Jump to content

User talk:J2UDY7r00CRjH

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EdmHopLover1995 (talk | contribs) at 02:12, 14 May 2024 (→‎Llama.cpp moved to draftspace: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Unreal Engine 5 Video Games (December 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Qcne was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
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.
Qcne (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources.

@Qcne The source for these claims is simply the links themselves which contain Engine = Unreal Engine 5 in their infoboxes. See also for example List_of_PlayStation_games_(M–Z) or List_of_plants_known_as_orange. These types of lists do not necessarily need sources linked as they are contained in the items of the lists themselves (that is, the linked Wikipedia articles). J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists, which states lists should have sources. The existence of lists without sources already on Wikipedia shouldn't be a basis to create more unsourced lists. Qcne (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Qcne Thanks for your reply. Most of the infobox information isn't directly sourced (although may appear in some of the sources of the article in general). In light of this fact I will not pursue this list anymore, despite the fact that it is in my opinion highly valuable for readers, as I can't be bothered to do all that work of sifting through the sources. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, J2UDY7r00CRjH! 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! Qcne (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Llama.cpp moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Llama.cpp, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. EdmHopLover1995 (talk) 00:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why specifically do you feel that the article does not meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines? In line with the general notability guidelines and the recommendation in Wikipedia:Multiple_sources that "it seems that challenges to notability are successfully rebuffed when there are three good in-depth references in reliable sources that are independent of each other" I have four sources that are mainly about llama.cpp that explain what the software is and how to use it. Two sources are from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources and one is from an academic journal (with one of the keywords listed in that paper being "llama.cpp"). I feel that the article should be moved back to article space. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 01:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think you should a closer look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. I do agree that those two sources would be considered reliable sources, however they do not offer significant coverage, most of your article's content relies on original research not found in either source. EdmHopLover1995 (talk) 01:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for replying. Can you explain why those articles do not offer significant coverage? To me, they "address the topic directly and in detail" as they are primarily about llama.cpp and explain what it does, how to use it, and why it is important. Is it the length that is the issue? Also, I can remove all the as yet unverified claims I made in the article. Would that fix the problem? J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 02:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all! The length isn't necessarily a determining factor for an article. Removing any unverified claims would certainly make the article ready for main-space in my opinion. I'd like to hear @CanonNi's opinion as well. EdmHopLover1995 (talk) 02:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Llama.cpp (May 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CanonNi was:
Recently draftified, do not resubmit without improvement.
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.
'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:J2UDY7r00CRjH&oldid=1223746610"