Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,332 pending submissions waiting for review. If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space. If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here. In the meantime, you can continue to improve this submission by editing normally. 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 Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Reviewer tools Instructions · What links here · Canal Boat Diaries (talk: + · bio) · (log) · Copyvios report · reFill · Citation Bot · (Search: Google, Bing, Wikipedia) · Submitted 58 days ago by BellotaUK (talk: D · +) · Last edited 47 days ago by MicrobiologyMarcus

Submission declined on 25 April 2024 by ToadetteEdit (talk). 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) reliable secondary independent of 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. 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 Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by ToadetteEdit 58 days ago. Last edited by MicrobiologyMarcus 47 days ago. Reviewer: Inform author. This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review.

Submission declined on 23 April 2024 by S0091 (talk). 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) reliable secondary independent of 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. Declined by S0091 60 days ago.

Submission declined on 23 April 2024 by MicrobiologyMarcus (talk). 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) reliable secondary independent of 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. 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 MicrobiologyMarcus 60 days ago.

Submission declined on 23 April 2024 by MicrobiologyMarcus (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. 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) reliable secondary independent of 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. Declined by MicrobiologyMarcus 60 days ago.

Submission declined on 23 April 2024 by KylieTastic (talk). 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) reliable secondary independent of 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. Declined by KylieTastic 60 days ago.

• Comment: Resubmitting without improvement is disruptive. The Guardian article might have enough independent content to pass but the other two are interviews/what Cumming's says which are primary sources and not independent so cannot be used to establish notability. S0091 (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: I have reformatted your references correctly (Update: since reverted by author) so that they may be placed inline around supporting material. Note that each of these are not independent and therefore do not establish notability. So for future references, follow the instructions at WP:REFB so that they will be formatted similarly. Further, the article must be written in descriptive encyclopedic prose and not promotional in nature. microbiologyMarcus 14:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: See WP:REFB for help with references and WP:NTV to see what it takes to establish WP:Notability for television series. microbiologyMarcus 12:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (April 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Canal Boat Diaries is a British television series in which the narrowboat enthusiast and liveaboard boater Robbie Cumming explores the canals and rivers of the UK and features day to day life onboard his narrowboat home The Naughty Lass.^[1][2]

The first four series of Canal Boat Diaries^[3] were originally half hour episodes which aired on BBC Four^[4] and BBC One before transferring to UKTV Yesterday.^[5] Series 5 was commissioned by UKTV Yesterday and takes the format of 60 minutes episodes.

The concept was created by series producer Stuart Woodman, executive producer Tony Parker and presenter Robbie Cumming.^[6]

References