Jump to content

User talk:Wxidea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fiberartist42 (talk | contribs) at 18:29, 18 September 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi. Thanks for visiting my talk page. I cleared a lot of historical history from here in September 2015, but you can see it by viewing history.

Request on 03:13:32, 3 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Shanno2012


Hello, this is my first article I have tried to submit to Wikipedia. I have submitted an article about the Granny Nannies company but it has been rejected twice due to it reading "more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I have made edits to the article in order to fix the proposed issues but I have not been successful. Any help you can offer to ensure the approval of this article would be greatly appreciated. Shanno2012 (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shanno2012 (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

03:35:01, 4 September 2015 review of submission by Breton66


Hi, I am keen to get this entry approved, and am unsure why it is not being accepted. The problem seems to be with the references and golden rule. In my opinion, the article cites significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (including references from x3 independent business magazines). I am unsure of what to do next. Please help. Regards Jonathan.


Breton66 (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry, I'm not the right person to be lobbying when you haven't edited your article for 2 weeks. I'm sorry to be negative, but my opinion is that your article doesn't convey notability. The articles are too insider, talking about opening an office, etc? You need real objective articles that might target a kind lay public. Some other editor might interpret thing differently, and you are welcome to resubmit, but I think resubmitting without edits is futile. Wxidea (talk) 04
04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

4 September 2015 Thank you!

Hi Wxidea, thank you for leaving the comments on the article. That's helpful, clear and constructive feedback. Glad the devil is not in the notability of the sources any more. Will keep my eyes peeled for articles about success and longevity. Have a great weekend ahead! Mkraay30 (talk) 12:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

23:54:22, 9 September 2015 review of submission by Breton66


Hi, I am keen to get this entry approved, and am unsure why it is not being accepted. The problem seems to be with the references and golden rule. In my opinion, the article cites significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (including references from x3 independent business magazines). I am unsure of what to do next. Please help. I entered this question over a month ago and it disappeared into your archives without being answered.

Breton66 (talk) 23:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I responded in my note on your article draft which I just rejected. Sorry to be negative, but I don't think your article establishes notability. Wxidea (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Hancock Historical Museum

Thank you for your feedback on the article. Just to clarify, I do not work for, know anyone who works for, or am otherwise affiliated with the museum. I live in Florida and happened across it on a recent trip to the Midwest. I know that my relationship (or lack-there-of) with the museum does not affect whether or not the article is sufficiently cited, but I wanted to let you know that it is not "mine."

I will gladly move the website links to an external links section. Thank you for the advice. However, I am a bit confused: only two of the eleven references are directly affiliated with the museum. The other nine are all independent sources, three of which are published books with the authors, publishers, ISBNs, etc. already included. I guess I just don't understand what additional information you are looking for. Also, the article already states and cites that the museum is a non-profit. I can cite NCCS, or any other 501(c)(3) database source you recommend, if you think it would help.

I believe that it is important to document these little gems of cultural and historical significance, and I think that this one in particular is notable enough to warrant its own page, rather than a subsection on an existing page. I appreciate your advice on improving the article, and look forward to hearing any additional feedback you can offer. Amockens (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for clarifying, and apologies for the assumption that you are affiliated. I guess I was working too quickly while tired, I saw your article was sitting in the queue, and was trying to give you some attention, apparently at the cost of imprecise comments. You can ignore my question about AASLH. Thanks for your effort to add interesting content. The 3rd party citations are all fine, it's just the early ones that directly cite the museum that should be removed (I think). It's a quirk of Wikipedia that they don't like primary sources. I'd say give it another pass, and let's see. And even better if you can dig up some older references. Wxidea (talk) 15:53, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick response, as well as your candor. It's true, I was tired of waiting in the queue to be reviewed, so I do appreciate your time. I will make the suggested revisions before resubmitting. Unfortunately, at that point, the article's future will be subject to the whim of the next reviewer. I'm just afraid it will be glanced at, seen that it was already declined twice, and automatically dismissed as another trivial article written by an overeager affiliate looking for free advertising. :/ Amockens (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Send me a note when you edit it. I'm fundamentally interested in cultural heritage institutions being including in Wikipedia. Wxidea (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry for the delay, but I removed the primary source citations, created an external links section, and resubmitted. Thank you again for all of your help and support. Let me know if there's anything else you think I should change. Amockens (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:14:03, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Maggie Edmunds


Thanks for helping review this submission. I've reworked it again to be even less promotional. I know clearly establishing notability for the company is key, so aside from mentioning awards and the Inc. 500 placements, do you recommend another way?

Maggie Edmunds (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi... My sense is that you've established notability, the catch is to sound disinterested while making statements about notability. Wxidea (talk) 16
16, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggie Edmunds (talk • contribs) 17:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16:33:57, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Maggie Edmunds


Hi - Looking at GoPro's page, they list out their individual products. Do you have any tips on how to do this without sounding too promotional? Thanks! Maggie Edmunds (talk) 16:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17:10:26, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Fiberartist42


HI, Thanks so much for the helpful comments! This has been a character-building effort for me, and I hope I've made progress toward getting it right!

I'm not sure how the review process works, but will you be able to look at my submission again and see if I followed your good advice?

Thanks again

Fiberartist42 (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's looking better. :) I'd suggest you try making the "Founding Institutions and Officers" section into a table. Wikipedia seems to like tables. Similar to the kind of table that might be in the bio of an actor/actress. Or just make it paragraph format. I'm not convinced a list of people's names is relevant, so you could just list the founding orgs in paragraph format. Wxidea (talk) 17:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:07:05, 18 September 2015 Submission Declined. Halyna sm

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

I appreciate the review and I would like to further edit the article for publishing. I used references (third-party, independent sources) for almost every sentence in my article about "Nova Ukraine". Yet, it was not submitted due to lack of notability. I read all the guidelines and still can't figure out why the references I used were not enough. Was it because not all of my sources were in English? Could you please explain how can I improve the situation? Should I simply wait for more online publication about "Nova Ukraine" to appear? Thank you!

Halyna sm (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:29:40, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Fiberartist42


Thanks again. I like the more uniform look of the section much better! And, on we go...

I appreciate your help!

Fiberartist42 (talk) 18:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wxidea&oldid=681671576"