User talk:MitranaSage

Welcome!

Hi MitranaSage! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Epipelagic (talk) 11:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Renewable Water (October 15)

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 reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Renewable Water 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:Renewable Water, 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, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on AFC Decline

You wrote: 'Thanks for the feedback, Honestly I am quite new to Wikipedia editing and content creation - because the review process generally takes a long time I misguidedly thought that the sooner I submitted the page for review, the sooner it would get through the process, but that in the meantime I could keep working on the draft. Hence I had submitted a pretty rough first draft that I was then going to redraft with better references and in a better style. In future I will make sure that pages are submitted in their final form unless they require just some minor edits or additional references.'

User:MitranaSage - It is true that you can continue working on a draft while it is waiting for review. Sometimes a draft gets reviewed quickly; sometimes it doesn't. You don't need more references. In fact, it may be difficult for a reviewer to review because it has too many references, so I suggest that you identify which of the references are the most important. Identify at least three and not more than five as the key references, and list them in an AFC comment, or on the talk page. However, the real problem is style. Your draft is written more as an expression of your opinions than the opinions of reliable sources. I declined it for style, not for sourcing. I didn't check the sources, because I don't check 40 sources. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MitranaSage! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bio-dredging (December 8)

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

For the most part, the sources provided don't actually mention the subject, which doesn't show notability. Please consider adding some more reliable, independent sources that are about that 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bio-dredging 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:Bio-dredging, 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, 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.

Clear friend a ^💬 00:41, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lake Rogerene has been accepted

Lake Rogerene, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

Rusalkii (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project (December 22)

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project 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:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project, 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, 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.

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 06:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ecological Infrastructure (December 28)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by FeralOink were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Ecological infrastructure appears to be a non-notable neologism that is almost identical in meaning to Green infrastructure. Although you attempt to distinguish between them (green is urban, eco is natural) in the lead, many of the examples given in this draft are urban or otherwise indistinguishable from green infrastructure. Similarly, wastewater treatment facilities (which the draft depicts as harmful due to byproducts and excessive eutrophication) are in fact a form of biotechnology which the draft otherwise praises as a more nature-based solution, but without any specifics of implementation to make it be so.

I recommend merging a much abbreviated version of Ecological Infrastructure into the current Green technology article.

Also, this draft reads more like a public policy proposal or essay than an encyclopedia article. There is advocacy for at least two projects, Payment for ecosystem services and Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security. Many of the sources are to "ecosystems services" proponents (see last reference 54, titled "Ecosystem Services... A Case for Investment") as well as biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org (the sponsor for Eco Infrastructure for Water Security) and opinion pieces (e.g. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability). Please observe WP:NPOV. If Ecological Infrastructure exists only or primarily as specific public policy or other project of one nation or a small group of adjacent nations, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia.

FeralOink (talk) 08:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on AFC Decline of Ecological Infrastructure

User:MitranaSage, it may be helpful to consider this portion of the recommendations provided to you by Robert McClenon in the context of this AFC submission too:

You don't need more references. In fact, it may be difficult for a reviewer to review because it has too many references, so I suggest that you identify which of the references are the most important. Identify at least three key references but not more than five, and list them in an AFC comment, or on the talk page.

As I mentioned in the AFC decline comment, I am concerned about the article style (re advocacy) AND sources. However, it may be the case that of the 54 references provided, there are three to five which are WP:NPOV and WP:RS but were not apparent due to there being so many, some only peripherally about the subject of the draft. If you decide to expand Green Infrastructure to include a section on Ecological Infrastructure, please keep these suggestions in mind for that as well.--FeralOink (talk) 08:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writing for Wikipedia is different from writing for a magazine, a newsletter, or an op-ed page. I took a very brief look at Draft:Ecological Infrastructure, and I think that it has the same stylistic problems as Draft:Renewable Water, and I agree with User:FeralOink. Some editors think that including more sources is the key to getting an article accepted. It sometimes is, but it more often isn't. If either the topic is non-notable or the style is non-neutral, more references will not help, and even will annoy the reviewers. Your topics are notable and your style is non-neutral. Please work on the style, because some of your topics appear to be notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:29, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Renewable Water (December 29)

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 reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

See my previous comments as well as my comments elsewhere. This draft still reads as if its purpose is to persuade the reader that renewable water is good. (Well, it is good, but the mission of Wikipedia is to present a neutral point of view, meaning to say that reliable sources say that renewable water is good.)

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:Renewable Water 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:Renewable Water, 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, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:54, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project (February 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 Devonian Wombat was:

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.

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:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project 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:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project, 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, 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:36, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bio-dredging

Hello, MitranaSage. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bio-dredging, 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) 15:01, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ecological Infrastructure

Hello, MitranaSage. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ecological Infrastructure, 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) 09:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Renewable Water

Hello, MitranaSage. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Renewable Water".

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. If 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. ✗plicit 03:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project

Hello, MitranaSage. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project, 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) 15:01, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project

Hello, MitranaSage. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Ecological Infrastructure for Water Security project".

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 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}}, {{db-draft}}, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Renewable Water

Hello, MitranaSage. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Renewable Water".

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. If 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!} 00:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Bio-dredging

Hello, MitranaSage. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bio-dredging".

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. If 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!} 00:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]