Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Prince of Erebor were:
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
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:34613 (2000 UR13) 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.
Hello, HehgRja!
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! Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul）05:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is just for the orbital and physical components if someone has info to add I will add it minorlanetcenter.net is where I get the orbital and some physical components this is just for people to know if they are space geeks like me HehgRja (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If all (or most) of the info is from minorplanetcenter.net and there's nothing else that can be added, unfortunately Wikipedia isn't really interested in hosting that article. Other people interested in this specific planet can check out that site for the same info that we'd be hosting here. Also, I'm not sure if this is anywhere enshrined in a guideline, but you basically have to have actual text in the article outside of an infobox. Skarmory(talk •contribs)06:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Skarmory were:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
The comment the reviewer left was:
There is no text in the article outside of the infobox, and just a single reference. Please write a couple of sentences that can be backed by sources, and before putting any more work into the article, you should check if it can even meet the notability guidelines for astronomical objects.
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:34613 (2000 UR13) 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.
It is an asteroid I can barely find information on it like shape in depth stuff so please add it I can’t find other info on it I’m tired it 11:24 pm please add it HehgRja (talk) 06:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also you call some of these sources reliable but I look stuff up on nasas things and they are wrong I’m actually giving stuff off of eyes on asteroids a nasa website and minor planet center database ok like the size I don’t care if it’s like 1-5 off but when it’s 10-20 off for meters or kilometres even 0.010 0.020 or 0.1 off I get a little made if it’s a asteroid that is not even a kilometre in diameter so at least I’m giving more reliable sources and I now know why a lot of people don’t bother trying to upload something on Wikipedia instead they use a different wiki because Wikipedia allows not reliable or accurate stuff onto the website but when someone has accurate but not in depth enough info it gets rejected and I’m adding stuff as I research it I adde just the basics sense I need sleep I will continue it tomorrow HehgRja (talk) 06:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
The comment the reviewer left was:
The draft still has no text. Please do not submit it until there is actual, reliably sourced information, written in paragraphs and showing how it meets the notability criteria.
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:34613 (2000 UR13) 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.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
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:36017 (1999 ND43) 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.
