Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CommanderWaterford was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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:DOGE-1 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:DOGE-1, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, KnowledgeableHrvatica!
Having an article 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! CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DOGE-1, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Your statement did not specify what the end of construction was. I see you meant to say end of construction of Unit 5 & 6. How do you know this date was 2010? You need to substantiate that statement or remove it.
Also where do you get the information to say the maintenance on the sarchofagus was good until the dissolution of the Soviet Union. How do you know that for a fact? You need to substantiate that statement or remove it.
The previous wording "it was further enclosed in 2017" is better because the Sarchofagus was not replaced by the New Safe Confinement. I don't think the word replaced is a good description because it can imply removed and replaced with.
If you want to delete a page that you created, where you are the primary contributor, just tag it for CSD G7 speedy deletion. You can find instructions on what code to place on the page at WP:G7.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to SVD-63, without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ✗plicit03:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The page was initially moved because the literal translation of the name is slightly misleading (and controversial to some) and the rifle (like many other firearms, especially those of Soviet design) is more commonly referred to by its acronym (SVD). The reason the page was subsequently moved from SVD-63 to SVD (firearm) is because SVD-63 is not an official designation of the rifle, as I mentioned in the edit, and consensus appears to have been reached by those watching the page closely. I contemplated waiting until SVD (rifle) was deleted until the page was moved, but I figured it would be better to correct the page name sooner. If this page cannot be moved to SVD (firearm), could the first change also be undone as well? KnowledgeableHrvatica (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As the notice atop SVD-63 states, the article should not be moved until the move discussion is closed. Move discussions are typically left open for at least a week. Plus, you have yet to receive a response for your comment at Talk:SVD-63#Requested move 18 August 2022, so I'd hardly call that consensus. I'm not quite sure what "the first change" refers to. Can you please clarify? ✗plicit04:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I had recently moved the page from "Dragunov Sniper Rifle" (Direct translation) to "SVD-63" (Acronym, but incorrect). Given the issues with the current name, it may be better to revert this change until a consensus regarding the new name is reached. KnowledgeableHrvatica (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
