User talk:Salimfadhley/Archives/2021/March

Onward
I don't thing I would have declined a draft because of incorrectly done disams. That's the sort of theing that is easily fixable in normal editing. Declining runsthe risk that they won't come back to fix it. (Tho they did--but then either they didn't tell you, or it wasn't spotted, and it's been sitting there for 3 months. I accepted it, and apologized/ . )  DGG ( talk ) 00:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey DGG, thanks for fixing my mistakes. Which article were you referring to. --Salimfadhley (talk) 17:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Rejected e-flux draft page
Hi @Salimfadhley, I was working on Draft:e-flux last fall, and you rejected it in September 2020. On your talk page in November 2020, I wrote the following note: "Hi, I've been working to edit Draft:e-flux, which you rejected on the basis that it was a temporary video store. This is inaccurate, as the article represents. e-flux is an exhibition space that housed a video store temporarily as part of their exhibition program. The article lists countless other projects that e-flux has hosted as well. Please revise your decision to reject the draft, as the article clearly shows that e-flux continues to be active in hosting events, programs, and exhibitions and in publishing journals and books. Let me know if I can help clarify anything else. Thank you." I did not receive a response from you and wanted to restart the conversation, as I really would like for this page to get back up as soon as possible. Thanks! Hallieedit (talk) 17:59, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better to allow another editor to consider the status of this draft. --Salimfadhley (talk) 10:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Induszalim


Hello, Salimfadhley. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Induszalim".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz Read! Talk! 20:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Robert S. Gailey
Hi Salimfadhley,

Would you be willing to take another look at my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Robert_S._Gailey? I saw you rejected it based on a lack of notability referencing the general notability guidelines. However, based on comments from previous reviewers, I think the relevant notability criteria for an academic are WP:PROF. I think the subject satisfies those based on their awards, number of published works and citations, and Worthingham APTA fellowship.

Per the previous review from DGG, the subject was deemed notable, but I was asked to improve the promotional tone, which I've tried to do. I'm curious to get your thoughts on how I could improve from here.

Thank you for your time.

Soundingwell (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The main criteria for approving a draft is notability. Could you identify three sources which most speak to this subject's notability? --Salimfadhley (talk) 00:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)