 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,783 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
| Submission declined on 26 March 2024 by Mach61 (talk). 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.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
| Submission declined on 17 January 2024 by Johannes Maximilian (talk). 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. Declined by Johannes Maximilian 6 months ago. | |
Comment: Okay, let me go through this. Now, on English Wikipedia you should, in general, cite secondary, independent, reliable, significant-coverage sources. A citation usually includes an author's name, the work's title, the name of the source or media, and a date. Your first citation does neither contain an author's name, nor does it specify the work; the date is missing. If you had cited the source properly, it would have been immediately obvious to the knowledgable AfC reviewer that the source is a good one. Footnote 2 refers to the subject's personal website, but it does not provide any useful information, or indicate any sourcing in the sense of that word. Footnote 3 refers to a primary source; it proves the fact, but it doesn't indicate why the fact qualifies for inclusion in this article. Footnote 4 refers to a an online source that cannot be accessed, and the citation makes no sense, i.e., it is meaningless, and it wouldn't make a difference if this footnote was not present. Footnote 5 refers to an interview, which does not count as a reliable source. Footnote 6 contains a proper citation, but it refers to the subject as a source. Footnote 7 does not contain a proper citation, and it also refers to the subject as a source. Footnote 8: Okay. Footnote 9, 10, and 12 seem to refer to program notes if I see that correctly; that does not count as a source. Footnote 11 is a proper citation, but the page is missing from that citation. Also note that, footnotes 1, 7, 10, 11, and 12 are placed at the beginning of a section, i.e., technically, they are not used as citations because it remains unclear what they're being used for. I also suggest that you remove footnotes 1 and 2 from the section headings. I must also add that, you should cite sources that indicate why Wikipedia would have an article on Beil – currently, I'm not quite conviced that the sources indicate notability. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 23:30, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Wikipedia is not a place to establish knowledge (or opinions), it is a work that depicts established knowledge (or opinions). The cited sources do not support the text. --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 21:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Michael Beil (Weinheim, July 13, 1963) is a German composer of contemporary music. Characteristics of his oeuvre are the combination of instrumental music with live-audio and live-video, and the use of theatrical elements such as a detailed stage direction and scenography. Since 2007 he has been a professor of electronic composition at the Hochschule für Musik und Tanz in Cologne, where he is in charge of the studio for electronic music.