Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jeraxmoira was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
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:David Black (writer) 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.
Hello, JoClarke100!
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! Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to remove the < nowiki> and < code> tags in your user page to fix the COI tag. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your help, Jeraxmoira. I removed the COI tag and am working on adding "significant coverage" in secondary sources. Your continued review would be so helpful. I have never created an article before - only added to an existing one. JoClarke100 (talk) 13:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have removed it completely. You need to add "{{UserboxCOI|1=David Black (writer)}}" without the quotes on your user page. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Paul W were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Article is not written in prose in an encyclopedic style - the bullet points approach is not how biographies are presented. Key content should be written in proper sentences, with supporting references presented as inline citations. References should be drawn from significant coverage about Black in reliable, independent, secondary sources (the writer's website is not a reliable source). Some background on his education and career is needed for a biography.
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:David Black (writer) 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.
Thank you Paul. I had a feeling bulleted lists would not suffice and will work on a prose style. Is there any way for you to tell from looking at what we have submitted if David will be considered “wikiWorthy”? I understand the citation format is incorrect but I can assure you they are valid and will be corrected. However, I’d rather not do all that work if David will not be considered notable enough. I very much appreciate your time and expertise. JoClarke100 (talk) 13:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your input, Jeraxmoira. Here's what I have so far. There may be more coming. What do you think? Are we getting there?
Edgar Allan Poe Special Award from the Mystery Writers of America for best fact crime book: Murder at the Met
Writers’ Guild of America Award: The Confession
Writers Foundation of America Gold Medal for Excellence in Writing: TV movie, Legacy of Lies, a drama about three generations of Jewish gangsters and cops in Chicago, which starred Eli Wallach
nominations:
Pulitzer Prize nomination: The Plague Years, a book based on a two-part series that he wrote for Rolling Stone JoClarke100 (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have reliable sources to confirm the same? I believe he is likely notable under WP:ANYBIO. However, you still need a proper article for it to be accepted. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, User:JoClarke100. The awards themselves appear notable, so nominations for them and/or awards won (if supported by reliable citations) are likely to evidence his notability. As well as recreating content as prose, it would be helpful to present information in a clear, chronological order with dates so that readers can see and understand Black's career progression. If you look at other biographies of living people (BLPs), they often have a prose section outlining early years, education, career, then listing key works or publications (every section should include reliable sources). Hope this helps. Happy editing! Paul W (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Paul. Your suggestions are helpful. Many awards hang on Mr Black's wall but we are chasing down verifiable citations, which presumably have to be online [?] like these:
Both of those would suffice (rendered as inline web citations, not external links as you have done here). Online helps with speedy verifiability, but details in independently published books or offline journals are just as valid (so long as someone could conceivably go to a library or archive and verify the source). Paul W (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
