User talk:Rosereid

Declare any connection

Hello, Rosereid. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Draft:Crown of Crimson (The Afterlight Chronicles), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Worldbruce (talk) 14:36, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Crown of Crimson (The Afterlight Chronicles) (August 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tokyogirl79 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 general guideline on notability 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I'm sorry, but I just don't see where this book is notable. Online popularity doesn't count towards notability and Goodreads and blog sources aren't considered to be reliable sources. They're actually considered to be so unusable on Wikipedia that they aren't even supposed to be in articles at all. The same goes for e-commerce sites like Amazon and Indiebound, especially as adding these can be seen as very promotional.

I know that this is harsh to read and I feel bad writing this, but I just don't see where this book will pass notability guidelines any time soon. Don't take that badly. Most books don't pass - even ones published by big, mainstream publishers.

I also must extend a bit of caution when making claims of having been reviewed by thousands of people online. This was not backed up by the links you gave on the page, as Goodreads had less than 200 reviews and there were none on Indiebound. A search didn't result in many blog reviews either. Now while none of the reviews listed will count towards notability or be considered usable to add into an article, you need to be careful of making these claims in general. This sort of thing is easily disproven and tend to turn off a lot of readers and book bloggers, as they're used to dealing with a lot of authors overhyping their work. People won't necessarily treat you badly or anything, but it does make people a little overly cautious. This might have been an accidental overestimation of reviews, but it's just something you need to be careful about because it can make people start questioning the validity of the reviews in question. You can thank authors like Robert Stanek (and to a lesser degree Gloria Tesch, as she purchased a lot of her own reviews and acclaim) for this, since he went around claiming the same thing, only to be found to have been creating and buying his own reviews. (Not saying that you're doing this - in contrast, it looks like you're decidedly not doing this. It's just that bloggers have long memories and you've got to be careful how you represent yourself.)

Now what I do recommend is just continuing to hit up the blog circuit. You should also look into starting up your own wiki at someplace like Wikia, as that's usually a good way to get fans to interact with the books. Keep plugging away at getting those blog hits and use those to appeal to larger websites. If you can, try asking your local newspaper if they will review works by local authors. Local sources are greatly depreciated on Wikipedia, but an article or review by a local paper is still helpful when it comes to demanding notice from mainstream publications and publishers. Since your book is aimed at young adults, I also recommend looking into Common Sense Media. I seem to remember them occasionally reviewing self-published and indie works, so it's worth a try. Tor.com is also an option to look at, although it's a bit of a long shot. I'd talk to them after you contact your local newspaper.

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:Crown of Crimson (The Afterlight Chronicles) 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.

Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:43, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Rosereid, 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! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:43, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Crown of Crimson (The Afterlight Chronicles)

Hello, Rosereid. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Crown of Crimson".

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. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 04:47, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]