Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback/Archive 14

Feedback from Granitic (2 January 2016)
Not very. Hard to understand what exactly was a "reliable" third-party source.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Within a few days. This was a resubmission after initial rejection, but I felt that the subject warranted being on Wikipedia, so I worked on it a bit more..

Not yet. I am too new to writing articles: this was my first. Granitic (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 84.205.227.11 (7 January 2016)Mardono

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

The Greek verb "μαρδώνω" pronounced as "mardono".
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Its history Due to his extremely great disaster at the Plataeas battle against the ancient Greeks, Mardonius "granted" his name to the Greek verb "μαρδώνω" pronounced as "mardono", which means "to blow it, to foul it up". That verb has still been in use since those distant ancient times (479 BC) till today!

Feedback from 90.149.252.237 (7 January 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * 1min


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

Feedback from 182.190.204.139 (9 January 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very quickly


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

Feedback from Bichetteln (9 January 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes really clear and everybody was always positive about my work


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * about 2 months


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

Bichetteln (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from 71.3.135.148 (10 January 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * fairly fast


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

Feedback from ANUSHA (21 January 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * YES


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * VERY QUICKLY

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

Raphael Jabbour رافاييل جبور
رافاييل جبور طالب لبناني في ستار اكاديمي 11

Feedback from 167.128.165.149 (27 January 2016)
Kinda*
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not sure

167.128.165.149 (talk) 19:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)EmilyCollier
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * let us type the article--

Feedback from Patrick F. Matre (1 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * not sure


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * weak


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 168.167.149.28 (1 February 2016)FHFHFFFSDSSFSDGGMDGINHFHRUWUYO4D,GGDGHDGDODGIGUDGE,GHYDDJBYLO BGDDF HDGFJSDFVSGFEF BDFU IIEFJB DFIBFNUGEWoh9eql

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * YEAH...........


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * SO QUIK LIKE 3 SCNDS

SO THAT CHILDREN MAY FINDIT USEFUL
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * YEAH....MAYBE YOU SHOULD MAKE IT WITH SIMPLE ENGLISH

Feedback from 69.64.225.171 (3 February 2016)
yes, did not expect a dozen reasons to give up on making an entry...
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

no clear link to start making a new entry! put a category picker, and start or at least a example of a active contrasting entry. like g w bush military service, or tax cuts by administration...
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 92.234.225.148 (6 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * NO


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes. Video game sare getiing bigger and bigger, and our debut VR title CDF Starfighter is needing a wiki.  After half an hour trying, how do i create a new page for a new game/software?

zindagi (2008)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * good


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

Feedback from 121.6.71.160 (7 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

http://leonghimwoh.blogspot.sg/2012/04/writing-my-profile.html?zx=accbabe4be8b1419
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 136.185.188.14 (8 February 2016)
&lt;!-- Answer next to the asterisks below the questions. You need not answer all of them. --&gt;

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

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

Feedback from Pajokie (12 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Initial submission very quickly (a few hours) ; re-submission-about a week


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * maybe send alerts via email when an article has been reviewed.

Feedback from 188.221.38.190 (12 February 2016)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

fast
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

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

Feedback from 173.228.249.242 (17 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * fast


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

Feedback from 67.209.198.247 (20 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Not really.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I don't even know if it was successfully and/or fully received.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I have heard and seen the term "Biblical agrariansm, but you have no definitions of it, its boundaries, terms, contexts, or usage. I'm terribly disappointed in your services.

Feedback from Dkargathra (21 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes found


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * enough quick


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Tony Thornburn (26 February 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, very clear.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very quickly, within two days.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Not especially, certainly everyone with whom I have corresponded has been very helpful when I encountered difficulty, which I did. That said, I do find some of the references and instructions on Wikipedia a little convoluted.  One seems to end up going from one link to another, and yet the core issue one was trying to address eluded one, or did not become apparent.

The difference between Creative Commons and Wikimedia did not appear clear to me if you read the email exchange below (from bottom up I suggest). You will see I was getting slightly anxious during the process of uploading images! This relates to my aforesaid comment, so perhaps a review of the instructions could be considered. I suppose basically what I am saying is that a link to the upload process needs to appear higher up the 'explanation path' - perhaps predicated by something like: If you want to upload an image right away then click this link. Further instruction follows on licensing...and so forth: ......... And shouldn't there be a place where one can add the appropriate certificate authorising the use of the image? Perhaps I missed it! I suspect there may be two basic ways to upload an image both of which I used by accident, but I'm still not sure frankly.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Creative Commons  Subject: Re: Nigel Konstam in front of Maquettes Auythorisation Date: 23 February 2016 at 23:51:18 GMT To: tonythornburn Reply-To: Creative Commons 

Yes, that's right, Tony. We're different organizations. CC does copyright licensing and Wikimedia happens to use those same licenses on their content so it's easy to get confused.

Mari --- Creative Commons On Tue, 23 Feb at 5:51 PM, Anthony Thornburn <> wrote: So is Wikipedia Commons different to Creative Commons? On 23 Feb 2016, at 22:49, Creative Commons  wrote:

Hey Tony,

We don't review any of the work that is licensed with us, I'm sorry. There is no authorization or registration or anything like that. The licenses are applied independently of CC but the rightsholder (or in some cases, a person who has sufficient rights to the work).

We don't control the wikimedia commons so if you're having a problem with your upload, you should contact them directly.

Does this help at all?

Mari --- Creative Commons On Tue, 23 Feb at 5:34 PM, Anthony Thornburn <> wrote: Mari,

Thanks for getting back so quickly. All I want to achieve is that the images are accepted onto the Wiki site. If this is the case now, by the way I have uploaded them, then that is sufficient and the matter closed.

My point was that I used that link you have provided for the second image I uploaded (Nigel Konstam in front of his Maquettes, Verrocchio Art Centre) but it did not seem to offer an opportunity to include (what I would call) ‘authorisation' from the licence holder/initiator - i.e. in this case the photographer - for anyone else to subsequently use should they wish.

I tried to upload the first image (Konstam Maquette of Musicians) but during the process it didn’t seem to work properly and I seemed to end up uploading the certificate. I eventually blundered into locating the image I had upload first, so then added the certificate link from (what I would call) the second upload (the certificate jpeg).

So all I would like you to do is to review what I have inserted in the Draft: Nigel Konstam page, by way of images, and make sure they are accepted, and the appropriate CC comment/agreement.

Many thanks.

Tony On 23 Feb 2016, at 22:20, Creative Commons  wrote:

Hey Anthony,

No bother over here at all. I'm not quite sure what your question is though. If you would like to apply a CC license to the new images, that's fine. There's no registration or anything like that. It's as simple as deciding which license and marking the work: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license

If you are uploading them to wikimedia commons then you'll have the option to apply the license as you upload it if I remember correctly.

Or maybe I've misunderstood. In any event, let me know if there's anything I can do for you!

Mari --- Creative Commons On Tue, 23 Feb at 4:51 PM, Anthony Thornburn <> wrote: Mari,

Well I’m sorry but the first set of images that Konstam provided (the subject) did not pass scrutiny. So I asked Konstam to get them retaken and the photographer to sign a certificate. The first certificate I loaded, in error, thinking it was uploading the image, but I then inserted the http link to the image talk space. I do find Wiki procedures convoluted frankly. I then discovered the other way to promulgate an image, but it did not provide a link to add the certificate. Just declaring CC as an individual does not seem appropriate frankly.

As long as these images are now accepted by CC then fine, but if not can the certificates be attached to the pages so that no further confusion occurs.

Many thanks.

Tony On 23 Feb 2016, at 14:22, Creative Commons  wrote:

Hey Anthony,

There's no need to consult Creative Commons if the artist has given you permission, they are the rights holder after all!

Mari --- Creative Commons On Tue, 23 Feb at 6:53 AM, Anthony Thornburn <> wrote: Please see attached certificate from the photographer to allow unrestricted use of his picture, used in the Draft: Nigel Konstam.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ANigel_Konstam_in_front_of_Maquettes.JPG

By Alaya Sinclair (Alaya Sinclair via Nigel Konstam) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons from Wikimedia Commons 27637 Tony Thornburn (talk) 12:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from George Li (27 February 2016)
it is not totally clear, but very good. 1 week was reasonably quick.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

I really appreciate the review and significant improvements to my writing!!
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from DrJB01 (28 February 2016)

 * 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 108.7.72.112 (28 February 2016)z

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


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

Maybe Yakult ace light is an product that is created by yakult Singapore. It is yakult but with vitamins b b12 and others. It is light meaning the taste isn't so tastable. But only Malaysia and Singapore sell it. It has40 %less sugar than yakult ace.it has some calories.in Singapore they only have yakult regular and yakult ace light.it's very crisp .in Malaysia  there is only yakult ace and yakult ace light.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Shelleycaldwell (7 March 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Thank you for accepting my article. I clearly have a lot to learn.  I appreciate the suggestions that were given.  The instructions are clear, but there are so many that it's a little overwhelming.  Shelleycaldwell (talk) 15:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from Fouziabegum gangadhar (18 March 2016)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * yes


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

Feedback from PsycheMac (19 March 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * I did indeed!


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * About one week, excellent.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Noe I can think of.. thank you.

Feedback from So-retro-it-hurts (22 March 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not long at all


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 201.157.80.211 (30 March 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, I do.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No one, thank you.

Feedback from Lutho01 (1 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * 'Bold text'Yes I do


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * quite fast


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

Feedback from 105.112.34.141 (2 April 2016)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

very fast
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


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

Feedback from Malikofori (5 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, very clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * An hour or 2


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I'm impressed with your service

Feedback from 178.135.82.201 (9 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Zahidmanzoorbhat (10 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes I find them clearly


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * it was just cliking foreword


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * some how

Feedback from HamzaKhaliq12345 (13 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yeah. Found it clear my brotha from anotha motha.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * God knows.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Hell naw.

Feedback from TimoFieret (15 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not fast


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * When I want to know how to make a article just post an URL

Feedback from Dr Arjun Y Pangannavar (21 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

'Bedara' is a aboriginal clan of India. Bedara is Kannada form of Vyadha Clan means the hunter-clan There are references of this clan in Ramayana and Maha Bharat, valmiki, Shabari, Guha, Vyas, etc were belong to this clan. Bedara is called in different names in different languages and places in India.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 173.240.132.107 (28 April 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

needs fixing
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Slothbearina (30 April 2016)
Yes Very quickly, 3 days Slothbearina (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Cajetan392 (8 May 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No at all. You should ask your grandfather to try using them.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Too fast

Thanks to Mona who did the few necessary corrections.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I submitted a draft to receive help. The first reviewer should have said to use the past tense and should have given an exemple of a peacock word. Or my draft should have been transferred at the right place.

Feedback from 96.5.171.138 (11 May 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * IDK


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

Feedback from 117.217.131.123 (27 May 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 67.149.168.199 (27 May 2016)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * idk


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

Feedback from 192.107.142.7 (1 June 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

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

Feedback from Charles Matthews (12 June 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * I didn't submit the article James Mangles (MP), so not applicable.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * What happened was that Draft:James Mangles (MP) was sent to AfC without my being made aware of it. The treatment of so-called "stale drafts" seems to me erratic. I would much prefer to be notified when they are under consideration.

Feedback from 180.211.242.254 (16 June 2016)

 * 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 142.26.99.100 (17 June 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * not really


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * pretty quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * nope MISSISSIPPI MOVIE INTERPLANETARY

Feedback from 197.77.22.251 (20 June 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

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

Feedback from David Tom G (22 June 2016)
yes very fast how do i'm select the topic search
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 75.102.168.228 (26 June 2016)
never!!!!
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no

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

Feedback from Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (29 June 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very quick


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * It would be good if the reviewer adds the related Wikiprojects covering the article or template to talk page after accepting the submission

Feedback from Victor Kayode Igbekoyi (2 July 2016)

 * 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 S SUBHASHIS (2 July 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Very clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * so fast


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Its good one

Feedback from Inaccuray (5 July 2016)
yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

yes
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

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

Feedback from Kamel Tebaast (6 July 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * I didn't start this process (which is part of my feedback below). did.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not quickly. (Wasn't expecting either, the person reviewing wrote that there are 800+ articles waiting for so don't expect a quick review. (Part of the problem.)

Thank you...  Kamel Tebaast  22:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Firstly, I didn't create the Louis Danziger article that was initially submitted for review.  did. And that's some of my feedback.  Salij2016 should get credit for the article, not me. S/he did a lot of work... it was a well documented article, it just had some slight problems with language, formatting, and reference structure. I basically cleaned it up, but do not deserve the credit, and I think that the congratulations and feedback form should (also) have been sent to Salij2016.
 * The process seemed overly long and involved, and felt a little like a power trip was going on, although I don't believe that was the intention of the reviewer. The first submission was declined specifically because "peacock language" and "format of the references" needed work. I fixed that. The second time, it was declined because the references were "inconsistent." Had the reviewer been more specific of what s/he wanted, I could have fixed that. In any case, I fixed that and resubmitted. Then, 47 days after if was first declined for submission, the reviewer came back with a completely NEW issue: the headings and levels need fixing. I actually agreed that they did. However, I thought that after 47 days of prolonged declines, with no mention of this issue, to then get new problems to fix, it felt like a Chinese water torture. At that point, I think the reviewer could have approved the article, and placed a template at the front that the headings and levels need fixing. In any case, I would have gladly done it, instantly.
 * While stumbling into this process accidentally, and knowing what I now know about this process, I ask: Why would I (or anyone) ever submit an article for review when they can easily create a new article and hit save in two minutes?

Feedback from Tarvarus (23 July 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * not really


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I dont even really know.. please help me.

Im kinda lost... i dont know how to contact anyone for help
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

I just saw a picture from article was deleted .. reason made no sense

also I just created another article and I don't know why the words Template is on the top here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylan_Taylor_%28Jazz_Bassist%29

it seems like the article is already live (approved)?

Feedback from 202.65.142.46 (26 July 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * not able to write

yes i would to provide information about my village,but your are quoting that i need some reliable sources to verify the facts of my village. As it is difficult for many to know about my village as there is no single article in any papers or books.. so i tried to create one article on my village
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 121.44.98.126 (30 July 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * NO


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * HAVE NOT SUBMITTED ANYTHING BECAUSE CANT UNDERSTAND


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * MAKE INSTRUCTIONS CLEARER AND ONLY DELETE PAGES IF THEY ARE PORNOGRAPHIC OR CONTAIN OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE

Feedback from 109.153.28.40 (7 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Y


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Y


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * List me buses of Japan in a year order

Feedback from Abbas2016 (11 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes

quickly enough --Abbas2016 (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no, every thing is good

Feedback from (pm162016ub Fridaypm2016upm12)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * ayoub laouad comdian


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

Feedback from AYOUB LAOUAD (12 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * quickly enough


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * no, every thing is good

Feedback from Lorraineboucher (23 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear? No


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed? There was no method to actually submit something.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

I don't understand how to use the Article Wizard. I answer all the questions in each step, but at the end of it there is no way to actually write an article. Where can I actually write my article for submission?

Feedback from Klpanawzad (23 August 2016)
yes very no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Dear wikipedia-
My article is supposted to be about Sandra platt, Paw patrol rules est 2016 and sandra platt! I Don't know! Let me write the stuff out, There's only one reason I'm using wikia to make my own articles!!!!!!! If you fix this, I will use both wikipedia and wikia for this.

- Sandra platt 2.0, 2016.

Feedback from Mbalenhle M (26 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It hasn't been


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes, send notification via email

Feedback from 103.230.7.74 (27 August 2016)

 * 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, It's very easy to creat a new page

Feedback from Faridahmadi.itp (29 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * I really didn't get the instructions


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * it took like two weeks

I don't why your team has deleted Farahnaz's bio from Wikipedia, there are more then five good source that verify her identity and her job. there were video links as well.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Pleaes help me to get back the Farahnaz Forotan's biography on Wikipedia. this was her Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farahnaz_Forotan

Please help me to get her bio back online.

Thanks, Farid

Feedback from 147.110.251.39 (29 August 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No because there is not on link that answers my q


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Not quick


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * May you please put in the branch of Google in South Africa as i am hoping to work for Google company but i am not getting the right direction

Feedback from 121.45.96.188 (8 September 2016)

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


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * very quickly


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * nothing everything was perfect →→→≠≠

Feedback from Junosoon (8 September 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes,they were very clear


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Reasonable time.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * It looks perctect procedure.Thanks

Feedback from Geetha akkihebbal (17 September 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

Dear WIKI TEAM AND Joseph 2302 thanks for accepting and creating article of Mr.T N SURESH KUMAR. i shall add more sources, information and citations shortly regards akkihebbal geetha
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 109.93.169.158 (18 September 2016)
It asks me fucking tons of questions and when I do them, I get absolutley nothing about editing articles I'm trying, but fucking site dosen't give me a shit!

Feedback from 73.129.102.184 (19 September 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * no


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

!
''
 * Did you find the instructions clear?Nope I didnt can they have a page for KIDS!!????--92.9.128.76 (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Italic text''--92.9.128.76 (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It wasnt!:(


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Make a kids website and make the writing nicer.

Feedback from 2A03:2880:3020:1FE9:FACE:B00C:0:8000 (29 September 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Quickly

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

Vision2.0
Yeah..it was quite easy for beginners..
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

it took time though..but they reviewed it.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

yes..i have vision of improving the estimated required data which the will find easy..
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Abdul Azim Khushnawa (2 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * yes i have suggestions to improve the process when i use wiki

Feedback from 2601:807:8103:FDF0:B8C2:160D:ECC8:E160 (4 October 2016)
yes fast Not really. I was simply searching for information about USDT (US 'tether' dollars) which are the digital equivalent of USD on digital markets.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 196.15.184.154 (14 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes

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

Feedback from KDBlackmore (18 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, although I misinterpreted instructions about making changes while the article was being reviewed.


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


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * None.

Feedback from Thapa Kazi999 (22 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * I find it quite good.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 51.37.245.41 (23 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Not really


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * It was about 5 minutes


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No I don't have

Feedback from 196.30.21.19 (26 October 2016)
Yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * 13 Minutes exercise

This far not.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Newamordia (27 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, very clear. A valuable learning experience. Thanks to all involved.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * The first two submissions were reviewed in a matter of days, which was surprisingly quick. The third took a few weeks, but I think this is acceptable. In the meantime, the dialogue was clear, concise and helpful.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Not at this stage. Looking forward to being involved more in Wikipedia.Newamordia (talk) 22:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback from 73.15.250.105 (27 October 2016)
Yes i did
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

super fast
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

No I do not
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the processes

Feedback from Carries mum (28 October 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Pretty clear, thank you. I don't edit very frequently, and am slow getting up to speed, but I do read instructions!!!


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very quickly.


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Yes. People like me need to do this more frequently, so we don't keep forgetting how to do stuff -- I think that chipping away, regularly is better than doing a big blast at a wikipedia editathon once a year. So, that's my advice -- a little editing, often!

Feedback from 173.66.249.238 (31 October 2016)
no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * was not


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * more help

Feedback from 124.123.75.225 (4 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Vayuyatra (5 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Really soon


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Please suggest ways when there are only primary sources for verification and i am in possession of them.

Feedback from 51.6.182.218 (5 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * v. quickly


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

Feedback from 39.59.68.254 (9 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 41.114.177.79 (9 November 2016)
Yes
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * fast

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

Feedback from Rabia saeed (13 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * no


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 180.191.118.108 (14 November 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * happy

pam and jambrec new word
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * yes

Feedback from UserSCL1958 (19 November 2016)
Not really, but that probably reflects more on my understanding of the WP process than on the four editors who took time over my first article. I did feel that one editor (the second) at first just rejected on one issue without taking the time or trouble to review further or provide helpful feedback.
 * Did you find the instructions clear?

Not quickly to start with, but editors three and four, I suppose once the article got a little closer to acceptable, were very helpful and prompt in responding to my emendations or questions. The process was not helped by my having been ill for quite a period so nothing got done.
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

On balance it would help if the acceptance/rejection process tended to reinvolve editors, or alternatively if editors had more experience in applying standards consistently. I felt that I resolved issues for editor the first in referencing lists of works that was wasted when editor the second (probably quite properly) rejected again on the basis that these lists added nothing to the article. Conversely, I was helped immensely thereafter in the talk page of editor three and in the Teahouse. UserSCL1958 (talk) 11:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from Ukashatu Ibrahim wakili (22 November 2016)
yes 5 days no
 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?

Feedback from 175.157.144.88 (1 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Fast


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

Feedback from YMG2 (2 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes, indeed!


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * About two weeks.

YMG2 (talk) 05:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * N/A (I am a beginner.)

Feedback from Aronno93 (4 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * YES


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * I DIDNT SUBMIT


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * NO. I JUST WANT TO CREATE A PAGE FOR MYSELF. CAN ANYONE HELP ME ? THANK YOU

Feedback from 178.152.70.70 (4 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * Yes


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Immediately


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * No it's very nice. I just want to know how to start

Feedback from Shahid asghar (6 December 2016)
i want to write somethig about my village but i could not do so as please help me.

Feedback from Maaley (15 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * yes, the instructions were clear.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * within 5days.

thank you Maaley (talk) 19:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * the page have been graded C-class. new editions made accordingly. kindly riview once to see if the gradation can be improved.

Feedback from 24.210.169.126 (19 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?

-Deanna
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * I honestly was not even sure I submitted anything; It's just I thought you should add the word flabbergasted. I know that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but you are widely know for having "EVERYTHING" and I just thought this would be a little something extra and unique. Clearly it may not be worth your time, but I would like to show my brother exactly what it means. I also suggest you add more things along the line of foods and word that are well-known throughout the community. I'm pretty sure that is what you just outlined for me in this submission process using that long word neo-something. Anyways I also thought it would be really cool if there is anything I could contribute or write. Right now, I probably sound like a barely literate writer, but I promise I know my way around writing. Anyways I'm not going leave any info, but I hope this got through and will check for "flabbergasted". Also I might consider signing up and seeing if I could find an interesting topic that Wikipedia doesn't already have to write about. Good Luck and along the lines of improving this process. Make the steps more clear and the minimize the amount of tabs you have.

Feedback from 163.6.207.163 (20 December 2016)

 * 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 Mickeyd20 (25 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * No - I was at one time a promotion writer, not a journalist. The writing styles are very different and it wasn't until some feedback was left that I understood what you needed (thanks for that feedback).  Fortunately I've done a very little bit of web page creation so I understood some of the creation process, but I doubt that the average person would understand.


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Very

. I would like to thank  Anne Delong for the great editing job.
 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * Perhaps you could create more of a Word type interface.  I found that this interface got in the way of the creation process, as did the journalistic style of writing.

Feedback from Paul Lavern (30 December 2016)

 * Did you find the instructions clear?
 * At first not, but once you understand the logic of Wikipedia's interface and coding; and the rules about copyright release, which takes about a day or two to sink in, then it's all fine and smooth. Also, the advices from the reviewer were very important to grasp the concept and criteria of a Wiki article.--Paul Lavern (talk) 00:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * How quickly was your submission reviewed?
 * Within minutes of my submission. Impressive!--Paul Lavern (talk) 00:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Do you have any suggestions to improve the process?
 * My humble suggestion is that your criteria for the Film Industry should be a tad different. IMDb Pro (not regular IMDb) should be the main source to accept a film, or information. The criteria they use to accept a submission is the toughest you can find. The information posted on IMDb Pro is made in collaboration with Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, The Alliance of Motion Pictures, SAG, DGA, WGA and all the sites owned by Amazon, like Box Office Mojo, Blu-ray.com, etc.--Paul Lavern (talk) 00:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)