User talk:Ballantyne82

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

This submission is not adequately supported by

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Per

WP:GNG

, we need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.

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:Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies 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:Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies, 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 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ballantyne82! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from https://aims.edu.au/, https://neoskosmos.com/en/2021/11/20/life/books/the-book-launch-on-imbros-and-tenedos/.

closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here

.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 07:40, 15 September 2022 (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 DoubleGrazing was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

All sources bar one are primary. For notability, we need to see significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.

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:Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

I do not understand why you have decided at this point in time to move the article. I had added many citations since DG's comments. I have added further additional citations in any case. Ballantyne82 (talk) 05:28, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The citations you've been adding have not addressed the main problem: you need to demonstrate that the institute is

significant coverage about AIMS. If you post at the draft talk page and say something like "here are three reliable sources, all totally independent of AIMS, that wrote at least a couple of paragraphs about the institute itself" your draft is likely to be approved. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:19, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

An article you recently created,

Hi, two different experienced editors have moved your article back to draft. Instead of edit warring about that, you'd better try to understand why the think your draft isn't ready and then address that problem. Then somebody else will approve your draft and move it to article space. I'm going to move it back onoe more time. Please realize that your behavior is disruptive and that continuing warring about this may get you blocked from editing (by an uninvolved admin, not me). --Randykitty (talk) 13:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have independent sources from newspapers and TV. Why is this not enough? Ballantyne82 (talk) 22:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I have posted a detailed evaluation of the current 14 sources on the talk page of the draft. It should be obvious what the problem is. Most of those references are trivial and should be replaced with sources that discuss the institute in-depth. --Randykitty (talk) 16:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  How convenient that the only article that discusses the organisation in depth is "not accessible outside of Australia". You've got to be kidding. Ballantyne82 (talk) 01:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, it isn't, at least I get a message saying "not available in your location". And as I explained in that analysis, even if that one reference would turn out to be "in-depth" (which I doubt), one source still isn't enough to show notability. --Randykitty (talk) 07:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  What definition of "in-depth" are you using? My topic is about an academic institute. Notability guidelines relevant to academic topics applies and I believe I have followed them. Ballantyne82 (talk) 09:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Which guidelines would that be? I don't know of any guideline that this institute would meet: the applicable ones are
  WP:ORG (meeting just one of those would be sufficient). --Randykitty (talk) 11:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Try WP:PROF Ballantyne82 (talk) 13:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Doesn't apply, as the article is not a biography of an academic. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Exactly. In case you didn't notice, Ballantyne82, each one of the 8 criteria of that guideline starts with "The person...". --Randykitty (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So explain to me why other institutes, such as the Institute for Balkan Studies (Serbia) - Wikipedia doesn't need any citations? Ballantyne82 (talk) 01:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed deletion of that article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:48, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gee your fast, and what about

Institute for Macedonian language "Krste Misirkov" - Wikipedia? Ballantyne82 (talk) 01:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

So why doesn't

Institute for Macedonian language "Krste Misirkov" have any citations? Which guidelines do you apply for this institute? Ballantyne82 (talk) 02:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

If it doesn't have any citations, you could either find and add some, or

WP:AFD. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

So why didn't you take action then, like you did on the previous one? Ballantyne82 (talk) 02:46, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, the responsibility for searching for sources to support unsourced articles is not mine alone. Nor is deciding whether to prod articles when my search comes up short. I spent some time, which I feel good about spending, looking for such sources for the Balkan Studies article and AIMS. I don't really feel like doing so for the Macedonian language article. You can if you want to! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ballantyne82, please have a look at

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I am waiting.for your answer to my question....the hypocrisy clock is ticking.... Ballantyne82 (talk) 08:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The answer is in OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but as you apparently either didn't look at that or didn't understand it, here's the gist of it: WP has millions of articles and thousands of editors. Sometimes articles that are below par hang around for years before someone gets around looking at them seriously. There are many badly-sourced/unsourced articles on WP, that's a reason to look for them and do something about it if one has the time to do so. It's not a reason to create more of such badly-sourced articles. And proposing something for deletion costs a lot of time and effort (see
  WP:BEFORE). --Randykitty (talk) 09:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  You are ignoring my question. You do not want to look at the article I pointed you to because it will show you are not acting in good faith. This has become obvious to me. Ballantyne82 (talk) 09:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I tagged it for missing soources, I have no time to propose it for deletion because I have no time for BEFORE (and expect that if there are sources, they might be in Macedonian, which I don't read, so I have to leave this for another editor. As for
  personal attacks may end badly for you. --Randykitty (talk) 09:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  So an article with zero citations gets tagged, yet my article with 15 citations gets moved? Seems hypocritical. Ballantyne82 (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Articles that have been around for many years, should not be moved to draft space. It's different for new articles. I'm sorry that you don't like this, but I don't make the rules. --Randykitty (talk) 10:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

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

Also see

WP:CITEKILL

.

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:Australian Institute of Macedonian Studies 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.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hello, Ballantyne82. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]