Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic 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.
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 User:Petjayso/sandbox 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.
Hello, Petjayso!
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! KylieTastic (talk) 20:26, 8 August 2022 (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'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:
lacking in reliable sources
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 User:Petjayso/sandbox 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.
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GoingBatty 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:
There are no independent sources - see WP:POLITICIAN.
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:Debbie Critchfield 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.
I was not aware that I did such a thing lol. I was also not aware that there was such a rule on Wikipedia. Thank you for notifying me. Petjayso (talk) 01:38, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a minute. I was not overlinking. There were links for Android and iOS already, but there were so for the Consoles that had Among Us aswell. In the same section. Why remove the links I added when you did not remove the other links? Idk its just not making a whole lot of sense to me. Petjayso (talk) 01:41, 27 April 2023 (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 DoubleGrazing 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.
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:Salva Dut 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.
@DoubleGrazing Yooo I remember you! Anyway, I kinda expected that. I made it quickly, and I made it at school. I made it because as a class we read a long walk to water so I was excited to learn that Salva was a real person and the book was not fiction! I looked him up on Wikipedia as I am chronically on Wikipedia and I found it was a redirect :/
I made it quickly.and I did not include many citations. Thank you for declining my article so I can make it better :D!
You made a good start. Here are some more sources you can use: [1], [2][3]. I also added a citation for the book you mentioned. You might want to add a sentence or two about what Salva actually did. Remember to use your own words, and not copy from the sources. Please let me know if you need help, and keep up the good work! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits16:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also said this at the helpdesk. Don't add your own pictures, or address or phone number or social media handles. Internet is not a safe place, and anything you save here becomes public and will stay with you your whole life. Let your older self make those decisions for you. — Usedtobecool☎️05:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In recognition of your continued improvement as an editor, and you persistence to always learn more and do what's right. Onwards and upwards! Panini!•🥪03:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Panini! Thank you! This is my first barn star and I was not expecting this! And, I will admit my edits were *bad* in the beginning, and I have tried to improve. Thank you! Petjayso (talk) 03:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok? I guess. I mean, "too much" sounds a bit exaggerated. My age and the state I live in, alright. Thank you for acknowledging it. Petjayso (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
March 2024
Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:Andrevan may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' user pages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on user page etiquette. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk)02:07, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Chris troutman Ah yes, I see where you are coming from. On his page he said that anyone could put anything (appropriate I assume) in that box. I assumed that the other images were from other users who put them there, but I haven't checked.... Jayson (talk) 02:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted my reversion of you. It seems Andrevan did invite your editing. That's an unusual thing which is why I reverted you without considering why. Never mind, I guess. Just don't edit anyone else's user pages. Have fun. Chris Troutman (talk)02:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Chris troutman Thank you for considering his user page, and defending it against vandals! Thank you for considering my edit quality and thank you for realising his strange user page policy and philosophy! Have a good night-or rest of your day? Time zones are weird. Jayson (talk) 02:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Jayson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Salva Dut, 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.
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.
Hello, I'm Pbritti. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to User talk:KlayCax. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Please avoid WP:GRAVEDANCING. ~Pbritti (talk) 11:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
