Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 September 13
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < September 12 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | Current help desk > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
September 13
[edit]12:50:18, 13 September 2016 review of submission by 117.254.144.150
[edit]- 117.254.144.150 (talk · contribs)
- No draft specified!
117.254.144.150 (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
hello i have created a article on Mr.T N suresh kumar ,but i don't see in my draft even in sandbox?why kindly help me regards akkihebbal geetha
- This is the only edit that you have made from this IP address. Did you create the draft while you were logged in to a registered account, or from a different IP address? If you have an account, log back in and look for the draft. If not, the shifting nature of IP addresses is an advantage to creating an account. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
20:21:26, 13 September 2016 review of submission by MayoMobile
[edit]- MayoMobile (talk · contribs)
I would like a re-review on my article because the reason for decline is "article should focus either on company or on its products". Not to be argumentative for arguments sake, but how can you properly cover the relevance of a company without detailing the products of the company? My article details the progress of the company to include a description of the company - its goals, dabbling in detail about the products.
Bottom-line: The article should be accepted because you cannot properly cover the company without covering its product.
- I agree in this case that it is not reasonable to try to divide coverage of the company from that of its products. I am not commenting at this time on whether the draft should be accepted, but I disagree with the reason for the decline and agree that a re-review is in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
23:16:43, 13 September 2016 review of submission by Wodaly
[edit]
I finished another edit of the citations/end references for the draft article "California Water Plan." A banner below the draft article suggests that it's been under review for sometime and is in the review queue. However, I've been told by the reviewer LaMona that it isn't under review and I need to resubmit it. Can you clarify whether I need to resubmit it, despite the presence of the banner stating that there are something like 835 articles awaiting review before it. I also don't see a means of resubmitting the article. No button or link appears. I would like to resubmit it, if it isn't in the queue.
Thank you!
William O'Daly
Wodaly (talk) 23:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Wodaly: You resubmitted the draft about 10 minutes before you asked the question, so yes, it's in the pool of drafts to be reviewed. The reason you had trouble finding a way to resubmit it is that you had removed an Articles for Creation review from the top of the draft. One of several reasons that the reviews bear the caution "-- Do not remove this line! --" is, if you remove review, you remove the resubmit button. The old reviews will be removed automatically if and when the draft is accepted. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:10, 14 September 2016 (UTC)