User talk:Unicornnerd

This is Unicornnerd'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: Teresa Wong (November 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 WikiOriginal-9 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.

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:Teresa Wong 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.

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Unicornnerd! 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! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Teresa Wong (cartoonist) has been accepted

Teresa Wong (cartoonist), 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!

Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kelcey Ervick (academic, author, artist) has been accepted

Kelcey Ervick (academic, author, artist), 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.

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!

~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 01:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Williams (December 30)

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

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:Erin Williams 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 13:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would note that the preferred term for the content of the encyclopedia is "article", not "page" which has a broader meaning. 331dot (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Unicornnerd, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! sawyer * he/they * talk 02:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Williams (January 4)

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

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:Erin Williams 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.

MurielMary (talk) 10:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Williams (January 14)

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

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:Erin Williams 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.

MurielMary (talk) 09:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Williams (January 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Spinster300 were:

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.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Erin Williams 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.

Spinster300 (talk) 05:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erin Williams

Hi. I just did a pretty significant edit on the Erin Williams draft. There was a lot of content related to the issues that Williams addresses rather than Williams or her work. I think that's what the previous reviewer was referring to when they cited the tone of the article as a reason for its decline.

I tried not to change the intent of your words, but I'm not sure that I succeeded. Please give it a look and change as you see fit (but be sure you are sticking strictly to Erin Williams and her book). Feel free to ping me when you've edited the draft and I will review it. Thanks! Julie JSFarman (talk) 04:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your edits and feedback, Julie. That was helpful.

Is this paragraph problematic for the tone? :: Additionally, reviews of Commute describe the memoir as "a necessary addition to the medium of graphic narrative, long dominated by men." Commute adds to a small but growing genre of graphic memoirs authored by women that focus on diving into vulnerable aspects of their lives. This genre includes work by cartoonists Ellen Forney, Teresa Wong, and Lucy Knisley. Commute contributes to diversifying the medium of graphic narratives, highlighting an all-too-common story experienced by women. ::

Thank you for reviewing the draft. Unicornnerd (talk) 16:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking forward to reading (experiencing) Commute. I know it is an important book.

The tone of the paragraph is fine; it's really about the content. It needs to be about Erin and the book, specifically. Are there reviews that address the writing or the illustration (or the subject matter as it relates to Erin, personally)? Also, be specific if you include reviews. For example: "In a 2019 review in The Guardian, Kristin Radtke wrote that Williams' illustrations of her body were 'rough' and 'reality-based', noting that the material was 'difficult and sometimes shame-filled'. (Again, just an example - I have not read the other reviews used as references.)

Hope that is helpful! Julie JSFarman (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Your explanation about how to use the reviews really helps. Unicornnerd (talk) 19:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julie, I wanted to say (1) I think the article looks good to go and (2) I just read your user profile page and was totally blown away--I have so much respect for your work. Thanks for all you are doing. Unicornnerd (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) So glad! 2) Thank you (I must have exaggerated on my user page) and 3) Thanks for writing the article and I hope you continue to contribute. JSFarman (talk) 18:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erin Williams has been accepted

Erin Williams, 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!

JSFarman (talk) 18:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]