How to Use the Wikipedia Articles for Creation Draft Writer Prompt to Write a Draft Reviewers Can Accept

Most Wikipedia drafts about small organizations and people are declined for the same few reasons: the sources are not independent, the coverage is not significant, or the text reads like a brochure. Writing better prose does not fix any of those. What fixes them is testing notability before you write a single sentence, and then writing only what the sources support. The Wikipedia Articles for Creation Draft Writer: Notability Source Assessment, Neutral Lead, Inline Citations, and a Conflict of Interest Disclosure That Survives Review prompt works in that order. It assesses every source you have, gives an honest verdict, and only then drafts a neutral article in wikitext with proper citations and the disclosure you need if you are connected to the subject.

What the prompt produces

1. A source assessment table that rates each source on independence, reliability, and significant coverage, with a plain reason for every row.
2. A notability verdict against the guideline you name, such as the general notability guideline or the guideline for organizations and companies.
3. A wikitext draft with a neutral lead, short body sections, and an infobox that contains only sourced fields.
4. Inline citations using cite news and cite web templates, plus a References section.
5. A triage of requested facts, marking each one keep, cut, or reword.
6. A conflict of interest or paid editing disclosure for your user page and the draft talk page.

How to fill the inputs

Subject is the name and type of the article topic. A company is judged differently from a scientist or a musician, so the type matters.

SourceList is the most important input. For each source, give the publisher, date, author, link, and a one line note about what it actually says. Be honest here. If an article is mostly quotes from the founder, say so, because that changes how it counts.

EditorRelationship describes how you are connected. Employees, volunteers, contractors, family members, and anyone paid by the subject all have a conflict of interest that should be disclosed.

RequestedFacts is the list of things the subject wants in the article. The prompt will check each one against your sources.

NotabilityGuideline names the guideline you think applies. If you are unsure, say so and the prompt will reason about it.

PriorHistory is where you paste any earlier decline message or deletion discussion. Reviewers will remember it, so the new draft should answer it directly.

Reading the example output

The example covers a nonprofit tool library with five sources and a volunteer editor:

• Only two sources count. A regional newspaper feature and a public radio story are independent and cover the library in depth. The library's own page, a grant press release, and an interview made mostly of quotes do not count toward notability.
• The verdict is borderline, not a yes. The prompt suggests finding one more source outside the city before submitting, which is the kind of advice a reviewer would give.
• The draft is short on purpose. A two sentence lead, two sections, and an infobox with four sourced fields. Short and well sourced beats long and promotional.
• Superlatives are cut. The claim of being the largest tool library in the region and an unsourced member count are removed.
• The disclosure is ready to paste. A user page statement and a connected contributor template for the talk page.

Tips for better results

• Gather sources before you open the prompt. Library databases and newspaper archives often have coverage that a quick web search misses.
• Paste the exact wording of key passages in your notes. It helps the prompt judge whether coverage is significant or just a passing mention.
• If the verdict is NOT YET, take it seriously. A declined draft is harder to revive than one that waits for better coverage.
• Submit through Articles for Creation rather than publishing directly when you have a connection to the subject.

Mistakes to avoid

• Do not treat press releases, sponsored content, or award listings as independent coverage.
• Do not add facts you cannot cite, even if they are true and you know them firsthand.
• Do not skip the disclosure. Undisclosed conflicts of interest are one of the fastest ways to lose a draft and your editing privileges.
• Do not argue with a reviewer about tone. Rewrite the sentence in plainer words instead.

Who it is for

Communications staff at nonprofits and small companies, volunteers who want to document a local institution, researchers writing about notable people in their field, and anyone who has had a draft declined and wants to understand why.

Related PromptDig links

Start with the Wikipedia Articles for Creation Draft Writer: Notability Source Assessment, Neutral Lead, Inline Citations, and a Conflict of Interest Disclosure That Survives Review prompt and paste your full source list with honest notes. To find more prompts for writers and editors, Browse more prompts. If you have a prompt that helped you get through a tough review process, Share a prompt.