Editing Eurovision Wiki talk:WikiProject Articles for creation (section)

== Overhaul of the AfC templates ==

I've been working on a comprehensive rewrite of the AfC decline notices. I've felt for a long while that the current templates are pretty bureaucratic, jargon-heavy, and can be confusing for new users. Some of them are also inconsistent in formatting, tone, and language.

The goal of the rewrites are:

* Decodes jargon and simplifies the language into plain-English.
* Removes some of the walls of text (replacing with bullet points as much as possible).
* Limits the use of links to policy so as not to overwhelm users.
* Provides actionable criteria for improvement.
* Standardises tone, language, and formatting.
* Hopefully cuts down on newbie confusion and questions at the AFCHD.

Feedback on specific wording or anything missing would be appreciated.

[[User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites|'''User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites''']]

Is there appetite, if there is consensus, to re-write the decline notices with something like what I have proposed? <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 23:28, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

:* Broadly supportive - particularly simplifying the language and making it more friendly. I'm not sure what difference it will make, but that is perhaps coloured by the revolving door articles, when actually most articles are not on a revolving door. I take the point about overwhelming contributors with a policy wall, but if we decline on policy / guidance grounds then it may make it more difficult to see the issue, though of course the text box can help there. One idea that may get around this is to have for each decline option there is a link to a friendly Essay, explaining the issue a bit more, and hints to next steps. This could then allow shorter messaging on the decline template, so the LLM one won't need to explain the hallucination point. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 11:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:Clear improvement, especially the ai notice, which were starting to become outdated. It achieves all goals stated in the Rationale. I have no qualms with replacing the current set with this one. 
:I do think the notices on SNGs needs to be differentiated. Lasting coverage is typically required for [[WP:NEVENT]], and [[WP:NCORP]] could use expansion on what counts as routine coverage. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 12:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
::Good point - I've expanded slightly on the EVENT and CORP ones. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 13:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:I also created three new decline templates, which I think neatly round out our list:
:# '''list''' for declining stand-alone lists.
:# '''med''' for drafts with medical, health, or psychological claims sourced to unreliable sources.
:# '''contentious''' for drafts on contentious topics where the editor is not permitted to create drafts due to a lack of user permissions.
:<span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 19:10, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:A general improvement over the current AfC decline notices. The only thing I found questionable is the addition of the "contentious" decline, which would be the most subjective reason to decline something. Blocking the creation of new "contentious" drafts, just because its editor doesn't have some "specific experience" (a very vague term by the way) instead of because of the content of the draft seems rather arbitrary and restrictive to me. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 20:26, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
::Not a huge fan of that either, but it's born out of [[Wikipedia:Contentious topics/South Asia]] where if a new editor creates a caste-related draft (which happens more often than you think) it's getting speedily deleted under [[WP:G5]], which doesn't feel ideal from a new-user experience point of view. I had trouble with the wording on this decline template, trying to keep it user friendly for often ESL editors. Any ideas? <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 20:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:::@[[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] I've checked all the CTs and all the ones with editing restrictions require EC status. I've updated the decline notice accordingly to be clearer. Hopefully that removes the subjectiveness. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 21:20, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
::::That's certainly better. I still disagree with the concept, but now at least now the issue is more clearly presented. I think that in these cases you mention, the draft could be declined/rejected under the reason of "What Wikipedia is not" instead of through a restriction that can cause issues of subjectivity and maybe even being abused by some who may want to control the discourse over certain controversial topics. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 22:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)
:I'm a big fan of the rewritten notability declines, especially mentioning the relevant criteria in the first sentence. I '''support''' implementing these changes to the template. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 23:20, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
:Now that I have read {{u|qcne}}'s proposed updates I want to express my '''enthusiastic support''' and thanks for the work he's done here. I really think the bulleted lists have a better chance at being noticed by new editors who may find the walls of prose overwhelming. '''[[User:ClaudineChionh|ClaudineChionh]]''' <small>([[Wikipedia:Editors' pronouns|''she/her'']] · [[User talk:ClaudineChionh|talk]] · [[Special:EmailUser/ClaudineChionh|email]] · [[m:User:ClaudineChionh|global]])</small> 23:26, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
:I've added four new decline templates, to round-out all the specific criteria for notability:
:* [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#geo]]
:* [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#species]]
:* [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#astro]]
:* [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#number]]
:I've also added a new decline template for creative professionals. We get a lot of authors etc coming through AfC, and I felt a more targeted template towards creative professionals would be good, giving actionable advice plus the tip that it's often easier to prove notability of their work than the person.
:* [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#creative]]
:<span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 13:56, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
::Looks good—agree with all guidance given. I suggest adding wikilinks to the medicine template. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 15:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Qcne|Qcne]] I welcome these changes, good work! [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 16:16, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
:'''Support'''. They are still 'information dense', but I can;t see how to overcome that.  
:{{Question}} re ecr: might it be possible to auto-check editors status regarding EC, and thus ask that AFCH pre-populates that decline once being reviewed actively?
:'''Great work'''. Thank you. 🇵🇸&zwj;🇺🇦&nbsp;[[User:Timtrent|<span style="color:#800">Fiddle</span><sup><small>Timtrent</small></sup>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Timtrent|<span style="color:#070">Faddle</span><sup><small>Talk&nbsp;to&nbsp;me</small></sup>]]&nbsp;🇺🇦&zwj;🇵🇸 16:01, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
:Since we're on a roll, I've updated the text for:
:* the accept notice, which gives some actionable next steps: [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#AfC accept]]. This is pretty complicated as it has some OR IF conditions in the code, so I've just given the plain-text version.
:* the Teahouse invite, which hopefully makes it clearer users can go to the AFCHD for draft-questions and the Teahouse for more general-questions: [[User:Qcne/AfC_decline#Teahouse invite]]
:<span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 20:00, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
::The AfC accept changes are a notable improvement, you certainly are on a roll. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 21:41, 3 January 2026 (UTC)
:Given the discussion has been open for over a week, and there is a clear consensus for the overhaul, I think it is ready for implementation. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 02:51, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
::I think we are not that many in the discussion right now, and further feedback might improve things further. Can I suggest sending messages for the rest of the members of the AFC wikiproject to invite them to the discussion, in case they haven't seen it? [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 11:35, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
:::Not a bad idea—is there an easy way to do this? [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 11:36, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
::::I was hoping this discussion would alert AfC members! I also want to work on re-writing the unsubmitted and pending templates, so will try and work on that this week. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 11:52, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
::::I can make a post mentioning all current members and requesting their feedback. If there is a better way to do something like this, then please tell me. If not, I will make the post later today. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 12:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::You can't mention all current members as mentions are limited to 50. So you would have to use another method. Maybe a mass message sender, but probably not to every possible reviewer as that would be every admin, npp rights holder and the AfC participant list. Maybe to everyone who has done at least one review in the last month (use Quarry to get)? [[User:KylieTastic|KylieTastic]] ([[User talk:KylieTastic|talk]]) 12:37, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::How about the December 2025 Backlog Drive participants? Its readily available list of people who are engaged with AfC. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 12:45, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::I see {{yo|User:GoldRomean}} has massmesage sender rights, perhaps he could do something like that? [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 15:09, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::::For some reason it never actually went through, but I was skimming through the discussions here and just happened to catch this ping :). Unfortunately, I've got the right for [[WP:AC/C|other reasons]], not because I'm actually very familiar with the tool, so another AfC-minded admin/MMS or [[WT:MMS]] is probably the better bet here than I. Since I'm here though, I'll see if I can't comment on this proposal in a bit; looks super promising at a glance! [[User:GoldRomean|GoldRomean]] ([[User talk:GoldRomean|talk]]) 22:50, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::Please don't ping everyone; we have hundreds of project participants. Those that are (or will be) interested in the discussion will (eventually) see it. This post was made barely a week ago, and there is no rush to get this implemented. [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Decline comments workshop|The last time we did this sort of thing]] the discussion was open for almost a month. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 00:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
:@[[User:Qcne|Qcne]]: Given that "Merge/Redirect" is the most common result at [[WP:DSALBUMS|Song/Album AfDs]] <sup>(based purely on the unscientific survey method that is my [https://afdstats.toolforge.org/afdstats.py?name=Nil+NZ&max=&startdate=&altname= AFD stats])</sup>, I wonder if adding the below to the bottom of the [[User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites#music|#music]] may be useful (similar to what's added to [[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#creative|#creative]])?
:{{Tq|In many cases, subjects not notable enough for a standalone article could be incorporated into existing articles instead, such as an album page (for [[WP:NSONG|non-noteable songs]]), or an artist page (for non-notable songs, [[WP:NALBUM|albums]], or [[WP:BANDMEMBER|band members]]).}} [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 01:23, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
::Added. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 22:01, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
:I think these are all fantastic, especially given that they explain notability requirements better. This is a problem that I've been thinking about every time I submit a notice to users. AfC, Twinkle warnings, and speedy deletions are the most common ways that new editors are introduced to the community, but they can often sound condescending, be confusing, or be [[WP:G|full of jargon]].
:{{br}}
:I do have one more thought that I have had in the back of my head for a bit of time now <sub>(it might just be wishful thinking)</sub>. Regarding the ''lang'' decline message, what if we had translations that appear depending on what language the article is in? So for example, if someone wrote a draft in Slovenian and the reviewer marked it as such in the decline message, both messages will appear:
:{{collapse|title=Example message|
{{Blockquote|This draft is written in Slovenian. This is the English Wikipedia and we can only accept articles written in the English language.
:* Please provide a high-quality English translation, avoiding machine translation tools (like Google Translate).
:* If you prefer to write in your own language, look for the Wikipedia project in your language on the Wikipedia home page.
}}
:<small>(some kind of divider)</small>
{{Blockquote|Ta osnutek je napisan v jeziku. To je angleška Wikipedija in sprejemamo lahko samo članke, napisane v angleškem jeziku. 
:* Prosimo, da zagotovite visokokakovosten angleški prevod in se izogibate orodjem za strojno prevajanje (kot je Google Translate). 
:* Če raje pišete v svojem jeziku, poiščite projekt Wikipedia v svojem jeziku na domači strani Wikipedije.
}}
}}
:If an unrecognized language/code is inputted, then it'll print out only the English message. It would likely require human translators because I don't think using translation tools for these messages are the best idea. Because translating this message into 300+ languages is honestly infeasable, we write up messages for the 10 most common languages in which people do it. Hell, we could even raise this as a possible test case for the [[meta:Abstract Wikipedia|Abstract Wiki]].
:If this is too much work, a complete pipe dream, and/or solving a problem that doesn't exist, at least having the ability to input ISO language codes in the language field would be nice :-) [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 07:33, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

::I think that's a really cool idea, though no idea if the templates can do that. @[[User:Primefac|Primefac]], any thoughts? <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 22:01, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
:::Alternative suggestion could be to have AFCH post one of the [[WP:WELCOME-FOREIGN]] templates to the user's talk page along with the decline notices (if that's possible)? [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 22:09, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
::::I didn't know that existed, that would be a great way. While this wouldn't fit as a decline reason, it would good to paste that automatically in their talk pages. [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 22:34, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::We give the option to invite the user to the Teahouse if the welcome has not already been given, so it's not terribly far out of the realm of possibility to add in the option for a welcome template, however much like with the "give them a custom message in their home language" we would need to code in ''every'' template and either have a big dropdown to allow selection or hard-code a matching algorithm into the AFCH backend. As with the custom message issue, it's not so much a "can we" as much of a "how long is it going to sit in the request queue because no one wants to actually do it". [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 00:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
:::"Can" do it? Most likely. I'm not entirely sold on the idea, though, primarily from a maintenance perspective but also because in this day and age everything is automatically translated ''anyway'' so us going through and going to the trouble of writing up a dozen different translations is likely a waste of effort. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 00:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
:'''Update as of 2026/01/08'''
:I think that's done, now: [[User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites]].
:I've re-written the unsubmitted and pending templates, so that's every single AfC template now re-written in a consistent style. I've also expanded the rationale to give some critical feedback of the re-writes.
:'''What next?'''
:I think it would be good to get some more eyes on this and some specific feedback. I would be open to moving this to a subpage of the Wikiproject. I've also included some Feedback subheadings so anyone can comment on any of the individual re-write blocks.
:Happy for this to remain open for a while longer.
:Let me know what you think. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 22:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
::Again, basically an almost complete improvement over the original. Ironically, I think the main issue isn't the template messages, but that people don't actually bother to read these messages (or only superficially), and then go around asking why their draft was declined and what can be done so it gets accepted. That has happened me a few times as a reviewer. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 22:59, 8 January 2026 (UTC)
:::Templated messages tend to get glossed over in general. [[User:45dogs|45dogs]] <small> (they/them) [[User talk:45dogs|(talk page)]] [[Special:Contributions/45dogs|(contributions)]]</small> 22:30, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
::Just read the revised unsubmitted and pending template messages. Much more friendly and readable. No concerns on my end. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 09:38, 19 January 2026 (UTC)
:Really like the gist of it, although the "bullet points with headers" structure doesn't read as naturally, and removing the bullet point headers or rewording them into the sentences could definitely convince me. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 19:37, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
::I'm also not especially convinced by the standardization of the subject-specific decline templates. Granted, having the main points (such as the need for independent reliable sources) is absolutely an improvement, but you lose important aspects that are relevant to each individual template. To take the very first one as an example, the current "neologism" decline specifically mentions that {{tq|links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability}}, which is an applicable concern, while the new one talks about less specific aspects like {{tq|press releases, the subject’s own website, or sponsored content}}, as that wording is shared between templates. It also gives the impression that Wikipedia has a specific notability guideline for neologisms, which isn't actually the case. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 19:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
::My thoughts on bullet points + headers is that it's easier to scan for new and ESL editors and gives them clear actions on what to do. I think bullets and headers are the only way to do this? Putting them back into sentences sort of defeats the point of the re-write, I think.
::As for unstandardizing: yeah I can do that and make the templates more bespoke. Some of them already are (i.e. NSCHOOL). <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 09:43, 16 January 2026 (UTC)
:::{{+1}} – For me, the bullet points & headers are part of the reason why it's an improvement, as it breaks up the wall of text that contributes to banner blindness whilst allowing for more information to be added. There's already a lot of sentences in the decline templates (a lot of which will go unread by submitters), so bullet pointing the salient points makes them harder to miss. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 05:28, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::The bullet points are good, I'm just a bit worried about the headers at the beginning of each. They can be a bit convoluted or even inaccurate (e.g. "Tone" for neutral point of view), and that's not necessarily an impression we want to give. Breaking the list into broader headers is fine though! Here's an example of what I have in mind:{{pb}}
::::{| class="wikitable"
|+ Side-by-side comparison
|-
! Current proposal
! Slightly rewritten proposal
|-
| '''Before you submit for review'''

For the draft to be accepted, its topic must meet Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Notability|criteria for inclusion]] and:

* ''Sources'': cite multiple published sources that are [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]] (with editorial oversight); [[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent]] (not connected to the subject); and provide [[Wikipedia:Notability#significant_coverage|significant coverage]].
* ''Tone'': be written from a [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view]].
* ''Copyright'': be written in your own words.
* ''Conflict of interest'': if you have a [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest|conflict of interest]] (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are [[Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure|being paid to edit]], you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Terms of Use|Terms of Use]].

'''Useful guides'''
* [[Help:Your first article|''Your first article'']]: a plain and simple overview of creating a new article.
* [[Help:Referencing for beginners|''Referencing for beginners'']]: how to add the required citations.
* [[Wikipedia:Writing better articles|''Writing better articles'']]: a guide to encyclopedic tone and structure.
* ''See examples'': browse [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured]] and [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good articles]] to find high-quality writing on similar topics.

'''Need help?'''
* ''Read our policies'': for an overview of our policies and guidelines, see [[Wikipedia:Everything you need to know|Everything you need to know]].
* ''About the process'': for specific questions on the Articles for creation submission process, ask at the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/New question|Articles for creation Help desk]].
* ''General help'': for friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the [[Wikipedia:Teahouse|Teahouse]], a question and answer hub for new editors.

'''Next steps'''
* ''Edit the draft'': click on the Edit tab at the top of the window to add content to your draft.
* ''Submit for review'': click the '''Submit the draft for review!''' button at the bottom of this box.
* ''Abandoned drafts'': if you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G13. Abandoned drafts and Articles for creation submissions|may be deleted]].

'''Scam warning'''
* If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. [[Wikipedia:Scam warning|Learn about scams on Wikipedia]].
'''Submit the draft for review!'''
| '''Before you submit for review'''

For the draft to be accepted, its topic must meet Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Notability|criteria for inclusion]] and:

* Cite multiple published sources that are [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]] (with editorial oversight); [[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent]] (not connected to the subject); and provide [[Wikipedia:Notability#significant_coverage|significant coverage]].
* Be written from a [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view]].
* Be written in your own words, without [[Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources|copyrighted material]].
* If you have a [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest|conflict of interest]] (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are [[Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure|being paid to edit]], you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Terms of Use|Terms of Use]].

'''Useful guides'''
* [[Help:Your first article|Your first article]]: a plain and simple overview of creating a new article.
* [[Help:Referencing for beginners|Referencing for beginners]]: how to add the required citations.
* [[Wikipedia:Writing better articles|Writing better articles]]: a guide to encyclopedic tone and structure.
* Browse [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured]] and [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good articles]] to find examples of high-quality writing on similar topics.

'''Need help?'''
* For an overview of our policies and guidelines, see [[Wikipedia:Everything you need to know|Everything you need to know]].
* For specific questions on the Articles for creation submission process, ask at the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/New question|Articles for creation Help desk]].
* For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the [[Wikipedia:Teahouse|Teahouse]], a question and answer hub for new editors.

'''Next steps'''
* To edit the draft, click on the Edit tab at the top of the window to add content to your draft.
* Then, click the '''Submit the draft for review!''' button at the bottom of this box.
* If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G13. Abandoned drafts and Articles for creation submissions|may be deleted]].

'''Scam warning'''
* If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. [[Wikipedia:Scam warning|Learn about scams on Wikipedia]].
'''Submit the draft for review!'''
|}
::::{{pb}}I might also want to link [[Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide]] in the "Useful guides" category, or maybe in the bullet point about COI? Otherwise, Qcne's version looks pretty good and is definitely an improvement over the original! [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 06:06, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Chaotic Enby|Chaotic Enby]] I've removed the italicised prefixes and adjusted the neologism template. Better?  <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 15:31, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::Looks great now, '''strong support'''! [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 17:58, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::It's missing the criteria for secondary sources, which is important. [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 18:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Any suggested wording? <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 19:06, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::To keep it from getting wordy, maybe just qualify "multiple published sources" with "multiple published [[WP:secondary|secondary]] sources? [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 19:11, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::Done. I think it still keeps it not too wordy. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 19:25, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Another though (sorry!), for the Need Help section, I think we should focus on pointing people to [[WP:YFA]] as much as possible because it provides more detail about the sources requirements and how to build and article.  To the end, I would nix the [[WP:Referencing for beginners|Referencing for beginners]] as that is covered at YFA.  I would change the wording to: [[WP:Your first article|Your first article]]: a simplified overview of the sourcing requirements and how to build new article.  [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 19:29, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::::I'd also nix the "For an overview of our policies and guidelines..." bullet.  I think we should focus only on the article/draft creation process and the vast majority of new editors submitting draft are only here to try to get their draft published.  Also keep in all new editors now get the Growth Features information and tools.  [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 20:03, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::I don't think removing that is a good idea, the process creating an article goes under those guidelines same a when just making regular edits (no matter how big or small), talking to other editors, etc. It also discusses things not mentioned in other bullets/links such as proper etiquette or sockpuppetry. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 20:19, 17 January 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::Now that I have followed the link, it's not that bad.  I was thinking [[WP:Policies and guidelines]] or similar.  [[User:S0091|S0091]] ([[User talk:S0091|talk]]) 17:18, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

'''Update as of 2026/01/20'''

I have added one more decline comment, when a draft is totally unsourced. I often see people use "reliable sources" decline template when they mean "no sources" and hopefully this will clear up some confusion.

'''[[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#nosource]]'''

I have re-created the AfC template styles, so you can see what the re-writes would look like in the real world:

'''[[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites/sandbox]]'''

<span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 21:10, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

:Greatly appreciated this new nosource decline, as I had to decline many draft for basically being wholly unsourced. [[User:NeoGaze|NeoGaze]] ([[User talk:NeoGaze|talk]]) 21:58, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
:<small>(I've already mentioned this off-wiki, but thought it best to share here as well.)</small>
:My first thoughts were "yes, great & def useful!", but the more I've thought about it, the more I've come to '''oppose''' the addition of a  "''no sources''" decline. A draft without any sources will never* meet our notability criteria, so should always* be given a notability decline. All of the proposed rewrites for the notability declines include some variation of {{tq|Please add references that meet these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.}} which should sufficiently cover unsourced drafts.
:The addition of a ''no sources'' decline risks reviewers only giving drafts an unsourced decline, when they should ''also'' be given a notability decline; this will just mean submitters will continue to work on articles that – even with sources – could still fail our notability criteria. It's an issue that I occasionally see now with drafts receiving LLM declines, when notability should be in play from the get go.
:<sup>*noting that the ''verifiability'' decline exists for the very, very rare occasions where a subject would meet notability criteria, but is not supported by reliable sources.</sup> [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 22:48, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Nil NZ|Nil NZ]]  I might be a little late (and I don't review articles), but you seem to be saying that a reviewer can tell if the subject is notable (or not) when the draft has no sources.  I might be all wrong here, but  I thought it was the job of the sources to demonstrate notability. 
::In your view, does a notability decline come only after the reviewer has determined that no good sources exist to prove notability?  (The reviewer might not be able to find all the sources.)  The subject of a no-sources draft might, or might not, be notable. We might not know which is the case until we see a well-sourced draft on the same subject.
::I think the reviewer can't declare that a subject is not notable, just that notability has not been demonstrated. And thus, "no sources" alone would be a useful decline. [[User:David10244|David10244]] ([[User talk:David10244|talk]]) 08:16, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
:::{{reply|David10244}} {{tq|I thought it was the job of the sources to demonstrate notability}} – 100% this! Hence, a draft without sources doesn't demonstrate notability, so the current decline templates are still the most appropriate.
:::{{tq|In your view, does a notability decline come only after the reviewer has determined that no good sources exist to prove notability?}} Not quite – when I say "notability decline", I'm using that as shorthand for ''declining a draft with the template that says notability hasn't been established yet''.
:::A draft without sources may (or may not) be notable, in the exact same way a draft with poor sources may (or may not) be notable; neither are acceptable until they have reliable sources demonstrating their notability.[[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 08:41, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
:I do think these are great.
:The one sticking point I have is that they are a bit long vertically. While I don't think we should remove any content from them, it would be nice to have a [collapse] button at the top right corner. Of course, it would be expanded by default. [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 04:01, 21 January 2026 (UTC)
{{Od}}
I haven't been aware that this discussion was going on until today. I haven't read the discussion ... uh, actually I haven't even skimread it. I looked at what I take to be the proposed revision (within [[User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites]]) of "Draft article not currently submitted for review" (but for all I know might have since been superseded). Some comments:
{{Cot|title="Uncollapse" only if interested.}}
{{Tq|It is '''not''' currently pending review.}}

Here and elsewhere, rather than the curiously formal verb ''pend'', how about ''await''?

{{Tq|While there are [[Wikipedia:There is no deadline|no deadlines]], abandoned drafts may be deleted after six months.}}

''While'' here of course has no temporal sense. But readers for whom English is a second language may think that it does. Here and elsewhere, ''although''?

{{Tq|by using multiple sources that meet four criteria}}

"by using three or more sources that each meet all four of these criteria"

{{Tq|[[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent of the subject]]}}

"... and of each other"

{{Tq|To be accepted, a draft should: [...] do not [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism|plagiarize]]. Do not copy-paste.}}

It's rather odd to talk of a draft, rather than a person, copy-pasting; but it's more straightforwardly odd to say that "[something] should do not [whatever]".

{{Tq|It is '''[[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest|strongly discouraged]]''' to write about either [[Wikipedia:Autobiography|yourself]] or [[Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects|your business or employer]].}}

The passive voice is a wonderful component of English grammar -- but who or what is doing the discouraging here? "Wikipedia strongly discourages you from writing..."

{{Tq|If you need help '''editing or submitting your draft''', please '''ask us a question''' at the AfC Help Desk or get '''[[Wikipedia:IRC help disclaimer|live help]]''' from experienced editors.}}

This '''pattern''' of '''bold''' alternating with '''not bold''' becomes rather '''percussive''' and '''exhausting'''.

{{Tq|These venues are only for help....}}

"Venues"? They're ''pages''.

{{Tq|Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.}}

"Some WikiProjects have few (or no) active participants, so...."

{{Tq|[[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] – make sure your article includes [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]] [[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|third-party sources]]}}

Please, no. Asking people to "include" good sources is inviting them to sprinkle them in. Instead:

"[[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] – make sure your article is entirely based on [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] (which for almost all purposes must also be [[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent of the subject]])."

{{Tq|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.}}

You can indeed. But that's as if somebody thinking of erecting a shed for garden tools is invited to learn from a Palladian villa. How about instead sending people to the list of articles recently created via AfC?

{{Tq|Improving your odds of a speedy review}}

Talk of "improving odds" is likely to baffle those for whom English is a second language. "Making a speedy review more likely"?

. . . and then I ran out of energy to continue.
{{Cob}}
(If this doesn't belong here, feel free to move it. Or indeed to delete it.)
-- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] ([[User talk:Hoary|talk]]) 23:46, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

:Hi @[[User:Hoary|Hoary]], thanks for the valuable feedback. But I wanted to point out you seem to be reading the ''original'' templates and not my ''rewrites''? I had them next to each other in a table so readers could compare. Indeed, the existing grammar and style which you've highlighted was difficult to parse was one of the reasons I wanted to rewrite the templates!
:
:I would really appreciate your feedback to the rewrites column? <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 09:57, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
::{{U|Qcne}}, "the valuable feedback" is a delightful way to express "the feedback, utterly worthless other than for giving me a presumably intended laugh". I plead sleepiness. -- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] ([[User talk:Hoary|talk]]) 10:31, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

{{Od}}
Second try:
{{Cot|title=Peruse only if interested.}}
{{Tq|[[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent]] (not connected to the subject)}}

"[[Wikipedia:Independent_sources|independent]] (connected neither to the subject nor to each other)"

{{Tq|not contain [[Wikipedia:No original research|original research]]}}

"not contain [[Wikipedia:No original research|your own findings or synthesis]]"

{{Tq|Browse [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured]] and [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good articles]] to find high-quality example articles.}}

My previous comment still stands. Another problem with this advice is that it might encourage a non-trivial percentage of readers to bulk up their submissions towards GA or even FA levels -- of quantity, but certainly not of quality.

{{Tq|If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam.}}

Phrase it this way, and it may well sound like a scam even before its scamminess is explicitly pointed out. How about the slightly more innocuous-sounding "If anyone offers to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft for a fee, this is a scam"?
{{Cob}}
-- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] ([[User talk:Hoary|talk]]) 11:02, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you, @[[User:Hoary|Hoary]] - I never replied as I went on Wikibreak soon after you commented this. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 20:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
::{{U|Qcne}}, I'd quite forgotten about this. It may not be much more than a month old, but it's as unfamiliar as if a couple of years old. I'll be quiet and let you (or others) get on with the job. -- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] ([[User talk:Hoary|talk]]) 23:18, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

=== Rejection vs decline ===
This came up on discord but thought I'd raise here as part of the overhaul. Should the [[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#joke|joke/hoax template]] be moved from the "Decline" list to the "Reject" list of options? I don't think there's ever an instance where we'd want an editor to continue working on or resubmitting an obvious hoax? [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 05:45, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

:Yes, I agree with this. Surprised this isn’t under here already. [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 07:23, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:@[[User:Nil NZ|Nil NZ]] I think I have wanted to use Decline where it's obvious that it's a kid doing something like a profile on their cat or similar. Just to try and gently steer them to a more sensible use of their time rather than an angry red Stop sign popping up. Probably wishful thinking on my part and it isn't an issue if that option goes (I guess I could pragmatically call it a test page). [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 09:06, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
::Why not have both options? [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 11:30, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
:::{{+1}} Both would be a good; there are probably times when a decline is better than rejection (such as a draft that's ''probably'' a hoax, but not 100% obvious). Looking through the list, there are a few other ''declines'' which are also CSD-able; both the <code>[[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#van|van]]</code> and <code>[[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#adv|adv]]</code> templates are good potentials for both as well imho. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="font-family:Cooper Black;letter-spacing:1px;font-size:110%;color:#A7D335"><b>Nil</b></span>]][[User talk:Nil NZ|🥝]] 01:28, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
:{{+1}} to moving hoax from decline to reject. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:blue">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 17:15, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
::I've added a joke/hoax and an attack page reject to [[Template:AfC submission/reject reasons/sandbox]] for review [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 22:25, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

===Implementation===
:It has been 3 weeks since the last comment. Should this be put to a formal RfC? [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 07:37, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
::I doubt a formal RfC would attract much more participants unless we advertise it in CENT (although this is a local matter). Sixteen editors have voiced their approval of the overhaul and all concerns raised were addressed, so I believe we can skip the RfC imo. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 08:44, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
:::*I agree that there is consensus where it matters most. I think this would fall into the area about which to be bold, and if there is any pushback then it can go to RfC. [[User:ChrysGalley|ChrysGalley]] ([[User talk:ChrysGalley|talk]]) 08:57, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
:::We are our own project, an RFC does nothing we cannot do ourselves. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 09:43, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
::::Given there seems to be broad consensus in-project from the discussion above, what are the next steps for implementing the changes? [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 00:23, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Implement the changes. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 01:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::The changes would need a template editor or an admin since most AfC templates are protected. Would you like to implement the changes? If not, we should make a post at [[WP:AN]]. [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 01:33, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Going to do a few of them. Very late here and I have to sleep soon so can't promise I'll do them all. Best to post it at [[WP:AN]]. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 01:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::thank you! [[User:Ca|Ca]] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">[[User talk:Ca|talk to me!]]</sup></i> 01:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Well, nevermind, looks like the code is quite complicated (not just a copy-paste of the text) and I'm afraid to mess it up. I'll post it at AN. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 01:45, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::Fantastic. Thanks a lot. [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 02:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::Thank you, appreciate it. I've been on Wikibreak and not really paying attention to this. <span style="background-color: #006888; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">'''[[User:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">qcne</span>]]''' <small>[[User talk:Qcne|<span style="color: GhostWhite">(talk)</span>]]</small></span> 20:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
{{od|:::::::::}} {{ping|Qcne}} Looking at the existing [[Template:AfC_submission/comments/sandbox#cv|existing CV declines]], there's three different variations. I'm assuming that we want to keep the <code>{{error|<u>Note to reviewers:</u> Do not leave [...]}}</code> and <code>[[File:Symbol opinion vote.svg|18px]] This submission has now been clean [...]</code> fields?
And if a reviewer includes a URL in the decline, it adds {{tq|This submission appears to be taken from <code>URL</code>}} to the top, which would then make the first line of the [[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#cv|proposed rewrite]] repetitive.

Instead, should the rewrite be made conditional as below?
{{Text diff|This draft appears to contain copyrighted material which has been removed.|This draft appears to contain copyrighted material, taken from [URL], which has been removed.}}
-- [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 01:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
:Apologies, missed the further discussion. Not sure if I'll have time to code things up this weekend, but if folk want to put all the changes into the sandbox I can pretty easily implement things. As far as the <code>cv</code> declines go, yes we absolutely need to keep the notices about not leaving copyvio text in the draft. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:20, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
::Thanks @[[User:Primefac|Primefac]]! I've updated the [[Template:AfC submission/comments/sandbox|comments sandbox]] with all of the proposed changes and additions; for anyone interested in how they look, they can be viewed on the [[Template:AfC submission/comments/testcases|testcases page here]].
::I've also updated the following:
::* [[Template:AfC submission/reviewing/sandbox]]
::* [[Template:AfC accept/sandbox]]
::* [[Template:AfC decline/sandbox]]
::* [[Template:AfC reject/sandbox]]
::* [[Template:AfC submission/reject reasons/sandbox]]
::I ''think'' I've done the conditionals correctly, but someone who is smarted than myself should definitely double check.
::Wrt the remaining templates, we have hit a small bump for the wraparounds, which I've laid out at [[User:Qcne/AfC template rewrites#Feedback 16]] for anyone who has any thoughts or feedback. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 00:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
:::Super. I'll try to get to this in the next day or three. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 22:27, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Sandboxes copied over. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 23:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Awesome! Thanks a ton. [[User:EatingCarBatteries|<span>EatingCarBatteries</span>]] <sub>([[Special:Contributions/EatingCarBatteries |contribs]] &#124; [[User_talk:EatingCarBatteries|talk]])</sub> 00:12, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Amazing, thanks Primefac!  I've just submitted an edit request over at [[MediaWiki talk:Gadget-afchelper.js/tpl-submissions.js]], which should hopefully be the final step before they appear in the script. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 00:25, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

=== nosource ===
Why did we add "nosource"? Isn't it the same thing as "v"? I'd recommend removing "nosource", to reduce duplication. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:blue">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 17:20, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:Agreed. If I had to guess it's the difference between "inadequately sourced" and "not sourced", which is a distinction without any real difference. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 21:16, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:I was [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#c-Nil_NZ-20260128084100-David10244-20260128081600 personally against it], as our notability decline templates already states {{tq|The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that...}}, but was in the minority. I think merging "v" and "nosource" could be a good option? [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 21:42, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

=== 3 bullets is too many ===
I notice a lot of the new decline reasons have 3 bullets:

{{tqb|
* evidence that the subject meets the general criteria for inclusion;
* or evidence that the subject meets any of the specific criteria for creative professionals;
* or multiple published secondary sources that cover the subject or their work and: }}

<s>In my opinion, this is incorrect.</s> This roughly translates to...

{{tqb|
* must meet WP:N
* must meet an SNG
* must meet GNG }}

I think the first bullet is redundant and can be removed. To be notable, something must pass either an SNG or GNG. There is no situation where WP:N passes something that an SNG or GNG hasn't already passed. WP:N adds no new passing criteria that isn't already covered by an SNG or GNG. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:blue">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 17:38, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:{{tqb|1=or multiple published secondary sources that cover the subject or their work}}Additionally, this might not be ideal if these sources focus on individual works and do not have biographical elements. Maybe it should be made a bit more specific, like {{xt|that cover the subject or their body of work}}. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotic <span style="color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 18:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
:I think it's only [[User:Qcne/AfC_template_rewrites#creative|#Creative]] that's set out like this, with all the others only saying "must pass SNG or GNG". I believe the third point was added to the Creative decline, because it's one of the rare instances where coverage of the subject's work can lend notability to the subject themself. [[User:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000;font-family:Comic Sans MS;border-radius:20px;background-color:#8ACE00;padding:4px 7px 5px 7px">nil</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:Nil NZ|<span style="color:#000">nz</span>]]</sup> 00:45, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::Ah OK. I saw that and assumed they were all like that. If it's just that one, not as big of an issue. However I would still suggest removing the first bullet. [[WP:CREATIVE]] is an SNG, so the second bullet covers that, in my opinion. –[[User:Novem Linguae|<span style="color:blue">'''Novem Linguae'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]])</small> 02:30, 15 March 2026 (UTC)