User talk:Jonty Tower

Your draft article
Hello, Jonty Tower, and welcome to editing Wikipedia. I have had a quick look at Draft:Enoch's Folly. I will leave it for an editor with more experience of assessing draft articles than myself to make a formal review, but I will tell you a few of my impressions. You have evidently put a significant amount of work into writing this draft, but I'm afraid I think it is extremely unlikely to be accepted in its present form. All of the problems I have mentioned could be put right by suitable re-writing, except possibly for the question of notability. No amount of re-writing an article can change the notability of the subject of that article. It is possible that you may be able to find sources that establish the book's notability, but my fairly brief searches for information about it make me very doubtful about the likelihood of doing so. My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make (which you will, because we all do) will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It gives no references to sources at all. It is essential to show where your information comes from, for various reasons, including the fact that otherwise we can't tell that you didn't just make it up (unfortunately that does happen, frequently), and the fact that even if the information is genuine, without knowing where it comes from we can't tell whether the subject of the draft is notable enough to be included in the encyclopaedia. Some of the relevant issues are covered in the notability guidelines, the guideline on reliable sources, and the guideline on citing sources. Unfortunately, there are, in my opinion, far too many of these guidelines, and most of them are far longer than I think they should be, which makes it rather difficult for a new user to find their way around them, but my advice is to have a quick glance through them to get the general idea, rather than studying them in detail.
 * 2) Much of the draft reads like your personal review of the book, rather than an objective encyclopaedia article. For example, describing the book as "sprawling" is certainly a subjective opinion, as is saying that it is "at times overly complex"; saying that it is "a character-driven study in human relationships" and that Aldous Comely is "one of the more notably characters in recent literary history" may be valid assessments, but they need evidence that those are accepted views of significant reliable sources, rather than just the opinion of someone or other who chose to write in Wikipedia.
 * 3) While there can sometimes be a justification for making one or two short quotations from a book to illustrate some point, the extent of quotations in the section "Enoch's Folly quotes" is way beyond what is acceptable, and what is more they are taken out of any context, with no evident reason why they are being quoted, beyond the fact that you felt like quoting them.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Enoch's Folly (October 4)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hair was:

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.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Enoch's Folly and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Enoch%27s_Folly Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hair&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Enoch%27s_Folly reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hair Talk 16:58, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Enoch's Folly


Hello, Jonty Tower. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Enoch's Folly".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the  or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:23, 8 April 2016 (UTC)