going to be reject
Shivam2203 (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- User:CoconutOctopus has already warned you to stop using Wikipedia as a platform for self-promotion. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:42, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- And has now blocked them for same. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Object Class: Drygioni 14:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC)