Pass only 2 sources one with primary and other source link not loading at all (server issue). Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 14:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass. (Ignoring the incorrect title) The article is short and has no sources, prime case for Reject IMHO.
Bogger (
talk) 16:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Bogger I make a policy of almost never rejecting the first submission to avoid being
WP:BITEY, some reviewers never reject and there is no requirement too. Someone could easily submit a one sentence article with no sources that is still a notable subject, a reject is only to deter clearly non-notable resubmission, and thus a reject requires a
WP:BEFORE check which is not a requirement for a standard review and decline. Oh but thanks for taking the time to do reviews.. thumbs-up
KylieTastic (
talk) 20:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Sounds good to me updated to "Pass"
Bogger (
talk) 21:12, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass This one made me think. Since I have no idea whether it is notable or not my view is that it was pushed back to the creating editor correctly. If they choose to improve it, great. If not an eventual G13 will dispose of it. I agree with the reviewer's thinking on
WP:BITE, Nothing is lost by sending this back for work.
FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 21:09, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass correct fails
WP:NMUSICIAN virtually no content and no sources, waste of everyone's time and effort.
Theroadislong (
talk) 09:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass I was almost ready to decline this with v, nn until it was already done. Such AfC submissions should be checked for cv if not already done as plots are usually copypsted by newbies. Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 15:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass clear NPOL; for such a short article a few rather glaring errors remaining ("wa" for "was"; there" for "their")... but this is only a nit-pick given the level of your contributions here! --
Goldsztajn (
talk) 10:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass Book database entries, book publishing sources. Clearly fails GNG as well as WP:AUTHOR. Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 15:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass – unsourced neologism;
WP:NOTDIC (These can be declined with the more specific "neo" decline reason, by the way.)
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 20:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass – wholly promotional, and in any event sourced to nothing but the author's YouTube videos.
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 20:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass very generous decline, but IMO correct all the same, as the article/stub was very new (far too new and underdeveloped to be submitted, in fact) and may still turn into something. --
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 07:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass Sometimes I love these easy accepts, sometimes I wonder if they're used, but a good accept regardless. -
2pou (
talk) 23:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Fail copyvio should have been caught; if there were no revisions to revert to, the draft would have, at the point of review, qualified for both g11 and g12, so it should have been noticed. Usedtobecool☎️ 08:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass. I would perhaps say mergeto another switch article, but there is a rather stark lack of sourcing in the draft.
LittlePuppers (
talk) 05:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass This would be inherently notable, except that there are zero sources for confirmation.
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions) 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass - does not appear notable outside of duo, much unsourced. There are also translation issues.
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions) 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass only 2 sources one with primary and other source link not loading at all (server issue). Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 14:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass. (Ignoring the incorrect title) The article is short and has no sources, prime case for Reject IMHO.
Bogger (
talk) 16:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Bogger I make a policy of almost never rejecting the first submission to avoid being
WP:BITEY, some reviewers never reject and there is no requirement too. Someone could easily submit a one sentence article with no sources that is still a notable subject, a reject is only to deter clearly non-notable resubmission, and thus a reject requires a
WP:BEFORE check which is not a requirement for a standard review and decline. Oh but thanks for taking the time to do reviews.. thumbs-up
KylieTastic (
talk) 20:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Sounds good to me updated to "Pass"
Bogger (
talk) 21:12, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass This one made me think. Since I have no idea whether it is notable or not my view is that it was pushed back to the creating editor correctly. If they choose to improve it, great. If not an eventual G13 will dispose of it. I agree with the reviewer's thinking on
WP:BITE, Nothing is lost by sending this back for work.
FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 21:09, 17 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass correct fails
WP:NMUSICIAN virtually no content and no sources, waste of everyone's time and effort.
Theroadislong (
talk) 09:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass I was almost ready to decline this with v, nn until it was already done. Such AfC submissions should be checked for cv if not already done as plots are usually copypsted by newbies. Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 15:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass clear NPOL; for such a short article a few rather glaring errors remaining ("wa" for "was"; there" for "their")... but this is only a nit-pick given the level of your contributions here! --
Goldsztajn (
talk) 10:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass Book database entries, book publishing sources. Clearly fails GNG as well as WP:AUTHOR. Good decline
TheBirdsShedTears (
talk) 15:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass – unsourced neologism;
WP:NOTDIC (These can be declined with the more specific "neo" decline reason, by the way.)
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 20:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass – wholly promotional, and in any event sourced to nothing but the author's YouTube videos.
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 20:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass very generous decline, but IMO correct all the same, as the article/stub was very new (far too new and underdeveloped to be submitted, in fact) and may still turn into something. --
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 07:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass Sometimes I love these easy accepts, sometimes I wonder if they're used, but a good accept regardless. -
2pou (
talk) 23:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Fail copyvio should have been caught; if there were no revisions to revert to, the draft would have, at the point of review, qualified for both g11 and g12, so it should have been noticed. Usedtobecool☎️ 08:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass. I would perhaps say mergeto another switch article, but there is a rather stark lack of sourcing in the draft.
LittlePuppers (
talk) 05:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass This would be inherently notable, except that there are zero sources for confirmation.
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions) 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Pass - does not appear notable outside of duo, much unsourced. There are also translation issues.
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions) 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)reply