Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rambley was:
Blogspot and Facebook are not reliable sources, please remove them. Do not include your social media links in the "External links" section (WP:NOSOCIAL).
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.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Step Music (band) 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.
Hello, Thestepmusicinfo!
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! Rambley(talk)10:49, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bunnypranav was:
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.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Step Music (band) 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.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Step Music (band) 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.
I'm writing you about "The Step Music (Draft)" page, I've been trying to fix this page with the guys live on the online chat support, and with their help I think now there are references that are InDepth (it's not a mention anymore, it's three different reviews from third party music writers, in english and italian language), Secondary (as I said there are different thoughts involved, not based on presskit material) Reliable (as said on the chat, we're on the path of Indipendent and unsigned music band, and having three different song played by DJ Jim Gellatly on a National Radio like Amazing Radio is quite something, It should be seen like a music journalist that has "noticed" the work of the band) Indipendent (ofcourse I didn't payed anyone, I didn't payed Jim Gellatly, not bbc introducing, nor Create Music Festival or others)
On the Help chat, I tried to make the point that my work is also published on digital stores and streaming services, so it seems that a music group wanting to follow the indipendent route can't have the same "recognition of existence" of a band from a label, even if this band has also some Festivals in UK.
If everything is seen from the point of view of an indipendent and unsigned band there's material to be considered for a published page that it's not intented as a promotional page, but to state the existance of a music act that has been played in national radios in UK, played gigs and Festivals, has currently Music Material on Streaming Services and Digital stores, and not to be penalised because indipendent and unsigned
I hope I can hear back from you and you can reconsider the page
Hi Theroadislong, nice to write to you again, thanks for your comment. Yes, in fact I wanted to ask you what is not meeting the WP:NBAND . I've tried to edit and take off a lot of stuff, understanding that Blogs can't be used, and even Magazines articels refering to a presskit can't be used. So I managed to take off all of those things. So I'd like to ask what is not meeting the n.1 at Notability criteria for music.
It's this one:
// Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:
1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries except for the following:
Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.
Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases. //
So I've made the "history" section refering to three articles about The Step, those three articels are Multiple (more than two), Non-Trivial (they are not personal blogs) Published works appearing in sources that are reliable (they are all three music magazines) Not Self-published (there's the name of the writer in all of three) Indipendent of the musician itself (they work for a magazines not for me)
At this point, and with all the due respect, for you and the wikipedia site as well obviously, I'd like to ask you how do you see that those articles are not Multiple, Non-trivial, Indipendent, Reliable Published material, Not self published, and if so, please tell me where do you see something wrong and how do you objectively prove that those articles are not meeting the n.1 criteria for Notability for Music.
here are the 3 articles just for the sake of the argument:
Not sure how independent Renowned for Sound is? "We work closely with international artists from the world of music and film, entertainment PR companies and artist managers to bring you interviews and reviews from the front line of today’s entertainment world". Theroadislong (talk) 17:33, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like that states the grade of connection they have to bring contents to the readers, Does it really state the grade on dependence from those sources? would we say that Rolling Sones or NME do not work closely with international artists to bring interviews, or managers and PR companies when an album or else is released? Can we really state, with proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that that magazine is not indipendent? 95.251.12.131 (talk) 17:54, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like that states the grade of connection they have to bring contents to the readers, Does it really state the grade on dependence from those sources? would we say that Rolling Sones or NME do not work closely with international artists to bring interviews, or managers and PR companies when an album or else is released? Can we really state, with proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that that magazine is not indipendent? I think it should be believed indipendent until it's proved it is not. (sorry for the double replies, I don't know if I'm doing it right) Thestepmusicinfo (talk) 18:28, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
