Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chaotic Enby 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.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Some sources (like Medium or Coindesk) are not considered reliable. Also, it's not clear that all sources even talk about the same thing, like the 2008 New York Magazine source probably doesn't mean bitcoin and NFTs when saying "decentralized art movement".
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:Decentralized art 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 @Chaotic Enby thank you for the quick review, and reading through the sources. I was not aware that Medium and Coindesk are not considered reliable. They have both been removed and will submit this revision asap.
Regarding your note about the "same thing” with NY Magazine , I made an edit that clarifies this as an early notation of street art being a type of decentralized art. I agree, it was not likely that the author intended to equate decentralized art with bitcoin or NFT technology at this time.
It may be helpful in this respect to clarify decentralized art in context of art history. That is, decentralized art is an art form, not a technology or set of technologies per se. In other words, Bitcoin / NFTs / blockchain technologies are now an inherent part of the art form, but were not deterministic elements informing its early concept and practice, specifically artists operating independently and outside centralized control of the art world, using pre-digital methods and tools.
As a parallel, provenance, the tracking of art sales and ownership, is a longstanding practice in the art world, usually handled by art dealers, auction houses, and galleries, using analog technology like paper, snail mail, certification via embossed stamps, and so on.
Blockchain technology enabled a decentralized, coded, automated, transparent way to track provenance for artwork placed on this type of ledger, but provenance as a practice didn't require blockchain technology to exist.
I hope this reply is helpful. Maybe it's too much detail and I misunderstand your input about the NY Magazine source and intention. In any case, your comment helped show need for clarity and revisions along these lines, thanks. Soulincode (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! It's definitely an interesting topic, and I hope for the best! (Usually, drafts are reviewed by someone different each time, so you'll probably have another reviewer check it next - feel free to add this to the talk page of the draft so they can see it!) Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 00:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Chaotic Enby, appreciate the answer, encouragement, also the suggestion to add this to the talk page of the draft. I just did so, and hope it's helpful for the next reviewer. Soulincode (talk) 01:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Soulincode!
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! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 10:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Samoht27 were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Not set on the notability of this concept, besides that, this article is written as if it's trying to advertise this NFT concept.
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:Decentralized art 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 @Samoht27, would you mind sharing more detail on how this reads as an advertisement for an "NFT concept"? Any pointers to locations in the text and reasoning would be helpful.
Also, did you have a chance to read the talk page for the draft, about the art historical context, how this describes a type of art form and movement, not a technology like NFT, blockchain, etc?
There seems to be a disconnect going on where decentralized art keeps being considered as a web3 technology. I’m making efforts to adjust and clarify, per input, butmore specifics to your generalized comment made would be helpful.
Meanwhile, I agree more sources would help. It’s difficult, because it’s quite early in the development of this art form and movement. However, I do think it’s notable enough for an entry at this point, with decent sourcing that shows development to the current time. If you can also share why you don't think it's notable, this would be helpful.
Thanks for your consideration and input. Soulincode (talk) 21:54, 23 May 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 Liance was:
On Wikipedia, there is consensus that cryptocurrency news outlets (like CoinDesk, Cointelegraph, etc) are not reliable sources that can be used to establish notability. In order to meet the notability criteria you will need to locate additional sources that are reliable, secondary and independent.
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:Decentralized art 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.
Thanks for taking time to review and point this out @Liance. I previously removed another Coindesk source, but thought this remaining one was more reliable, as it was an interview with the Web3 associate for the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). Upon review and more research, I feel there is now a better and more relevant source. Thanks again for the review and note. Soulincode (talk) 03:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
