User talk:JimmyT1967

This is JimmyT1967's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sue Williams (writer) (January 22)[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 Dan arndt was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Lakes any inline citations - see WP:REFB

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:Sue Williams (writer) 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 08:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JimmyT1967! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 08:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sue Williams (writer) (January 24)[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 Theroadislong 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 people). 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:

sources need to cover her in-depth with significant detail.

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:Sue Williams (writer) 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sue Williams (writer) (March 25)[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 Greenman were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 people). 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:

Sourcing is poor. There are Wikipedia links which need to be removed WP:CIRCULAR, some sources have no relevance (source claiming she wrote for the Express Star leads to the front page of that website, which has no mention of the subject), there are WP:External links which need to be removed.

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:Sue Williams (writer) 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.

Greenman (talk) 10:32, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sue Williams (writer) (June 16)[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 Theroadislong 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 people). 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:

Her publishers websites are not independent sources and the "life" section is unsourced entirely?

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:Sue Williams (writer) 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Sue Williams (writer)[edit]

Hello, JimmyT1967. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sue Williams".

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. When 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. ✗plicit 00:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse host T has been a bit terse/blunt of late, but most of the info at Teahouse is to the point. Many new editors approach with listing what a person has done (books, journal articles, music, etc.) whereas Wikipedia cares about what has been published about the person. My edits - deleting a plethora of External links and nominations for awards - were intended to make the draft more acceptable to the next Reviewer. What is essential - at least three valid refs and verification of facts - needs to be addressed first. See WP:BLP for how Wikipedia addrsses drafts about living people. Hopefully, the run-in you had with a hired editor will not come back to haunt you now that that account has been blocked. It is possible that the person will create a new account. In situations like that, opening a sockpuppet inquery should result in all attempts to evade the initial block to also be blocked. Fingers crossed it does not go that far. P.S. Published reviews for her best-received books may include information about the author that can therefor be a reference for her. David notMD (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I had read the information previously but clearly have not retained or understood it. Or both. The hired "editor' experience was ugly but instructive. Some of the commentary about the page was untoward and unnecessary, IMHO. Some of my responses were similarly OTT. The tip about the biographical details in the reviews is invaluable because most will (or should) contain some nugget of personal info. By the way, I have used the editorial bio at the head of her latest story in the Sydney Morning Herald as my first citation. Does that qualify? JimmyT1967 (talk) 01:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Sue Williams (writer) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Sue Williams (writer). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 14:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Sue Williams (writer) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Sue Williams (writer). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]