User talk:Nancygerette

This is Nancygerette's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: N. West Moss (June 5)

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

Are there more reviews of her work/content about, not by, her?

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:N. West Moss 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.

Rusalkii (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nancygerette! 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! Rusalkii (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused by the comment: "Are there more reviews of her work/content about, not by, her?"

Where do you see a review by her in the article? The only review posted was written by Marion Wink in the Star Tribune.

https://www.startribune.com/review-smile-by-sarah-ruhl-and-flesh-blood-by-n-west-moss/600109117/

Did you misunderstand because the title of the review is "Review: 'Smile,' by Sarah Ruhl, and 'Flesh & Blood,' by N. West Moss"? And you interpreted the end of the article title "by N. West Moss" as an author attribution? Nancygerette (talk) 20:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry, yes, I have no idea what I was thinking. That source and the new sources look good, I've accepted it. And thank you @Freoh for tagging me in the below, or I would have missed this comment. Rusalkii (talk) 00:04, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		I was worried that the harassment at Talk:Steven Pinker had driven you away,^[1] so I am glad to see you back! Your Draft:N. West Moss looks great to me, and I think that you are correct that Rusalkii misinterpreted some of the citations when reviewing it. I have just tweaked some of the citations, and I think that it should pass inspection the second time around. I hope to see more of your contributions to the Steven Pinker article; you seem to know a lot about him, and you alerted me to some important information that deserves inclusion! — Freoh 13:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your encouragement! Nancygerette (talk) 15:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ User talk:Johnuniq § No personal attacks

Your submission at Articles for creation: N. West Moss has been accepted

N. West Moss, 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!

Rusalkii (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lloyd Moss (October 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 Johannes Maximilian was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Lloyd Moss 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.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 15:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Really? The New York Times is not a reliable source? As so often, the decisions of Wikipedia editors are absolutely inscrutable. It's amazing you won't accept an entry for a media personality and best-selling author. Nancygerette (talk) 15:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The guy got a feature-length obituary in the NYTimes. HOW is that not reliable? What on earth do you WANT?

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/09/arts/lloyd-moss-wqxr-announcer-and-childrens-book-author-dies-at-86.html Nancygerette (talk) 15:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lloyd Moss

Hello, Nancygerette. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lloyd Moss".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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. ✗plicit 23:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] User talk:Johnuniq § No personal attacks

[1]