User talk:AutumnBEA

Big Court (Court Dog) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Big Court (Court Dog), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:43, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback on this. I will work on citing more sources. AutumnBEA (talk) 05:11, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article also has an large number of external links sprinkled throughout the text. Please remove all of them, and convert them to references, if appropriate. Also, I suggest that you submit it the article, when you think it is in better shape, through the WP:AFC process. Happy editing! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can do! Where can I find the draftspace? I have been looking for it so that I can make the edits. AutumnBEA (talk) 05:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found it, never mind. Thank you AutumnBEA (talk) 05:20, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB & Discogs

Are not considered wp:reliable sources. They are wp:user generated content (UGC) See wp:IMDB and WP:RSDISCOGS Cheers Adakiko (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Big Court (Court Dog) (August 9)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:NMUSIC) but presently does not. Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable . Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see referencing for beginners. The citations require proper formatting to accord with WP:MOS. Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess.

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:Big Court (Court Dog) 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.

Cabrils (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cabrils, I have resubmitted the article after making some significant edits. May you look it over and inform me anything that may need to be adjusted, added or removed? Additionally, pease advise on everything (if any) that may still prevent this article from being approved. Thank you in advance. AutumnBEA (talk) 07:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AutumnBEA, you should re-order the sections according to MOS:ORDER. Also, try to maintain a neutral point of view in the text of the article. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:39, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback @MPGuy2824 Mind taking a look at the changes made per your advice? AutumnBEA (talk) 08:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some more suggestions. a) Move infobox to the top, before the lead. b) rewrite the lead according to MOS:LEAD. c) Don't add references to links in the external links section. move them to the article body. d)use bullet points for the external links. e) bold the article name in the lead. f) there is usually much less bolding of content in normal wiki articles. look at Burna Boy, for example. After that, it depends on your sources and whether they meet notability standards. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AutumnBEA! 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! Cabrils (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Big Court (Court Dog) (August 11)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote 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:Big Court (Court Dog) 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 09:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Big Court (Court Dog) (October 31)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

Difficult to read - now vastly over-linked. Refs do not show notability, just a wish to get as much publicity for a podcast as possible. Reads like an advert

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:Big Court (Court Dog) 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.

Velella ^{Velella Talk} 13:51, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Big Court (Court Dog)

Hello, AutumnBEA. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Big Court (Court Dog), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Big Court (Court Dog)

Hello, AutumnBEA. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Big Court".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:33, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]