User talk:Rwlove51

Hello! Rwlove51, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! (t) Josve05a (c) 04:07, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rwlove51. It has been over six months since you last edited your

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 01:06, 14 September 2015 (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, Rwlove51. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:43, 5 August 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 Liance 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)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent
  of 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:

Requires additional independent, secondary, reliable sources about the subject. "Bitcoin Magazine" is not considered

WP:RS

.

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:The People's Ledger 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.

Liance (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2023 (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 UtherSRG was:

This submission does not appear to be written in

peacock terms

that promote the subject.

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:The People's Ledger 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.

UtherSRG (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by

Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent
  of 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:

The sources are either Omarova's own papers (sources 1 and 4 in the current version of the draft), unreliable (source 3, Bitcoin Magazine), only tangientially related and not a RS (source 6), or entirely unconnected to the topic (the rest of the 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:The People's Ledger 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.

bonadea contributions talk 21:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to submitting articles. Are you telling me Darwin's theory on the origin of the species would have been an unsuitable subject for WP until it had been reviewed by "secondary sources"? Rwlove51 (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the person who declined your article, but the answer to your question is, without a doubt, yes. 4.16.149.14 (talk) 20:23, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your belated opinion on the Wikipedia guidelines. I guess I read them differently, but have since moved on from wikipedia. good luck 2600:1700:A4A8:48A0:6D88:B366:9420:25C4 (talk) 22:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever been published by a law review? I would suggest that requires a significant degree of "notability" ... as does specific mention of your ideas in a Congressional hearing. Rwlove51 (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rwlove51. 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, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While using the "visual editor" without signing in, I find no provision for online saving and sharing of a proposed edit to an existing article before I "publish" it. Furthermore, after signing in, I am unable to see how to use the visual editor and it still remains unclear how to save and share the proposed edit before publishing. Pretty clunky for 2024? Suggestions? Rwlove51 (talk) 11:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]