Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Eyebeller were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Samuel Stanford Ashley and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Samuel Stanford Ashley, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eyebeller (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Littledansonman! Having an article 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! Eyebeller (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Littledansonman. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Samuel Stanford Ashley".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 23:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Maude White Katz, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the update! I really hope this next iteration of the article can make it on to the main space. Seeing that there are articles out there about important people without any sources (Zeng Qi) I believe that this has been sourced enough to be put into main space. Littledansonman (talk) 16:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Karnataka were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Each statement needs to be sourced, multiple parts of the 'biography' remain unsourced, and many of it reads like an essay. The 'biography' can also be condensed and split up, and sections that explain her significance is required. See MOS:

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Maude White Katz 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Karnataka (talk) 21:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maude White Katz, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

S0091 (talk) 19:43, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Littledansonman, I tagged Maude White Katz with issues relating to the use of primary sources and neutrality because most of the content is supported by an interview with her which is a primary source so should only be used sparingly and does not contribute to notability. However, it appears some of the other cited sources support at least some of the content you cited to the interview so I suggest switching sources where possible. If the only source available is the interview, I suggest either removing the content or at least attributing it to her (i.e. "In an interview with blah, Katz claimed blah or "According to Katz,....", or something of the like). I accepted the article despite these issues because of some other sources you cited and a brief search on JSTOR suggested she does meet the notability criteria. If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. I will also leave you some additional information about editing Wikipedia. You may also be interested in WikiProject Women in Red, which is dedicated to creating/maintaining articles about women and other topics that suffer from systemic bias. S0091 (talk) 20:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for accepting the article. It feels great knowing that can help to catalogue this history. I will work on updating the article and I'm sure those who are real experts in the history will apply their own magic to the page. Littledansonman (talk) 07:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Littledansonman!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

• Editing
• Referencing
• Images
• Tables
• Policies and guidelines
• Talk pages
• Navigating
• Manual of Style

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

• Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
• It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
• If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
• Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
• When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
• If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
• Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, S0091 (talk) 20:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]