User talk:JournalismResearch

Welcome!

Hello, JournalismResearch, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

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. Red Director (talk) 02:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alexander Smukler has been accepted

[edit]
Alexander Smukler, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 06:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your scholarly and encyclopedic contributions at the Paula Fredriksen article

[edit]

Welcome to wikipedia, and I hope you stay. As a somewhat new user myself, bewildered by the many policies and guidelines, I formulated this cheatsheet that you may find helpful in getting started: User:Jaredscribe/Wikipedia_Ethics. Kind regards, and good luck.Jaredscribe (talk) 06:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon 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. 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:
This draft is written from the viewpoint of the vendor of the product, focusing on what the company says about the product. Product notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject. This draft does not establish product notability. You may ask for advice about product notability at the Teahouse.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, JournalismResearch! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:David Rubin (activist) has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Rubin (activist). Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Rubin (activist) has been accepted

[edit]
David Rubin (activist), 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!

SL93 (talk) 17:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Celsius Network (June 13)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RPSkokie 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 organizations and companies). 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.
RPSkokie (talk) 14:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Celsius Network (June 13)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Celsius Network instead.
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. 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:
This draft was resubmitted rapidly, within a few hours, after being declined, with only minor changes. Resubmitting a draft too rapidly after it was declined is not useful and is not likely to result in approval. When a draft that has been declined is resubmitted, the reviewers look at the history, and expect that the submitter will attempt to address the concerns of the reviewers. If the submitter is not sure what the reviewer wants, it would be a good idea to discuss with the reviewer rather than just resubmitting (and annoying the reviewers).

You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the declining reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)

The author is very strongly advised to discuss with the reviewers, or at least to rework this draft substantially, rather than just resubmitting.

If this draft is resubmitted rapidly again, it is likely to be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a topic-ban may even be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.

Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion.

If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celsius Network.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 19:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the confusion - I worked on a draft about a year ago under a different title. I resubmitted it after all the latest news and updated the title to Draft: Celsius Network I did not realize that there was a different version that had already been submitted and reviewed. My draft has many more sources. I submitted it again today after the most recent rejection because I added more sources which I thought demonstrated notability. I regret if I've made things difficult for any editors. I think my version is much more extensive and demonstrates the notability of the subject: numerous articles about the subject in mainstream sources over a period of time. I posted this note in the Articles for deletion talk page as well. JournalismResearch (talk) 21:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Celsius Network

[edit]

Information icon Hello, JournalismResearch. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Celsius Network, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:02, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Celsius Network

[edit]

Hello, JournalismResearch. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Celsius Network".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz Read! Talk! 20:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]