User talk:Uetli Ibex

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 11)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

The comment the reviewer left 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 User:Uetli Ibex/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Uetli Ibex/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * 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=User:Uetli_Ibex/sandbox Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KylieTastic&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Uetli_Ibex/sandbox reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 13:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi KylieTastic, many thanks for taking the time to review my proposed article. Your points about the need for significant coverage in independent, reliable resources has been duly noted. I assume, since this is the English instance of Wikipedia, such resources need to be in English, correct? I'm asking because the existing article in the German Wikipedia does provide additional resources in German. And another question, if I may: To avoid running afoul of conflict of interest rules, my approach was to create a stub and ask the editors community for a translation of the German article. Just to avoid any suspicion that my translation could be biased. On the other hand, I don't want to just leave the burden with the other editors. Based on your experience, do you feel my approach is appropriate or would you recommend doing the translation myself before re-submitting (only once sufficient resources are available, of course)? Again, thanks for your review and I appreciate your guidance. Uetli Ibex (talk) 14:21, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Uetli Ibex no sources do not need to be in English (nor online another regular assumption) although if possible English online sources are always preferred as it makes it more verifiable and useful to the readers. However for many subjects sources only or mostly exist in other languages. Do note though that each language Wikipedia has its own rules/guidelines so just having an article on another language is no guarantee the subject would be considered notable here. For this subject WP:BIO is the most applicable. If you have a conflict of interest see WP:COI and note the section WP:DISCLOSE. When someone has a COI it is best to keep things minimal, factual and well sourced, as many of the volunteers/reviewers see COI as promotional and/or paid editing (See WP:PAID) which gets a negative pushback. So creating a stub with enough content and sources to show notability is a good way to go. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your clarification and advice, KylieTastic. I will keep working on the article based on your recommendations and re-submit once I feel it fulfils all relevant criteria. Best, Uetli Ibex (talk) 14:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi KylieTastic. You provided me with helpful tips when I first submitted a draft of my article back in June. I've re-submitted my amended draft a few days later and assigned the article to two Wikipedia projects to highlight the content to potential reviewers. I fully appreciate that the review and approval of articles does take its time, but since submissions aren't reviewed in chronological order, I was wondering if there is anything else I can do to increase the chances of the article getting reviewed? Is there a chance for articles to "fall between the cracks", i.e. are there articles that simply don't get reviewed, even after months? Or will drafts that haven't been reviewed get deleted at some point? Best regards, Uetli Ibex (talk) 10:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Uetli Ibex sorry but I don't really know of anything else that can help. With some topics you can find editors/reviewers with an interest in the topic, but I doubt that in this case. Unfortunately the backlog has been growing as the number of volunteer reviewers has decreased, and some of the most active reviewers stopped or reduced their reviewing (myself included). It's depressing to see the backlog grow and good faith submissions take so long but this is the issues with systems that require appropriate people to find the project and volunteer. You could ask at the Teahouse, or use the links on the decline/submit notices for help. On the slightly good news no articles don't just get missed once submitted as it will be in the  outstanding submissions and some will use the Category:AfC pending submissions by age to find the oldest. We had got it down to only a few waiting up to 5 weeks, but now it's up to 2 months! Drafts only get deleted after not being edited for 6 months and a warning notice is posted to the creator first anyway. It sucks that so many people have to wait so long... but I just don't have the time or state of mind at the moment... hopefully things we get much better again post Covid! But it's always worth asking at the Teahouse or other links (help desk, live help). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your reply, KylieTastic. I fully understand if editors have other things to focus on during these times. I can also imagine that in the current climate of polarisation and politicisation, it must be quite a tedious job to keep existing Wikipedia articles objective and unbiased. And I truly hope Wikipedia will stay true to its purpose. Again, thanks for your answer and your time. Uetli Ibex (talk) 07:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jakob Stott (August 31)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kvng was:

The comment the reviewer left 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:Jakob Stott and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Jakob Stott, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * 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:Jakob_Stott Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kvng&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Jakob_Stott reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~Kvng (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Jakob Stott
Hello, Uetli Ibex. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Jakob Stott, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 05:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Jakob Stott


Hello, Uetli Ibex. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jakob Stott".

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! 23:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)