User talk:Huma.hamid

Huma.hamid, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Huma.hamid! 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 Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Code for Pakistan (April 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Yashovardhan Dhanania was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

We need reliable secondary sources such as news releases on major publications (even if local).

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 would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Code for Pakistan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Yashovardhan (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Code for Pakistan (June 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DrStrauss was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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 would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Code for Pakistan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DrStrauss talk 14:04, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Discouraged by reviewers feedback

Hello, Huma.hamid. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Marchjuly (talk) 07:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Code for Pakistan has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Code for Pakistan. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Code for Pakistan (January 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dial911 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The lede section is supported by primary sources i.e. their own website. Please cite reliable, independent and secondary sources for the information in the lede section. Primary sources are not deemed as reliable and independent.

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 would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Code for Pakistan and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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:Code for Pakistan, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dial911 (talk) 21:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention is required.

Hello! Huma, thanks for reaching out. I appreciate your enthusiasm for contributing to Wikipedia. Your article about CfP has been declined primarily because it has not garnered significant coverage in reliable, independent sources yet. What I see is just some trivial mentions in some reputed media organizations. This is okay for supplementry information only.

Also, please bear in mind that significant coverage in two reliable sources is more powerful than 20 sources with mere trivial mention of the subject. Moreover, notability is not inherited. Just because CfA has an article does not guarantee that CfP will have its stand alone article. Though, with some improvements it will be included in the encyclopedia.

Please remove and re-write whatever you copied from this website: http://www.openislamabad.org/sheba-najmi-redefining-the-tech-landscape-through-code-for-pakistan-san-francisco-california/

Please remove any unnecessary information as Wikipedia is not a news site. Also, an article that reads like an essay is not acceptable. Blogs, primary websites and interviews are not notable as per encyclopedia’s standards.

Please restructure your article and we shall be good to go. Thanks again for reaching out. Do not hesitate to ask if you need any further assistance. Dial911 (talk) 00:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Dial911 (talk) 00:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dial911,

Thank you for a detailed feedback. I have two followup questions, which will help me in further improving the article.

1. You have asked me to remove the reference of one of the blog posts (which I will do as it is clear that a blog post is not considered to be a reliable resource for Wikipedia), however, you have also asked me to rewrite the copied material, to which I would say that it is not copied material, but it is definitely inspired by that blog post. Since I am also the original author of both the articles, hence the similarities. Can I not use my own writing to reproduce a similar content? What is the concern here? Copyright or identical thought or selection or words etc?

2. My second question is related to the flow of the article. I have tried to stay as close as possible to an existing Wikipedia entry for Code for Pakistan's sister organization i.e. Code for America. If I change the flow (not like an essay or a news update), which other example or guideline should I follow or refer to?

Thank you again for your help!

Huma.hamid (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I put your article through our plagiarism detector and it shows substantial and exact chunks of texts directly copy-pasted from your blog. Taking inspiration does not mean copy-pasting texts. I am sure the thought behind the subject is going to be the same; however, it does not have to be the exact version. You can paraphrase it, or probably find even better way to formally express it. Hope this helps. Refer to this for better understanding about the tone of the article. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dial911 (talk • contribs) 04:05, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Got it! Thank you!

I will try my best to come up with a better version, however, it is looking more and more challenging to write an article for Wikipedia. :(

Huma.hamid (talk) 21:20, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't lose hope. Once you get the hang of it, contributing to Wikipedia will feel equally or even more rewarding. Dial911 (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Code for Pakistan concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Code for Pakistan, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Code for Pakistan concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Code for Pakistan, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Code for Pakistan

Hello, Huma.hamid. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Code for Pakistan".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]