User talk:Joewriter

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joseph M. Schuster (February 16)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Joseph M. Schuster and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Joewriter, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joseph M. Schuster (February 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Joseph M. Schuster and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Joseph M. Schuster

Hello, Joewriter. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Joseph M. Schuster".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. 1989 15:37, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shannon Ravenel (May 6)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Excessive personal detail, and far too many personal quotes about her life and motivations. This is written in the typical format of a press release, not the concise manner of a Wikipedia article .

The distinction is that a press release is concerned with what the person would like to say, an encyclopedia article with what the ordinary reader might want to know. so reduce section 1 to a single sentence, and section 2to half its length.

Then remove all the name dropping from the rest, and resubmit.

The same problems are present for the current version of Margot Lindsey, and need to be fixed, or it will either be reverted to the version before you started adding the inappropriate material.

After that, I can restore Draft:Joseph M. Schuster if you want to work on it.

Since it is written in exactly the format of a press release, it is reasonable to ask whether you are a connected contributor, in which case you must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures.

You should reply here, or on your user talk page, or on mine. DGG ( talk ) 02:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Shannon Ravenel and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Shannon Ravenel, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 02:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Response to User:DGG

I am not a PR person -- most of my professional background is in writing features for magazines and newspapers, particularly profiles where one uses direct quotes as a matter of course--as support, to give a flavor of the individual, etc. Nor am I compensated in any way for either of the entries you cite -- both Ravenel and Livesey are former teachers of mine from decades ago (roughly 40 and 30 years ago, respectively) and I thought both merited up-to-date bios; I was particularly surprised that Ravenel did not already have a bio, as she has been a significant figure in publishing for decades, especially beginning in the mid-1980s after she co-founded Algonquin with Louis D. Rubin Jr.. I will revise these entries, deleting the direct quotes and making a note that they are my former teachers from long ago; I will also reduce the number of other names I cite in the Ravenel entry -- I believe I need to cite a few, however, as she is an editor: I thought mentioning some of the writers she worked with would give readers a sense of who she was and why she merited inclusion in Wikipedia. I think her association with Best American Short Stories could stand without mentioning the annual editors, but talking about her work at Houghton Mifflin and Algonquin needs the names of some of the writers whose work she acquired and edited, I think. Thanks for your comments. Joewriter (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fine Of course I accept your assurances. . .Go ahead and make the changes. If you list her authors, pick only the most famous, be sure she i s the person's principal editor for at least part of their career, and mentioned as such in bio sources about the author . You canask me for a quick revieww whenyou;ve done that. DGG ( talk ) 16:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I am on deadline for something but will tackle this in a couple of days. Appreciate your offer of a quick review and I will let you know as soon as I finish. Joewriter

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shannon Ravenel (May 24)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Thanks for submitting this article. A search of sources suggests that the subject has earned enough media coverage to meet notability criteria. However, the sources provided do not support the claims made in this article (e.g., her parents' names, most of the years provided). Please refer to additional sources or remove claims that cannot be sourced.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Shannon Ravenel and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Shannon Ravenel, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

MapleSoy (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shannon Ravenel has been accepted

Shannon Ravenel, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MapleSoy (talk) 05:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate your advice that helped me get it into shape.