From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
|
 |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|
:Showik123, you need to read [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources]]. There is no possibility of your draft being accepted while it fails to demonstrate that the book meets our notability criteria – which is indicated though significant coverage in published reliable sources with no connection to the subject matter. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 00:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC) |
:Showik123, you need to read [[Wikipedia:Notability]] and [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources]]. There is no possibility of your draft being accepted while it fails to demonstrate that the book meets our notability criteria – which is indicated though significant coverage in published reliable sources with no connection to the subject matter. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 00:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC) |
||
|
:@[[User:Showik123|Showik123]]: First and foremost, drafts are not “unavailable to see”; ”anyone” can see ”any” page on Wikipedia. Instead, it was moved here because it’s simply not ready yet to be included on the “main space” (article space, these do not have prefixes such as Draft: or Wikipedia: or Talk:). Now, as for tips? See [[Wikipedia:Notability (books)]] for what makes a book notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Also see [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction]] for how to write articles about books. To be honest with you, working on your first article is a very daunting task for a new editor to take, and you might be better off getting experience editing other book-related articles instead. I could give you more tips, but these are the ones that I got from the top of my head. Hope this helped. <sub>[[User:SignedInteger|S.G.]] (They/Them) [[User talk:SignedInteger|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/SignedInteger|(Edits)]]</sub> 00:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC) |
:@[[User:Showik123|Showik123]]: First and foremost, drafts are not “unavailable to see”; ”anyone” can see ”any” page on Wikipedia. Instead, it was moved here because it’s simply not ready yet to be included on the “main space” (article space, these do not have prefixes such as Draft: or Wikipedia: or Talk:). Now, as for tips? See [[Wikipedia:Notability (books)]] for what makes a book notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Also see [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction]] for how to write articles about books. To be honest with you, working on your first article is a very daunting task for a new editor to take, and you might be better off getting experience editing other book-related articles instead. I could give you more tips, but these are the ones that I got from the top of my head. Hope this helped. <sub>[[User:SignedInteger|S.G.]] (They/Them) [[User talk:SignedInteger|(Talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/SignedInteger|(Edits)]]</sub> 00:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC) |
||
|
I understand what you are saying about it being difficult. I’m still a little fuzzy on the reason it can’t be published. I read the notability section. It talks about books not being suitable as a resource if the author and the publisher are the same. This is true of this book, I see. Although I thought that was referring to a source that could be used to prove something else. It seems unrealistic to have that rule apply to a reference citing itself as nothing else could be a better representation of the book than the book referencing itself. What else could you possibly use? Or is this just a blanket rule that says no books that are published by the authors can be included? If so, I wish I hadn’t spent all day writing about this book, ha. |
|||
Latest revision as of 01:50, 11 January 2026
I do not know what you want me to do to make this page better. Can someone please help me. I do not understand why it was made unavailable to see. Showik123 (talk) 23:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
- Showik123, you need to read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. There is no possibility of your draft being accepted while it fails to demonstrate that the book meets our notability criteria – which is indicated though significant coverage in published reliable sources with no connection to the subject matter. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Showik123: First and foremost, drafts are not “unavailable to see”; anyone can see any page on Wikipedia. Instead, it was moved here because it’s simply not ready yet to be included on the “main space” (article space, these do not have prefixes such as Draft: or Wikipedia: or Talk:). Now, as for tips? See Wikipedia:Notability (books) for what makes a book notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Also see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction for how to write articles about books. To be honest with you, working on your first article is a very daunting task for a new editor to take, and you might be better off getting experience editing other book-related articles instead. I could give you more tips, but these are the ones that I got from the top of my head. Hope this helped. S.G. (They/Them) (Talk) (Edits) 00:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC)
I understand what you are saying about it being difficult. I’m still a little fuzzy on the reason it can’t be published. I read the notability section. It talks about books not being suitable as a resource if the author and the publisher are the same. This is true of this book, I see. Although I thought that was referring to a source that could be used to prove something else. It seems unrealistic to have that rule apply to a reference citing itself as nothing else could be a better representation of the book than the book referencing itself. What else could you possibly use? Or is this just a blanket rule that says no books that are published by the authors can be included? If so, I wish I hadn’t spent all day writing about this book, ha.
