User talk:Harald Geisler

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

Praxidicae (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Harald Geisler! 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! Praxidicae (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae: Thank you for pointing out the issue with the article Elizabeth Waterhouse. I did follow your advice and improved the sourcing of the article and also drastically changed the structure, as well as added new information. And I too asked my first question at the Teahouse :-) Notifying: @Praxidicae: — Looking forward to the conversation. Thank you. Harald Geisler (talk) 19:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Harald Geisler! You created a thread called Improving tone on first article Elizabeth Waterhouse at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 5 May 2019 (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 Scope creep was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Seems to run of the mill. Entirely non-notable. Name drops

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

scope_creep^Talk 00:05, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Harald Geisler. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Elizabeth Waterhouse".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse. Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 15:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the email. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any help with the request I've placed on the draft. ~Kvng (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse. Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 14:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the email. I have requested help at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Draft_talk:Elizabeth_Waterhouse_sources. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dance might also be a good idea but it looks like a less active project. The main purpose of our notability criteria is to assure there is enough published information on which to base a competent article. You can learn more at WP:N. ~Kvng (talk) 16:33, 31 January 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 Modussiccandi 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:

After consulting the talk page discussion between Kvng and the submitter and reading the sources myself, I agree with the two previous reviewers that the subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Elizabeth Waterhouse, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Modussiccandi (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Harald Geisler. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Elizabeth Waterhouse".

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!} 20:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Harald Geisler. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Elizabeth Waterhouse".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:18, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]