Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback/Archive 11

Feedback from 116.203.230.125 (3 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

I want to add my Native village "HORALPATTI".
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 68.107.134.74 (6 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No, but I just ignored them. Wikipedia instructions are so long-winded, convoluted, and involved that nobody reads them, anyhow.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * A couple of hours. I only submit encyclopedic, neutral and well-referenced AFCs, and mine don't tend to languish in the queue. It's not like there are article-creation emergencies, though, so time doesn't really matter.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * You should include a spot for necessary redirects in the main form, instead of requiring, as it is now, for the IP user to also request redirects. I sometimes remember to put the redirect requests in the form, but I forgot this time.
 * --68.107.134.74 (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from DGG (18 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * this really needs advice to use  a user sandbox page  rather than a user subpage for drafts --there are people moving all such  user subpages  to AfC -- I'm myself not sure its a good idea, but it's the current state of things.  DGG ( talk ) 00:49, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from Fechu (18 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Too quick, perhaps too much quick


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * First I am about to send a supporting source, full castlist, the flm plot, and a review of Nkwocha. Secondly, let us not make reliable source requirement very subjective; let's use the same standard for all. I saw zach Orji without any reference, and his profile was approved. I can mention a lot more. Yet my submission was refused 3 three, because it had interview and standard newspaper report.

Feedback from Milnehouse (22 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * It is unclear how to proceed to step 3 from this page.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Change the wording of the options presented to move forward in the tutorial, or highlight the option that moves to the next step (could also be done on other pages)

Feedback from Anne Delong (25 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Instructions on how to submit were clear. I had to ask for help to get my sandbox back after the article was accepted.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * My article was reviewed and rejected quickly the first time, because after the reviewing contest the queue was short. After improving it and resubmitted I waited several days and my article was only 1/3 of the way to the top of the list. Not completely a bad idea, though, because I had time to think of more ways to improve it and ask some questions at the teahouse. Also, while waiting for a review I read some of the other new articles, learned a few things, and made some obvious edits.  A user at the teahouse took pity on me and accepted the article at that point, so I don't know how long it would have taken to get to the head of the queue.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Well, of course, it would be nice not to have to wait so long, but since these are volunteers you have little control over that.
 * I come across the Template:AFC statistics page by accident and found it quite interesting, since it showed a little of what was going on in the queue and helped me to understand the process. Maybe this could be pointed out to new submitters.
 * I know this may seem silly, but when the wait is long it is comforting to know that an article is moving up the queue. Would it be hard to change the "Category:Pending AfC submissions" page to have numbered items instead of bullets?

Thanks for the opportunity to respond. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 21:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from 92.17.123.173 (26 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?very clear,accurate and concise.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?a short time and duration


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

Feedback from JoeBlogsE14 (29 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * it initially took me some time to get to grips with the writing format but clear instructions were avaialable all over the Wikipedia Network so with a bit or perseverance and some trial and error I managed to work it out...


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * from inital submision to final creation of the page (with one rejection) took less than three weeks (which I reckon is pretty good)


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * not off the top of my head.

Feedback from 36hourblock (30 January 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, just fine.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not bad, I wasn't in a hurry.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Not really,but thanks for asking.

Feedback from Heisler57 (3 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

I am editing the entry on 'Norman Adler' and having trouble with the reference section. Can someone help 'clean it up'; can't seem to get it right ...    ^ "Error: no |title= specified when using Cite web". http://www.philomathean.org/alumni/philograds/honorary-members/. Retrieved 2011-01-29 Philomathean Society.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

{Template:Http://www.philomathean.org/alumni/philograds/honorary-members/

thanks

Feedback from Anne Delong (8 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, but I've done this before.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * After nine days, my page was about 190 on the list, and then Xyphoid moved my submission to article space. I'm not sure how long it would have taken if I'd had to wait until it hit the top of the list, but maybe another two days.

&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * It would be nice if the list of submissions could be numbered instead of bulleted.
 * I checked my Talk page, and I didn't get any kind of message when my article entered the queue. A lot of articles seem to enter the queue in bad condition.  The main problems seem to be self-promotion, material copied from a web site, and lack of references.  Would it be hard to send each submitter a standard message with a thanks for submitting, Please be aware that your article will not be accepted if it has one of the following common problems .............  While you are waiting for a reviewer, please review your own article for these problems and adjust it accordingly; if you need help fixing it up visit the help page. If after reading this you would like to withdraw your submission, here's how..... (The queue would be shorter if people didn't have to resubmit.  Also the wait will seem shorter if you have something to do while waiting.)

Feedback from 98.162.225.89 (9 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * 10-25 minutes after my lunchtime

Feedback from 2602:306:CD3C:580:58EA:2BE5:E50C:9287 (10 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?wordy and prologated;creating ambiguiety


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?there should be a catagory for Phases or articles inclusion based upon importance to society.

Mohammad Mustafa safi

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


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


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

Feedback from 203.39.81.18 (22 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

The insrtuctions are crap, that bascically go round in circles without allowing you to get anything done.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Kk007gaurav (23 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * not sure


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * please increase your review time

Feedback from Aztar Press (24 February 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes and the editors were extremely helpful and patient


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I first submitted on 5/12/2012 and it was finally approved today 24/2/2013 - but the delays were because of resubmission errors I made, so the time delay is not a true reflection.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Just want to say thanks to the editors for their help.

Aztar Press (talk) 17:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from 70.196.64.123 (6 March 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed? can the the barbra Streisand children page be created


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 101.58.162.144 (9 March 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

a certificate error is occuring while i am opening gmail a/c and no solution is found
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from KINGKAMEHAMEHAVI4ever (10 March 2013)
the instructions are clear precise and to the point quickly faster then time nope i would say more interaction with the world and allow them to post anything fun and interesting stories.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Silkroader (12 March 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * The instructions were very clear in most places. Sometimes I got confused because there are so many things I didn't know (and my lack of knowledge is still huge).  I would read the instruction until I saw a link and then leave the main article to follow it up. Then, on that second page, I'd find another link that I needed to follow up, and so on.  Sometimes I simply could not get back to the page I began on and would end up feeling lost.  On the other hand, the links are there and the learning just goes on and on -- which is encouraging.  I did not find dead ends; I just found so many links to follow until I lost track of where I ought to be.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Within 2 weeks -- amazing!


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Is there any method of color-coding so people like me can see where we have been? Sometimes the link I clicked led back to something I had read and understood, so I'd realize too late that I should have ignored that link. Perhaps the color would apply to that session only, so that a new session would have to be re-colored by the user. If they can't remember what was already explored in the previous session, then advice to take better notes might help.

Feedback from 5.0.65.249 (15 March 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I am wondering if you could possibly help find the real meanning of " election- eve"

Feedback from 196.222.2.10 (28 March 2013)
yyyyyyyyyouaregoooooood

Feedback from Maria.orciuoli (2 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * totally! But I still have problems in understanding how to use the talk page to communicate with wikipedia community.(Nevertheless I'm quite new; I think I just need to get used to it)


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It took a while, but I understood that there were some problems due to the huge amount of submitted articles :)


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No worries! just keep "contributing" :)

Maria.orciuoli (talk) 08:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from Richardbuck53 (7 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

I give up! Have you ever heard of the 'kiss' principle?



Feedback from Sarjayfuentes (10 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * let my article be public

Feedback from 59.182.171.202 (17 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * NO


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * NOT REVIEWED

I WANT Mumbai B (Asmita Marathi Programme) 558: AVAILABLE ON RADIO STATIONS ACCESSIBLE FROM NETWORK
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 180.215.179.251 (21 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * 2 sec


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

Feedback from Arielpalioc (23 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very Quick


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

Feedback from 86.121.167.186 (24 April 2013)

 * 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 80.135.143.228 (24 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No. Somewhere in the process WP suggested that I can submit a proposal for an article, instead of writing it down myself. I did not find where I can do that, or at least not as an anonymous user.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I didn't submit anything, because of this.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Instructions could be imho much clearer, and also, the instructions or the process could be changed until they match.

Feedback from 31.115.45.138 (28 April 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Not totally clear but some useful information when you stumble across how to create your in article


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It has not been reviewed. I am an ex professional football player from the UK who wishes to write a factual career biography.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes allow people to put up biographies especially for sports players and their factual career stats.

Feedback from Sugathadasa (2 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Took a couple of weeks

Cheers!Sugathadasa (talk) 02:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Maybe a template for articles would make it easier to create. Sort of like a form to fill in. Just an idea.

Feedback from 217.165.17.53 (7 May 2013)
Yes Easy Not now
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 206.219.175.151 (14 May 2013)
yeah way too quick no sir/ma'am
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 41.190.3.30 (17 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

Thanks for making the Article Oyin-Akoko a reality. However, please note that the hyphen between Oyin and Akoko should have been omitted as searcher on the web would not normally include the hyphen. Once again I am proud of Wiki and all that have contributed to making my first major contribution a reality, a stimulant to make many more useful contributions.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Musicle (19 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Well, I actually had to hire someone to do it all.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Considering your enormous backlog, I have no complaints.

I deeply appreciate the reviewer's experienced attention. And I would be immediately responsive to the reviewer's specifically identifying for me what might have stood out as needing the most attention. I can also see where inserting 'hidden red marks' might pose mechanical problems.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I understand the Start status for "Stanley Jungleib" and will work to strengthen external refs on the assumption the writing itself isn't the issue.

As a novice, I'm unclear how to respond directly to the reviewer. I don't need think I need to page a public question or anything.

Musicle (talk) 22:01, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from 201.141.90.88 (21 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * quick


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

Feedback from IT-syscon (24 May 2013)
Yes. I tried to follow the instructions. For the citation number, I included the link to google scholar page as the citation number is changing over time.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 75.150.209.73 (30 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?

10 seconds
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Prtik4u (31 May 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * within minutes


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no, the process is very good and easy.

Feedback from Rpsce (4 June 2013)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 74.44.179.248 (10 June 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

I didn't write one I didn't write one
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Lem-nic (11 June 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

In the sentence "Remember that not every subject in the world meets the notability criteria – some that don't might do so in future, and some (probably) never will.", I suggest we change the "probably" in brackets to a "possibly" in brackets, it sounds more polite.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Otherocketman (19 June 2013)
Yes!
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

Very fast.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

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

Feedback from Prof bed (26 June 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Around 3 or 4 days


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I had a problem after writing the article, being able to submit it. I couldnt work out what I was doing wrong. I went to the help page where a user very kindly and without fuss submitted it for me instead. My article was approved first time and the user made a couple of slight amendments to tidy it up. Thanks to all those who helped me. This was very much a positive Wikipedia experience and look forward now to having created 1 article, creating some more.

Feedback from OxieB (27 June 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes. Thank all of you for the work you put in to review and edit the essay. There is more content to come. This is the start.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It took about 2 weeks. I checked my queue status several times and just 2 days ago there were 960 essays ahead of me. I expected to wait a month.

Pictures on Wikipedia go into public domain. A self portrait will be provided.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * None that I can think of. FYI: the absence of pictures is due to copyright.

OxieB (talk) 20:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from Emmy nimme (1 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

I don't get how to do a bio page on myself will you help please
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from KirbykoMusicLLC (7 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * 50/50 on this one. I thought that I met most of the "notability for musicians" criteria but I had a tough time deciphering which sources were problematic, and whether or not television appearances counted, or legitimate IMDB credits for TV shows and movies. I did try the live help, where they confirmed that IMDB is not considered a source. I wonder if it's worthwhile to link to a cheat-sheet of some kind specific to musicians or entertainers about which sources (like IMDb, for example, which is key in my industry) are considered valid sources as "proof" or evidence of a claim made on Wikipedia.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Surprisingly quickly! Revisions were addressed quickly as well.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Jackquigan (8 July 2013)

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


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

probably some more specifics on what is required to meet criteria
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Praj0148 (13 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Instructions are clear. No doubt. But it is very hard to find out the instructions at initial stage for new users.

But I did not understand: 1. who are the reviewers? What are their names? For example, I did not understand the reviewer name "RadioFan" who checked my article "Rajan Raje" third time. 2. Can I talk to the reviewer or not? If yes, what is the process? It is better if I can chat with reviewer regarding the comments given.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Review process is very vey fast that I had thought. I appreciate Wikipedia's quick action.

My article "Rajan Raje" is now accepted. But I want to know, 1. Do the reviewers never check grammatical mistakes in the article? In my article, some grammatical mistakes I found evenif the article "Rajan             Raje" was accepted. 2. What they check exactly? 3. I have a question, if any user wants to spoil my article, what is the action taken by wikipedia? How does Wikipedia know that some stuff from wikipedia is deleted or added or disturbed in the article? If the new stuff added which is not relevant, do you delete it immediately? If any sentence or paragraph is deleted by any user, does Wikipedia bring the previous stuff again? If any user is irritating frequntly to my article, can I take a legal action against him?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Please provide the rules and regulations at your instruction page regarding below questions:

Feedback from 123.237.22.165 (16 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very soon


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

Feedback from 108.241.73.189 (16 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

stop Wikipedia users form changing and articles that they now nothing about. yall should make them answer questions about the     subject they are trying to change. because some wikipedia users make changes to articles that they know nothing about. Wikipedia users that don't like a type of music or dance will try to give anybody looking for that subject the wrong information sometimes they try to put a protect on the wrong information just to mess up and article to make people that are interest in article not like the subject they they are researching.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 108.241.73.189 (16 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

stop Wikipedia users form changing and articles that they know nothing about. yall should make them answer questions about the     subject they are trying to change. because some wikipedia users make changes to articles that they know nothing about. i will give and 1 examples of what i am talking about. A wikipedia users that don't like a type of music or dance will try to give anybody looking for that subject the wrong information sometimes they try to put a protect on the wrong information just to mess up and article to make people that are interest in article not like the subject they are researching or they will get a article delete just because they don't like it. Example 2. They put alot of other subjects on the article to make people look at there article
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 77.71.220.14 (17 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very fast


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

Feedback from 41.203.65.171 (28 July 2013) jesmion

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * yes

41.203.65.171 (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * yes

Feedback from 172.242.40.94 (30 July 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * don't make so hard for new users

Feedback from APerson (2 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * As a relatively experienced editor, I just wanted to see what this new-fangled thing everyone called the "Article Wizard" was.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * The buttons need some sort of rollover style. Otherwise, great!

Feedback from Kovinmel (5 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

can i insert the college logo (taken from the college official website) in its infobox
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 69.244.215.144 (13 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

20 seconds at least
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * nope

Feedback from Visualchillout (17 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No - not at all


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I can't see how to submit

Yes - add clear instructions on how to add new phrases/articles!
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Nemanja Radinovic (19.08.2013)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * quickly

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

Feedback from 168.167.93.245 (21 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * 30seconds


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * faster links and clearer instructions please.

Feedback from Teun Teunis (27 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * In a week, thanks!


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Send an email if submission is declined, I found out about it by checking the website
 * My article was declined because of inadequate references, while all references were (correctly) cited medical journals. I had to go to the Wiki Medicine talk page to request a new reviewer (who accepted my article within an hour, without any changes to the references). It would be great if I could explain to the first reviewer why my references were sound; to prevent this from happening again.

Feedback from AmusingMuse (28 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * The first time, within 24 hours. I was amazed how fast. It was initially rejected with specific clear instructions on needed improvements. I made those just as fast and resubmitted. Here is where the process became murky for me as a first time article-creator. I continued to see the Aug 8 rejection message at the top of the page. I found a way to reply after I had followed the directions (essentially for more and better references) and resubmitted. But my response was not placed at the top near the first editors message. I did see the yellow box at the end of the article stating that it was waiting for review. The hierarchy seemed odd to me, placing the older rejection message prominently on top and the newer 'waiting for review' message at the very bottom. This was so confusing to me that I entered a chat for support. The volunteers I communicated with were helpful and very quick.

I suggest that you have a consistent hierarchy of messages as well. (see above) Thanks!! You are all awesome and I love Wikipedia!
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes, allow an equal back and forth communication between creators and reviewers, with dated entries. Thanks for requesting feedback on the process.

Feedback from Royale.heart (28 August 2013)
Yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I would like to invite more people to make it a much better article. I am a beginner. I need to learn a lot.

Feedback from 69.248.111.33 (30 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 177.106.99.142 (30 August 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes,to me cancer this is an incontavel celulas that crescem desordenadamente no corpo do individuo e por ser incontaveis naum era nem retirado antigamente nem se mexia naum havia tratamento pois se mexer aumentaria o numero de celulas mais ainda.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * not very quickily


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * to improve the processes read more in the site www.einstein.edu in philadelphia united states metastases existem em todo ser humano porem algumas desenvolvem outras naum quimioterapia e radioterapia para ca maligno naum adianta fazer soh por milagre de Deus mesmo eu jah tomei bactrin com ranitidina por sete dias mas ha casos que se tem que ficar de quarentena 40 dias repouso absoluto.

Feedback from Mabdul (11 September 2013)
yes i do.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

that is very quickly.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

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

Feedback from 68.172.246.163 (15 September 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear? No


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed? I couldn't submit, the wizzard didn't have a feild for my subject.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process? Yes sometimes there are terms in history for persons or people who you want to write about. I wanted to write about the history of the white rapper. But the wizzard didn't allow me to write it. Frustrating

Feedback from 41.206.11.3 (22 September 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * exactly


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very quickly

41.206.11.3 (talk) 23:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * tolerance

Feedback from Royale.heart (25 September 2013)
Yes 22 days Yes I invite all Wikipedia editors to improve this article. I have learnt a lot and would like to learn more as Wikipedia is endless. Initially I was not knowing much. But now I am gaining ample of knowledge about Wikipedia and will soon would like to publish more article which are as per Wikipedia guidelines.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 71.40.70.250 (26 September 2013)
Ok
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes

quik
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no

Feedback from 59.178.201.32 (3 October 2013)
I've attached the copied page here below. I wanted to submit on Daily Allowance(D.A.) and Travel Allowance (T.A) These allowances are provided to people on travel, esp. in NGOs. The Daily allowance is the food allowance to a prescribed limit of 250/300/500 etc. per day while travelling on official duty to outstations, as per the designation and eligibility. The travel allowance is provide to people who travel to outstations on official duty, to a prescribed limit of 500/1000/1500 etc. per day, as per the category of designation and eligibility per day. This differs for every NGO according to the provision fixed by the officials.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes your instructions are clear. But they don't yield any positive results. You've given some instructions. After following the instructions, at the end I find that "this wizard is under active development" "please leave your comments" etc.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * You've no provision to submit the article.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes. You may create a column to provide the article/ write-up by any individual. Then you may review and add it in your dictionary after finding out about the validity and authenticity according to your procedures.

I've attached your process of instruction which yield no positive outcome.

No, my proposed article doesn't already exist on Wikipedia (continue with the wizard) I'm writing about a new phrase/word I want to learn more about using Wikipedia I want to learn more about writing articles I want to learn more about neologisms. This wizard is under active development. click here to give feedback Thank you.

This is what I got from your website. Francis K. National Coordinator Training. Compassion for India - NGO

Feedback from 113.162.145.175 (10 October 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * yes

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

Feedback from HCGiese (11 October 2013)
to discover how to get the best article up.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * It was hard and time-consuming for the novice user


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * A couple of weeks-- not bad.

to help get up the best possible article and is easy to communicate with, person to person. At the moment, the anonymity of editors who swoop in to make needless changes, bots, boxes that pop up above and below the article giving instructions and a general sense of noise and activity that isn't really focused, is hampering what should be a simple process of sharing basic knowledge. HCGieseHCGiese (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Why not assign new users one friendly mentor who wants

Feedback from Bwisok (12 October 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

How do I comment on the Wiki editors' comments? Bwisok (talk) 03:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

== Feedback from !-- Answer next to the asterisks below the questions. You need not answer all of them. -->


 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * The first time, within 24 hours. I was amazed how fast. It was initially rejected with specific clear instructions on needed improvements. I made those just as fast and resubmitted. Here is where the process became murky for me as a first time article-creator. I continued to see the Aug 8 rejection message at the top of the page. I found a way to reply after I had followed the directions (essentially for more and better references) and resubmitted. But my response was not placed at the top near the first editors message. I did see the yellow box at the end of the article stating that it was waiting for review. The hierarchy seemed odd to me, placing the older rejection message prominently on top and the newer 'waiting for review' message at the very bottom. This was so confusing to me that I entered a chat for support. The volunteers I communicated with were helpful and very quick.

I suggest that you have a consistent hierarchy of messages as well. (see above) Thanks!! You are all awesome and I love Wikipedia!
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes, allow an equal back and forth communication between creators and reviewers, with dated entries. Thanks for requesting feedback on the process.

Feedback from Royale.heart (28 August 2013)
Sbell92677 (15 October 2013) ==


 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No. How do I advance to next page? Not clear at all. Very convoluted.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * How would I know, I wasn't able to submit
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes, make the process clear. How to advance to submit is not clear.

Feedback from Ajit rout (17 October 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 82.114.168.158 (19 October 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No. I want to refer to my papers which have been published at SSRN and other networks but your instructions how to do this are complicated and not clear at all.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Please simplify your relevant directions.

Feedback from Sophierose123 (4 November 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

Yes, My ? is: I want to create an article to help my classmates learn about a topic that hasn't been created yet on the Wikipedia. Do you know how to make an article that my classmates can see on the wikipedia, but on their computer at home?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?



Feedback from Random College Student

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

Yes, My ? is: I want to create an article to help my classmates learn about a topic that hasn't been created yet on the Wikipedia. Do you know how to make an article that my classmates can see on the wikipedia, but on their computer at home?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?



Feedback from NBELQ (5 November 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How to instructions are extensive and give many sources for further information BUT they are also rather technical for the average person or at least it seemed so to me. Instructions by reviewers were helpfully specific and easy to understand.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Faisal Mujahid
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * fast

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

Feedback from 41.133.148.92 (6 November 2013)
No. I see there is no coverage of the "Red Ants" the nic-name given to Wozani Secruity Services. They are a security company in South Africa that is used to enforce court orders to evict people from buildings and land. They were apparently formed by by some former policemen when the special forces "Koevoet" (meaning Crowbar) Unit was disbanded in the negotiations around Namibia's first free election. Wikipedia has a link and info on Koevoet which makes for interesting if chilling reading. The Red Ants are named after the colour of their uniforms and overalls. They too are a very controversial security group as their removal of people is done in large groups by force and intimidation and often resulting in press articles and criminal charges. I can find no working phone number to contact Wozani Security Services. A Google search of "Red Ants" za in South Africa will reveal numerous press articles. I feel its important that such a powerful and controversial security group is in Wikipedia as most South Africans will know them and have some opinion of them and they do continue to shape the country's future.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Book and Horse Lover (17 November 2013)
The instructions were clear and easy to follow, even for an inexperienced member of the Wiki community like me. However, the Article wizard could be improved by giving clearer guidelines on what a notable subject is and how to tell if the subject someone wants to write about is notable enough.

Thank you, sincerely, Book and Horse Lover

Feedback from Hadodohd (19 November 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Fairly clear, there were was a lot of text to read.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Really quickly, considering the backlog warnings.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I created the page anonymously but then created an account, I was unsure of how to merge the work.

Feedback from 24.193.87.121 (23 November 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear? not at all


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?10%


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


 * do you need help?--24.193.87.121 (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Italic text--24.193.87.121 (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)help people in need
 * do you need help?--24.193.87.121 (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Italic text--24.193.87.121 (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)help people in need

Feedback from 213.55.73.97 (29 November 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

find wikipedia-wiki project Article serves Nurhusien
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 204.126.64.99 (12 December 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Was it reviewed? How would I know?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * How does one know if an article has been taken under review?

Feedback from 112.79.37.45 (13 December 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Within a short time


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes, you can make it more easier by giving a search bar powered by Adobe Flash which will directly display suggestions and results without going to the other page.

Feedback from 119.92.196.162 (13 December 2013)
although i am not famous or something i just want my write my story that's all.
 * Did you find the instructions clear? No. Because i want to write about my self but it wont let me.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Kanga Roo in the Zoo (17 December 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes Kanga Roo in the Zoo (talk) 17:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It was very quick. I created the article around four or five days ago and submitted it today (17th Dec. 2013). It was reviewed on the same day. Kanga Roo in the Zoo (talk) 17:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Pliming (18 December 2013)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, the instructions were easy to understand.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * With than a day or two.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No, not at the moment.

F SQUARE Revolution (band)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes i got clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very first


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