Rushistoriia

Your submission at Articles for creation: James T. Andrews (September 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla 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:James T. Andrews 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:James T. Andrews, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 00:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rushistoriia! 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! Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 00:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James T. Andrews (April 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Modussiccandi 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:James T. Andrews 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:James T. Andrews, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Modussiccandi (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James T. Andrews (September 1)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by MaxnaCarta was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

MaxnaCarta (talk) 12:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I am wondering if it is possible to make adjustments to this submission so it can qualify for inclusion. As I read the guidelines for notability for academics, I see at three areas that would qualify for inclusion. These are points 1, 3, and 5 listed on the notability page for academics. "1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." The submission lists several examples of other important scholars commenting on the impact of his books. "3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society)" He is a member of the Russian Academy of Arts and Sciences. "5. The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon." He is a "University Professor" which is a type of distinguished professor. I am happy to make any further edits to make this clearer, but I wanted to understand on what grounds you rejected this submission. Rushistoriia (talk) 14:16, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

MaxnaCarta, pinging as you may not be monitoring this talk page. Hopefully can clear up the rejection, as unlike your other reviews, there are no comments to help others understand the decision. Another reviewer and I encouraged editor to get more feedback when they posted at AfC help desk last week. Slywriter (talk) 20:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter happy for you to undo the rejection and assist editor with a review if you see fit to accept it. MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter I’ve undone my own reject. I should have left a comment. I’ve only seen one relatively insubstantial edit since the last decline. That was all. Just seemed as though it was being submitted over and over without much addressing of issues. Cheers. MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

MaxnaCarta, Thank you. Just to explain the concern with rejection, article is a possible WP:NSCHOLAR pass, but needs improvements to sourcing, so unless an editor being disruptive with submission, no reason to deny them a chance at incremental improvement. And only reason it even became a concern was lack of explanation for the rejection, which was out of character as you leave often left detailed comments, so other reviewere couldn't quite see your thinking.

Rushhistoriia, with all that said, the last leg of the race is on you. If you need help, stop by the WP:TEAHOUSE or drop a line on my talk page. Article has potential, so would hate to see it given up on. Slywriter (talk) 03:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter I consider rejecting without explanation to be unacceptable and will do better. So I appreciate you finding this one and letting me know. Please know I always am open to undoing a reject if any AFC reviewer sees fit. There is never harm in allowing another go. Sometimes sheer rubbish is declined 3-4 times without improvement and I consider rejection necessary to ensure that other articles get a chance to be reviewed - the editor of the rejected article can always reach out to me for advice. 9/10 this does not happen and so rejection is an effective way of finalising the review of an article that is never going to meet notability yet will endlessly be resubmitted by the editor in hopes it will eventually be approved. This one does not fall under this criteria, so I ought not to have been so hurried. Appreciate the feedback Sly. MaxnaCarta (talk) 03:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarity and help with this. I am not exactly sure how to "talk" on your page, but I have made an attempt at edits, and have posted in the Teahouse to ask for feedback as well. Rushistoriia (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James T. Andrews (September 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Akevsharma 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:James T. Andrews 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.

Akevsharma (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Sections

I created sections that are commonly used for academics. Work on making sure all information is referenced. Some of this can be done by multiple use of your existing refs. David notMD (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, the sections look good, I will recheck the references. Rushistoriia (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James T. Andrews (February 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Praseodymium-141 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:James T. Andrews 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.

¹⁴¹Pr {^contribs/_{Best page}} 14:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)