Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2016 November 18

= November 18 =

00:10:53, 18 November 2016 review of submission by Joanna Buckley
Hello, I am just enquiring about a draft article that I submitted for review on 24/10/16 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Robert_Owen_(artist) ), at that time there had been a note saying there were 1,174 articles in line waiting for review and to expect 2-3 weeks approx. I noticed that there are now 928 articles waiting in line 4 weeks later at 18/11/16.. Can you advise me if this is correct and the lead time for review is going to be much longer than expected? I am just checking to make sure that there hasn't been some mistake, as this is my first article and I am not familiar with the process. Many thanks, Joanna Joanna Buckley (talk) 00:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Joanna Buckley (talk) 00:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Joanna. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Right now, the review queue is extremely backlogged and we are currently working through drafts that were submitted some three weeks earlier than yours.  I think it is reasonable to expect another two-week delay in looking at your submission.  We regret the delay and thank you for your continued patience.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:49, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

01:40:25, 18 November 2016 review of submission by Sugda98
I want to make an article i am working on look nicer. How can I put pictures in the article. the copyright rules are very confusing and i am unsure how to get all of that info from a picture i found on the internet. thank you. Sugda98 (talk)sugda98 Sugda98 (talk) 01:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Sugda98. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  The procedure for uploading images, as well as the copyright rules surrounding them, can seem difficult at first.  You might want to take a look at WP:Uploading images, which is our introduction to the process.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

11:51:31, 18 November 2016 review of submission by Bookslaidbare
I have added additional links to the page but got a note that the edit was unconstructive ,I am not sure that can be so, surely any additional material is a constructive addition. I cant even re-submit, I cant understand why it is proving to be so difficult to edit and update a page for submission. It was refused as the reviewer said the person wasn't notable, we asked the man himself to provide links to interviews etc and those are the links I have uploaded, or at least tried to. Can i assume that this latest set back is indication that any submission about him will be rejected because I cannot fathom what exactly you are willing to accept.I have removed links that were indicated as causing an issue but still completely lost as to what teh expectations are now. Can you please explain what is going on and why?
 * Hello, Bookslaidbare. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Where did you get that note telling you that your edit was unconstructive?  NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Interviews are not considered independent sources and do not establish notability. The draft has no references.  The draft is also inconsistently formatted.  The draft is also, to use Wikipedia terminology, not written in a formal neutral style.  You will need independent sources (not interviews) and to rewrite the existing draft.  I don't see the comment about a link.  Read the external link policy, which will say to put any external links in a section at the end of the draft, and that external links do not take the place of independent sources.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

15:56:49, 18 November 2016 review of submission by Davinaya
Hello! I resubmitted an article for review more than 4 weeks ago but still I haven't got an answer. It was rejected before on October 13th. I wonder if the article still has chances to be reviewed and published. I appreciate your comments. Thank you.

Davinaya (talk) 15:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Davinaya. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Right now, the review queue is extremely backlogged and we are currently working through drafts that were submitted some two weeks earlier than yours.  I think it is reasonable to expect another one- or two-week delay in looking at your submission.  We regret the delay and thank you for your continued patience.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I accepted it. Thank you.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

16:21:55, 18 November 2016 review of submission by WaqasT
I had updated the article based on the suggestions of the people on this help page and then resubmitted it for a review. More than three weeks later, it's still under review. Can I get any idea when it will be reviewed?
 * Hello, WaqasT. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Right now, the review queue is extremely backlogged and we are currently working through drafts that were submitted some two weeks earlier than yours.  I think it is reasonable to expect another one- or two-week delay in looking at your submission.  We regret the delay and thank you for your continued patience.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:32, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

20:20:20, 18 November 2016 review of submission by 69.120.80.240
Hi, Might you be able to tell me when this article will be reviewed? Thank you for your time. Laura

69.120.80.240 (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 69.120.80.240 (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, Laura. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia.  Right now, the review queue is extremely backlogged and we are currently working through drafts that were submitted some ten days earlier than yours.  I think it is reasonable to expect another one- or two-week delay in looking at your submission.  We regret the delay and thank you for your continued patience.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)