User talk:Jams2018

This is Jams2018's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

AfC notification: Draft:Gulliford Farm has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gulliford Farm. Thanks! KJP1 (talk) 19:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Gulliford Farm has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gulliford Farm. Thanks! KJP1 (talk) 19:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gulliford Farm has been accepted

Gulliford Farm, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:52, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gulliford Farm

Hi - you're adding way too much detail and you're not sourcing any of it. I'm assuming you have some connection to the farm but Wikipedia's not a family history website. Everything you're adding runs the risk of being deleted. KJP1 (talk) 14:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cardiff University Rifle Club (September 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Cardiff University Rifle Club and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 20:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jams2018! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 20:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KylieTastic. I apologise, I was using Aberdeen University Rifle Club's wikipedia as a template, and as it has much fewer references, I had assumed that my article would be less problematic. Jams2018 (talk) 00:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately although they are are slowly being addressed lots of sub-par articles that were created before the current standards still exist in the 6.9Million we have. Aberdeen University Rifle Club is a poor article written back in 2010. I don't have the time to check now, so have just tagged it for issues, but it needs sources or major deletions or maybe even full deletion. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). You at least have sources that mention the subject and source the claims so a much better article but it needs more independent coverage to show notability and preferably much less primary sourcing. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 10:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and no need to apologize, it's a very sensible thing for people to compare with existing articles. It would be good if when new editors started creating a new article they have to read and conform they understood the basics of the notability requirements and where told not all existing articles meet these. It would save people wasting there time and getting disappointed and deterred for editing. KylieTastic (talk) 10:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]