Draft:Jessica Urlichs
New Zealand author of poetry and children's books / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jessica Urlichs (born 30 November 1987) is a New Zealand poet and author[1]. Her first three self-published poetry books were based on motherhood. Her first of two children's books was based on emotions and reached number one on the best seller children's book list in New Zealand in April 2021, followed by her book on parenthood "You Hung the Moon", which also reached number one in Australia and New Zealand in 2023.
Submission rejected on 19 June 2024 by SL93 (talk). This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Rejected by SL93 20 days ago. Last edited by SL93 20 days ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 23 February 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 4 months ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 3 October 2023 by Spinster300 (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. Declined by Spinster300 9 months ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 5 August 2022 by Cabrils (talk). 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. Declined by Cabrils 23 months ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 13 July 2022 by Theroadislong (talk). 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. Declined by Theroadislong 23 months ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 18 February 2022 by Paul W (talk). 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. Declined by Paul W 2 years ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 11 February 2022 by MurielMary (talk). 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. Declined by MurielMary 2 years ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 30 November 2021 by Johannes Maximilian (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. Declined by Johannes Maximilian 2 years ago. | ![]() |
Submission declined on 8 October 2021 by Theroadislong (talk). 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. Declined by Theroadislong 2 years ago. | ![]() |
Comment: Several rejections later, and still no notability has been shown. SL93 (talk) 00:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently does not. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable . Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see referencing for beginners. Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft- presently the draft would be (at best) WP:TOOSOON- there's just insufficient reliable sources. If you feel you can meet these requirements then resubmit the page and ping me and I would be happy to reassess. Cabrils (talk) 02:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Comment: As MurielMary has commented, the article does not establish notability (WP:NCREATIVE), verifiable via significant coverage about the subject in reliable, independent sources. The article's current references mainly derives from the subject's own work (by her, not about her), from PR/publicity outputs, and from interviews/podcasts (Note: interviews are primary sources – Wikipedia requires secondary source material). This may also just be WP:TOOSOON. Paul W (talk) 15:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Comment: To clarify why this draft hasn't been accepted yet – there is insufficient evidence that the subject meets any of the criteria of a notable writer. You can read the criteria here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals MurielMary (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Thanks for creating this draft – you need to make a statement of your conflict of interest on your talk page and on the talk page of this article. Also the subject doesn't meet the notability criteria for a writer to have an article on Wikipedia. MurielMary (talk) 23:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Please abide by Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy and remove all external links from the article body. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 22:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Comment: not clear how they pass WP:NWRITER and we don't use external links in the body of an article Theroadislong (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (February 2022) |
Quick Facts Name, Born ...
— Wikipedian — | |
![]() Urlichs in 2021 | |
Name | Jessica Urlichs |
---|---|
Born | Christchurch, New Zealand |
Education and employment | |
Occupation | Author |
Contact info | |
Website | www |
Close