Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Asilvering 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 passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet 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:
There is no evidence in this draft that this subject exists in the English language at all. It is therefore very likely that this draft should a) instead be titled "Gretchenfrage", and b) that we already have an article on this concept somewhere, and it would be better to write about this topic there instead. We can then create a WP:REDIRECT from Gretchenfrage to that article, whatever it is.
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:Gretchen question 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.
I revised the draft for “Gretchen question” so that it more clearly shows that the subject matter of the article exists in the English language. I’ve added the new reference (Smith, 2011), from the Goethe Yearbook, a research and reviews journal of the Goethe Society of North America.
The subject Gretchenfrage or “Gretchen question” is discussed in literature (Smith, 2011) and the philosophy of religion (Liessmann, 2007; Planck, 1937). It is also discussed in philosophy and linguistics (cf. logic and linguistics of questions, and rhetorical, loaded, leading, misleading and other types of questions).
I believe all references cited are reliable, independent secondary sources. The key references cited are also in-depth, and make “not just passing mentions about the subject.” Liessmann, 2007, and the additional Smith, 2011, are bona fide academic references wholly centered on the subject (cf. their title). In addition, the German Duden Dictionary and the Oxford German Dictionary, also cited, are authoritative reference sources for “Gretchenfrage”. Please let me know if you still disagree with any of this.
Re. (a) in the comment, I agree that this article can be titled “Gretchenfrage” and added the term in the first paragraph. I chose “Gretchen question” since that seems more accessible to English speakers. The article should have an English WP:REDIRECT from Gretchenfrage, or viceversa from “Gretchen question” if we choose “Gretchenfrage” as the title of the article.
Re. (b) in the comment, that there is already an article on this concept somewhere in Wikipedia English, a search returns no results (“The page "Gretchenfrage" does not exist.” Search on 05/19/2025). There is one article for the proper name Gretchen (it contains an edit redlink to non-existent page Gretchenfrage). A few search results mention Gretchenfrage, but they are about other subjects.
Please note also that Wikipedia German and Wikipedia French do have a "Gretchenfrage" article, which shows that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article in those languages. This new draft article is intended to fill the current gap on Wikipedia English. I believe Wikipedia English users will enjoy having access to this proposed page.
OK, I hope the revision of the draft article, the new reference (Smith, 2011) and the clarifications on this response let our draft page pass the litmus test for a Wikipedia article. I will proceed to Resubmit the article. If you have further comments about the article or the references, please let me know.
Hello, Ncorrea!
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! asilvering (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2025 (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 WeirdNAnnoyed was:
There seems to be quite a bit of WP:OR in this article. Reference 2 appears to be secondary and reliable, but the rest appear to be just passing uses of the term, examples, or unreliable sources (e.g. helpster.de). We need better sourcing and less author analysis of the term's significance and where it has been used.
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:Gretchen question 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.
I’m glad to read that reference 2 (John Smith, 2011) is accepted as secondary and reliable source, and that the subject exists in the English language (WP:Notability).
Regarding the objection that … “There seems to be quite a bit of WP:OR in this article,” and that “the rest [of references] appear to be just passing uses of the term, examples, or unreliable sources,” I beg to differ. Refs. 4 and 5 (Konrad Paul Liessmann, 2007 and Max Planck, 1937) are ENTIRELY about the topic of “Gretchenfrage”, not just passing uses of the term, examples, or unreliable sources. They are reputable printed sources from a recognized top academic (Liessmann) and top scientist (Planck).
I have however added another reference to the article, (Collenberg-González, 2023), so now we have not one, but four solid references and the article is not WP:OR.
Our draft article has a superset of the references of Wikipedia pages for “Gretchenfrage” in German (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gretchenfrage) and French (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gretchenfrage). If Wikipedia criteria WP:OR is the same across languages, then this WP English “Gretchenfrage” article should, AS IS, quality for sufficient secondary and independent references.
“Gretchen’s Question” or “Gretchenfrage” may not be a popular topic for English speakers, but it is relevant to those of us with interest in German culture, literature and philosophy. ncorrea (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
