Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Beachweak was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Cecilia Benattar 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.

Beachweak (talk) 01:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Beachweak,

Thank you so much for reaching out and offering your support. I have resubmitted a new and improved draft on Cecilia Benattar and am hopeful that it meets the necessary criteria this time. I really appreciate your guidance and advice regarding my previous submission, and it has been invaluable in making improvements.

Could you kindly check on the resubmitted draft for me? Your expertise and feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Best regards,

Marlaytoday Marlaytoday (talk) 17:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for taking the time to adjust your draft.

Taking a quick look over everything, the prose seems much better (although the Legacy section could still use some work). The main issue with the article as it stands is establishing notability. As per WP:NBIO and WP:BASIC specifically, "people are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". As of your current revision, the article only cites one source (and a bunch of Wikipedia guidelines, which it does not need to do).

If you can find multiple, reliable sources that are independent about the subject that discuss Cecilia and can be used to back up the points in the article, this can definitely be published. One source alone does not establish notability. Beachweak (talk) 18:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have meticulously revised this draft to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines, ensuring that it maintains a neutral perspective throughout. The article incorporates comprehensive citations from reputable and independent sources. The tone and formatting are consistent with an encyclopedia. Promotional language has been eliminated. The subject's notability is evident through substantial third-party coverage. Take a look please : ) Marlaytoday (talk) 20:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just finished taking a look at the draft. While the sourcing looks much better than before, the language is still not in line with a neutral tone. Some immediate examples I can spot are phrases like "a trailblazing figure who revolutionized New York City’s real estate industry" and "Benattar’s career was marked by groundbreaking achievements". Language like this is not neutral and can come off promotional. Additionally, I see you have moved the article to mainspace whilst it isn't ready for publishing. This is not ideal and in the future I advise against doing so. Beachweak (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Marlaytoday! 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! Beachweak (talk) 01:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Cecilia Benattar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it is clearly not neutral tone. 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 for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Theroadislong (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a bunch of changes to the page and would love to get your feedback. I've taken your suggestions into effect and would really appreciate it if you could give it a look and let me know if you're happy with the revisions. Thanks a bunch! :) Marlaytoday (talk) 10:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well the very first sentence says "a successful real estate developer, defying the traditional norms within the male-dominated industry" which is CLEARLY not neutral tone! Theroadislong (talk) 10:29, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused, though. That's what articles say about her. Would you prefer I write inaccurate information? Marlaytoday (talk) 10:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited for neutral tone if you would like to take a look and submit it for review. Theroadislong (talk) 10:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]