Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback/Archive6

Feedback from Tara1975 (3 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * with in a day


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no, thanks!

Feedback from Jonsweaver (17 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ? No, I found the documentation on issues like References and Neutrality hard to follow. I am a web developer and worked for software companies-I have experience following documentation. I appreciated the reviewers efforts, but in several attempts was declined without any clear direction. Frankly I felt that it was more subjective than following clear editorial guidelines. Once the article was accepted, it was given a C-grade - when I looked at the C-grade example, there was one reference in the example article. My article has 14 references from newspapers and professional websites. I don't understand the grading system and I don't understand what I can do to improve the article.

The article was quickly declined a few times without effective comments until a senior editor stepped in and told the original reviewer that he/she needed to completely read articles before declining. It's confusing to have work declined by people not following procedures.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? Editorial guidelines need to include examples and when an article is declined it would be helpful to offer specific reasons with examples of why it's declined and how it could be improved. Generalities and broad statements are not helpful at all.

Feedback from Robhaywood10 (22 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes, but took a bit of getting used to.

Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?

I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Robhaywood10 (22 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes, but took a bit of getting used to.

Impressively quickly. And the help was very very useful indeed. The editors were extremely well informed and very helpful.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?

I wonder if there's an easier 'trouble shooting' page that could help first time users? I'm still unsure how to create connections between articles and pages...
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Rkhaarma (28 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes. It was very helpful.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Within a few days.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes. I submitted my article for review through WikiProject Articles for Creation because I am new to this and I wanted to make sure I had followed all of Wikipedia's guidelines for posting, including citing verifiable sources and neutral point of view. When the article was submitted and reviewed, it was found to be acceptable. The article was approved with some edits and was posted to Wikipedia. It was edited a few more times and continued to improve along the way. But then, suddenly, an alert was added to the article that it is not written in neutral point of view. Now, the alert is threatening deletion of the article. My suggestion would be that if the article is approved by the WikiProject Articles for Creation, there should be a way to note that it does in fact meet Wikipedia's guidelines. Thanks for letting me provide feedback.Rkhaarma (talk) 16:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Heisler57 (29 January 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * very quickly, supportive community


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Several of us made revisions to improve the article -- addition of many more references (online and print), stylistic improvements, better, tighter organization showing range of contribution in this bio. We feel that it can now be upgraded from a C rating to a B rating (compared to others in that category); how do we go ahead and get it re-evaluated for upgrade January, 29, 2011 Heisler57 (talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Heisler57Heisler57 (talk) 06:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Savajr (16 February 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * not at all


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * very fast


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * not yet

Feedback from Aakheperure (24 February 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * What instructions?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Very fast


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Actually have a process? I was told on the channel to put the template on after I tried to get feedback (unsuccessfully) for my article. Then the talk tells me to do something else? I have no idea how to do this properly.

Feedback from MeredithIraymond (26 February 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * I understand that my article needs some work. As this is the first time that I have contributed to Wikipedia, I am finding it a little difficult to understand exactly what I need to do.  Although the resources are quite complete, I am in a bit of information overload as well.

For example, my article was listed as a C-Class. I see the grading scheme but am unclear if I need to add additional references, have too much supplemental information or not enough, or if my article is expressing bias or opinion. I took a couple approved sample pages and tried to mirror the flow of content from those. Any direction here would be greatly appreciated.

Secondly, there was a not that as I am a logged in user, I can create articles in another way. I did not understand what that was saying. Clarification would be very helpful.

Thank you for your time.

Feedback from Michael P. Barnett (7 March 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * completely


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * astonishingly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * cannot think of any -- I think it is very wise for WK to urge people not to write new articles until gaining adequate experience editing existing articles.

I have some questions as a follow up about how to make the time I can spend on WK most useful. The office in which I worked from 1953--1955 was next door to Macfarlane's, and he spoke to me many times each week. The organizational relationship was informal, and one of my two main activities was assigned and followed closely by him personally. So I was a bit upset to find no article for any member of the "hierarchy" -- Leo Pincherle (my immediate supervisor), George Macfarlane, R.A. Smith, W.J.Richards (the Director who became a Companion of the Order of the Bath) -- who really were notable. I am 82. Likewise, from my days at King's College London, there are several faculty who became FRS without articles, and likewise my wife remembers several of the dons at Girton she thinks merit articles. The tension for us is between cluttering WK with articles that are too flimsy and time running out on us. If it is not anti-social to do articles about as long as what I did today for George Macfarlane, then I will press on with more, and hope I can find some students willing to dig for more using search tools I can advise on. (I don't have any students of my own these days, but I may find a class of article that will find volunteers)

Thanks Michael P. Barnett (talk) 04:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Veteranoak (8 March 2011)
I still can't see how to change the category of the pictures after they have been uploaded.
 * Did you find the instructions clear ?

Taking into account the fact that your reviewers are all volunteers and that they probably have many other papers to work through, I found that they gave me their assessment very quickly.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Thank you for the comments on my article which I found to be fair and constructive. I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and I have a steep learning curve. I hope to progessively improve the article and to make additions and corrections to the text.

One notable problem that I have is with the title that has been assigned to my contribution. This is 'Stockway North Nature Reserve', but this refers to only one of the items in the article, so it is rather misleading. The title that I gave it on submission was 'The Natural Environment in and around Nailsea' which relates to all of the sections of the article. Is it possible to revert to this title? Is there any way that I, as a user, can do this myself. I would be grateful to have your guidance on this.Veteranoak (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Alpha Quadrant has replied on this user's talk page. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:14, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from George Dance (22 March 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes. I kept them open in a separate window in case I had trouble, but that wasn't necessary.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Well under 24 hours.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No. I'd like to know more about why specifically my article got the grade it did, but I don't know how to accomplish that -- I don't think the approver should have the onus of having to explain him or herself.

Feedback from Saharnsaleem (25 March 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Not really. It was 6 form a scale of 1 to 10.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Very quickly within an hour or so

The editing process was very useful experience. You have great reviewers such as (Armbrust) who did a great job in directing me to useful links and supporting me in a professional friendly way. Thanks for this great place, people, and service. (Saharnsaleem (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC))
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * The editing system is very confusing. Please make it more user-friendly with more illustrations and templates. Simplify it to be similar to Word or other popular system.

Feedback from Nobelovac (31 March 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * The last review of my article was really fast.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * It is clear that the reviewers receive every day a great number of articles, but I think that the process of preparing an article would be significantly accelerated if a more experienced administrators assist the editors in finding some credible sources of information.

Feedback from Sue Boller (13 April 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Could you give me some feedback on why there is a Dead End symbol on our entry for National Families in Action after the article was approved by your editors? What should we do next to have this symbol removed?

Thanks.

Feedback from Alexx04 (21 May 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Ahmadfaisalsidiqi (7 July 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * yeah the content is too clear and understandable, I really appreciate.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * My last submission which was about Manava Baharati India International School was reviewed and created within one hour, it is really nice.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Nothing but just want to thank you for such a wonderful work you did and I personally highly appreciate it, God Bless you

Feedback from Ilovesurfing (5 August 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Instructions were clear and when I had problems, live help was great.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Generally within the day. The last one took 2 days.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * N/A

Feedback from Anjula rasanga (22 August 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Thank you for approving my article. To be honest the instructions are not that clear. But manageable.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Very quickly I must say. Under 24 hours. Thank you!


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Be a bit more user friendly in the instructions sections. Video tutorial would help a lot, like in Google products.

Feedback from Senra (14 October 2011)
I assisted the (relatively) new user after he followed the WikiProject Articles for creation process and his article  has since been nominated as a DYK candidate. I call this a good result for your procedure --Senra (Talk) 18:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Shalini61290 (18 October 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * yes the instructions have been very clear.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * my submission was reviewed and accepted within two days.it was very fast.

Thanks for all your help. I would be happy if I get some more help on creating side charts and inserting pictures and graphs.--Shalini61290 (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I found the process very clear, I would really like to contribute to wikipedia by editing more articles.

Feedback from 109.155.134.117 (22 October 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Very quick


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Mis-spelling in title got overlooked, but very easy to do that. Reviewer was very helpful.

Over all very quick and easy. Thanks. 109.155.134.117 (talk) 09:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from 96.49.140.106 (Wed 26 Oct, 12:36 am)
medi eval = medical evaluation Please consider the special attention that should be featured for "medieval" the concept, bearing the status quo of file edit "shorthand", suddenly reminded that it (the 'word' is actually a file sorting edit that specifies "medical evaluation", with all of the following 'probing the annuls of personal/personnel files maintained. Big changes, small file name size.  I guess size, or length, or character enumerate matter(s) very much.

If you care to respond, my e-mail is at (Redacted). I realize that this is a rather large, hefty, left handed lob from the middle of nowhere (which, by the way, changes to 'now here',simply by spacing the word correctly, at the w), so I don't really expect to make too much of a difference initially, but it would be really very much appreciated if you could let me know what your thoughts or reaction is... ~shade brisance~
 * radically different*

Feedback from Brand of Amber (4 November 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Extremely. Especially the file upload process.  There has to be a way to fit all of the relevant instructions onto a single page, and to clean up the 1000's of codes into a manageable few.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Quite quickly, however it was always reviewed by the same person. After a while I honestly gave up trying to satisfy this person's standards of perfection.  Thanks to 'Sceptre' for stepping in and just publishing the damn thing.  This article has been better than MOST on wiki, for several revisions now...


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Don't let the same reviewer review an article twice.

Feedback from CAWylie (20 November 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * At first, no but the Live Chat help is a life saver!
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Within a few hours, and that was my first!
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * What I don't like is the quickness of people to "speedy delete." I had to be away from another article for a while, left an edit note that I wasn't finished and it was deleted while I was gone. I think there should at least be a day's wait for anyone to recommend deletion.  Not all of us have the information at hand to create articles.  That ruined Wiki for me.

The great auk is not extinct

Feedback from AlanPerry (23 November 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * Sort of. My article submission still has a "lack of references" warning, which is odd since almost every sentence has a reference.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * It took more than a week.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Make it easier to ask questions. The help links weren't helpful to the questions that I was looking for help with and there never seemed to be anyone at home on chat.
 * I removed the maintain box. User HallowsAG (the accepter) missed to remove it. mabdul 23:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Bgillcalgary (26 November 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear ?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Little glitch: I was told "The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page." but the link to the talk page says it doesn't exist...


 * I added the WP:WikiProject to the talkpage. Thanks for reporting. mabdul 00:05, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, it might be possible that you are seeing an old cached version the page. Try to bypass your browser cache! mabdul 00:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from LCSDFW (27 November 2011)
I didn't realize that I wouldn't be able to edit the first section later. I would like to change the wording a little, but is that possible or not? Probably it's a good idea to warn people that that part will not be editable later.


 * Similar to the image on the right, you should click at the "edit"-link displayed at the top (between Read and History) to get the whole page (including the lead) in the edit-field. mabdul 00:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC)



Feedback from 72.218.90.14 (27 November 2011)
No Slow Make easier and more understandable instructions
 * Did you find the instructions clear ?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed ?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 99.164.78.31 (29 November 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, it was easy to understand the prompts and guidlines.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * My submission was not reveiewed because I could not find enough reliable sources.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Perhaps there should be a way to request a source search to find reliable sources?

feedback from unknown

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * it review fast


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no i dont

Feedback from Cchlouber (2 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Not really. They are really confusing and not very straight forward.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * My submission was reviewed very quickly. Within a day.


 * Is it possible to move my article for creation to an actual wikipedia article? I cannot figure out how to do this.
 * I restored the submission template, which was vandalized. mabdul 11:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from Strickly bmx (3 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * idk


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * faster

Feedback from Kromholz (4 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Needs an easily-findable "button" for creating stubs.
 * You need to learn our copyright policy better first. Then I might show you a faster way. mabdul 11:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Feedback from 219.89.225.200 (4 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * have a list to just write what is needed.

Feedback from 2.51.61.13 (4 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?

yes no
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 86.24.57.242 (4 December 2011)
Awsome!

Maxime Boulinguez

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, but not really helpful


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I don't know yet..


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Instructions on how to make a page and on how to write information to the person/place or thing.

Feedback from 65.68.14.2 (6 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * hell no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * not quick enough


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * ya dont make it so dumb :P

Feedback from Crazybgm13 (6 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * In about 30 mins

Make it a bit more simpil
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 199.250.13.98 (7 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Robcw (10 December 2011)
Yes I thought the reviewer was firm but fair Quite quickly considering volunteer process Give key reviewers of medical articles free access to journals
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 180.215.162.227 (10 December 2011)
yes very fast no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

AdBadshah Pakistan's 1st Auto Rickshaw Advertiser (12 December 2011)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 99.25.151.244 (12 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Really fast

No
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 112.135.235.198 (14 December 2011)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * yes

yes
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Karlen91 (14 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, all instructions are clear and easy to understand.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * The administrators answer to my question very quickly and help me to submit my article very quickly.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * NO, all is ok.

Feedback from 122.164.173.76 (15 December 2011)
yes 10 years;Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

Feedback from 168.103.182.71 (16 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 108.206.124.111 (16 December 2011)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

10s
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed10s
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no

Feedback from 79.123.77.148 (17 December 2011)
This article is actually a review of me No just random asdf movie is good

Feedback from 69.140.192.87 (17 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * yes


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * yes

Feedback from 70.76.43.104 (18 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes They Were Clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I'm Not Sure'


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Not really!'

Feedback from 173.226.0.114 (20 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, but since I am new to the process, it takes time.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Fairly quickly, about 20 to 30 minutes, but once Chzz took over, it was super fast. The person went beyond what I hoped for and I thank Chzz for his time.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * The format with instructions is hard to read. I noticed users just asking "Can anyone help me?" and not writing what their issue is.

Kaushal Kumar

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * don't know


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * if any one id editing any page ,please make sure the content what they have edited is correct.

Feedback from 68.60.135.224 (23 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

a couple of minutes
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no

Feedback from 27.251.106.58 (25 December 2011)
Did you find the instructions clear? Yes

How quickly was your submission reviewed? few minitues

Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? No

Feedback from 24.181.86.104 (25 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No I didnt, Thank You For Asking


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I Really Dont Know


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes Maybe you should just let people click a certain page and when you click it you can go ahead and start writing about something.

Feedback from Meowsi34 (27 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes

Pretty fast No
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 92.40.193.106 (29 December 2011)
yes 5 mins no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 24.211.159.43 (29 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yeah


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * osl

no
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

102 boys

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yeah


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * osl

no
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 141.0.10.109 (29 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no

Feedback from 24.13.225.57 (30 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No

Feedback from 31.53.130.90 (31 December 2011)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

no
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?