Draft talk:Speed Darlington

Comments from the draft creator
The comments below were posted on the draft page. --bonadea contributions talk 19:33, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Comments : How can you decline an article without a comment because don’t expect me on your talk page for article being decline.? How can you tag that the submission's references doesn’t show significant coverage while it does.? Does this references looks like a mere mention or promotional which it doesn’t.? If you have been doing this to other editors I think you better improve yourself by leaving a comment when declining articles so that editors can understand your point. Take corrections because they are other editors who leave a comment while declining articles and if I also have the right I would lovely like to be leaving a comment as well, @Timtrent. I will be resubmitting this article for other reviewers to see because theirs no sense towards your action. Gabriel  (talk to me )  08:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * it’s nice and I appreciate the fact you listened to the correction. Talking about the WP:NMUSICIAN, I just finish reading and the subject passes No.1 on the Musician notability despite the fact his way of lifestyle. The subject also is Notable not just passing mere mentions but independent of the subject from secondary reliable source. This was why I needed your comment and it has been cleared, thanks and I hope you having a good day ahead, cheers.  Gabriel   (talk to me )  09:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The references are not poor. My question here is does the subject passes WP:GNG or not? and you jump to WP:NMUSICIAN which of course I cleared your doubt. I have no aim in making this my best article written so far or receiving an award for it. Kindly read back your statement and you will find out that you made a typo, now you see that you are not also a perfect editor. It just seems like a waste of time communicating with you I’m sorry because I still can’t find a meaningful point to work on. At this point you just have to contribute to the article if you feel theirs something missing while I learn from your contribution. Gabriel  (talk to me )  22:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Reply : The Wiki link you cited says : A topic is to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received  in  that are . Let me start by listing out all secondary sources subject has received independently and not mere mentions. The Punch, Nigerian Tribune, The Independent, The Nation (Nigeria), Daily Post (Nigeria), Vanguard (Nigeria). What is the difference between this article and Portable (musician) reviewed by Reading Beans. I would have dump this article if your point are meaningful but they are just meaningless and I will be reporting this whole discussion to an admin to take a look at the whole discussion because I still don’t get it. I don’t feel disappointed for article being decline so that tag on my talk page is not necessary because I’m not new to Wikipedia, have got couples of articles accepted and decline which I accepted the fact here @ Draft:Genesis (restaurant) but on this article your comments are just meaningless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel601 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * well, context matters. Any reliable source will publish texts that can't be used as sources in a Wikipedia article. You may also have misunderstood what a secondary source is, perhaps because "source" can be used to refer to the publisher (e.g. The Nation) or the specific text (e.g. an article in The Nation) that contains the information. Occasionally you'll see "source" used to refer to the author of a piece, as well. "Secondary" only refers to the text. This is not secondary, for instance. Neither is this one from The Punch. (As an aside, the publisher Bella Naija is classed as "generally unreliable", so that source has to be removed in any case.)


 * It is also unclear why the citation markers (footnotes) have been placed where they are in the article. Take this sentence:   Almost none of those citation markers makes much sense. Why does his name need another source, and how is the word "activities" verified by this? (Why would "activities" need verification at all?) This source does not support the claim that he is active "especially on instagram", and this source doesn't verify his "content" being "seen as comedy". Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Now I clearly understand your point @Bonadea. You just gave me a good reason to dump the subject and work on other article. Thanks for the context matters, learnt a new way of creating articles.-- Gabriel  (talk to me )  08:30, 13 October 2022 (UTC)