Article alerts |
|---|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Request a Co-Author
I have a draft at Draft:Startup_Illness that I cannot submit myself due to a conflict of interest. I am the author of the book. Could an experienced editor please review and submit this draft if it meets Wikipedia's guidelines? Draft link: Draft:Startup_Illness I am disclosing my conflict of interest as required by Wikipedia's COI guidelines. The book is a fiction novel published in December 2025 titled Startup Illness: A Story of Burnout, Ambition, and Peace by Mr. Mujtaba. Mujtabaeditior (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for being up-front and conscientious about your conflict of interest. To clarify, editors with a conflict of interest can't publish articles about their closely connected topics, but writing a draft and then submitting it through the Articles for Creation process is actually the desired alternative. So, in principle, you are very welcome to submit drafts for review even with a conflict of interest.
- In the specific case of Draft:Startup Illness, however, it looks like it went through the Articles for Creation process several times and was rejected. A rejection is usually a final decision, meaning that independent editors have evaluated the topic and decided that it cannot meet our criteria to have an article. In the case of books, those criteria are documented at WP:NBOOK and generally boil down to having at least two detailed, third-party, professional book reviews (eg at Kirkus or The Guardian). A rejection can only typically be overturned if something has really changed about the underlying topic, such as if new book reviews have been published. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 03:32, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification, LEvalyn. That is very helpful to understand the process correctly.
- I understand that the draft was rejected due to lack of third-party professional book reviews, and that this is the core requirement under WP:NBOOK. I am currently working on obtaining independent professional reviews from credible publications. Once I have at least two detailed third-party reviews published, I intend to resubmit the draft with those reviews as citations.
- Would that be the correct approach to overturn the rejection? I want to make sure I follow the right process before resubmitting.
- Thank you again for your guidance.
Mujtabaeditior (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, if new sources exist that let a book meet our criteria, that can allow for a new article draft being submitted even after a rejection; ping me with {{u|LEvalyn}} in such a case and I can help with resubmitting.
- However, I should warn you that most reviews that you can pursue will not meet Wikipedia’s criteria as “independent”. For example, a review in Kirkus meets our criteria, but a review in “Kirkus Indie” does not. If you have paid a reviewer to write about your book— even if you have no editorial control over the result— Wikipedia does not consider that “independent” and the review will not qualify. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 14:47, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
"Crash of 1929 book" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Crash of 1929 book has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 31 § Crash of 1929 book until a consensus is reached. ScalarFactor (talk) 14:46, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Bookland#Requested move 28 May 2026
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Bookland#Requested move 28 May 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 03:56, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
Requesting a neutrality review
I'm hoping someone can give an independent review for neutrality of The Polymath. Please have a look at the article and make any suggestions in the Talk page thread. Thanks in advance, MartinPoulter (talk) 09:48, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Energy Work
The article Energy Work has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Tagged for notability concerns and only primary sources for 10 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. Poorly sourced stub about a book that has no objective reviews.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.
If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 04:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)