Hello, My name is Deniz Unay. I am writing in good faith regarding the deletion discussion of the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Deniz_Unay First, I would like to clarify that I did not create or author the Wikipedia article myself. The article was written by another editor, without my direct involvement. For nearly a decade, I have been working on topics related to technology addiction, social media behavior, and digital well-being, primarily through public education, expert commentary, and media analysis. My work has appeared in national and international news outlets and has continued consistently over the years, including after the article’s deletion. I fully respect Wikipedia’s core principles, particularly notability, reliable secondary sources, and neutrality. I understand that deletion discussions can sometimes be challenging. However, I would like to ask whether this case could be reconsidered in light of the independent secondary coverage that has accumulated over time. What was most difficult for me was not the deletion itself, but the sense that long-term, public-interest work may have been evaluated within the context of a heated discussion rather than a calm, source-based assessment. If appropriate, I am open to the article being rebuilt strictly in accordance with Wikipedia standards, using only independent, reliable, secondary sources and avoiding any promotional tone. My intention is not self-promotion, but to ensure that work carried out in the public interest is accurately and neutrally documented, if it meets Wikipedia’s criteria. If direct communication would be helpful, I can be reached at:

Thank you for your time and for your volunteer work on Wikipedia. Kind regards, ~2026-21242-5 (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reply here with a list of secondary, independent, reliable sources and I'll take a look at them. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:20, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]