Draft:Joe Calhoun

Submission declined on 24 September 2025 by Wikishovel (talk).

This draft appears to be a duplicate of an existing article. Wikipedia does not permit multiple articles on the same topic.

To improve the existing article, please edit it directly at Joe Calhoun. If the article is protected and you cannot edit it, propose your changes on the article's talk page.
If you are writing about a different subject with the same name, ask the reviewer to rename your draft to distinguish it.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted.
If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors.
Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.

Where to get help

If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.

How to improve a draft

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia.
Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup
Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references
Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article
Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article
Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources

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.

Add tags to your draft

Editor resources

Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs

Declined by Wikishovel 5 months ago. Last edited by Wikishovel 5 months ago. Reviewer: Inform author.

Resubmit

Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

Submission declined on 11 September 2025 by Theroadislong (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft reads like an advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for promotion or marketing. Drafts that are exclusively promotional may be deleted without notice.

Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:

promotional language: see Words to watch;
personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader;
informal language.

Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject.

If you have a conflict of interest (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are being paid to edit, you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's Terms of Use.

Declined by Theroadislong 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 11 September 2025 by Anachronist (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Declined by Anachronist 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 10 September 2025 by Theroadislong (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft is not written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:

promotional language: see Words to watch;
personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader;
informal language.

Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject.

Declined by Theroadislong 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 10 September 2025 by RangersRus (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Declined by RangersRus 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 10 September 2025 by Aviationwikiflight (talk).

This draft lacks inline citations. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. We require inline citations (footnotes) to show which source supports which specific statement.

You must place an inline citation directly after:

quotations;
any material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged or is contentious;
any material about living people.

Please edit your draft to support your statements with inline citations. Learn how to create inline citations in the:

Source Editor: Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup.
VisualEditor: Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor.

Declined by Aviationwikiflight 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 9 September 2025 by Keironoshea (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

This draft is not written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:

promotional language: see Words to watch;
personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader;
informal language.

Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject.

Declined by Keironoshea 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 1 September 2025 by Rambley (talk).

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Declined by Rambley 6 months ago.

Submission declined on 1 September 2025 by Reading Beans (talk).

This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources.

Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers.
Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute.

Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed.

This draft lacks inline citations. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. We require inline citations (footnotes) to show which source supports which specific statement.

You must place an inline citation directly after:

quotations;
any material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged or is contentious;
any material about living people.

Please edit your draft to support your statements with inline citations. Learn how to create inline citations in the:

Source Editor: Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup.
VisualEditor: Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor.

Declined by Reading Beans 6 months ago.

Comment: I don't know if I'll be accepting this, but the PennLive story ("What's next...") is clearly SIGCOV and the newspaper refs add up to what is arguably a WP:GNG pass. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:27, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Facebook and YouTube are not reliable sources you are wasting everyone's time here. Theroadislong (talk) 20:49, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: zero improvement, the next time you re-submit with little change it will be rejected. You are wasting reviewer time. Theroadislong (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: WGAL is NOT an independent source. Theroadislong (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: You changed a few words and utterly failed to address the reason (sourcing) why this has been declined multiple times. All you did this time was change a few words. Don't waste a reviewer's time with a further submission until you have found sources that confirm notability, and filled in citations where they are needed (or remove uncited statements) to comply with WP:BLP. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:22, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: I find it rather bizarre that you have included citation required tags, surely you know where the content comes from? Theroadislong (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Content like "A family man, Calhoun always thinks of his family first" is totally ridiculous in an encyclopaedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 12:10, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Much of the article is unsourced. The entire early life section is unsourced and huge chunks of later paragraphs are unsourced. I am also dubious of the tone used throughout; known for his accurate and insightful forecasts and Joe looked back on his extraordinary career and how his mentorship built a successful weather team of young weather broadcasters are not very neutral to me. Rambley 🦝 (talk) 11:45, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Joe Calhoun

References

Related Articles