User talk:Ajshul/Archives/2022/January
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ajshul. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
More experienced AfC reviewer help please
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I recently became an Articles for Creation reviewer, and I declined Draft:2021 Beechina bushfire, because it didn't meet WP:EVENT and WP:WILDFIRE-NOTE, it wasn't significantly covered, and didn't meet WP:DIVERSE. However, the editor claimed that they fixed the problem: that it meets WP:WILDFIRE-NOTE and that more sources were added (See discussion here: User_talk:Whistler441). However, the name of the article doesn't show up anywhere on Google or in the sources listed (the article seems poorly named but I'm not very familiar with Wildfire naming conventions), and the last WP:WILDFIRE-NOTE criterion which the editor claims it meets is very vague. I still think that it should be declined, but I'd appreciate if a more experienced reviewer would help. Thanks so much. Ajshul 😃 03:46, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Ajshul! If you are unsure about what to do, just don't do anything. Tell anyone who requests, you are not comfortable taking an action. As an AFC reviewer, be cautious and start out with drafts that you are sure about. It may be advisable not to review same draft twice; that way, if you make a mistake, next reviewer can correct it. I decline re-reviewing drafts I have declined before unless I am 100% sure it should be declined or I am accepting it. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool Thanks so much for the help; I really appreciate it! I was sure about the original decline, but now I'm unsure if the new improvements by the editor should lead to it being accepted or declined, and as you suggested, it makes sense to leave the re-review to someone else. The original editor left me a couple messages on their talk page regarding their improvements on the draft. Should I move them to the talk page of the draft so they are visible to the future reviewer? Thanks again for the help! Ajshul 😃 04:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- It does not seem like a must see for another reviewer. That is the default expectation from declined drafts that they would have been improved based on why they were declined before. I would just tell the editor that you won't be reviewing it again and advise them to put information they want to share to the draft's talk page so the next reviewer can see them.For the future, questions you have about your AFC reviewing may be better asked at WT:AFC. There is no guarantee people patrolling the {{help}} template will be familiar with AFC. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:28, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Perfect, thanks! Ajshul talk 04:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- It does not seem like a must see for another reviewer. That is the default expectation from declined drafts that they would have been improved based on why they were declined before. I would just tell the editor that you won't be reviewing it again and advise them to put information they want to share to the draft's talk page so the next reviewer can see them.For the future, questions you have about your AFC reviewing may be better asked at WT:AFC. There is no guarantee people patrolling the {{help}} template will be familiar with AFC. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:28, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool Thanks so much for the help; I really appreciate it! I was sure about the original decline, but now I'm unsure if the new improvements by the editor should lead to it being accepted or declined, and as you suggested, it makes sense to leave the re-review to someone else. The original editor left me a couple messages on their talk page regarding their improvements on the draft. Should I move them to the talk page of the draft so they are visible to the future reviewer? Thanks again for the help! Ajshul 😃 04:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Signature
Hi! I am coming from Draft:Bhakti Marga where I was confused for about half a second to see that comment end with a 😃. In that context, it almost seemed like mocking the creator for using the sources that they did. I can think of other situations where it would be even more inappropriate. I would advise against using it in your signature. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:22, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool I didn't even think of that. That makes total sense though. Thanks for pointing that out. Ajshul 😃 04:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
About Quasar Entertainment's Wikipedia
Hey, I saw that you declined my draft because of having Twitter to be an unreliable source. How do I go on about this, how would I make myself my own source? Cause frankly, I'm writing about my own development team, so I'm the source. Is it still possible for me to pull off a page about us?
Also, another side problem. I tried uploading an image to Draft:Quasar Entertainment, but wouldn't let me because of it saying it was unreliable or something. The image was perfect and all the descriptions and sources to it, and I found no way of working around it. So I really have two problems here. Also it is very messy for me to write on Wikipedia like this, please add me on Discord if you can help me. Artyom Kalinitsev#0001
Sincerely, User:Artyom_Kalinitsev — Preceding undated comment added 22:39, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hey @Artyom Kalinitsev! Because you are writing about your own company, you have a conflict of interest, which, per Wikipedia's guidelines, you must disclose. See WP:COI for more information on what this means and how you can disclose your COI. Also per Wikipedia's guidelines, "a topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject," (See WP:GNG). Twitter is not regarded as a reliable source, and a company's own Twitter account is not independent of the subject. For a Wikipedia article to be created for your company, a significant number of reliable sources (See WP:RS on what a reliable source means) must cover it. WP:YFA will provide much more detail. Generally, it's usually best to let others write Wikipedia articles about topics that are directly connected to you because this would prevent your "external interest" from interfering (this is explained in more depth in WP:COI and in the first part of WP:YFA). However, it's not impossible, but does require clearly disclosing the COI. Hope this helps. Ajshul<talk> 03:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)