• 103.200.134.151 (talk · contribs)
  • Jang Eui-soo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Jang Eui-soo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Good written and well sourced article, he clearly meets the WP:NACTOR. So please kindly accept the article as soon as possible if you agree. Thanks

103.200.134.151 (talk) 05:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted the draft for review, it will be reviewed in due course. As there are over 2300 drafts awaiting review, you may need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Galawesh (talk) 10:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, so I have made a mistake by copying a press release to my article.

Can I change this and rewrite it with my own words? Where do I do that? It's for CHALK Salon

@Galawesh: yes, you can certainly change that. Launch the Article Wizard to create a new attempt Please amke sure you dont copy stuff this time. Also you should respond to the query about COI/PAID editing at your user talk page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Movidatabase (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Luciano Francesco Silighini Garagnani Lambertini (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Movidatabase (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I edited my page as requested. can you publish it now?

• Jessepf (talk · contribs)
  • R. W. Alexander Jesudasan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:R. W. Alexander Jesudasan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I am an old Wikipedia/Wikibooks hand and I had to recreate my user as I am unable to recover my original account. As my account was not confirmed then, the article went into AfC. But its been there for nearly a month now. Is it lost forever in draft loop?

Jessepf (talk) 14:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As noted on your draft, it is awaiting review. Drafts are reviewed in no particular order by volunteers, and there are over 2300 drafts awaiting review, so you will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot, in short, its stuck in the loop, isn't it? Slightly disappointing that there's no specific order defined - it lets articles slip through unnoticed, justified by the chaotic review system. Isn't it time to employ a better system? --Jessepf (talk) 05:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jessepf At one point the backlog was over 5000 drafts, so it is coming down. What is 'better' is relative- but if you have ideas as to how to motivate more unpaid volunteers to review more drafts, feel free to offer them. 331dot (talk) 07:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jessepf - I have looked briefly at your draft. I think that the subject probably satisfies academic notability, but the draft reads as if it was written to praise the subject rather than describe him neutrally. I am also aware that it is very much the Wikipedia way to find a group of volunteers to whom one does not belong and to scold them for not doing their share of the volunteer work. So you are doing your share of scolding, and your draft will be reviewed. Welcome back to helping to scold the volunteers. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon and @331dot the article has made its way to main space, thank you. Trust me, he is no saint, neither am I someone you can expect to praise him - he harrassed me as an employer, misused his powers. But I can't ignore his contributions with valid evidences available online to back it up. I will continue my research and in case I come across anything that has a citation, I will surely update it, to make the article more neutral. Thanks again, to both of you for your response and @TheImaCow who reviewed it. Will continue my contributions in whichever way possible.

On the other hand, a queue system can be thought of, for volunteers who don't mind opting for it. It can be optional. During my active days back in 2008-11, I wouldn't have hesitated to jump into the ship, I'm sure there will be many such volunteers around even now. --Jessepf (talk) 20:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 2409:4060:18B:D7CF:F56E:C750:D200:D135 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Melvano (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I have been writing this article keeping references to other wikipedia articles, They are published to see in public but mine is getting rejected. Why this discrepancy?

2409:4060:18B:D7CF:F56E:C750:D200:D135 (talk) 19:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Tel Tandom (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Eric Bauer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm not too sure what I can do to better my chances of getting this article approved. The subject is definitely notable enough to warrant having a Wikipedia article written. I've compared the subject to other similar subjects which have been approved and I don't understand what is missing. I've included secondary sources from credible independent origins, linked all relevant and noteworthy content within this article submission to the other Wikipedia articles. It really escapes me why this is being denied. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Tel Tandom (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You only have one reliable source, Discogs is not considered reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 19:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

21:40:16, 5 July 2020 review of submission by HarveyYaz

Below this line, tell us why you are requesting a re-review. Take as many lines as you need.-->}} I am earnestly trying to post a page for Dr. Boris Berenfeld. My first reviewer said the entry needed some work to conform to Wikipedia's guidelines. I made edits to conform to those guidelines. My second reviewer said I was getting close. I made additional changes. My third reviewer, however, told me abruptly to stop. I'm doing my best to adhere to Wikipedia's rules and guidelines. I have made further changes, but if the entry still fails to conform to the guidelines, could someone please give me some specific examples of what I need to do to get the entry published.

I'm trying very hard to prepare a draft that's satisfactory to Wikipedia. FYI: I'm not getting paid by Dr. Berenfeld or anyone else to do this. I would greatly appreciate guidance. Thank you.

HarveyYaz (talk) 21:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This re: Draft:Boris Berenfeld. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Li-reg (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ori Isaac (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I'm requesting a review for the third time sine im not getting a proper response. Isaac is an Israeli personality that should be on wikipedia and this is very strange he was declined. If it's an issue with sources, we fix it, as well as fixing he text itself but I need someone to really help and guide me and not just erply with its rejected... who can advise on how to move forward? Li-reg (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC) Li-reg (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been given an answer by three different people. You need to move on from this or explain why you are so invested in this. Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 23:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 On hold pending paid editing disclosure, see User talk:Li-reg#Declare any connection. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Msftbebe (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:QuayGame (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The artist that this article is about asked me to make a wiki page about him so all my information comes for the artist directly. So the article is notable in the case of having reliable sources Msftbebe (talk) 23:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Msftbebe We don't want the information from the artist themselves, we want it from independent reliable sources. If the subject is not written about in such sources, it would not merit a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 23:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]