Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk

Main pageTalk pageSubmissions
CategoryList (sorting)
TalkBy subject
Reviewing instructions
Helper script

Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation help desk

  • This page is only for questions about article submissions to Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
  • Bona fide reviewers at Articles for Creation will never contact or solicit anyone for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article. If someone contacts you with such an offer, please post on this help desk page.
Click here to ask a new question.

A reviewer should soon answer your question on this page. Please check back often.
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Archived discussions

November 29Edit

07:36:02, 29 November 2020 review of draft by Shahramsh452Edit

Shahramsh452 (talk) 07:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Shahramsh452 You don't ask a question; I assume this has to do with the draft you wrote(which I've fixed the link to above). 331dot (talk) 09:48, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
  Declined for the reasons explained on the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

08:44:36, 29 November 2020 review of draft by Amirhossein bazvandEdit

Amirhossein bazvand (talk) 08:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Amirhossein bazvand You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

09:49:01, 29 November 2020 review of submission by

Hi guys, just wanted to let you know most of the sources on this page are tweets. (talk) 09:49, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello, the proper place to bring this up would be the article talk page, Talk:Bang Zoom! Entertainment. This page is for users to ask questions about drafts they have created. The general help desk is at WP:HD for future reference. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Please see other crap exists finding a poorly sourced article, is no excuse for creating another at Draft:Justine Tung. Theroadislong (talk) 10:14, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:36:51, 29 November 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Beth WimmerEdit

Hello, I'm requesting assistance by staying in communication about his article. I'll continue to work on this article, and i'll be resubmitting it. I think the article I created does meet the criteria for being noteworthy, and does have reliable sources. This is an article about a person who is widely agreed on, in the important "Vierländerregion" in Europe (the four-country region near Lake Constance consisting of Austria, Switzerland, Germany, and Liechtenstein) and in the UK and USA, as being a cutting-edge technology sound recorder, project creator, and producer. I will find and add some more reliable sources, and try linking this article to other notable musicians' Wikipedia articles (Fred Wesley, Simon Phillips) who laud and endorse the validity of Manfred Konzett's being a person of note. I've read the recommended Wikipedia help pages that were highlighted in the reason for denial of my article, including 'Referencing for beginners', and mistakes to avoid when resubmitting an article. I still believe in this article I'm creating, and will try again with it. Lastly, I am still trying to address the proper crediting problem with image File:Manfred "Little" Konzett working at a Solid State Logic 4000 G+ Series mixing desk.jpeg and other images i'd uploaded months ago, but I think the images are no longer to be found on Wikipedia? Yet, when I tried uploading that image (just noted) once again, a second attempt, there was a window that came up saying this image seems to have already been uploaded, and this time around, the system would not let me complete the photo credit information. To be honest, I am finding adding a photo to the article very difficult, which is a shame as the photos themselves add to the validity of the article. If you have an advice for me, I'd be grateful. Otherwise, i'll just edit and add to the article, do my best to verify everything, and resubmit when I feel it's ready. Thank you very kindly for your time. Beth Wimmer (talk) 14:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC) Beth Wimmer (talk) 14:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you could suggest how you think they pass WP:NMUSICIAN. Theroadislong (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
@Beth Wimmer: It's not clear to me exactly what you are purporting he is notable for. For being a musician? For being a recording engineer? Everybody has to work, but that doesn't mean that every working person deserves an encyclopedia article. A plumber is just as hard-working as a recording engineer, but just because the plumber fixes the pipes of the rich and famous, or uses the most expensive wrenches in the world, doesn't mean that he is notable. So the obstacle here is that you're going to have to demonstrate why this person deserves an encyclopedia article. Did he create any sort of landmark recording technique that won him attention from his peers and the music world? For instance, people are very well aware of Phil Spector's Wall of Sound, a recording technique that had a tangible impact on American music at the time. You will need to find references that speak about Konzett and his recording work in great detail if that's why he is notable. See WP:GNG in addition to what Theroadislong has noted above. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

17:22:44, 29 November 2020 review of draft by MyceliumXEdit

Hi, I was trying to upload a head shot to Draft: Sher Doruff but wasn't able to publish it. MyceliumX (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

MyceliumX You don't yet have enough edits to be able to upload images (you need 10 or more edits). 331dot (talk) 18:05, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
@MyceliumX: And once you have enough edits to upload images, you need to be careful about that headshot. It is no doubt copyrighted (as most things are by default) and a copyright violation would not be acceptable. You should probably read our copyright policy as well as our policy on our policy on non-free content. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:57, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Images don't help a draft anyway. Focus on the text and sourcing. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 21:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

November 30Edit

02:40:06, 30 November 2020 review of submission by GoodlugEdit

I am working on an English version of a Chinese page. Everything is translated from Chinese directly. As the Chinese version has already been published, I wonder why my submission of English version is declined.

Goodlug (talk) 02:40, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Please see WP:OSE. The chinese Wikipedia is a seperate Wikipedia with (possibly) seperate rules. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:29, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

09:47:39, 30 November 2020 review of submission by ActingadviserEdit

Actingadviser (talk) 09:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Actingadviser You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Courtesy link Draft:Mandar Kulkarni, draft not submitted yet?. Theroadislong (talk) 09:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

14:08:48, 30 November 2020 review of submission by AnonUser0413Edit

Can You Give Me Some Advice, Spicy? Then I Will Try To Fix It. AnonUser0413 (talk) 14:08, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

AnonUser0413, We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 14:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

14:25:21, 30 November 2020 review of draft by Boating-bernardEdit

I am new to doing anything like this. I am also 75 years old and don't necessarily understand all your instructions, for which I apologise. I believe I have independent sources of information about my subject (Arthur Keene, Van Art) from the Coventry Evening Telegraph archives. Unfortunately they are now in the hands of 'Find My Past' the genealogical site, who charge £160 to join. I think I can obtain the same information from the Herbert Art Gallery in Coventry, but not until the Covid 19 restrictions are over! So I have two questions 1. Is this sort of information likely to provide you with the evidence you require? 2. Will you wait until I can access this information? Boating-bernard (talk) 14:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Request on 14:26:03, 30 November 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by GabriellainberlinEdit

I would need help with the creation of my article. It is the biography of the German choreographer Christoph Winkler. His biography can be found on his website or on dance websites in Germany. How can I do it? I have to quote the web source in case I use phrases taken from these sources. please, what is the right template? Furthermore, I have a number of articles published in magazines that I have translated, but they are in my personal archive. How do I insert them? I can create the entry: "Reviews". Thanks for your help, my article has been deleted due to copyright infringement. It was not my intention, I would like to understand how to do it. --Gabriellainberlin (talk) 14:26, 30 November 2020 (UTC) Gabriellainberlin (talk) 14:26, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gabriellainberlin: Wikipedia is mainly based on what reliable independent sources choosed to write about a subject. Private archies are not usefull here, as they cannot be verified. Sources in other languages are perfectly acceptable, as long as they are reliable and independent]]. As for copyright, I have added some information about that to your user talk page. As a matter of thumb: Never, realy never copy text onto Wikipedia, with the exception of quotes of maybe atmost one or two sentences, which are directly marked as a quote. Even if we could get the legal stuff resolved, 99% of the text not written for Wikipedia are also unsiutable for Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

16:01:02, 30 November 2020 review of submission by Gabriele CusimanoEdit

Dear Sir, Madam, I have recently submitted a draft for an Article on The State of the Union, an annual event organised by the European University Institute. It was the first time for me, and, although I though I had carefully followed your guidelines and instructions, my submission was denied by Amkgp because "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations". I would be glad if you could give me some more details or feedback on how I can make this article acceptable for publication, as I understand that the rest of my draft was acceptable. With kind regards, Gabriele Gabriele Cusimano (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gabriele Cusimano: Hi there, you should probably see Referencing for Beginners. But pick any article, let's say Amitabh Bachchan. Notice how in the infobox, in the lede, and in the body of the article you find statements with subscripted links? That's because while building the article, editors added "inline references" after each statement made.
Amitabh Bachchan (born Inquilaab Srivastava;[1] 11 October 1942[2]) is an Indian film actor, film producer, television host, occasional playback singer and former politician.[3]
When these are added to the article, they will be propagated into the References section after a {{reflist}} template is added, which I have done for you in the State of the Union article. So references would appear at bottom like this:


  1. ^ James, Anu (25 February 2015). "Amitabh Bachchan, Kamal Haasan, Katrina Kaif and Other Bollywood Celebs Who Changed Their Names [PHOTOS]". Retrieved 21 July 2018.
  2. ^ Dedhia, Sonil (7 October 2012). "Amitabh Bachchan: No resolutions for my birthday". Rediff. Retrieved 9 October 2019. On October 2, the superstar took time out to give interviews to the media, as celebrations for his 70th birthday on October 11[, 2012,] started picking up
  3. ^
To re-use a reference, you should give it a name: <ref name="Birthdate"></ref> After placing that into the article, if you wanted to re-use that reference, you could just add the shortcut <ref name="Birthdate" /> at the end of sentences that are supported by that reference.
Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

17:55:22, 30 November 2020 review of draft by Farooque AzmEdit

First of all thanks for helping me in advance, now this is my first article on wikipedia so i dont want it to be deleted this article was declined by Theroadislong user stating the following reasons for the declination "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you."

Farooque Azm (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@Farooque Azm: See the help request directly above this one, where I explain how to add inline citations. However, your obstacle will be much bigger, since there are only two references in the article. The Telegraph India article doesn't mention Syed Aaraf Ashraf, so it's entirely useless in determining general notability, and the other reference is a primary source, which only proves that he works with AIBA. It doesn't do anything to determine that the subject is notable, since we require independent sources. The bulk of the content doesn't really tell me anything about this person or why they are notable. In fact, much of it just reads like an opinion piece. Anyway, you need to read our General Notability Guideline and do your best to demonstrate that the subject has received significant coverage (not passing mentions, but in-detail writing about him) in reliable secondary sources (mainstream news sites, for instance, not blogs or random websites) that are independent of the subject (no interviews, not his personal website, not the AIBA's website, etc.) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

21:43:49, 30 November 2020 review of draft by Raindi StawEdit

I would like to ask how can I apply my own photos to the article I am writing. I have applied some through the INSERT option, but it appears that I have no permission to publish them. How can I make those photos valid and visible?

Raindi Staw (talk) 21:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Forget the photo, the draft has more pressing issues than the position of its deck chairs. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 21:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

23:37:07, 30 November 2020 review of draft by EugeneKononenkovEdit

EugeneKononenkov (talk) 23:37, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Colleagues, please help new user to creat short article about medical doctor. 20+ years of experience. He helped many patients. Created new treatment methods, a lot of scientific publications... as a thank to this doctor I try , but dont have enough experience in coding.

Thank you in advance

Draft - — Preceding unsigned comment added by EugeneKononenkov (talkcontribs) 23:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@EugeneKononenkov: Sorry, but Wikipedia is not the place to memorialise people who have helped you in life. We only care about subjects that are notable, as defined by our General Notability Guideline. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

December 1Edit

04:16:43, 1 December 2020 review of submission by SwickouskiEdit

Hi. I am the author of an article which was submitted and recently declined. The reviewer noted that the article lacked proper citation and read lke an advertisement, However, I made a point of using internationally recognized third-party sources AND including detail about significant charges of insider trading. What do I need to do before resibmitting? Swickouski (talk) 04:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Swickouski, I've replied to your message on my talk page, and on Hegvald's talk page too. It should answer your question. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 05:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

04:52:51, 1 December 2020 review of draft by Adityapawar1408Edit

Please tell me where you fill that our content looks like a marketing. Kinldy help me to publish this draft.

Adityapawar1408 (talk) 04:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

06:15:44, 1 December 2020 review of draft by AysarGhaEdit

It isn't clear to me what is not cited correctly. I felt the message left by Andrew was rather vague.

AysarGha (talk) 06:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

09:01:50, 1 December 2020 review of submission by Nikhilesh barua9Edit

Nikhilesh barua9 (talk) 09:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Nikhilesh barua9 You don't ask a question, but Wikipedia is not a place for you to tell the world about yourself. Please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

15:56:14, 1 December 2020 review of draft by SienawardsEdit

Gina Williams (talk) 15:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, I submitted corrections to this page and haven't heard back for some time. I just want to make sure I'm doing everything correctly. I also asked for a revision to the name of the page, which should be: "Drone Photo Awards"

Thank you! --Gina Williams

16:42:17, 1 December 2020 review of submission by 2409:4071:E18:9CC5:941F:A521:8CE3:FBC3Edit

Dear Sir/Mam Please consider a relook into this article for publication consideration. Thank you in advance 2409:4071:E18:9CC5:941F:A521:8CE3:FBC3 (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

In order for a subject to have an article, you must demonstrate that the subject meets at least our General Notability Guideline, which says that Baikady would have to receive significant coverage (in-depth coverage, not passing mentions) from reliable secondary sources (no blogs, no random websites, but mainstream sources) that are independent of the subject. So where are the references that show that the media, (newspapers, magazines, books from major publishers, etc) are writing about Baikady and his work in depth? Because if the answer is "I can't find any", then the subject is likely not going to meet our notability standards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

17:43:53, 1 December 2020 review of draft by SPP2012Edit

I have created my first AfC submission and clicked the box to "Submit the draft for review!" When I return to the draft page, it continues to read, "Draft article not currently submitted for review. This is a draft Articles for creation (AfC) submission. It is not currently pending review."

Is there anything else or additional I need to do to ensure my AfC submission is in queue for review?

SPP2012 (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

@SPP2012: Did you press the Publish Changes button that appears at the very bottom of the next page you see after you click the "Submit the draft for review" button? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

17:58:22, 1 December 2020 review of submission by KennyParisEdit

Hello, I believe my draft about the musicians/artists Picard Brothers is now ready to be approved but I still don't have any news and it's been 2 most since my last edit. I would really like to know if it's going to be declined again or if it can be approved please. I have searched and found more reliable sources and I have taken other examples of producers who are less known than Picard Brothers and saw the sources they used and I have searched in the same places. I am following the rules of Wikipedia and I truly believe that they deserve their page to be approved please. They have won a Grammy and they have produced the latest Beyoncé single, the last Mark Ronson album, and many songs for Diplo and Major Lazer. There are many websites mentioning their names, they participated in many of the biggest songs of the last decade.

KennyParis (talk) 17:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

19:08:17, 1 December 2020 review of submission by Hardik kachhawahaEdit

Hardik kachhawaha (talk) 19:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

This was correctly rejected outright, nothing to suggest that you are notable enough for an article I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 19:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

20:36:56, 1 December 2020 review of draft by Zifnab25Edit

I am currently revising Sima Ladjevardian's Wiki entry to expand its scope and establish her as a local political figure with significant press coverage. Prior to running for Congress, her philanthropic work and political activism has had a sizable impact on the Houston Area. And her close relationship with the Beto Senate and Presidential campaigns drove his success as a high profile fund raiser. The assorted links and notes should bare out both.

That said, I know standards for an article can be a bit subjective. So I'd like to know if the current updates are in line with Wiki standards for notability before I submit these article updates another time.

Zifnab25 (talk) 20:36, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

It is not. We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every claim the article makes MUST be cited to a strong secondary source or removed outright. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 21:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2Edit

00:54:32, 2 December 2020 review of submission by FlewisssEdit

Hello Wikipedia community,

I was hoping someone could provide me with more specific feedback regarding my draft. I am a first time editor trying to put together a page about Bill Russell, an illustrator in the San Francisco Bay Area. My submission was rejected because the article "read too much like an advertisement." I felt I included numerous non-biased sources and my tone was neutral (perhaps I am wrong, feel free to disagree here), so I am guessing what got flagged was the external links section listing some of Russell's personal websites. I was trying to be thorough since I saw similar sections on other illustrator's pages, but in reading about what Wiki considers spam, the help pages listed external links as a big no-no. I wanted to know if that section was indeed the issue, or does the whole article need restructuring? Thank you, I am enjoying learning about the community here!

Flewisss (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Flewisss

Flewisss (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

11:39:32, 2 December 2020 review of submission by WykaxEdit

   11:39:32, 2 December 2020 review of submission by Wykax

Wykax (talk) 11:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Wykax You don't ask a question, but your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further, as it is nowhere close to being suitable as a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 11:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

11:44:51, 2 December 2020 review of submission by AkarnikosEdit

Please review this article, Haris Stampoulids is playing profession soccer now and I've updated all reference. He is also in spanish wiki: - Charalampos Stamboulidis, better known as Haris Stamboulidis, represented here as his Greek name.

I'm hoping you can now approve this article. Akarnikos (talk) 11:44, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Akarnikos If this player has now appeared in a game in a fully professional league, you should appeal to the reviewer who rejected your draft. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

12:24:43, 2 December 2020 review of submission by 2401:4900:4BB6:EB61:2DC2:692C:2A5C:373CEdit

it was mentioned that this draft is blatant book promotion. However this, not a blatant book promotion, rather this is an article about an academic, researcher subject with international contribution and reputation. requesting you to have relook as many inline citation and external links are now provided in the draft article 2401:4900:4BB6:EB61:2DC2:692C:2A5C:373C (talk) 12:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk)`

12:39:26, 2 December 2020 review of submission by (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

The draft has been rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. It is completely unsourced to independent reliable sources with significant coverage. Wikipedia is not a place for a company to tell the world about itself. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

17:19:36, 2 December 2020 review of draft by 2604:2000:E010:1100:ED6A:E0EC:D1FD:8889Edit

Hi. This page seems to lack that yellow notice that it is being reviewed. Can someone help? Thanks. 2604:2000:E010:1100:ED6A:E0EC:D1FD:8889 (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I have added the appropriate information to allow you to submit your draft. 331dot (talk) 17:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
thanks-- (talk) 01:59, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

18:09:10, 2 December 2020 review of draft by SabulhabEdit

Hi, I have resubmitted the article with 10 more references/external link, as suggested by the draft reviewer. I can add more if needed. Also, I am aware that the article involves myself, but reading over the help pages, they said it is ok to write autobiography article since it will be open for future corrections from other editors.

I would like to know if all is ok now. Thanks.

Sabulhab (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sabulhab: I'm not sure what help pages you read, but WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY says fairly unambiguously, Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is an example of conflict of interest editing and is strongly discouraged. Editing a biography about yourself is acceptable only if you are removing unambiguous vandalism or clear-cut and serious violations of our biography of living persons policy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Also, if you look at one of our quality Featured Articles, like Priyanka Chopra, you'll notice that in the body of the article, there are inline citations that support various claims and facts stated in the article. And if you scroll down, all of those various inline citations are collected at the bottom of the page. The draft article about you would need these as well. Which reference says when you were born? Which reference says where you went to school? Which reference talks about the creation of the Mutamathil Type Style? Which reference indicates how many original Arabic and bilingual font families you created? All of that would have to be supported inline, and it's almost certain that the article could be declined quickly for a lack of adequate inline referencing. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
I did read the Wikipedia policy on autobiographies. It says autobiography articles are strongly discouraged, as you have wrote. Clearly this does not say forbidden. Therefore I went ahead and wrote one, with good faith to open it to editors input. The other option is to use paid editors! I do not like to support that trend in Wikipedia.
Finally, the external links I provided verify my education and coverage.
As for your question which help Wikipedia pages I am referencing regarding the Notability criteria, I am referring to "Wikipedia:Notability (people)":
Sabulhab (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Sabulhab It is true that autobiographical articles are not absolutely forbidden. But it is a rare thing for someone to actually succeed in writing one. I have never seen anyone succeed at it in my eight and a half years here. But Wikipedia is not interested in what people want to say about themselves, and is not a place for people to merely tell the world about themselves and their accomplishments. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person.
In order for you to succeed at that, you would in essence need to forget everything you know about yourself, and everything you have accomplished in your life, and only write based on the content of independent sources with significant coverage(not press releases, brief mentions, or other primary sources). Most people cannot do that about themselves, even though it is technically possible. If you truly feel that you are one of the rare people who can do that, you are free to extensively rewrite your draft. 331dot (talk) 23:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't mean to argue but if you have never seen anyone succeed at it in your eight and a half years this does not make it right. How about being the first? I am clearly qualified via the Academics Criteria. This is not an auto bio. Just info page.
BTW: I noticed you ignored commenting on which Wikipedia help pages I am reading regarding the Academics Notability criteria, even though you asked me. Here is is my answer again if you want to comment:
I am referring to "Wikipedia:Notability (people)": — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabulhab (talkcontribs) 00:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Sabulhab It is an autobiography because you are writing it about yourself. As I said, if you truly think that you are one of the very few people who can write in the the manner I stated above and succeed at it, you may proceed, but your draft will need to radically change from its current state. Wikipedia articles are not mere "info pages" that merely provide information, they summarize independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 01:00, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


I am sorry, you still think my bio is not for a notable person. I can point to many many others who are not even close to notability on Wikipedia. Notability depends on the field you are in. As academics, as you will read in your own help pages below, are notable by definition if they produced heavy research work and publications in their fields. I have plenty and supplied them. At this point, I am confused and don't know how to handle this. As I said, I looked into your help pages and clearly see that I fulfill you notability criteria, basic and additional. Please see below with my comments under each.

Basic criteria "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,and independent of the subject."

I have supplied 3 articles from major widely circulating newspapers. I forgot about other coverage over the years and I am too old to hunt for them now.

Additional criteria


"Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources."

I am a known researcher and scholar working in a major university who produced very original publications and research, 7 books and plenty of articles. I got lot of grants. Your help page says "academics" are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources. I belong to the "academics" criteria. I have even supplied 3 "secondary sources" without needing them according to your help page. On CUNY (the City University of New York) Academics work, I just reached more than 16,500 downloads from around the world of my research/publication, making me rank in the top 10%.

Creative professionals

  • "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors."

I am widely notable by peers because of my unique (but controversial to many) non-traditional Arabic font design style. I have designed 45 original font families over the past two decades. I am among the most active Arabic font designers in general. For sure, I am the most active non-traditional Arabic font designer in the world. Many articles and theses which have referenced my work. I am too old to go and hunt for them.

  • "The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique."

The New York Times says I introduced a significant new concept, or technique. Many other sources said that too. Why do I need to list more than three secondary sources, when I clearly fulfilled the notability criteria based only on the "Academics" additional criteria that I listed above.

Please help and reconsider.

Sabulhab (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Sabulhab Please make follow up comments in this existing section, do not create additional sections. You've been told how you can proceed if you insist on pursuing this. You would be better off to allow independent editors to take note of you and write about you. Also note that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. 331dot (talk) 10:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Also see other stuff exists. Other similar articles existing does not automatically mean yours can too. Each draft or article is judged on its own merits. As this is a volunteer project, it is possible to get inappropriate articles by us. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

20:54:12, 2 December 2020 review of draft by ArekSmithEdit

ArekSmith (talk) 20:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC) ArekSmith (talk) 20:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Can you please help me with creating the Lowell Police Department (Indiana) article

@ArekSmith: the first thing you want to do is looks for reliable independent sources. Then you want to expand the draft with the information from them. Make sure that you use your own words. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

22:20:24, 2 December 2020 review of submission by WordforesterEdit

I'm having a hard time understanding why this article was Declined. The stated reason was that "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." However, it was patterned after other articles written about Psychologists and reads in a similar style, like the one linked below. Can some point out specifically what part(s) read like an advertising? Some help to better understand this would be very appreciated.

Wordforester (talk) 22:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

22:52:24, 2 December 2020 review of submission by Carlden10Edit

Hi can you please give me a clear explanation of why the article was rejected? I don't see any reasoning on the article submission page. Thank you. Carlden10 (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Carlden10 You were given a reason, "This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia." Please read Your first article and the definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

22:52:40, 2 December 2020 review of submission by GentlemenistZeroEdit

I'm literally trying to add a wikipedia page for myself... to document my achievements pursuits, for public relations, etc... why do you people keep declining my post. This post is 100% legitimate. GentlemenistZero (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Even if I believed that someone would seriously call themselves stupid in their autobiography, Wikipedia is not a forum for promotion, and we don't care about people who aspire, we care about people who have achieved. WP:GNG. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
GentlemenistZero Wikipedia has no interest in aiding your public relations or in otherwise aiding your career. There are alternative forums where that is permitted. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

22:57:21, 2 December 2020 review of submission by

This page was moved to draft with the explanation "Quarantine likely covert advertising". I was curious so I was reviewing the Wikipedia guidelines around this, but I can't seem to find anything to back it up. I reviewed WP:DRAFT but I don't see anything about moving a page to Draft for "quarantine" or for issues related to the tone of the article. The guidelines state "Other editors (including the author of the page) have a right to object to moving the page. If an editor raises an objection, move the page back to mainspace and if it is not notable list at AfD." but this was clearly not followed on this page. Can someone please share the guidelines for moving a page to draft in this situation? I think there are many articles that need to be moved to draft for advertising but I'm not 100% sure if this is allowed. (talk) 22:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

The article creator was blocked indefinitely for advertising, which is a violation of WP:NOT, as Wikipedia is not a forum for promotion. Also, someone who is editing for pay, but who has not disclosed that, would be violating WP:PAID.So, moving the article, which has the stench of promotion wafting from it, to draft space, would be to metaphorically quarantine it. I'm sure you can understand that we wouldn't want anyone getting paid for something they were doing in violation of our community policies. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
It's somewhat common practice to move articles that would be a slam-dunk AfD deletion to draft space so that they can be worked on, as an alternative to the AfD debate and deletion. It gives the author (or anyone else interested in editing the page) more time to work on the article and get more used to Wikipedia policies, and it's less likely to torque off a contributor than a deletion debate will. Of course, this generally only happens with articles that do have some potential, but are either too promotional, mercenary, or too wanting source-wise to be fit for article space.
Moving a page to draft from article space also ensures the not-ready article doesn't get indexed on search engines, limiting any potential fallout from having an article that isn't up to par being near the top of search results. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
wheres the policy for this commn practice? Draft:Unify Square this article shouldnt be moved to draft it is not new see WP:ATD-I for nwly created and incubaiton not intended to be a backdoor to deletion. WP:ADMASK says nothng about draft just to add tag advert template and rewrite to nuetral. this has no sales-oriented languAge or external links to commrcial website as WP:ADMASK. please share lnk to community policy or move page to live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

23:15:13, 2 December 2020 review of draft by Hmichelle1Edit

I do not know how to submit my draft for review. Hmichelle1 (talk) 23:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@Hmichelle1: Did you try clicking the giant blue button that says "Submit the draft for review", and then the one at the bottom of the next page that says Publish changes? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

23:51:42, 2 December 2020 review of draft by

I am the subject of this entry. I find it surprising that I am deemed not worthy of an article but, given that's the concensus, I would like this entry to be deleted from Wikipedia. It is not fair to make money from having my name/draft article on the site. PLEASE DELETE. I am a living person who does not wish a draft version of some article about myself to be published online. (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not "make money" based on the existence of any one article or draft. But as the creator, you can request its deletion, which I will carry out. Please note that autobiographical articles are highly discouraged, and that there are notability criteria to merit an article(as reviewers told you). 331dot (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
If you didn't want a draft article about you to be published, why on earth did you create one? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

December 3Edit

06:17:11, 3 December 2020 review of draft by IamlillykEdit

Hello, I am trying to publish an article for the Wiki page titled, Draft:Montana Jacobowitz, but I keep getting a decline because of the references pages, is it possible if someone could correct this for me so that it could pass guidelines or help assist me as best as possible? Thank you.

Iamlillyk (talk) 06:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

07:21:47, 3 December 2020 review of draft by Shish Mohammad JakariaEdit

Shish Mohammad Jakaria (talk) 07:21, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

English versionEdit

So I am asking for an English version of Coup de Jarnac to be created so that people that know the word, but don't understand French can read it. Is there anyone that can do this?Volcannon (talk) 01:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

10:52:01, 3 December 2020 review of submission by Ammy666Edit

Ammy666 (talk) 10:52, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

11:35:14, 3 December 2020 review of submission by AJMonWikiEdit

The content of my submission does not meet the minimum standards for inline citations. Please could you tell me if this means there are not enough citations (i.e. not enough of the content has verifiable references), or that the citations it does include have not been formatted correctly. If the former, should I reduce the article length so that only verifiable content is included? Thank you for your help.

AJMonWiki (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

The former, and yes, if you can't find any usable sources for them. We require every single claim to either be sourced to a strong secondary source or outright removed. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

12:55:50, 3 December 2020 review of submission by AliOlaideEdit

What can I do to make my page go through? AliOlaide (talk) 12:55, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

In order to demonstrate notability, you will need to provide multiple references to in-depth articles written about you in unrelated, independent journals, magazines, books or online. Any article should be based on them alone, we have no interest in what you want to say about yourself. Theroadislong (talk) 13:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

13:23:11, 3 December 2020 review of submission by TigurasEdit

In the original submission, none of the work was properly referenced, so I have added links to the various projects and shows. Thank you.

Tiguras (talk) 13:23, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

A link isn't a reference. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to actually create references. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:26, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

13:32:40, 3 December 2020 review of draft by IMuelllerEdit

Dear Wikipedia people, we would like to know whether we can describe a phenomenon on wikipedia with the set of sources available below, or whether we can't because the phenomenon has not gained enough attention by other sources yet.

We wrote an article on a phenomenon in the international facilitation and do-it-yourself-projects scene that we deem interesting enough to be on wikipedia, without wanting to promote anything. There is a subset of facilitators organising around the term „Art of hosting“, that, based on specific assumptions, organise processes in specific ways. They organise around that theme for at least the last 20 years now (and have developed interesting principles for adressing social challenges as come with climate change or poverty or…)

When we wrote the article, some people were veery concerned to only use science quotes in order to get accepted. Now, we got the review that we should not quote original research.

(„This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.")

I can see the point about the tone and we're about to change this.

The thing about sources is: that there aren't so many. - there is the documents by the community itself (abundant grey literature, websites) - some books by individuals from that community - webpages by individuals - a bunch of scientific articles

… but are all not „secondary, reliable sources“, are they? So is the phenomenon just too small to be talked about in wikipedia, if there is no such secondary literature by non-practitioners yet? How should we handle that?

For full disclosure: some people in our author collective use the approach themselves, but having other jobs none of us earns their living with that. So our intention is not to advertise, but to make something interesting and helpful more transparent to the world. We assumed that this should be possible.

Best Imu IMuelller (talk) 13:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

By the read of it, the sourcing isn't so much the issue as the tone - aside from the concerns it was essaylike, the reviewer also expressed a concern that it mutated into promoting an associated website that seems to have usurped the generic phrase. I tend to agree with him - the article reads like an advertising brochure, and is practically crammed with buzzwords. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 13:45, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

16:15:40, 3 December 2020 review of submission by Francisjk2020Edit

Hi, Please could you take a look at the draft. No one seems to be reviewing it. I have incorporated all compliance changes as suggested by Wiki administrators. Thank you for your consideration. (Francisjk2020 (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)) Francisjk2020 (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Francisjk2020: The article was declined in October because the reviewer didn't feel that you had done enough to establish that the company met our notability guidelines. See WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Since then,[1][2] you haven't done much to address this issue beyond adding a single reference, deleting evidence that the draft had previously been declined, and that there had been a community discussion about the subject not being notable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

18:49:07, 3 December 2020 review of submission by Satish Punewale(SP)Edit

Satish Punewale(SP) (talk) 18:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Satish Punewale(SP): You didn't ask a question, and you [3] blanked the article draft. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

19:19:52, 3 December 2020 review of submission by CanAge2020Edit

Why was my CanAge page rejected? We are a new nonprofit. Can I still edit the page as I wasn't finished? CanAge2020 (talk) 19:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@CanAge2020: Wikipedia does not allow advertising or "spreading the word" about a brand. Also, Wikipedia is not here to help your noble cause. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

23:37:07, 3 December 2020 review of draft by

An avid fan of Dead Meat like I am needs to have James on this wiki along with the other popular youtubers. (talk) 23:37, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 23:46:52, 3 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Kiraly17Edit

Hello and thank you. This regards the draft for "Gabriel T Rozman". I have several questions as follows: (1) when editing a draft, how do I save my work if I am not yet ready to publsih? I have just lost 2 hours work (but fortunately printed beforehand so all is not lost). How do you save a draft, then go back later and continue working on it before finally publishing ? (2) how do I tag for review my draft submission ? I pressed the "tag" button, but an AFC template box appeared with text already in the multiple and number white text boxes ? (3) I would like to get input on my draft to improve its chances of being accepted. I understand the comments made at the last rejection and I am working to build out more, but would still like an experienced user to make suggestions. (4) finally, I need help with inserting a photo. I have read the help text and have tried to google the info, but when I insert the photo according to the instructions as I understand them, the photo is inserted in the middle of a random paragraph of the draft!

many many thanks and look forward to hearing back soon.Kiraly17 (talk) 23:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Kiraly17 (talk) 23:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Kiraly17: Your work is saved when you click "Publish changes". There is no requirement that you submit a final draft every time you click this button, so feel free to use it as often as you need. A greater item of importance, however, is that you really need to read our General Notability Guidelines and be sure that you are demonstrating that the subject has received "significant coverage (in-depth coverage, not passing mentions) by reliable sources (no blogs, no random websites. Major mainstream sources. See WP:RS) that are independent (no interviews, not the subject's website, not an article written by his spouse, etc.) of the subject". So far I don't get the sense that subject is notable. He sounds like a regular person who has had regular jobs. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, this article currently feels a bit too LinkedIn. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

December 4Edit

03:24:52, 4 December 2020 review of submission by XupnextEdit

Xupnext (talk) 03:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Xupnext: Your help request is blank. Did you have a question? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

03:41:16, 4 December 2020 review of draft by Azi RafatiEdit

Azi Rafati (talk) 03:41, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Azi Rafati: Your help request is blank. Did you have a question? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
@Azi Rafati: this submission is undersourced. is not a reliable source. Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Every claim you want to make in an article about a living person needs to be directly backed up by an inline ctaion to a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:27, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

05:16:18, 4 December 2020 review of draft by Rom0011Edit

I am working on DRAFT: Gilles J Guillemin. My article was rejected because it did "not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article." and that I should "make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject". I have made some edits and I believe I have resolved the problem, but I would greatly appreciate if someone else took a look over it to let me know if I have misunderstood or still need to change things. This is my first article so I am still getting used to and learning the ways things are done. Many thanks. Rom0011 (talk) 05:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Rom0011 (talk) 05:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Rom0011, I've helped with a bit of copyediting on the draft, and I see another editor has as well. You've listed a significant number of non-notable achievements in there, and that detracts from the strength and credibility of the submission. That can sometimes present to a reviewer as an attempt to disguise the absence of notability. For instance, listing the number of published academic documents he has, his number of active collaborations, his leadership of various non- or semi-notable societies, and his participation in various journals of unknown importance. This one looks especially like WP:PEACOCK: Guillemin has participated in hundreds of national and international conferences, both as presenter and guest speaker. It looks to me like Professor Guillemin may indeed be notable, because of his membership in the Royal Society of New South Wales, and because the contributions the draft suggests he has made to neuroscience. If I were you, I would go through WP:NACADEMIC carefully, and remove non-notable material unless it somehow contributes to an overall narrative, or offers context for another significant point. For example, rather than say that he manages a consulting company, bring that up only if it adds context to his career or scientific trajectory, or to some other notable feature of his life. You seem to suggest in the draft that he has made a significant impact in neuroscience in his investigation of the kynurenine pathway. Spend more text on this, and be sure to use citations where you can to show the impact of this research. (Don't just put up citations of individual research papers he has published on the subject, or individual research papers that cite his research.) Hope this helps. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 05:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

08:55:13, 4 December 2020 review of draft by IpsitamEdit

Ipsitam (talk) 08:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Ipsitam You don't ask a question. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

10:04:41, 4 December 2020 review of submission by Satyadev yadavEdit

This is orignal content which i have written by myself for my employer company. Why its getting rejected Satyadev yadav (talk) 10:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Satyadev yadav Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on formal declarations you are required to make. Your draft was rejected because it is blatant advertising. Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 11:05:45, 4 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by HispringEdit

It's about 3 months that I was working on the draft and trying to fix the issues which were mentioned by reviewers (It was declined 3 times up to now). I provided lots of reliable sources in English, Persian, and even french to confirm the notability of the subject (AloPeyk). In comparison with Snapp!, the subject has been mentioned by more English sources such as financial tribune,bloomberglaw and daily star, meanwhile snapp! is available in Wikipedia but AloPeyk does not get the permission to published.

On the other hand, I used the advice of another user or paid attention to the advice of the second reviewer who said to me try to identify and mimic the language used Uber Eats in my article. But for the third time the draft was declined and the reviewer believed that the Uber Eats has poor quality. I have reviewed other articles like Uber Eats and snapp!, and I tried to use the same construction and language used in those articles in mine. I have tried to do my best to publish an article that follows Wikipedia policies. I tried my article to be non-advertisement and have a neutral point of view. But the draft cant get chance to be accepted. I really appreciate it if anyone helps me. Hispring (talk) 11:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

12:49:02, 4 December 2020 review of submission by Sj LahiriEdit

Sj Lahiri (talk) 12:49, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

15:38:04, 4 December 2020 review of draft by Sophie QuenardEdit

Sophie Quenard (talk) 15:38, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I'd like to understand why my page Millennium Global was declined as I respected all guidelines...

I even took as example Kantox, Mesirow, Millennium Management pages as inspirations.

All my resources are reliable (Financial Times, awards... eg).

So please tell me how I can improve the page.

Many thanks, Kind regards,


  On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Sophie Quenard#Managing a conflict of interest. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Sophie, if you're going to model an article on another, you should probably pick from our Good Article or Featured Article pool. If I tried to build a house using bad blueprints, I'm sure you can guess the result. Further, you need to demonstrate that the subject meets either our General Notability Guideline, which wants mainstream, independent sources to be speaking about the company in detail. Being quoted in mainstream reliable sources or being interviewed does not count as being independent, since the content is entirely reliant on the Millennium Global rep's responses. Someone at the Wall Street Journal (or other reliable source) would have to crack their knuckles and write an in-depth solo piece about the corporation to qualify as "significant coverage ... independent of the subject". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

16:03:01, 4 December 2020 review of submission by EllenfrancisoshEdit

Under "Anglican Religious Orders", all of the active communities are listed. Some have Wikipedia pages and some do not. I submitted an article for the Order of Saint Helena and it was rejected because I didn't have enough references. I resubmitted with references, including published books (not by OSH) and newspaper articles, including the Times (London). It was rejected because I didn't have enough secondary sources.

When I look at the other Anglican orders' pages, I don't see secondary sources, so I'm wondering why the Order of Saint Helena entry was rejected when others have been accepted.

Ellenfrancisosh (talk) 16:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

See other poor quality articles exist. Theroadislong (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Ellenfrancisosh: Hi there, your question is predicated on the assumption that those other articles you're referring to went through the same drafting and review process that you are going through, which I don't know to be true (as you didn't provide links). Short answer: the existence of other poorly-sourced articles at Wikipedia doesn't mean the community has accepted those poorly-sourced articles. It's always unfortunate when poorly-sourced content makes its way to live article space, which is why we want to do our best to encourage quality in the drafting phase. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

22:52:33, 4 December 2020 review of submission by DalrundEdit

I have gone through the previously submitted draft for Michael Apa and tried to reduce any non-encyclopedic language and content. I would love for any more direction or advice as to how to further move the draft toward a Wikipedia-appropriate tone, should the subject be found notable. Thanks for any guidance someone can provide!

Dalrund (talk) 22:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Here's my question for you: Assuming this guy is an American, in a world where millions of Americans attend college each year and eventually get jobs and work to support themselves and their families, why would we care specifically about this guy? What makes him stand out from the millions of other people in America? This is why we have notability criteria that helps guide people in determining who should be written about in a global encyclopedia. Unless this guy has received lots of attention from mainstream periodicals that have independently written about him I can't see why this article would exist anywhere other than LinkedIn. Wikipedia, unfortunately is not a social media outlet, and we don't exist to host information about rank-and-file proletariat. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

December 5Edit

04:29:19, 5 December 2020 review of submission by 2603:8080:E809:3600:547A:67DB:89E0:1451Edit

The club now has a WPSL team, in addition to the men's UPSL team.

2603:8080:E809:3600:547A:67DB:89E0:1451 (talk) 04:29, 5 December 2020 (UTC)