Hi User:Jimfbleak I'm the editor of an edit-a-thon on South African music. Please see a list of our significant revisions at the dashboard: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/AOI/Fynbos_Edit-a-thon

You've deleted our revisions on Madosini. We also commissioned an entry on Thandeka Mfinyongo, who we'll assist in getting the entry up to standard. Will you please return the drafts to my userspace so that we continue working on it? Happy to address any questions you might have. Viljowf (talk) 14:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've restored them both as subpages of your user page with the appropriate names. I have to say that they both need a huge amount of work Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Viljowf (talk) 15:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Stephanus Muller, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stephanus Muller".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 01:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Viljowf,

Sorry, I didn't see your comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound before it closed. For what it's worth, I'm not trying to squash ambitions here - if you want to get an editing group going, that's fantastic! Happy to make suggestions. It's just that the full machinery of tagging articles, assessing them, etc. is "heavyweight" and tends to lead to a lot of "wasted" work on internal stuff that readers never see. So it's usually best to start an informal group first so that the focus is on editing, not on internal organization, which Wikipedia already has in spades. A simple on-wiki list of articles worked on works fine, or using Category:South African music. You can see that Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa/Politics task force has a list of related categories, for example.

I'm not trying to be too much a downer here, just this is one of those "from bitter experience" thing - there are tons and tons of inactive task forces lying around that had one or two well-meaning people doing a bunch of work on internal organization, then nobody else showing up, then the main editor moving on. Which is sad but harmless if it was just a page or two, but leaves a bunch of Stuff everywhere otherwise which nobody wants to clean up, and is perceived as a feel bad "this topic doesn't matter" if it IS cleaned up. The end goal is upgrading the articles themselves, after all.

That said, I'd recommend considering just asking on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Africa, and either moving your project to a subpage, or possibly creating a task force similar to the Politics task force linked above. If you go the task force option, there'll be an option added to the Template:WikiProject South Africa list where someone can simply mark an article already marked as South Africa as also being about music. That said, I'd really suggest just seeing how things go first. SnowFire (talk) 19:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Friedrich Wilhelm Jannasch. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and I suggest you read WP:TFA and WP:BACKWARDS before attempting to create more articles. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. UtherSRG (talk) 11:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stephanus Muller is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephanus Muller until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Southern African Music & Sound portal articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Viljowf. Thank you for your work on Koortjie. Another editor, Bastun, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work on your new article. Please consider adding it to appropriate Wikiprojects.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Viljowf (talk) 15:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Percival Robson Kirby, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Friedrich Wilhelm Jannasch, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:07, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Friedrich Wilhelm Jannasch".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (talk) 11:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 20 § WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Viljowf. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Sapphire Retail Limited, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Viljowf. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Viljowf|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:36, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have disclosed the COI in the edit page. Perhaps I didn't do it correctly? Viljowf (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the relevant entry: * curprev 11:58, 6 March 2025 Viljowf talk contribs m  20,976 bytes −127   Neutrality adjustments. I, Viljowf, have been compensated for my contributions to this article in accordance with Wikipedia’s policies on paid editing. I have taken care to ensure that all content adheres to Wikipedia’s standards of neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. In compliance with Wikipedia’s guidelines on conflict of interest (COI) and paid contributions, I am disclosing this relationship and affirm that my edits are fact-based, properly cited, and made in g Viljowf (talk) 04:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I might disclose on your user page, too. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that my work on the Southern African Music & Sound project is entirely voluntary. Viljowf (talk) 04:13, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Sapphire Retail Limited. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Gheus (talk) 08:18, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gheus, the conflict of interest has been declared. Also, as noted above, I did not publish the page onto the mainframe; it was moved by another user. Viljowf (talk) 14:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Viljowf Please see this diff: [1] You published it on mainspace. Gheus (talk) 06:59, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please also remove your tag from my Furhat Robotics draft? I did disclose the COI in the edit history. I will update my declaration to ensure that it is 100% clear. Viljowf (talk) 14:59, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changed the tag. Thanks for your clarification. Gheus (talk) 06:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Sapphire Retail Limited. Thanks! Gheus (talk) 08:24, 28 March 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 Caleb Stanford was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I am going to reject this for now due to the promotional issue and COI concerns. The article's references appear to have several issues and will need a major reworking. I did not check all of them carefully, but from the references I did take a look at, they raised the following concerns: 1. The University of Manchester source does not appear to mention Furhat. 2. Bloomberg is a reliable soruce, but the Bloomberg source given returns a 404. 3. Similarly, WSJ is generally reliable, however, the WSG source provided returns a 404. 4. New York Post is not generally considered reliable, except on topics of entertainment, per WP:Perennial Sources. 5. There are other 404 errors, such as this URL, and probably others. 6. The PRISCA lab source again, does not mention Furhat. 7. The article relies on several references to academic articles published by Al Moubayed, my assumption is that these are notable, but they should be used in a restricted fashion and with care, and I think that the same paper source is listed in the references several times. 8. This BBC article, once again, returns a 404.

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:Furhat Robotics 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Caleb Stanford (talk) 01:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Caleb, I think something went awry in the conversion process! I'm on it to fix the broken links. Viljowf (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf! 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! Caleb Stanford (talk) 01:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caleb! I've resubmitted the Furhat Robotics drafts. Something def went wrong when converting my footnotes into wikicode :/ I've a) fixed all the broken links b) included extra references where appropriate c) reduced reliance on the key source you mention. Thanks so much for your comments! Let me know if you spot anything else. Viljowf (talk) 06:48, 31 March 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 Theroadislong was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Furhat Robotics 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 08:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, could you perhaps be more specific here, with examples of where it reads like an advertisement? I believe the article refers to a range of independent, reliable, and published sources. It is also written from a neutral point of view. Viljowf (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Furhat Robotics. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've removed that section. I've also made a number of other edits as indicated. Does this address your concerns? Viljowf (talk) 16:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Viljowf: I'm concerned about the level of scrutiny required on this article and its state and sources due to the paid nature of the edits. In an ideal world, it would be best of course to wait for a third editor to review and submit the article for AfC who does not have a COI. Barring that, I wonder if you can provide some more context about your edits here -- I noticed serious concerns about several of the sources I checked, including many 404 links and potential WP:RS issues. Could you provide further context about how these sources made their way into the article (what is your editing process), and in particular, how we ended up with so many 404 links?

Thanks! and Kind regards, Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reposted also at Draft talk:Furhat Robotics#WP:FCOI issues and reference list. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caleb, this was a mistake on my part. I used an LLM to convert my references from a google docs document with footnotes into wikicode, and in the process the urls and some of the article titles somehow got scrambled. I should've checked! As you can see, though, the articles and sources referenced are all real, and the corrected links are the original sources I've based my article on. I have now verified all of the links and dois against my research, and corrected them where necessary. I've also replaced sources closely connected with the company with independent ones. Happy to answer any further questions. Also, could you please be specific about the peacock terms? I understand the concerns regarding a COI submission, and am entirely happy to make any specific changes required. Viljowf (talk) 19:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply. Based on this, I have added template:AI-generated to the article and I will recommend it for increased scrutiny to ensure the accuracy of the text and references. For the part about peacock terms, this is a default message by the AfC submission system and so can be disregarded if not applicable, however, I do not have time at the moment to look into the article at a more detailed level to identify specific problematic sentences. Caleb Stanford (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Caleb, what I said only concerns the references, though, and I have checked them each manually - the draft is not AI-generated, and I have fact-checked - again - all of the claims against the sources. Can you please let me know what the next steps are? I feel a bit concerned that there are no real identifiable issues with the article right now, but it is still being rejected? Viljowf (talk) 21:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not claiming that the article is wrong in a specific way, my statement is that the article will need increased scrutiny for accuracy of content + references; I believe this recommendation to be in line with WP:LLM. Due to the FCOI this scrunity should probably should not come from you. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 01:23, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Caleb, thanks again for your time and guidance. I just want to make sure I'm following the correct procedure here: should I resubmit my draft to AfC for a view from a third editor now that all of the identified issues have been addressed, or is there a better place where I should request independent scrutiny? Viljowf (talk) 06:03, 1 April 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 Caleb Stanford was:

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Declining due to WP:NPOV until the source list can be given greater scrunity, and asking the editor to respond to the concerns via the talk page to identify next steps for WP:FCOI.

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:Furhat Robotics 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furhat (robot), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 4% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You may also consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's "Did you know" section.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Imwin567 (talk) 05:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Afrikosmos is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afrikosmos until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 14:00, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Furhat Robotics. Thanks! Zzz plant (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Gheus were:

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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

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:Furhat Robotics 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 11:33, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Eternal returns.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 14:31, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It can be deleted, sorry for the trouble. Viljowf (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Gheus were:

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.

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing
  

Please address these issues. The best way to do it is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 00:06, 30 May 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 ToadetteEdit 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

After reviewing the article, it is pretty much clear that the sources mostly talk about the buts and not the company itself significantly. It is best to add one more source that also meet the criteria.

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:Furhat Robotics 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:04, 2 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 reasons left by Avgeekamfot were:

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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Many of the sources do not appear to be reliable and the draft reads as promotional.

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:Unstoppable Domains 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Avgeekamfot (talk) 17:44, 3 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 Avgeekamfot was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Previously deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsay Levin. Subpar sourcing.

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:Lindsay Levin 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Avgeekamfot (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Avgeekamfot! Thanks for this review! Is it relevant that a page was deleted in the past (2009) when the sources cited are mostly from after that? This is an entirely new page. Viljowf (talk) 18:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Unstoppable Domains. Thanks! Avgeekamfot (talk) 04:24, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Unstoppable Domains. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 05:38, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Unstoppable Domains. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 05:39, 5 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 Caleb Stanford was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Hi, I took another look at the article and noticed lots of adv and WP:Promo language. Please rewrite the article from a neutral tone and remove descriptions of "services", "designed to enhance user privacy", etc. - and all other such corporatespeak, there are many other examples. Happy to take another look after. Thanks.

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:Unstoppable Domains 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Caleb Stanford (talk) 05:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unstoppable Domains, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:49, 6 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 Rambley was:

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Promotional, non-neutral tone throughout.

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:Lindsay Levin 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Rambley (talk) 19:43, 7 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 CSMention269 was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Fix those in-line citations before submission.

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:Lindsay Levin 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 04:35, 9 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 WikiMentor01 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

WikiMentor01 (talk) 10:20, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furhat Robotics, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 06:10, 18 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 reasons left by Gheus were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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.

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:Lindsay Levin 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 18:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Lindsay Levin. Thanks! Gheus (talk) 18:49, 24 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 Gheus 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)
• 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I think WP:BAND is not met. Reprieved to Totality EP is defintely notable so I suggest to submit a draft about it instead.

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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 20:15, 24 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 Vanilla Wizard 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)
• 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

No alterations have been made to the page since the last decline. Reviewing the author's comments, I don't believe WP:AUTHOR is met. They're correct to point out it applies to all creative works (it's also known as WP:CREATIVE), but it has not been established that their works are sufficiently significant.

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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:40, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to William E. Bonini. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Gheus (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you mentioned you are a freelance paid editor, you are required to disclose external accounts. Please fully comply with WP:PAID, link your freelancing profile, and never move your paid drafts to the mainspace. Thanks, Gheus (talk) 02:31, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to volunteer work on the WikiProject Southern African Music & Sound, this editor works as a paid, freelance editor on upwork.com (https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~015f85a904e21c8105?mp_source=share). Viljowf (talk) 07:46, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by MediaKyle were:

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.

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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Seems to pass WP:NACADEMIC, but the sourcing and tone needs improvement

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:William E. Bonini 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MediaKyle (talk) 11:26, 7 July 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 Cabrils was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. In short, "notability" requires reliable sources about the subject, rather than by the subject. Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a promotional CV, which Wikipedia is not; and contains prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK). Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.

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:Lindsay Levin 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Cabrils (talk) 01:47, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Viljowf, you introduced errant reference syntax distinct to ChatGPT-generated text in this edit to Furhat. Did you use ChatGPT to write the article? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zanahary, chatgpt did not write this article. Happy to engage on any substantive improvements you have in mind. Viljowf (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To what extent and how exactly was ChatGPT involved? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 14:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly. As I was learning the ropes, I used a <ref> <ref> template suggested by chatgpt, into which I manually pasted the details and urls of my sources. But I later learned this wasn't complete and so I changed the templates before I submitted it to AfC. I now only use Wikipedia's built in citation maker. Viljowf (talk) 06:13, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thank you! ꧁Zanahary꧂ 13:09, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William E. Bonini, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

qcne (talk) 17:08, 16 July 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 RangersRus was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

RangersRus (talk) 14:08, 18 July 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 Gheus was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damon Vickers and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damon Vickers (2nd nomination).

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:Damon Vickers 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 02:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Gheus was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Gheus (talk) 22:29, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Avgeekamfot were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Considered rejecting this promotional article which does not show notability entirely.

In reply to previous reviewer Gheus, the COI editor submitting this lists three citations as the best sources:

- A brief mention in a New York Times article about his hypnotist (really) - 3 short paragraphs in a larger article listing wealthy people avoiding taxes in Puerto Rico in Caribbean Business - A segment in Russia Today, a mouthpiece of the Russian government that is not considered reliable on Wikipedia (artfully hidden behind an archive link)

Aside from notability, this draft is full of puffery and quite obviously written by a COI editor. It likely requires WP:TNT even if Vickers is notable.

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:Damon Vickers 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Avgeekamfot (talk) 10:54, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ulrich Süße, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:10, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Ulrich Süße".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 15:26, 23 October 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 TheObsidianGriffon 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:NOCO distillery 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TheObsidianGriffon (talk) 07:23, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Simm, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:20, 25 October 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 Somepinkdude 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:Workwize 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Somepinkdude (talk) 01:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sapphire Retail, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ian Simm businessman.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 18:28, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Aesurias were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Too many spelling & grammar issues

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:Bartesian 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Aesurias (talk) 23:51, 6 November 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 ChrysGalley was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I think we are still stuck on the Rolling Stone piece. I can see half a dozen new references have been added, but none of them approach RS in terms of reliability. Many of the new items share the same wording, presumably off a press release, which isn't unusual but it's unhelpful in terms of WP:BAND which remains a hurdle here. It is less about the quantity of references and lot about the quality of them. It may be that WP:TOOSOON applies, but if there was a reasonable review in Kerrang! or NME or or Brooklyn Vegan or USA Rolling Stone or similar then that will change the dial, and will presumably happen at some point. As a more minor aside, I am a bit concerned about some of the referencing. Was it LLM generated? The reason being that for example one German reference was down as Michael Lesedauer, and Lesedauer in German fairly obviously means "reading time", when his actual surname is allegedly "E.". In other words the writer (shown as editor) isn't prepared to commit their real surname to scrutiny even after 1,009 contributions to that website. Even a brief look at the source would have shown the article has a 3 minute reading time (https://time-for-metal.eu/eternal-returns-let-there-be-sin/). I've corrected and Waybacked it as a courtesy, but this is an editor's job to check sources carefully, and it didn't give me much confidence that I was dealing with a reliable source.

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:Eternal Returns 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ChrysGalley (talk) 12:04, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Viljowf. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Viljowf. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Viljowf|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Whpq (talk) 13:06, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I’m not sure which page you are referring to, but I have declared the COI in the page history, as it is one of three legitimate ways of declaring the COI, to my knowledge. Viljowf (talk) 04:47, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bartesian. Thanks! Valereee (talk) 17:41, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Viljowf. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Sapphire Retail".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 00:25, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bartesian, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]