User talk:WhinyTheYounger/Archives/2023/February

Orphaned non-free image File:Matt Daniels White House press conference 2006.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Matt Daniels White House press conference 2006.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 1Day Sooner (February 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by InterstellarGamer12321 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:1Day Sooner 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 11:40, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @InterstellarGamer12321 — thanks for the review. To be honest, little was done because I believe the original submission was in error; see the SigCov table I wrote up. Unfortunately, the editor who declined went inactive shortly after doing so, so I wasn't able to discuss with him. If you disagree with the SigCov table, I'd be happy to discuss more, but as it stands, I'm very confident that it meets GNG requirements. WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 17:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the article needs a cleanup. There are references with sigcov, but I assumed that there were issues with them because the last editor declined the draft. He had not left a specific comment, so his reasons were open to interpretation. Proofread the article, making sure to cite the reliable references but not cause WP:REFBOMBING. Once you have proofread it and resubmitted it I will accept the article. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 17:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I've made changes; Special:Diff/1140572190. I will say that 1Day in general received a lot of media coverage, which is why there are a lot of refs, but point taken re: the potential for refbombing. I suspect that there might have been confusion by the original reviewer based on a Ctrl + F search in a spotcheck of some of the articles — people variously wrote about "1Day Sooner", "OneDaySooner", "1 Day Sooner", etc.

I've removed a few single-instance citations. In the case of the survey article, where I cited a peer-reviewed PLOS ONE paper that included 1Day Sooner members, I also include citation to independent, significant coverage of the paper in Vox, which names 1Day Sooner and highlights the same two points made (re: altruism and potential exploitation) in the draft article. My goal was to make sure I wasn't just relying on possibly primary coverage to push what we wanted to be publicized out of that study. WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 18:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@InterstellarGamer12321: Went ahead and resubmitted Draft:1Day Sooner — thanks again for the feedback. WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 20:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I have accepted the draft and it is now a proper article. Sorry for the delay. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 09:00, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 1Day Sooner has been accepted

1Day Sooner, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 08:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 23 February 2023 (UTC)