This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
SCAM WARNING! If someone contacts you asking for money to get a draft published, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article—do not trust them! These offers are scams. Report them to paid-en-wpwikipedia.org. See WP:SCAM for more information.
This user talk page often deals with similar or reoccurring topics. Generic titles of messages may be refactored for clarity, such as renaming the section title to a link of the topic page.
This user is a regular and doesn't mind if you template him. Though he will appreciate if you expand on your reasoning should your concern not be immediately apparent.
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me.
Hi Bobby! I would like to ask what specific part of my article "Momm Ched" I need to fix? I appreciate if you pin point on what part I need to edit. Thank you! MommyChed (talk) 07:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @MommyChed, I assume based on your username that you have a conflict of interest with the subject of the draft. Please see the notice I left on your user talk page at § Managing a conflict of interest. It has relevant information about disclosing a conflict of interest as well as guidance on writing about topics with which you are closely connect to and the inherent difficulties in that process.
As for the draft, you need to make sure that everything is sourced to reliable sources and there is sufficient coverage in secondary sources independent of the subject to demonstrate notability, see WP:NBIO. You then also must ensure that the draft complies with our content policies and is not promotional and is strictly neutral in tone, see WP:NPOV.
In addition, while not directly assessed during review at AfC, the style of the article likely plays a large role in how it is perceived and presently it is very strangely formatted and bolded. Often times, in conjunction with the non-neutral tone, this will cause reviewers to further perceive it as non-neutral and decline it for the reasons I have just given. I would therefore also advise, having some experience with this, that you review the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and ensure that it also doesn't look promotional either.
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Reviewing these will help you write better articles in the future. As for this subject, it is not notable and the article has been rejected. See WP:NSCHOOL. It will not be considered further. Bobby Cohn (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Bobby, Thanks for your feedback on my article. I am working on addressing the concerns you mentioned in your response. I have a question for you about context. You requested more background for readers not familiar with the topic. Do you mean more background on jazz dance, dance in general, or choreography and choreographers? I note there is a Wikipedia article on jazz dance that could be linked to this article. Defining jazz dance could be a lengthy topic, but I'm happy to give it a paragraph if you think it's warranted. Thanks, Wroliver (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Wroliver, I think you've misinterpreted my review, which is fair, the default pre-filled comments are sometimes vague. Mea culpa. Instead, as I mentioned in the comment, you need to determine what this draft article is about. Think of it this way: should the draft be located at Draft:Pat Taylor or Draft:JazzAntiqua Dance & Music Ensemble? What is the subject? When I had reviewed the draft, it hadn't decided. Then, the only context needed about the subject and anything about the other is only relevant as it relates to the subject. Everything else is unnecessary, and will tend to get the suspicions raised of reviewers at AfC who are looking for notability, and are not concerned about the other as notability is not inherited. Hope this helps, but I'd be happy to clarify further if you have any other questions. Best, Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bobby. That makes total sense. I've decided to go with a biography of Pat Taylor, and the dance company will naturally be a secondary part of it, since that is her major achievement. I'll resubmit it when it is ready.
Hi @Nadeem Afzal989, there is no need for a draft article. The subject already exists on Wikipedia, you can edit it without creating someone new. Include the well-referenced items in the draft in the article that already exists at REPowerEU.
Dear colleague: You declined the aforementioned draft, supposedly due to: "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". It seems to me, that there are planety of good references now. I want to understand, what is missing - and- how it can be improved. A side note: there are many published articles in English Wikipedia, which are of much lower quality, than this draft. Also, I would appreciate you share your SPECIFIC comments on the article page (rather than via emails between the two of us), since I am not the only editor involved with this draft, and the others should know about your objections. Walter Tau (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
French
Deutsch
Courtesy link: Draft:S F S High School,Agiripalli
