Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.The reason left by KeyolTranslater was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
The comment the reviewer left was:
A notable cemetery but the way this article is written sounds more like what you would find on a website of the cemetery, the use of “Our country” isn’t neutral or encyclopaedic (it would be odd if all people referred to a site as “our country” on Wikipedia, especially because millions of users worldwide use it). Also a lot of the paragraphs are unsourced and I think the list of known surnames buried at the site should be placed in an external links area as opposed to at the very start, also this is a nitpick but I believe it would be better if the infobox was higher in the text but that’s just my view on aesthetics.
Also the “Looking ahead” section strengthens my earlier point on it sounding like what I’d find on the website itself, also finally I don’t think all the names of veterans are required, a handful, perhaps notable or high up officers or ones with Wikipedia pages or other external sources should be mentioned.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit it after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Redford Cemetery and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, IntrepidWanderer!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Mwen Sé Kéyòl Translator-a (talk) 08:45, 2 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.The reason left by KeyolTranslater was:
Wikipedia can’t be used as a source so I suggest you remove those ones and replace them.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit it after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Redford Cemetery and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Latest comment: 3 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Draft declinedThank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
FeedbackThe reviewer, MWFwiki, left the following feedback:
Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers.
Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute.
Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed.
I agree with the previous assessment that this cemetery is likely notable for our purposes. However, we have an over-reliance on primary sources and no sources for the "notable burials" section (save for one person).
Next steps
Edit Draft:Redford Cemetery to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.
Thanks for the reply. We're disappointed that it seems we should remove the article per the link you provided. Small, rural, historic cemeteries by their nature will rarely be bathed in secondary, interpretative, analytical, evaluative materials with majority and minority views or legal analysis. This may explain why they rarely appear on Wikipedia and why our cemetery board of several bright, educated, volunteers haven't been able to navigate this after 3 months and dozens of hours of reading, learning, and making edits to comply with every comment. We have no idea if we are any closer than when we started. As first time editors, we suspect that publishing a new article might be best left to experienced editors. We appreciate the rigor of Wikipedia editing and appreciate your help. Perhaps we can grow some editorial skills on Wikipedia and try again in a few years. Sorry to come across overwhelmed and disappointed... we are reflecting on 50,000+ living descendants of those buried at this cemetery who can benefit from understanding it more through Wikipedia. Thanks for helping us try. IntrepidWanderer (talk) 05:37, 7 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Searching briefly, I was able to find some coverage in this book; if you can find one more independent source I think you'll be on adequate footing. If such sources are not available, it is not going to be appropriate to create a separate article, but, it may be appropriate to include content about the cemetery at Redford, Michigan or U.S. Route 24 in Michigan, and then we could have Redford Cemetery forward readers to that page. signed, Rosguilltalk19:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Your comments give the impression that you may be multiple people sharing an account. This is not allowed, per WP:NOSHARE. Please either change your password and stick to one-person, one-account, or else clarify that you have indeed been a single person this whole time. signed, Rosguilltalk19:01, 14 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Shared account? Goodness no. That's not the case. I seem to have caused you concern or frustration. That is not my intent. Just looking for a friendly individual who might offer some more detailed guidance. Any mention of 'we' is referring to our little cemetery's voluntary Board of Directors of which I am the President acting on their behalf. I'll add that source and seek a few more like it. Thanks. IntrepidWanderer (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Redford Cemetery, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. Feel free to further improve your accepted article.
Future articles
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.
Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
