Draft talk:George J. Seideneck

Reviewers comments

The comment from Netherzone is untrue. The sources provided back up the statement: "In 1911, Seideneck left for art training in Europe with painter and teacher William Victor Higgins. The first year was spent with studies in St Ives, a seaport town at Cornwall, England. There, he received instruction from the Canadian painter Harry Britton, and developed skills in portraiture. He also delved into landscape painting and utilized his camera to capture scenes for future reference in his artwork. He exhibited with the St Ives painters at their Show Day in March, 1912."

If Netherzone were to read the entire article and all the sources, then it would become clear that the sources cited cover this paragraph. See citations for the following: GEORGE JOSEPH SEIDENECK, The Cornishman. In the future, please use the talk page to discuss issues instead of rejecting the entire article. Greg Henderson (talk) 02:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

No, the two sources for that statement when the draft was declined were [1] and [2], neither of which back up the content that he "utilized his camera to capture scenes for future reference in his artwork" nor mention the word camera or photography at all. The sources in your message above were not those that were in the draft when it was declined. Netherzone (talk) 03:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Verifiability is policy WP:V. Reviewer guidelines for notability and verifiability state that if the sources don't verify the content of the submission, the course of action is to decline the submission. Netherzone (talk) 04:33, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, you jumped the gun on declining this article. It was well sourced. You could have made an inline tag to suggest moving or adding a citation closer to the text. It did not warrant a full decline. I am surprised that you are so quick to decline an article instead of working with the creator of the article. In the future, please talk to me about this before declining an article. Greg Henderson (talk) 05:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

You are of course entitled to your opinion. However, the fact that there have been so many instances of poor-and inaccurate sourcing in your articles over the years that it was one of the contributing factors that led to your block. To demand that reviewers waste more time hand-holding/mentoring/teaching when many have already done so over a period of years is unreasonable. Again, please double check your own work and review all your sources against the content before resubmitting otherwise they will be declined again. I get it that sometimes mistakes are made, but please consider paying closer attention, and slow down. WP is not a contest for numbers of articles created or a race to an imaginary finish line. Think quality not quantity. Please kindly submit correctly sourced drafts in the future because that will also help to resolve the flood of edit requests for your articles. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 19:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I have placed no demands on you or anyone else. All I ask is that you talk to me about this before declining an article. I think it is rude to make comments like "This is an ongoing problem with this editor," as if to say, don't accept this article because the editor has an ongoing problem. Rather, we should encourage each other and work together to create meaningful articles. My articles are well sources and are written about historical figures or places. Most are accepted after only a few days of being listed for review. Greg Henderson (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)