• Rennis970 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Piquetero Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I want to know if anything else is ok, in order to re submmit the post, Rennis970 (talk) 01:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been accepted. 331dot (talk) 09:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Laser5918 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Clemens Burda (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

For this entry, I believe that point 3 of WP:NACADEMIC is met via my election to the AAAS. Can you please revisit my submission? Laser5918 (talk) 03:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's inadvisable- thought not absolutely forbidden- for you to write about yourself at all- but if you intend to proceed, the main issue is that the sources you have provided do not seem to be reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Laser5918 However, it does seem that you pass the point you mention. I agree with @331dot on the references, but I believe this draft is acceptable if tagged tor the correct improvements. This I have Accepted the draft and am in process of flagging inadequacies 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 11:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bhushanpkg (talk) 11:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bhushanpkg (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Kirtiraj Gaikwad (professor) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How i can improve the article draft so that it will published.https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=twitter&lang=en&q=Draft:Kirtiraj_Gaikwad_(professor) Bhushanpkg (talk) 12:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bhushanpkg: you could certainly start by cutting down that very long list of publications considerably. Wikipedia is not meant to be a comprehensive catalogue of someone's entire output. If you feel the need to mention any publications, focus on a small number of the most noteworthy ones only.

Other than that, you need to show how this person meets the WP:NPROF notability guideline for academics. Anything else is arguably superfluous at this stage.

I have posted a conflict-of-interest (COI) query on your talk page, please read and respond to it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Bhushanpkg. A Wikipedia article should be a neutral summary of what people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable publications, and very little else. Almost nothing that the subject or their associates have said is relevant. ColinFine (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• OffxLethal (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:OffxLethal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Can you please give me more details on how to improve it? OffxLethal (talk) 12:28, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@OffxLethal: this draft has been rejected and will not be considered further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:32, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@OffxLethal, see my reply to the previous section, #12:02, 4 May 2025 review of submission by Bhushanpkg. Also note that writing about yourself is very strongly discouraged, and very very few people who try it manage to get their drafts accepted. ColinFine (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ajlr555 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Spacy (Tatsuro Yamashita album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why are relevant albums the only articles that should be made on the site when there are other albums of less relevance on the site that are accepted? Ajlr555 (talk) 12:55, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of older articles on the project that pre-date the current community standards for notability; if submitted today many would not be accepted. CoconutOctopus talk 13:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are nearly seven million articles on Wikipedia. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid justification for publishing an article. Allowing low-quality articles because other low-quality articles exist only degrades the quality of Wikipedia. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 21:50, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Lsb997 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Luke Laulilii (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, what can I do to improve this article? Other articles submitted by myself in past have used identical sources and been approved, what is different with this article and what can be done to improve it? Lsb997 (talk) 14:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lsb997: rugby players must satisfy the general notability guideline WP:GNG, which requires significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and independent. This draft cites mostly primary sources, passing mentions, or routine match reporting. This source probably comes closest to meeting the GNG standard, but it alone isn't enough; we typically require three. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Jennie.Gonzo.33 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • User:Jennie.Gonzo.33/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I’m not sure why it says submission deleted. This is my first article and trying to do this correctly Jennie.Gonzo.33 (talk) 21:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You tried to submit the draft for review, but ended up not doing it correctly and declining it yourself at the same time. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 22:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Eck28 (talk · contribs) ^(TB)
  • Draft:Opera Populaire : The Phantom of The Opera (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Why was this declined? Eck28 (talk) 22:56, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And how can I make it so that it cannot be Eck28 (talk) 22:57, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not copying and pasting Chat GPT-written text would be a good place to start. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]