User talk:130.245.132.3
{{Talk header}}
Your submission at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|Articles for creation]]: [[Draft:Ryan L. Boyd|Ryan L. Boyd]] (May 23)
{{divbox|gray|3=This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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.
{{clear}}
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ryan L. Boyd 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.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:Ryan_L._Boyd Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ToadetteEdit&action=edit§ion=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Ryan_L._Boyd reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 08:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
:The revised submission directly addresses the previous rejection regarding notability and insufficient coverage in reliable, secondary sources:
:1) Expanded Independent Coverage: The draft now cites over a dozen independent, reliable, secondary sources that provide significant coverage of the subject's research contributions. These include detailed discussions in outlets such as The New Yorker, CNN, The Boston Globe, The Los Angeles Times, Associated Press, Forbes, and The Telegraph.
:2) Restructured Research Sections: The article has been restructured to highlight distinct areas of scholarly contribution (namely psychological stylometry, political psychology, and emotional language use), each of which is supported by peer-reviewed research and independent secondary commentary.
:3) Citations Now Demonstrate Notability: Inline citations now reference multiple published journal articles, along with mainstream secondary sources that go beyond brief mentions to provide substantive engagement with the subject's work. For example, the analysis of Double Falsehood is supported by independent discussions in multiple national publications and journals.
:I believe that these changes collectively satisfy the Wikipedia notability criteria for academics and researchers by demonstrating sustained, independent coverage in reliable secondary sources. 130.245.132.3 (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
| style="margin: 0.4em 2em;" |
| style="vertical-align: top;"
| Hello, 130.245.132.3!
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! ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 08:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC) |
Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC