Talk:Ali Cobby Eckermann

Notability

Due to the news.com.au profile and fact that Ms Eckermann has won a top-tier literary prize (the NSW Premier's awards, in two categories) I think that notability is established here and this should be moved into article space. Nick-D (talk) 04:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Just adding to the above - Ali Cobby Eckermann this month won a Windham-Campbell Prize, one of the most prestigious international literary prizes. Combined with the other publications and prizes mentioned in the article, notability seems well established. User:Runciblehon

@Nick-D and Runciblehon: I've moved this back into Draft space. You both might well be correct about the notability, but the fact remains that the draft's creator has requested a review and has not withdrawn that request. NewYorkActuary (talk) 10:48, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

@NewYorkActuary: Hi New York Actuary. I think that Nick and Runciblehon were trying to fix what is seen as a problem with the process on this article. I'm the draft's creator and had it rejected by SwisterTwister on what seem to be spurious grounds - i.e. lack of notability. I don't understand the process anymore - I have created several Wikipedia articles in the past but the system seems inexplicable now. What do you do when a draft is rejected the way this one was? Sterry2607 (talk) 11:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Sterry. Thanks for weighing in here. Before answering your question, let me make clear that my decision to move this back into Draft space was not based on any opinion as to the subject's notability. It was based solely on my own concerns about "process". Specifically, as the person who requested a review, it is you -- and you alone -- who has the right to withdraw that request. By moving the draft back here, I was looking only to restore that right to you.

So what to do when you disagree with a reviewer's assessment? There are several things that can be done. You can post a question on the reviewer's Talk page asking for clarification or further explanation. Or, you can post a question at the AfC Help Desk (a link to which appears in the "decline" box), asking the same thing or asking for review by another person. Or you can resubmit the draft, effectively getting a second review (and when notability is the only reason for declining a submission, most of us here won't review the draft a second time -- we'll leave it to someone else to give their opinion).

But there's another option on top of all those -- you can withdraw your request and move the Draft into article space yourself. No one here will object to you doing that, because there is no requirement that you participate in the AfC process and no requirement that you maintain that participation even after starting it. If that's the approach you want to take, I'll be happy to help you accomplish that.

I hope this response has been helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 11:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks NewYorkActuary. Thanks for this - and yes, I understood your reasons and certainly didn't take offence (though I was bothered by the initial rejection which didn't make sense at all). The people who did the move are new to Wikipedia, I think, and misunderstood what "move" meant. I believe the article is good enough to go into the article space. It's a long time since I've done an article from scratch and somehow I fell into the AfC system thinking that was mandatory now. If it's not, and I can just move it into the article space, then thanks, yes, I'd like to know how to do that with this article. (I'm a retired librarian/archivist and an active lit blogger, so am not about to produce - I think anyhow - shoddy articles - so would prefer not to e part of this AfC system if it's not necessary). Sterry2607 (talk) 12:16, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay, Sterry. You're good to go. Thanks for your patience. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to add more project banners if you feel that others would also be appropriate. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much NewYorkActuary. I'll check to see if there's any others e.g. indigenous Australian. Thanks again for all your help Sterry2607 (talk) 14:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi both, I'm the source of the problem here - I jumped the gun in moving the draft into the article space. Sorry! Glad it has been sorted out. Thanks for your patience and explanations.Runciblehon (talk) 19:13, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

No worries. It all worked out in the end. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Bibliography

Note that the bibliographical citations came from the National Library of Australia with some listed under Cobby Eckermann, and some under Eckermann. This has been queried with the NLA, and will be fixed when they respond. If they respond that the author should be Cobby Eckermann, I will also fix the Default Sort. Sterry2607 (talk) 14:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)