User talk:Dawnmariehayes

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Norman Sicily Project (June 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zoozaz1 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:The Norman Sicily Project 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:The Norman Sicily Project, 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.

Zoozaz1 talk 22:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dawnmariehayes! 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! Zoozaz1 talk 22:32, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Norman Sicily Project (June 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Calliopejen1 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:The Norman Sicily Project 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:The Norman Sicily Project, 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.

Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:25, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

You appear to have a close connection to the subject on Wikipedia that raises concerns about a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged.

Anyone with a conflict of interest must avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing articles related to you, your family or colleagues, your organization or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);

   and you must always:

4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Note that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Even if you are not being paid, you are expected to disclose any close connection with the subject of the article, using the connected contributor template.

For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

Deb (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Norman Sicily Project (August 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jmcgnh 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:The Norman Sicily Project 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:The Norman Sicily Project, 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.

— jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Norman Sicily Project (August 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 Sahaib3005 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:The Norman Sicily Project 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:The Norman Sicily Project, 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.

Sahaib3005 (talk) 08:30, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:The Norman Sicily Project has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Norman Sicily Project. Thanks! Deb (talk) 13:13, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

I've been looking at this again and have come to the conclusion that the project doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. All the references seem to lead back to you. The best thing you can do is list it as a resource in the Norman Sicily article and wait until it has achieved some independent notability via independent media coverage (e.g. substantial coverage in periodicals, preferably not written by you) before trying to create an article. This will probably take some years. I don't think you will ever get this draft through review. Deb (talk) 10:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Deb,

Thanks very much for your reply. Without laboring the point, I have to respectfully - though strongly - disagree with your conclusion. I am unsure what you mean by "all the references seem to lead back to [me]." Of course they will, in some way, as I have been contacted by the editors of three of the publications. But they are independent, as per Wikipedia's guidelines. I have no relationship to any of them or totheir employees. In addition to the 4 sources I've included, I have been invited to publish an article on the project in a volume of collected essays soon to be published by Palgrave Macmillan - a book that will target a wide academic audience. In addition, the project has received support through a highly competitive process at the national level - winning funding after review by a panel of distinguished scholars assembled by the National Endowment for the Humanities as part of a grant program with a 17% funding rate (both the award and the program's funding rate are a matter of public record). I am confident that very few academic projects can demonstrate this level of notability.

I share this not to sing the project's praises - or to be difficult. Instead, I raise this as part of a more important issue. You had cautioned me earlier about using The Perseus Project's article as a guide since it is old and has not been vetted under Wikipedia's newer guidelines. However, I used it because I was hard-pressed to find more recent examples of articles on academic projects. Perhaps I have overlooked some and, if I have, I apologize. But I suspect this is because of the way Wikipedia reviews articles on academic projects. It seems to me that Wikipedia has largely shut out these kinds of articles by insisting on a moving - or perhaps ill-defined - notability target.

This is particularly unfortunate when a team is able to clearly demonstrate that its project has been deemed notable by numerous scholars in the field. I wonder about the wisdom of privileging volunteers - presumably many or perhaps all of whom are not formally trained in the subject - over the judgments of scholars who spend their professional lives assessing, reviewing and publishing in peer-reviewed venues. My apologies if this sounds elitist. But it is a valid question.

This leads me to the crux of why I have written. Putting aside the merit - or lack of merit - of the article I have drafted, I am asking if Wikipedia would consider opening a conversation on thinking differently about how it reviews articles on academic projects. If so, I would be happy to be part of that conversation. Wikipedia has done important work over the years and it would be wonderful if it put in place a more sensible policy for these kinds of articles.

Thanks again for your time,

Dawnmariehayes (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm really not the person to ask what Wikipedia can do. What you're proposing is that Wikipedia should lower its notability standards for research projects. The guidelines are made by the editors of Wikipedia, which includes you, so the place for you to argue for a change is probably Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) or perhaps just Wikipedia talk:Notability, where you could suggest the creation of alternative criteria for research projects. However, any topic that relies entirely on references to works written by its creators is unlikely to be generally regarded as notable in neutral terms, so be prepared for opposition. Deb (talk) 19:32, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:The Norman Sicily Project

Hello, Dawnmariehayes. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Norman Sicily Project, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)