Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing 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)
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:JMP.chat 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.
Hello, Myrcy!
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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! I was surprised how fast you all were—I thought reviewing these requests usually took a few months. I will spend some time editing this article and resubmit it for review.
If there is anything in particular you think I must add, please do let me know!
It's largely a luck of the draw, some drafts get reviewed as soon as they're submitted, others wait weeks or even months. It can also happen that this was reviewed instantly this time, but waits long for the next review, you never know.
Currently the draft only cites a close primary source, which doesn't contribute anything towards notability. Per WP:GNG, we need to see significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah—I was concerned if their website met source reliability requirements.
I added some other sources. However, I think to make it most useful on Wikipedia more content may be needed. Thank you so much for all of your help! Myrcy (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ibjaja055 was:
The sources could not establish the Notability of the subject.
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:JMP.chat 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.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dr vulpes was:
I tried looking for sources and wasn't able to, this topic might be either too small or hasn't gained enough traction yet.
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:JMP.chat 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.
