User talk:FormaleAnzeige

Welcome!

Hello, FormaleAnzeige, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Randykitty (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities (January 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 Reconrabbit 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There is far too much information that the journal itself wants to convey, rather than what has been said about the journal, and the language used leans into WP:PUFFERY (for instance, no other article on Wikipedia uses the analogy of the "golden thread" outside of quotations made by other people). Also, the list of notable alumni is far too long to be appropriate for an encyclopedic article.

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:Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 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.

Recon rabbit 14:47, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FormaleAnzeige! 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! Recon rabbit 14:47, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Many problems

you must provide independent verifiable sources Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the an organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what an organisation claims or interviewing its management

Most of your text was referenced to your own articles, obviously not independent sources

Publications written by the person should be listed as such, in a separate section if preferred, with no references for the items. They should not be used as references either, since by definition they are not independent third-party sources as required here.

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

"Missions" are always a red flag, and sure enough your text is largely self-promotion, which led to the speedy deletion.

Hard to see notability when you appear to have no circulation figures. People aren't notable here unless they have an article, and I'm not sure you need such interminable lists anyway. Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have achieved their posts if not alumni?

You need a shorter article with real facts, genuinely independent references, and a neutral tone Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]