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.
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 User:Karinvanderlaag/sandbox 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 User:Karinvanderlaag/sandbox, 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.
Hello, Karinvanderlaag!
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! Theroadislong (talk) 08:52, 23 June 2022 (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 Star Mississippi were:
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:David Wicht 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:David Wicht, 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.
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Wicht. Thanks! StarMississippi 20:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I agree and will keep working on the article to make it ready to publish. Question: Can I save my changes without re-submitting everytime, as I would like to work on the article over a period of time and save changes as I go and then re-submit when I am fully ready?
Hi @Karinvanderlaag. Yes. Just hit publish and your changes will save. When you feel it's ready, click to re-submit. Let me know if I can help in any other way. StarMississippi 15:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Wicht. Thanks! Greenman (talk) 18:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Greenman. At the beginning of this process I was asked to disclose whether I was being paid or not and did so. I am not sure why it does not show up here. Can you help me add anything else that will show that I am a paid contributor for this page? I tried to add the template on my talk page as well. Thanks in advance, Karin van der Laag Karinvanderlaag (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the disclosure is not yet correct. The template that appears on the talk page says "InsertName ... has been paid by InsertName ..." which isn't very enlightening. The specifics of your own situation need to be included. Greenman (talk) 17:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
InsertName (talk ·contribs) has been paid by InsertName on their behalf. Insert relevant links, such as relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts written by paid editors, or diffs showing paid contributions being added to articles.
. ==
((Connected contributor (paid)|User1=InsertName|U1-employer=InsertName|U1-client=InsertName|U1-otherlinks=Insert relevant links, such as relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts written by paid editors, or diffs showing paid contributions being added to articles.)).
When I started the process I disclosed that I was a paid editor, but seem to have gone about it the wrong way.
David Wicht will pay me to write his Wikipedia page and FIlm Afrika the company will pay me to write their page. I do not work for either of them. I am a writer, Script Supervisor and Actress in the Film Industry.
I am not sure if i have disclosed this correctly now.
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:
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:David Wicht 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.
AfC notification: Draft:Film Afrika has a new comment[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Film Afrika. Thanks! 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:51, 28 October 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 S0091 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)
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:
In addition to WP:CITEKILL, much of the content is unsourced and sources provided are brief mentions or what representative of Film Afrika say about themselves.
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:Film Afrika 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.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Thatguy1987 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.
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:David Wicht 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.
Hello, Karinvanderlaag. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:David Wicht, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
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. FireflyBot (talk) 13:01, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I re-edited the page a few days ago and resubmitted it. It is now being reviewed once more. Thank you. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hello, I want to help you out on this, I added the infobox and corrected part of the filmography, so you'll be able to do the rest of it. Filmography don't usually have ref, and producteur should be mentionned after the movie example
2005: Duma: productor
you can look into articles of your favourite actors or other person to check their page to help you write. There's lot of sources too Veganpurplefox (talk) 13:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if you can take like 4 reliable sources with significant coverage of him and improve the draft it would be better. I learned a lot with making my own Drafts and how it is made I wouldn't have put on submission, but you can improve it Veganpurplefox (talk) 13:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. I will take a look. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 14:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Wicht. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:05, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Star Mississippi - I thought so. All that I did was to leave a template message that I leave on a draft that was moved from article space to draft space. The message was not really meant to be addressed to any one editor, but to anyone reviewing or editing the page. I thought that there had been COI editing and maybe other misconduct. The note was left on the talk page of Karinvanderlaag because Twinkle thought that they were the submitter. I wasn't trying to figure out who was doing what. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha, thanks @Robert McClenon. I misread If you do not understand why this article was sent back to draft space, please ask the reviewer rather than simply resubmitting. as saying they had moved it and it was moved back. Need more coffee. StarMississippi 12:31, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, User:Star Mississippi. That's a template message, ((sentback)), that I put on almost any page that was draftified, telling editors not to move-war it back into article space. As we know, if an article is move-warred back into article space after being draftified, AFD is usually the way to resolve the issue. Anyway, you and I both knew that there was some sort of disruption with the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:46, 13 September 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 Cabrils 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:
Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:CREATIVE) but presently it is not clear that it does. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple publishedsecondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements (it would be helpful if you could please identify, with specificity, which criteria you believe the draft meets?) then resubmit the page and leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.
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:David Wicht 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.
I will re-look at the article with your suggestions. As regards being paid, I have mentioned this a number of times on my talk page so I am not sure why it is not showing up. Greenman asked me this question already in August 2022 and I stated clearly on this page that I would be paid as well as adding the "connected contributor" paragraph.