User talk:SafariScribe/Archive 11

Archive

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
548		Rendering (computer graphics) (talk)	Add sources
92		Jellyfish Entertainment (talk)	Add sources
52		Tiwana family of Shahpur (talk)	Add sources
156		WakeOne (talk)	Add sources
1,168		Acetylcholine (talk)	Add sources
82		Parasympathomimetic drug (talk)	Add sources
252		Muscarinic antagonist (talk)	Cleanup
10		Mirchi Music Award for Album of The Year (talk)	Cleanup
33		Disability in Japan (talk)	Cleanup
5		Empress (album) (talk)	Expand
58		Muscarinic agonist (talk)	Expand
339		Joe Cullen (darts player) (talk)	Expand
8		Chaudhry Imtiaz Ahmed Ranjha (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
85		Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
327		Rajahmundry (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
3		3D Morphable Model (talk)	Merge
11		Multitask optimization (talk)	Merge
30		Mass of the Phoenix (talk)	Merge
28		NA-86 Sargodha-V (talk)	Wikify
8		NA-85 Sargodha-IV (talk)	Wikify
4		Zbrojovka Z 6V (talk)	Wikify
8		Wang Gang (computer scientist) (talk)	Orphan
3		New Zealand contributions to human rights instruments (talk)	Orphan
3		Katarzyna Tubylewicz (talk)	Orphan
11		4D reconstruction (talk)	Stub
14		Cross Keys High School (talk)	Stub
28		View synthesis (talk)	Stub
40		Ranjha (clan) (talk)	Stub
13		Brahmaputra Mail train bombing (talk)	Stub
3		Welt-Kindertheater-Fest (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:AFC/R - possible incomplete edit?

Hello! Hope you're doing well.

I noticed that you accepted many requests at WP:AFC/R but didn't leave an acceptance note on the page - I've fixed the easy bits. If you could look over the Blue Origin-related requests again and complete those requests, that would be great. Thanks so much for your help. Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 00:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Elen Smile

Please explain why the Elen Smile page was rejected again after revision? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Elen_Smile

I am thoroughly familiar with the guidelines and followed them carefully, double-checking all sources, which are reliable. What’s wrong? Please help. M.krakovets (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I think you didn't read the decline message box. Please do before coming here since you claim to know the guidelines. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:14, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

The question of using YouTube links still needs clarification and discussion. Personally, I consider them a reliable source since they come from the official channels of TV networks and shows on YouTube. M.krakovets (talk) 17:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

YouTube links from a news channel is considered reliable, but you need to know how notabikity works. We dont base everything on the amount of sources presented instead we use certain SNGs to determine notability; contents would then require a reliable source for verification. Looking at your draft about a musician, it is expected to meet WP:NMUSICIAN. The discography section is completely unsorted, and we would want to see reviews of the songs by reliable sources. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

1. Could you clarify if reviews or critiques are needed for all the songs listed, or just a selection of them?

2. Are there any other issues with the article? I'd like to address everything at once. M.krakovets (talk) 18:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Instruction about the sources and references is mind-boggling

Hi @SafariScribe,

Thanks for your recent review of my article on the Belarusian Sport Solidarity Foundation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Belarusian_Sport_Solidarity_Foundation

Here's your feedback: "This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements), reliable, secondary, strictly independent of the subject.

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

I supplied 64 different references and links, including those from Reuters, Deutsche Welle, The Guardian, Inside the Games, the U.S. Department of State, etc. They could not possibly be more in-depth, reliable, secondary, and strictly independent of the subject.

Please, be so kind as to specify which particular links do not meet the criteria and how to remedy that. The article reads as a neutral, matter-of-fact material supported by existing references from reputable sources. Hopefully, we will be able to finally publish it after your constructive input.

Thank you. Artrage (talk) 11:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Artrage (talk page watcher) it seems that you feel strongly about this. Before you take the reviewer to task please double check that:

• Each of your 64 references is about the subject of the draft
• Each of your 64 references is significant ccoverage of the subject of the draft
• Each of your 64 references is independent of the subject of the draft
• Each of your 64 references is in a reliable source

Once you have done that please tell us so, and then, if appropriate, ask your question again. However, please use a less strident tone. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Timtrent, thank you for your message.

Indeed, I have checked all the links, hence my surprise - and the submission of a kind request to specify which of them seem not to adhere to the eligibility criteria.

I believe the reputability of the likes of Reuters and Deutsche Welle is beyond doubt.

Perhaps, the reviewer is not entirely familiar with lesser known but equally reliable non-English language sources referenced in the draft.

True, I do feel strongly about the article. It has been rewritten several times to match the stylistic criteria. And now we are talking about the references with no specific details mentioned.

I would be most grateful to the reviewer for a more precise overview with regard to the references, as well as for further advice should some of them happen not to match the criteria.

Thank you as always. Artrage (talk) 12:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Artrage It may surprise you to learn that Reuters is not always a reliable source. It depends upon context. I choose Reuters as an example. Sometimes Reuters creates articles. This is when, generally, it is reliable. At other times it acts as a news aggregator, republishing the articles of others. This is when it is not reliable.

All news media receive and carry press releases. It is how they carry them that is important. If they create articles based upon them, with true editorial oversight, they are reliable. If they regurgitate press releases then they are not.

I am saying all of this without looking at any of your references. My intention is to give general information, not to get bogged down with specifics. I hope you see where I am coming from.

I will take a look at a sample of your references soon. I'll let you know my opinion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Artrage The following references are deprecated sources and should be removed:

• Twitter
• Instagram
• LinkedIn

Additionally I examined a small addition random sample:

• https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/jul/22/our-consciences-were-clear-belarus-players-taking-stand-against-a-dictator - I am finding it hard to see how this verifies "resulting in over 100 athletes receiving fines, dismissals from their positions, or incarceration"
• https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1103273/calls-for-belarus-to-lose-uipm-worlds - I judge this to be a PR piece
• https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/belarus-sentences-absentia-former-olympian-herasimenia-12-years-prison-belta-2022-12-27/ - is not about Belarusian Sport Solidarity Foundation but mentions it in passing. It majors on the unfair sentencing of two people.

This is the type of analysis that I believe you should be doing. You need to be very selective about what you reference. I believe you have written what you wanted to say and found references to fit, or almost fit. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Article "Nigel Sparks" rejected

Hi, you have just rejected my article about a notable individual here in Malaysia. Nigel currently has 98.9k followers on IG and 543.8k followers in TikTok as I write this response. He is very much of notable reputation especially here in Malaysia. I have seen articles on wikipedia about individuals with a much smaller following and much smaller impact on a nation's culture. Are you able to clarify by which metric you are using to decide the inclusion of this on Wikipedia, as I cannot see why this article about a person with a cult following and is having a strong impact on Malaysian culture is deemed "insufficiently notable". Kartunbear (talk) 01:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Kartunbear, having many followers doesn't determine notability. We use the WP WP:GNG to check if a draft should be moved to mainspace. There should be reliable sources to support anything you write here because we are May not know about the person, but the sources should/must know. For the entertainer, you may need to check WP:ENT, as well as avoid using WP:PEACOCK terms when writing. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from avjjj (11:47, 22 October 2024)

Hello, I could really use some help with this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tropical_Strays. It has been rejected twice now for not having enough reliable sources, and this is quite frustrating as I am a biologist just trying to get the information about this well documented phenomenon out on the internet. I've cited 12 sources, from all sorts of places such as NASA, various news outlets, government websites, the Linnean Society, etc, and I just don't know what else I can add. I think I have cited all of the reputable sources of information on this topic that exist. How else can I improve the article so that it can be published? I understand Wikipedia's desire for purely cited information, so I tried to edit the article down to just the information that is found at my sources, even though as a professional working with these tropical strays I have much more common knowledge than the cited sources offer. I don't believe there exists more information from credible sources out there right now, so I just don't know what to change after the latest rejection of the article. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!

I will look at it later. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:13, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, did you ever get around to looking at this? Avjjj (talk) 16:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

List of Indian state fishes

Hi, you accepted List of Indian state fishes from draft to mainspace, but none of the sources in the article seem to verify the contents, and I can't easily verify online that e.g. Puducherry has a state fish at all. Other states seem to have a state fish, and while many match this official list, many others are different. Fram (talk) 10:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Fram, I believe that the article is important and atleast there are sources supporting some as well as being in line with the AFC standards. You know this is a work in progress, sources could still be found, and those I have left for an NPPer to do, if possible, before marking as patrolled. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Er, can you point to one source in the article supporting the list of state fishes? Fram (talk) 10:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Even if we don't have, I still research about a topic before declining or accepting. This article and PDF was a bit enough for me to accept the draft. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Completely irresponsible to put an article in the mainspace with no sources about the subject and with many obvious errors when compared to the sources which exist. I have redraftified it, please don't put things like this in the mainspace in the future. Fram (talk) 11:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I also note things like this decline, which seems to be completely incorrect, as noted by the submitter. Perhaps you had a good reason to decline it, but the one given is nonsensical when compared to the draft. Something like Draft:Demissie Bulto has much more right to be an article than the list of state fishes, it is about a clearly notable subject and would easily survive AfD, and the sources are about him. Why you think Draft:Geology of Berkshire is not sufficient for a stand-alone article but needs to be merged into an article of already 60K isn't clear. Draft:Antoni Wodziński: I have no idea why you declined it, well-sourced and seems obviously notable. Draft:Andrew I. Schafer: apparently the sources didn't allow you to verify the claims? Strange, the sources seem perfectly adequate for that task. If you had another reason to decline it, then state it, because this will leave the submitter either baffled at best or disgusted by the whole process at worst.

That's five very dubious declines, and I only checked 1 1/2 hours from your AfC work from today. While that work is very valuable, it can also be very WP:BITEy and needs to be done with care, not gatekeeping apparently correct articles on notable subjects and with multiple sources about the subject because of some minor or imagined issues.

Please slow down with your AfC reviewing and be less ready to decline, or give better, actionable reasons for your declines. Fram (talk) 16:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the corrections, and I have accepted all the drafts you've listed above. I would tell you that I believe in godly criticisms, and that, I follow the AFCSTANDARDS. However, I quickly undo my edits when it becomes objectionable, and try as possible to assimilate the new knowledge. Peace be with you! Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Slow down. I am not interested in you accepting the ones above if you then decline Draft:Marcin Gwóźdź. Fram (talk) 17:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

No problem. If you still have time, you can fish out more from the AFC log. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

On the contrary, it is a big problem. If you don't change your approach, I'll raise this at WP:ANI and you will probably lose your reviewer rights. You are "reviewing" way too fast, which leads to declining a Polish Member of Parliament as "Doesn't meet WP:NPOL." Your error rate is way too high. Fram (talk) 17:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Are you threatening with ANI? I complimented you and took feedbacks. Is there any other issue? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 17:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't care about compliments, and yes, I rather clearly threatened you with ANI, because you didn't take the feedback to heart, but continued to make the same kind of error after the previous issues were pointed out. Fram (talk) 17:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@Fram I suggest bringing it up at AfC, highlighting some of the issues you have found and request some additional re-reviews. More hands make lighter work. While such requests do not happen often, they do happen when reviewers/editors see problems with another reviewers work and the AfC pseudo-perm has certainly been removed based on the findings. Up to you, of course, as ANI is also appropriate. S0091 (talk) 17:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I usually bring such things to ANI as it takes admins to change user rights. But if it turns out that these problems have been going on for much longer than today (and judging from the above I would be surprised if this is a new issue), then AfC is the right place to ask people to go through their old declines (and accepts perhaps) and re-review them. Fram (talk) 17:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Primefac, asilvering and other admins are active at AfC and keep an eye on the talk page so having an admin review and take necessary actions (if any) should not be an issue if that is the main reason you prefer ANI. There may be other reasons you prefer ANI, which is fine and no need to explain them. S0091 (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Apparently, we can also be summoned by certain edit summaries... Fram, please do take this up at AfC. We've been really excited to get the backlog down to a much less soul-destroying wait, but if too many are being declined when they shouldn't be, that hardly makes the process better from the newbie perspective. SafariScribe, I really appreciate how much effort you've been putting into this, but please do slow down!

@Fram, just checking that you know that you can resubmit improperly declined drafts on behalf of the original submitter if you use the AFCH script? -- asilvering (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I've only activated the script today and used it once to decline one draft, so no, I'm not up to speed with all its possibilities yet. Thanks, that may come in handy, but obviously I prefer if no mess is made instead of cleaning up someone else's mess ("mess" as in making too many errors, not the inevitable occasional one). Fram (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that would of course be the ideal. Once an error has happened, though (or even if you think it's not an "error" exactly, but you disagree with a decline), if you immediately reverse it with a submit-and-accept, then the submitter at least gets their article into mainspace without further bother on their part. Thanks again for pointing out the issues you noted above. -- asilvering (talk) 19:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@Fram, alright. Process grows like a tree—stage by stage—and so all of us would want to do better. I wouldn't allow you clean up, yes, "my mess". Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Request on 13:43:23, 31 October 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Gita Lana

• Gita Lana (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Dejan Milicevic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

the article you are telling me that it already exist is a whole different person and the one I am publishing about is another person, kindly review my article and let it b publish thanks Warm regards

Gita Lana (talk) 13:43, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted the first rationale, and now, it's declined for lacking sources. I have tagged the ones that needs to be addressed. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Please be careful with science AfC

It can be very tricky to do an AfC review in science. In NPP I looked at a couple you did recently, Radial drift and Nottingham effect. While both might be OK in the end, currently they dont have high quality sources or a wide enough scope. In both cases much more work needs to be done.

I never do an AfC review unless I have a decent knowledge of the area. I think that way reduces the overall load, particularly for second-state specialty area reviewers. Ldm1954 (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ldm1954, thank you for your kind words. I have always appreciated AFC's focus on supporting newbies especially in any area of contributing to WP. I think it helped me when I first joined Wikipedia, and I recalled, even till date, making mistakes, which were used to, in my view, criticise me, although it could have been constructively corrected by other editors. I even considered leaving the project due to frustration, although I know that my departure wouldn't impact the project. It was with that recall that I realised that if an article deserves existence, we must work together to achieve it: a starting point could be accepting it via AFC.

Points to cnsider: Before accepting drafts, I research topics on my own to know if it deserves a WP article, and check for sources including ones that aren't listed in the "Ref" section. I feel bad not to have shared some of them (sources) for that particular draft, on the talk page for future improvements. Once again, thank you for your contributions, especially in science. Your work inspires me, hahaha. Although I studied science in high school, I'm currently pursuing philosophy and theology but still read my Physics and Chemistry and Biology, e.t.c. I don't give a move to a draft I don't know about the topic. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Brian Chesky request follow-up

Hi SafariScribe, I'd left a message here a while ago about a request I made of the Brian Chesky article. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on my response to what you had implemented. If you are curious, The Verge also wrote about it. Cheers PY Airbnb (talk) 14:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I was looking for a better source. Please request again, and ping me, and I would be ready to help. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Rejection of Donald Boles article

You rejected my article submission, asking if it was a bio or a company overview, and that's a good question. I think it may be stronger as a company overview, since Boles Aero Manufacturing is one of a handful of mid century trailer manufacturers that still enjoy popularity as collectors items and it would be useful to have a history of the company on Wikipedia. I will rewrite it as such. F18shack (talk) 03:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
103		Lisuride (talk)	Add sources
3		Dutch Cup (ice hockey) (talk)	Add sources
1,002		Vacuum tube (talk)	Add sources
110		Cold cathode (talk)	Add sources
4		Freight rail transport in Turkey (talk)	Add sources
95		Electron-beam welding (talk)	Add sources
22		Geology of England (talk)	Cleanup
392		Hemant Kumar (talk)	Cleanup
131		Charge carrier (talk)	Cleanup
2,860		Trazodone (talk)	Expand
172		Turkish State Railways (talk)	Expand
118		High-speed rail in Turkey (talk)	Expand
41		Thermionic converter (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
33		Chile–Peru relations (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
615		War of the Pacific (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
87		Yüksek Hızlı Tren (talk)	Merge
16		Trained band (talk)	Merge
4		Chabula acamasalis (talk)	Merge
5		NA-29 Peshawar-II (talk)	Wikify
168		Culture of Albania (talk)	Wikify
29		Willard Burleson (talk)	Wikify
17		Jonas Bergquist (talk)	Orphan
9		Sajdaa (talk)	Orphan
3		Spinterface (talk)	Orphan
7		Eindhoven Kemphanen (talk)	Stub
15		Gebze railway station (talk)	Stub
14		7,N,N-TMT (talk)	Stub
14		Oxypertine (talk)	Stub
4		Bill Wensink (talk)	Stub
5		Eaters Limburg (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Surname Kupffer

See here

• https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kupffer

--92.77.57.1 (talk) 14:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

That is not a reason my dear. The different versions of Wikipedia, eg German, French, English have different policies guiding notability, and research have, not sure but likely, researched that English Wikipedia has more strict rules than others. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

you can think what you want, but i think it's correct. --92.77.57.1 (talk) 14:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Move just accepted draft?

Hey @SafariScribe,

I have seen you have recently accepted a draft from AfC, now located at The Shulgin Index, Volume One: Psychedelic Phenethylamines and Related Compounds. Isn't it better if we move it to The Shulgin Index: Volume One, or just The Shulgin Index? I believe it is too long and can be moved. If you have no objection, I am ready to move it.

Thanks ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

 Done Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Mary Robertson moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mary Robertson. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hitro talk 21:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Mary May Robertson

Hi there,

While analyzing the sources, I noticed that you accepted this draft within about six minutes of its creation. Do you have access to The Telegraph? Did you observe that the subject is also the article’s author? Personally, I would have declined it and requested additional references. Please be mindful of your Schumacher's level velocity, as it may not be beneficial to the project. Regards. Hitro talk 19:05, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

There was a tag in the article that indicates the need for sources. Draftifying it appears to be a problem since you could have waited for some hours or even days. Before you start coming here, please did you search for sources, like a WP:BEFORE; because I see WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 45, 2024)

Hello, SafariScribe. The article for improvement of the week is: Slow living Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Space Age • Image Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI •

Mary Robertson moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mary Robertson. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and I believe UPE issue is here. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hitro talk 00:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Please I have no COI or UPE. Thanks. @HitroMilanese, why did you draftify an article twice? @Asilvering please intervene. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry @SafariScribe, I didn't get your ping here for some reason. I have reminded Hitro that this is an out-of-process redraftification and should be reversed. -- asilvering (talk) 00:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The Answer Studio

Hello. Thanks for suggestions. I want to clarify that I am not related to company. I have used Anime News Network as source mutiple times because it is considered a reliable entertainment website in anime community and is used in multiple articles as sources. Additionaly, I fixed references by adding additional third party as well as sources from company itself. Request to recheck the article if it can be submitted now. Thank You. Coolduckbird (talk) 07:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

We dont need citations to the film, we want sources that tells us about the film and how it was produced including the works of the producing company. Here the studio enters. I hope you do understood? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The article I made is about the films and tv series made by The Answer Studio. Detailed information of the films as wiki pages are not yet available because not enough articles are made since they are not very famous and most of them are catered towards kids. Although Imdb pages are availabe but it is not a reliable source. I think they are notable enough because they have significant coverage,WP:NEXIST. When other animation studios like Wit Studio started, initially they had just Attack on Titan, but it was notable enough to be made an article of the company. Thank you. Coolduckbird (talk) 11:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions, I have improved the draft. Coolduckbird (talk) 05:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @SafariScribe, could you plz check if the draft is better now? Coolduckbird (talk) 08:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Scott Foster (engineer)

Hello SafariScribe, this is absolutely wonderful work and feedback! Thank you so much for your work to make Wikipedia what it is today. The wikipedia community is proud to have you!

I have corrected all of your suggestions. It just so happens I was logged in when you left your comment - so I was able to get editing straight away.

Kind regards,

W

Qetuadgjzcbm (talk) 13:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)