Wikipedia talk:Requested articles

If you want to request an article, follow this link. Don't request it on this page.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Create an article

I was trying to create an article for Draft:Early Start (first incarnation), and Draft:Early Start (second incarnation) and it keeps been declined can you please look into it and try to make adjustments to creating an article for Early Start (first incarnation), and Early Start (second incarnation), please thank you. 73.248.230.222 (talk) 06:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any record of those two drafts being created. Can you please elaborate a bit on if you succeeded in creating the draft, and if you're getting a certain error message? –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2025

Write the edit ,

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

107.15.213.109 (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Alpha Beta Delta Lambda (talk) 13:52, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We need reform

This list is basically unusable, especially with regards to the biographies and companies. When people ask for ideas for articles to create, I see (and give) responses such as "check out the associated WikiProjects and ask there, there's also WP:REQ, but I don't recommend it because most things on it are not notable". This is true, but also renders everything useless. Not to mention the large amounts of articles requested 10 years ago with no sources but a dead link to someone's personal website. Any ideas? GoldRomean (talk) 17:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could launch an RFC at WP:VPPR with question "What should we do with WP:RA?" and options A do nothing, B mark historical and revert new entries, C delete everything. Or could WP:MFD the entire thing. I have concerns about WP:RA being a black hole that tricks newbies and attracts spam. To help combat this, in 2021 I changed Wikipedia:Requested articles/Header to recommend making a draft (via the article wizard) instead of requesting an article at WP:RA.

Before going through the drama of an RFC or MFD, could also just make a post at VPPR asking if folks think it's a good idea to "do something" about RA, and ask for opinions. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really love all your suggestions, and I agree that RA is basically a black hole.

Overall I like the VPPR idea, to get some broader community opinions.

Just a note, I did have a conversation with @Trovatore a few months ago who seemed to believe that pages like Wikipedia:Requested articles/Mathematics, at least, were still helpful. So if deletion is proposed, I think we ought to keep those non-promotional pages or send them to their associated WikiProjects.

Let's finally get this mess sorted out after 20+ years. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, it's not that I think RA is very useful. I think it's potentially at least a bit useful, and worth keeping around for that reason. I don't see any need at all to "clean it up". What trouble is it actually causing? The impulse to make Wikipedia all neat and tidy is not really helpful. --Trovatore (talk) 19:56, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point as well; I suppose the trouble is that we have an active requests area where zero people are actively picking up the requests, and thus people are misled and efforts are wasted. It's just useless. Technically the same article could be made at AfD - why don't we just draftily everything? Nothing causes much harm as a draft. GoldRomean (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a de minimis harm. The effort needed to request an article is negligible. There is a chance that someone will get around to it someday, and in that sense it's not even completely wasted effort. --Trovatore (talk) 21:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You make an excellent argument, I'll leave it for others to discuss. GoldRomean (talk) 22:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether they get round to it from seeing it on RA or just deciding to make it themselves is something that should be taken into consideration on that front I feel. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 10:05, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My honest thoughts are just to go with option C, delete it and start over with a systematic process to prevent us getting into the same mess as before. There are some uses to the pages, but it's just too backlogged right now for anything useful to properly come out of it. Starting a proper discussion at VPPR should happen sooner rather than later because some broader opinions than the people who watch the RA talk page would be nice Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 10:04, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldRomean@Novem Linguae hiya, just wanted to bump this back into your notifications because this seems to have gone stale. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 15:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry about that. What do you all think about something at WP:VPPR along the lines of “do you think we should do something about WP:RA and what” and then start a RfC later on? GoldRomean (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, maybe post it at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). VPPR seems to be for concrete, actionable proposals, not WP:RFCBEFORE. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:26, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm yeah, probably. What do you think about this (pretty horrible, but gives us a starting point, I guess) draft for a post? GoldRomean (talk) 22:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doing something about WP:RA

Wikipedia:Requested articles is pretty inactive these days. Should we do something about it, and if so, what? See also this relevant discussion.

(Well, I did say it was bad lol :).) GoldRomean (talk) 22:37, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure go for it. Drop a link here when you're done so I can repost some of my comments from here over there please :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Novem Linguae @Zippybonzo - here you go: WP:VPIL#Doing something about WP:RA. GoldRomean (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can you please create an article about author Toni Weschler, MPH. She is the author of Taking Charge of Your Fertility that has sold over one million copies. Source: https://www.amazon.com/Taking-Charge-Your-Fertility-Anniversary/dp/0062326031 JohnSmith1199 (talk) 22:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. You can add the article to the WP:RA list yourself by visiting one of the unprotected subpages. However WP:RA is inactive, so I would suggest writing the article yourself instead by using the article wizard. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § Doing something about WP:RA

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § Doing something about WP:RA. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]