User talk:IMacattack

Hello, IMacattack, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 19:37, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Getting started

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Intuitive guide to Wikipedia

Finding your way around

• Table of contents
• Directories and indexes
• Department directory

Editing articles

• How to develop an article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help

• Frequently asked questions
• Cheatsheet
• Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
• The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
• Help pages
• Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

• Community Portal
• Join a WikiProject
• Follow Wikipedia etiquette
• Practice civility
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Your submission at Articles for creation: Microskiff (February 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were: 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:Microskiff 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm a bit lost on the references as they are directly related to the article and are independent of the subject. What should they look like specific to this article? IMacattack (talk) 19:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi, for showing notability normally 3+ good sources are required. You have one real source and one from a non independent source that is also just a forum post. KylieTastic (talk) 20:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, not sure exactly how to process this as the term "Microskiff" was created by this online community almost 20 years ago. The term Microskiff really didn't exist until a group of us independently got together and created it. Now it's a widely used and well understood term to describe a specific niche within the general boating lexicon. We are the source for this term. Thus the forum where it originated (old posts are not available due to platform changes) is the most trusted, in-depth and reliable source. The term did not exists within the boating industry nor was it used before this time. IMacattack (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IMacattack! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Microskiff (February 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Curb Safe Charmer were: 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:Microskiff 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.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Microskiff (February 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by NegativeMP1 were: 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:Microskiff 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.

λ NegativeMP1 04:54, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you.

I have thoroughly reviewed the provided help materials and have revised the cited sources multiple times. However, each rejection continues to use the same boilerplate response without providing specific, direct examples of where or how the sources need to be adjusted. This process is beginning to appear subjective and arbitrary.

I formally request detailed, specific examples, resource by resource, explaining how they need to be modified in order to meet the approval criteria. Despite carefully reviewing the referenced help materials multiple times, they do not clarify how my cited sources fail to meet the required standards.

Furthermore, none of the sources cited are "materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed." To suggest otherwise is an entirely erroneous claim. A minimal amount of research by the reviewer would have revealed this before making such a baseless assertion. This is a serious and concerning accusation without any supporting evidence. I respectfully request that this statement be removed from the rejection, or that the reviewer provide concrete evidence proving that I am the creator of the cited sources. This raises concerns regarding the neutrality of the review process and the lack of thorough research conducted in approving or rejecting articles on this platform.

Additionally, the reviewer stated:

"This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia."

If the reviewer is unfamiliar with the topic, a minimal effort to research the subject would be beneficial before making such a claim. The assertion that there is an "appearance" of an advertisement without substantiating evidence only reinforces the perception of subjective bias in the review process.

I look forward to receiving a response with direct, specific, and objective recommendations for passing the approval process. Additionally, I request that any claims made against my submission be supported by research and evidence.

Respectfully yours. IMacattack (talk) 12:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)