User talk:DiScience
Your submission at Articles for creation: Efficient Voter Rule (March 19)![]() This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information. This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission. The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs more context for why this term is notable. It seems to be originated mainly by Anderson's research paper. Please note Wikipedia is not a repository for research articles. WP:NOTJOURNAL 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 when they have been resolved.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Efficient Voter Rule (September 26)![]() This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information. This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission. The comment the reviewer left was:
The previous reviewer's comments have not been sufficiently addressed. This still reads like a journal paper rather than a Wikipedia article. It is still not clear what the context is, or why this subject is notable. 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 when they have been resolved.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Efficient Voter Rule (November 13)![]() This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information. This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission. The comment the reviewer left was:
While slightly improved, the draft still fails WP:NOT. To quote from that guideline, "A Wikipedia article should not be presented on the assumption that the reader is well-versed in the topic's field. Introductory language in the lead (and sometimes the initial sections) of the article should be written in plain terms and concepts that can be understood by any literate reader of Wikipedia without any knowledge in the given field before advancing to more detailed explanations of the topic. While wikilinks should be provided for advanced terms and concepts in that field, articles should be written on the assumption that the reader will not or cannot follow these links, instead attempting to infer their meaning from the text."
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 when they have been resolved.
Please also add inline references that make it clear to the reader where statements made in the article can be verified. WP:ILC explains how to do this. Lastly, you have still to show that this is a notable subject. At the moment, if I google for 'efficient voter rule' I get one mention, on a blog. You should demonstrate, through the addition of appropriate references, that others have already written in depth about this subject.
Draft:Efficient Voter Rule concernHi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Efficient Voter Rule, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC) Your submission at Articles for creation: Efficient Voter Rule has been accepted![]() Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits, you can 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. If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .Thanks again, and happy editing! DGG ( talk ) 06:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC) |