User talk:Bscotrousse

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Bscotrousse! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! 〜 Adflatuss • talk 20:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Adflatuss! Bscotrousse (talk) 20:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bombay Beach Institute (April 21)

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

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)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Neither of the NYT pieces or LAmag mention the Bombay Beach Institute - just the Bombay Beach Biennale (which does seem to be notable). So we are left with primary sources and 1 local PBS piece. I made an effort to look for anything else in newspapers.com etc. and didn't find anything. I think the content would be better served with a merge into Bombay Beach Biennale as it doesn't seem the institute is noteworthy on its own. The organization seems to be only a few months old so perhaps it might become notable in the future, but I would recommend moving it to your sandbox to incubate it until more WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS can be identified.

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:Bombay Beach Institute 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.

Zzz plant (talk) 19:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bscotrousse! 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! Zzz plant (talk) 19:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the comments! I really appreciate your guidance and suggestions. Bscotrousse (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Monogamish (June 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 CanonNi 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 films). 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:

Needs more reliable sources. Several sections are also unsourced.

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:Monogamish 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.

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thanks for your review of my draft entry for the Monogamish documentary. I added sources for all of the previously unsourced sections (synopsis, production, and cultural context).

I wanted to kindly ask that you double-check your assessment of the other sources I provided for the film. All of the sources cited in the "critical reception" section are reliable, secondary sources that are indeed independent of the subject. Film Threat and the Hollywood Reporter, for example, are well-known publications in the movie world, and Monogamish has an established page on both IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes. Film Inquiry and WKCY are less well-known but they are reliable sources independent of the subject.

Thank you! Bscotrousse (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Monogamish Movie Poster.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Monogamish Movie Poster.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]