• Gray, Andrew (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Robert James Cromie (1887-1936), Publisher of the Vancouver Sun from 1917 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello.

I'm writing to follow up on the decision to decline my submission (https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Draft:Robert_James_Cromie_(1887-1936),_Publisher_of_the_Vancouver_Sun_from_1917)

by 'Anarchyte' on behalf of 'Articles for creation', made June 6 with the following message:

"Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Anarchyte was: This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources."

I am waiting for a response to Anarchyte to my message to him or her to follow up from this decision.

I note that many of the claims about Robert Cromie's life in the draft article are reproduced in the article dedicated to his life in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography (http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/cromie_robert_james_16E.html).

Might that page suffice for a 'reliable source'?

I note that all claims in my rejected draft originate from quoted passage from print publications.

Your thoughts would be welcome.

Yours truly, Gray, Andrew

Gray, Andrew (talk) 03:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Gray, Andrew. As the reviewer said, Wikipedia articles must be written in the editor's own words, not as a series of quotes. Also, you need to look at wp:Refbegin to see how to connect the references you have to the text in the article that each reference supports. You've added references in quotes in the text, but here they are placed between brackets ("<ref></ref>") which hide the reference behind a number in the text (just like a footnote in a journal article), and place the text of the reference at the bottom of the Wikipedia article. You should also look at a page called wp:SMOS, which is the simplified style manual. That will show you how to format the headings within your article. LaMona (talk) 20:26, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• SuperMemoWorld (talk · contribs)
  • Olive Green (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Olive Green (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Wikipedia helpdesk! I am experiencing problems with my article being rejected two times for reasons: <quote> This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. <unquote> From my point of view, the article is neutral in its tone, it is not an advertisement. I have already taken into account first reviewer's notes and provided independent, reliable, published sources to support the article. The sources are not produced by myself; they include articles from around the world, and from sources so recognised as the Newsweek and Wired magazines. I honestly think the entry is worth to be included, but I have run out of ideas how to change it to make it acceptable. Could you please advise what I do still do to make the article acceptable to Wikipedia reviewers? Thank you in advance for your help!

SuperMemoWorld (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One of the big problems is that your username, "SuperMemoWorld", is the same as the name given as the publisher of the software: SuperMemo World. This violates Wikipedia's username policy which disallows "Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company...". This also indicates that you may have a Conflict of Interest because you are directly related to the company whose product you are writing about. I will place more information on how to handle a Conflict of Interest on your talk page. After reading about the username policy, see Wikipedia:Username_policy#Changing_your_username on how to change your username. LaMona (talk) 20:07, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Sunrise2016 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mohamed El Gawady (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am not sure if my article was submitted or not. thanks

Sunrise2016 (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft was submitted yesterday (8 July 2016) and was declined again. Two of the reviewers have commented that the quality of the English is very hard to follow. Please either ask someone for help with the English or, if English is not your first language, consider editing the Wikipedia in your first language. Reviewers are very unlikely to accept (and should not accept) a draft that has multiple spelling and grammar errors. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• InfoGovernor (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

Is there a reason that pages such as this and the talk pages do not have the 'Visual editor' option?

InfoGovernor (talk) 11:06, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi InfoGovernor, welcome to the Articles for Creation help desk. VisualEditor still has many bugs and missing features. One of its limitations on the English Wikipedia at the moment is that it is not enabled for any discussion pages. I haven't tried to follow every why and wherefore, but believe the reason is tied up with another project that excites strong passions among Wikipedians, Flow. Worldbruce (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Disfarrar (talk · contribs)

Hi, I was just wondering if you could help me understand why my page was rejected.

Disfarrar (talk) 14:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My first comment is that the references do not appear to be independent of the organization. We are not interested in what the company has written about itself or in what those associated with the company have written, but in what third parties have written. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Alexpanneton (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Canadian Music Theatre Project (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I create this page over 3 weeks ago, The Canadian Music Theatre Project, and am just wondering when I can expect to have the page approved? Thank you!

Alexpanneton (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexpanneton. With the current backlog, it is not unusual for a review to take a month or more. There are only 25 drafts that have been waiting longer than Draft:Canadian Music Theatre Project, so probably it will be reviewed within the next week or so. When it will be accepted is a more complex question. Many drafts never are, and most drafts are not accepted on their first submission. But so long as in-depth coverage in multiple independent reliable sources exists, any other problem can be corrected and the draft resubmitted. Worldbruce (talk) 20:06, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]