• Ryan18088 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Ryan syuk (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

i dont know how to make my own wiki better so i just did the best that i can

Ryan18088 (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ryan18088. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Unlike social media websites such as Facebook, it is not a place to write about yourself, other than a small relevant amount on your user page. Your user page needn't be created in draft space, and should not be submitted for review by Articles for creation, because it will never be an encyclopedia article. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:26, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Blogs19 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Susovan Sonu Roy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Blogs19 (talk) 11:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• LaylaDakota (talk · contribs)
  • Ben Jones (boxer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Ben Jones (boxer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I need help getting my draft up to scratch to be accepted and published on Wikipedia. I have originally created this myself and have packed it with facts etc & backed it all up with links etc etc which is what i was asked to do was show some proof of the notable info i was using. However this was rejected again and im really in need of some help to get this published.

LaylaDakota (talk) 12:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Steveninealing (talk · contribs)
  • 2006 Ealing London Borough Council election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:2006 Ealing London Borough Council election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am trying to add a page about local election results, extending the coverage in Wikipedia beyond already published pages for more recent elections. I have reused the same format and structure as other articles. I think the data has value published in a more accessible format than it currently is, tucked away on the council website. The Council website is the only remaining source I've found for the data, but it is also the authority for that data, so I think quoting it as the source should be acceptable? It is neutrally reporting the outcome of an election. I have included one other news source which quotes the summary results.

Steveninealing (talk) 14:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay to cite the Council for the results of the election. 331dot (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an extra source from a better known, trusted source steveninealing (talk) 18:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Adouird al (talk · contribs)

Adouird al (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

why did my article did decline this is the pay that I live in I have family help pleas

@Adouird al: Articles must have reliable sources. This draft has none. I re-reviewed it and added an additional comment. I'm afraid we cannot make any decision about drafts and articles based on your personal circumstances. If you are paid for your contributions, you must also disclose this. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 2601:18E:C300:5770:59EC:73:6DDC:EA85 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Leadership-as-Practice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I believe I have complied with the reviewer's concerns in my edited draft because I now ensure that the submission is encyclopedic, that it supports its claims using secondary, reliable sources, contains no opinions, and approaches the subject from a neutral point of view. If this is not the case, I would like the reviewer to point out any instances when the aforementioned is not observed.

2601:18E:C300:5770:59EC:73:6DDC:EA85 (talk) 20:11, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Holcman1 (talk · contribs)
  • Active flow network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Active flow network (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Holcman1 (talk) 20:34, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand the new arguement of rejection: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified."

All sources are clearly mentioned in the reference list.

What is not clear? It is hard to work with such vague comments. You need to be specific.

David.

Holcman1 You have sources to cite the specific information in the article- but that does not establish that the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. An article exists primarily to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it is notable as Wikipedia defines the term. There are also copyright concerns with the draft that you have not addressed. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]