User talk:Giraffe1989

This user is a student editor in Arizona_State_University/Environment_and_Justice_-_fall_2024_(Fall).

Welcome!

Hello, Giraffe1989, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Editing Wikipedia, a guide for student editors Choosing an article to edit Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions in our FAQ.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SolarSPELL (November 11)

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

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.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid 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:SolarSPELL 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:58, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Giraffe1989! 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:58, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SolarSPELL (March 11)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid 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:SolarSPELL 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.

Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 13:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SolarSpell (April 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by CNMall41 were:

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.

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.

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:SolarSpell 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.

CNMall41 (talk) 16:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Solar Spell feedback

Hello, Giraffe1989.This is a response to your question at Wiki Ed expert Ian's talk page about Draft:SolarSpell. I'm not a Wiki Ed expert, just another editor like you, but with lots of experience here. I agree with the Afc reviewer's assessments about reading like an advertisement (I would have perhaps phrased it slightly differently, in terms of a company self-promotion, but in the end, that is a kind of advertisement.) This is an online encyclopedia, and the article should read how an article by Britannica or some other encyclopedia would, and not so much like self-promotion written by the company itself.

But note that reading like an advertisement is not the only feedback you got. In fact, the one in the second shaded box is about WP:Notability, and is much more important, imho, and I would have placed it first, namely:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article.

A lack of WP:Notability (as Wikipedia defines it) is a complete deal-breaker for a Wikipedia article. So I would work on that first, and forget about its reading like an advertisement for now, until you have demonstrated Notability of the topic. Otherwise, you can spend all the time in the world writing an article with perfect tone, but it will still get declined (or rejected, which is worse) if the topic is not notable. Once you have demonstrated Notability, you can come back and ask about the tone of the article again. Good luck in your course! Mathglot (talk) 18:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A further note: your question at Ian's talk page was followed 5' later by this discussion at the WP:Teahouse. Please ask your question in one forum, or at the very least, interlink your discussions so that they don't become fragmented. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Mathglot, I appreciate yours and @David notMD's feedback! I rewrote the article, and I am looking for more feedback before I resubmit it! have ensured the sources used in the updated article follow WP:Notability requirements. Would you both be able to read through the Draft:SolarSpell again and provide any additional specific suggestions on tone or notability? Thank you! Giraffe1989 (talk) 17:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft has been Declined. "Rejected" would have meant that the reviewer was of the opinion that there was no potential to succeed, and the draft should be abandoned or started over. David notMD (talk) 10:48, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Giraffe1989! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Writing Tone, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:17, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SolarSpell has been accepted

SolarSpell, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Rusalkii (talk) 18:11, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for working on the draft even past the end of your course. I hope you stick around :) I notice that you uploaded File:SolarSPELL-offline-digital-education-library-smartphone.jpg and File:ASU-SolarSPELL-Solar-Powered-Offline-Digital-Library.jpg. I assume you didn't personally take these pictures? In which case, please review Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Identifying_usable_images and check that these images are in fact usable on Wikipedia (the short version is if the copyright holder did not explicitly say they were releasing them under CC-BY-SA or public domain, they are probably not compatible with Wikipedia). If they're released somewhere public, please indicate that in the Commons file and re-add them to the article: I have removed them for now. Rusalkii (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]