User talk:31.10.156.103

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marius Brülhart has been accepted
 Marius Brülhart, 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.

You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Marius_Br%C3%BClhart 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.

Thanks again, and happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Dear @DoubleGrazing,
 * I hope this message finds you well. Thanks for your continuous support. I am eager to contribute to Wikipedia by creating articles and expanding its content. However, after reviewing the information on registering an account, I find myself a bit perplexed as to how it applies to me, as I have been a registered user for more than four days and have made over ten edits.
 * If I am indeed eligible to create articles independently, I would be more than happy. By taking advantage from this opportunity, I need your advice. I am currently in discussions with other Wikipedians about a draft I have prepared, and I must admit, I am feeling a bit stuck in convincing them of its worthiness for publication: Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, a learned scientific society with a rich history spanning 160 years. While I understand the concept of notability and that it is not inherently granted, I believe I have exhausted all significant sources to demonstrate the society's notability. Would you be kind to review Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics and offer your objective assessment? Additionally, any advice on how to further substantiate the society's notability would be greatly appreciated.
 * Thank you for your time and assistance.
 * Warm regards, KMerrigold 31.10.156.103 (talk) 09:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear @DoubleGrazing,
 * I hope this message finds you well. Thanks for your continuous support. I am eager to contribute to Wikipedia by creating articles and expanding its content. However, after reviewing the information on registering an account, I find myself a bit perplexed as to how it applies to me, as I have been a registered user for more than four days and have made over ten edits.
 * If I am indeed eligible to create articles independently, I would be more than happy. By taking advantage from this opportunity, I need your advice. I am currently in discussions with other Wikipedians about a draft I have prepared, and I must admit, I am feeling a bit stuck in convincing them of its worthiness for publication: Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, a learned scientific society with a rich history spanning 160 years. While I understand the concept of notability and that it is not inherently granted, I believe I have exhausted all significant sources to demonstrate the society's notability. Would you be kind to review Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics and offer your objective assessment? Additionally, any advice on how to further substantiate the society's notability would be greatly appreciated.
 * Thank you for your time and assistance.
 * Warm regards, KMerrigold
 * KMerrigold (talk) 09:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @KMerrigold,
 * Now that your account is autoconfirmed, you can indeed create articles directly into the main article space, without having to go through the AfC review process. Of course, can doesn't mean must, or even that it would be a good idea to do so. The AfC review system exists to help new users develop their content to a point where it complies with our core policies of notability, verifiability, neutral POV, etc.; I would therefore argue that it is inherently a positive and constructive system, rather than a negative or restrictive one.
 * Bear in mind that even if you choose to create articles directly, they will still be subject to new page patrolling (NPP), which applies the same sort of criteria as AfC does. The main difference being that whereas AfC will allow you to continue working on a draft until it is ready for publication, NPP will not work with you, but will instead deal with non-compliant articles in one of two ways: either move them into the draft space (which puts them effectively into the AfC system anyway), or propose them for deletion (either speedily or via the AfD process). The latter is best avoided, because once an article has been deleted, especially following an AfD discussion, this counts against it in future attempts to create an article on the same subject.
 * My advice would be to continue putting your drafts through AfC at least for another while, until you have had a few articles accepted and are comfortable with key considerations like notability. But it is your call, of course.
 * I haven't looked at the SSES draft, but if you have exhausted the available sources and these still aren't sufficient to demonstrate notability per WP:ORG, then it may be that the subject simply isn't notable enough to justify inclusion. Which wouldn't be all that unusual – the vast majority of organisations in this world aren't notable in Wikipedia (at least, the English-language Wikipedia) terms, and that includes many old and illustrious ones.
 * HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)