HiMitral8! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mcmatter was:
Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability.
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 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:Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency), 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.
Hi. I was unable to find evidence that Sefficiency is a term that is used except in the publications of one author. As mentioned in the above message, neologisms aren't covered in Wikipedia unless they've become widespread. The article is also currently written more like an essay rather than an encyclopedic article that just summarizes what reliable sources have said. Your article has been moved to drafts under the title Draft:Sustainable efficiency where you can work on it further and submit it for review. I would not necessarily recommend that however as I couldn't immediately see that the topic of the article was notable yet. – Thjarkur(talk)15:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I am confusing things because I am new. Sorry. Two questions:
(1) I started an article with the title Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency) and submitted. It got rejected stating that it is promoting neologism and should be changed and resubmitted. I tried for the second time. But this time I wanted to take out Sefficiency from the title. I could not! So I forgot the article, and started a 2nd article called Sustainable efficiency, which I have not submitted yet (as much as I know!). Now it seems that these two are getting confused. What should be done?
(2) I am writing about Sustainable Efficiency, which is reduced, as an abbreviation to Sefficiency, a practice that is very common in science. I am not producing a new word and the intent is not neologism. However, you got the idea that I am promoting neologism. I presume this is about "Sefficiency". Assuming that you are reviewing the 2nd article, would you please explain, if possible, how did you come up with such an impression? Best regards Mitral8 (talk) 10:55, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for writing on my talk page, I had not been keeping a close eye on my watchlist so I missed your reply above. Regarding point 1, creating a new article under another title is fine (if you are the sole author), in the future you can use the move function (found under More > Move) to change an article's title. Regarding point 2, I assumed this was about introducing a neologism since the article's body text (but not the title) only used the term "Sefficiency". The main issue with the article currently is that it's written in more of an essay-style rather than a dry encyclopedic summary-style, but if you disagree you are free to move the article yourself to article-space by using the move function (just go to More > Move and change "New title: Draft" to "New title: Article") (or ask me to do so). Possibly the article should be titled "Sustainable efficiency in water systems" to distinguish it from the more general engineering topic? – Thjarkur(talk)16:31, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you for spending your time and giving very useful ideas. (1) Your idea of changing the title is very good, I will do it. (2) I do not know how to write in encyclopaedic style. If you know a guide or a video that can help, please let me know, if possible. (3) I declared in my space that I have COI with this article. Because of this and previous point 2, if you can help me or be an editor (I read some place that something like this is possible), I would appreciate. Mitral8 (talk) 10:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article Wikipedia:Writing better articles mentions a few helpful tips for how to imitate the encyclopedic style, such as not asking questions in prose and not including "should be obvious that...". In general though you can often just look at related articles and imitate their structure or style, for example the article Sustainable energy starts off with an accessible summary style introduction, and then the body goes into more detail while each section is clear on how it relates to the general concept. I may not be able to be of that much assistance in your field of expertise, but do feel free to write to me on my talk page if you have any questions, you can also write at the WP:Teahouse for general editing questions. I've added a comment to Draft:Sustainable efficiency in water systems. – Thjarkur(talk)11:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mitral8. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you. I sent Draft:Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency) to be reviewed. It is a new version and my last edit of the Draft Article was in early June (less than two months ago). If you see the end of the Draft, it says Review waiting, please be patient. So I am waiting for your review, why you are talking about deleting it, please? Mitral8 (talk) 19:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@FireflyBot: I am not an experienced Wikipedia user, so I am not sure whether you got the above text that I just wrote. I hope I get some response from you, letting what I should do. Mitral8 (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HiMitral8 - the draft in question hasn't been edited since February, and isn't currently awaiting review. You can see here when it was last edited. Are you thinking of a different draft perhaps? firefly ( t · c ) 10:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Firefly: You are correct. Months ago I started my first article Draft Draft:Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency) and was rejected. Then after talking to editors, it became clear that it is better to change the title and the content. Now this changed article Draft is Draft:Sustainable efficiency in water systems which is waiting to be reviewed. I guess I was confusing the two. Now the first one that you mentioned can be deleted. But I wonder if this action will also delete the 2nd Draft that is waiting for review? Sorry about the confusion. Mitral8 (talk) 23:38, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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:
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. 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.
The comment the reviewer left was:
This draft is written more like an essay than an encyclopedia article and seems to use obfuscatory jargon.
While I cannot read all of the references, it seems to be the case that there is a primary source core from Haie, and other subsidiary references that are inserted for explanatory purposes but not to demonstrate that the specific formulation laid out here is notable, as Wikipedia would define it. Some of the defects in the writing and sourcing could perhaps by remedied by any editor, but the problem remains that the concept developed here does not appear to be used outside of a very narrow subset of the field. The PubMed external link needs to be replaced with a citation. The China cites don't lead to something useful.
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 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:Sustainable efficiency in water systems, 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.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hello, Mitral8. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sustainable efficiency in water systems, 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.
Hello, Mitral8. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sefficiency (Sustainable efficiency), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
