User talk:Kerri9494

 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Druware 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 [//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:Druware Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Greenman&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Druware reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 07:04, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

--> <!-- == Whoops... ==

...didn't realize we were discussing on an archive.

Here's where we were:

@Kerri9494, it was your comment Not sure how those snuck into article space, but I'll try to suppress my jealousy for now., which made other editors think you were saying Le Creuset, Cousances, and Descoware were likely not notable. I know that as someone interested in Druware, that is likely not what you were saying. I think what you were saying was not that you thought those subjects weren't notable but that if Druware needed better sources to show notability, so did those three. Which is very true: every article needs good sources, and for subjects like collectible vintage cookware, online sources are sometimes slim, and other editors can sometimes assume that means there are no sources. Valereee (talk) 5:49 pm, Yesterday (UTC−5)


 * @Valereee It was really the converse -- the bar for sourcing and notability for those other articles was, in my estimation, lower than what I had included in the article I was working on. The Druware draft's sourcing had, I thought, matched what I saw on the others, but to @UtherSRG's point, that's not a particularly strong argument for approval of the Druware article, and I wanted to do more.


 * I wasn't here to make a case for notability on the article I was working on -- I really had what I thought was a reasonable question (about the relationship of current popularity to perpetual notability), and regret my offhand comment about the other articles. That said, as someone who's not worked on Wikipedia much for the past ten years, things have changed, and I'm still learning. I was trying.


 * So I was shocked to see that my comment prompted deletion discussions on the other articles, especially in light of WP:BEFORE. I was under the impression that it was typical to make an affirmative case that something is not notable before recommending deletion on the grounds of notability (having recently been involved in the deletion process of another article). What I saw, though, seemed like strong-arming interested editors into sourcing under the threat of deletion within seven days, and I never imagined that my comment could be a catalyst for that. I didn't realize that was a thing on Wikipedia. I am sure @UtherSRG and I had precisely the same goals -- to make Wikipedia better -- but I have been knocked back by this whole thing. It is hard to feel welcome at Wikipedia under the best of circumstances; that was true ten years ago, and it's at least as true today. The documentation is a maze of twisty passages and contradiction, and there seems to be a hierarchy of cliques, with little opportunity to feel useful. It's understandable, with so many opportunists knocking at the door, I am sure.


 * That my first article creation and support-seeking experience here caused such turmoil is, I hope understandably, a disincentive for continuing to do more. My life's work is information, so the fact that an attempt at adding usefully to the corpus could lead to such chaos feels terrible. That is meant not as an emotional threat that I want to take my Dutch oven and go home, but instead perhaps it's of some value as feedback (to whom, I have no idea) that there weren't enough bumpers for me to avoid causing harm (even in the Teahouse), and now I've gotten Le Creuset, of all things, marked for deletion! It makes Wikipedia feel like it really is the aggressive place it can sometimes appear to be, and that's uncomfortable. Perhaps it is such a place, though, and perhaps that's ok, and like so many things, history will be written by those with the strength and experience to prevail, not by silly old ladies and their feelings.


 * I'm currently reading The Dictionary of Lost Words, which is probably why I'm bothering to think (and write and feel) about this more than might seem sensible. :-) Kerri9494 (talk) 12:15 pm, Today (UTC−5)


 * @Kerri9494 hahahahaha on taking your Dutch oven and going home! :)


 * Don't worry about getting Le Creuset 'marked for deletion', it's a clearly notable subject. One of our issues here is that by far most of our editors are white English-speaking men, and since we're all volunteers and edit whatever we choose, we have a definite slant toward covering subjects that are highly interesting to the [grossly generalizing here] average white English-speaking man. Our coverage of sports is second to none (as long as those sports are well-represented in English-speaking countries). Porn stars? We got 'em. Cars, tech, video games? Yep. Cooking implements? Not so much. So we really do need people who are interested in other things.


 * This place can feel a little overwhelming when you first start working here, and creating an article is hard to begin with, the hardest thing anyone does here. @UtherSRG may not have realized he was talking to someone with ~100 edits here at Teahouse where we try to encourage new editors, especially those who can in their first 100 edits write the kind of an article which, even if it needs some work, certainly tells us its writer is the kind of article writer we'd like to encourage.


 * Please feel free to contact me at my talk or ping me to yours, I love helping newer users figure this place out. I will put that draft on my watch and start going through the sources. And seriously don't worry about Le Creuset etc., they're notable subjects. Valereee (talk) 12:44 pm, Today (UTC−5) -->

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

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Druware 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! Valereee (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Hiya
Greetings from your old cyber-pal. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Froggy! (o)_(O) Kerri9494 (talk) 22:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Hello, Kerri9494,

I remember your discussion at the Teahouse on your draft and just noticed that Druware was accepted and moved into main space! Congratulations! Writing a new article from scratch is the hardest task an editor can take on and now you've done it! I'm glad you successfully jumped all of the hurdles and we can now enjoy your article on the project. Liz Read! Talk! 00:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Liz! Kerri9494 (talk) 05:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Oh, and you're a librarian! That explains why you were able to write such a good article from scratch in your first edits. Wikipedia loves librarians! Valereee (talk) 22:28, 12 November 2022 (UTC)