Jantzzzzz

Your submission at Articles for creation: William B. Bonvillian (May 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Worldbruce 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:William B. Bonvillian 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:William B. Bonvillian, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Worldbruce (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Jantzzzzz! 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! Worldbruce (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:William Boone Bonvillian has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:William Boone Bonvillian. Thanks! Fiddle Faddle 17:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Editorial Suggestions from Fiddle Faddle on draft article on William Boone Bonvillian

I just received a comment from Fiddle Fiddle

Unfortunately I didn't see a way to respond to him or her on the page where I received the comment, so I am posting a response here in hopes that Fiddle Faddle will see it here or that someone else will tell me how to respond more directly.

Here is what Fiddle Faddle said:

Comment: Using papers written by the gentleman is not necessarily useful for referencing purposes. Let me try to explain. If they manufactured vacuum cleaners, the cleaners would be their work. A vacuum cleaner could not be a reference for them, simply because it is the product they make. So it is with research, writings, etc. However, a review of their work by others tends to be a review of them and their methods, so is a reference, as is a peer reviewed paper a reference for their work. You may find WP:ACADEME of some use in seeing how Wikipedia and Academe differ hugely For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, and is in WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Please take this firmly into account while awaiting a formal review Fiddle Faddle 17:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Here is my response: First, I want to thank you for taking the time to read my draft article (it is my first) and for trying to help me. I want to understand your comment better so that I can be successful in getting this article published. At this moment I am very confused about citing and what more to do.

Since I first submitted for review, I have updated the draft on William B. Bonvillian several times with citations that cover virtually every fact asserted. I did this in response to an exchange with Dragonfly6-7. I am hoping that you are commenting on an earlier version of the draft article. If not, I would ask you to give me a few examples of text that needs further citation.

With respect to the citation of Bonvillian's books I am not sure where to make a change. Where the article says that Bonvillian published a particular book, then citing the publisher's website should establish that that he indeed published the book and meets the mandate to cite every fact asserted in the article. Beyond being published by notable presses, Bonvillian's books (and journal articles) were all peer reviewed. Should I add that fact to the text or is that clear from the names of the presses (Oxford University and MIT) or journals? I will try to find some outside reviews of the books, but the ones that were on the Publisher's websites seem to have been taken down. I'll see what I can do here.

The comments about books and vacuum cleaners seem to aimed at the question of whether Mr. Bonvillian meets the notability criteria. While the published peer reviewed books and papers are certainly a part of his qualifications, there is a lot more here -- see, for example the tribute in the Congressional Record which lays out Bonvillian's numerous accomplishments in public service. Moreover, in a comment I received yesterday from Dragonfly6-7 I was told that Bonvillian's being made a AAAS fellow and his distinguished public service award from IEEE were adequate to establish the notability criteria. At Dragonfly's suggestion, I added direct cites to the AAAS fellows website and to the IEEE award cite. I also moved these items from the last paragraph to the first.

I think Bonvillian does warrant inclusion in Wikipedia and I hope that my inexperience in writing for Wikipedia does not stand in the way of his article being published. Please continue to he

Jantzzzzz (talk) 19:07, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

All I want you to do is to achieve the acceptance of the draft with the minimum possible work!

With books, papers etc, select the top three to form a bibliography, and refer to a catalogue like Worldcat for the remainder.

Examine your references against WP:42. Often fewer references (coupled with fewer facts) are better. Fiddle Faddle 19:23, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Fiddle Faddle We both have the same goal. is there an example of a well done article about a living person that I could look at? I think that might be very helpful. In the meantime, thank you again. JantzzzzzJantzzzzz (talk) 22:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Boone Bonvillian (September 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Salimfadhley 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:William Boone Bonvillian 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:William Boone Bonvillian, 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, 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.

Salimfadhley (talk) 10:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:William Boone Bonvillian has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:William Boone Bonvillian. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 14:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Boone Bonvillian has been accepted

William Boone Bonvillian, 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!

DGG ( talk ) 01:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)