User talk:Heatrave

Why copy and rewrite someone’s article Latest comment: 13 hours ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion You created this article (https://w.wiki/9Bav) lifted someone’s hard work of reasearching . Its unfair to copy and rewritesomeone article in the sanbox and quickly publish first. As a newbie we help in reviewing articles by newbies as we encourage them from their sandbox. When community members participate in contest and this kind of things happens they stop newbies from staying in the community. In as much as this is free and open, the right thing needs to be done. If all volunteers do this there is no point contesting and participatning in contest or feeling like they have done something when we are in a community that also give credit to volunteers based on their edits.

This act is unfair and this article must be reversed to rightful person who started the research to publish. As you can see here - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adansi11/sandbox.

This act must not be entertained in this space. Wikimedia stands for fairness and inclusivity.

must be pulled down to allow the rightful person to go ahead to publish. As you can see here - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adansi11/sandbox. 

This act must not be entertained in the Wikimedia space. Wikimedia stand for fairness and inclusion.

Ruby D-Brown (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Heatrave (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 197.251.187.104. My ISP keeps changing the IP Address. Heatrave (talk) 19:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Yes, that's dynamic IP for you. Instead of getting into a really technical argument about whether your IP is an open proxy, I will just tell you that for that very reason it's much easier to advise you to use different devices, perhaps on another IP, to edit, and/or go to WP:IPECPROXY and request IP block exemption per the instructions there, which do not require editing access to follow. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Heatrave (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 41.210.5.81.Heatrave (talk) 11:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That IP is a P2P proxy. It will need to be turned off, your browser cache cleared, and a 24 hour wait before editing. Alternatively, you can proceed as described above. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Needs independent 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kwame Yogot and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kwame Yogot, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Lopifalko (talk) 11:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Heatrave! Having an article 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! Lopifalko (talk) 11:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Kwame Yogot requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://beatznation.com/profile/kwame-yogot/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 13:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Heatrave (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 197.251.181.251. I was previously using a VPN but even after removing it, i'm still unable to edit. Heatrave (talk) 15:23, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That is a confirmed P2P proxy. Yamla (talk) 15:30, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Reading Beans 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:Big Ghun 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Reading Beans (talk) 10:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Technical Barnstar
	Hello Heatrave, This barnstar is awarded to you to appreciate your effort in contributing to the African Wikimedia Technical Hackathon in the month of July. We say a big thank you for contributing to this hackathon. We look forward to seeing you at future Wikimedia Technical events. JDQ Joris Darlington Quarshie (talk) 13:08, 21 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 reasons left by CNMall41 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.

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:Big Ghun 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 06:55, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Heatrave (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 102.176.94.231. I don't use a VPN and not responsible for the changing IP addressHeatrave (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed P2P proxy and frankly, you appear to be wasting our time here. You've been given a path forward which would allow you to continue using these P2P proxies. If you aren't interested in following it, stop making unblock requests. Yamla (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hello, Heatrave. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Big Ghun".

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. When 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!} 06:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz what happens if I create a new one under the same name Heatrave (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Heatrave,

Thank you for creating Prince Kojo-Hilton.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for writing this. The subject seems notable: would you mind adding more sources so we can better verify this article's content.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Schminnte}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Schminnte (talk • contribs) 14:10, 17 July 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 Princess of Ara 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.

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:AMG Armani 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Princess of Ara 12:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cape Town Stock Exchange has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable stock exchange, not enough information to pass WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:49, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Seychelles Blue Bond, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:AfCFTA Mechanisms has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 21:45, 25 August 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 S0091 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:

Boomplay is not a recognized chart (see WP:CHARTS) and most of the sources are not reliable (MyjoyOnline, Pulse, Ghana Music, GhanaWeb, etc.) as they are either exist for promotional/advertising purposes or are user-generated.

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:Slut Boy Billy 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 15:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 thank you for your meticulous feedback.

As per Wikipedia's defining criteria of a Record chart (referenced in the article as a music chart), it includes streaming activity, number of sales and number of downloads as chart criteria. Hence the reference is duly warranted as a noteworthy mention.

Boomplay is the biggest streaming platform in Africa and is critical to the growth of music from the African continent. Recently, through an official announcement, data from Boomplay will count towards Billboard official chart ratings. At any point in time, there are a maximum of 100 songs on Top 100 which would not accomodate artistes on a global scale. Infact, Billboard chart is scaled towards the US Market primarily before everywhere else. This alone makes it difficult for indie artistes even in the United States to earn a place on the chart, talk less of elsewhere. A UCLA article has raised concerns about the bias of the Billboard chart and this in effect raises concerns on the some criteria and sections of WP:Charts.

To the topic of user-generated content, it can Heatrave (talk) 11:39, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 thank you for your meticulous feedback.

As per Wikipedia's defining criteria of a Record chart (referenced in the article as a music chart), it includes streaming activity, number of sales and number of downloads as chart criteria. Hence the reference is duly warranted as a noteworthy mention.

Boomplay is the biggest streaming platform in Africa and is critical to the growth of music from the African continent. Recently, through an official announcement, data from Boomplay will count towards Billboard official chart ratings. At any point in time, there are a maximum of 100 songs on Top 100 which would not accomodate artistes on a global scale. Infact, Billboard chart is scaled towards the US Market primarily before everywhere else. This alone makes it difficult for indie artistes even in the United States to earn a place on the chart, talk less of elsewhere. A UCLA article has raised concerns about the bias of the Billboard chart and this in effect raises concerns on the some criteria and sections of WP:Charts.

To the topic of user-generated content, it can be quite tricky as most online platforms have some form of user-generated content. Here is an example from Forbes, which has a section on its platform that features articles from vetted contributors. Does this suddenly discredit the platfom? Or will a submission be rejected because it was sources from a Forbes contributor article?

Promotion as defined by Wikitionary, indicates the dissemination of information in order to increase its popularity. Without promotion, there are a myriad of information that will go unnoticed. Every source, whether independently written or not can be quoted for promotional purposes especially within the music space. The number one song on billboard chart, will in effect promote the song and lead to more sales, despite being independently drafted into the chart.

Please review your reasons for the rejection and propose improvements. Heatrave (talk) 12:04, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Heatrave, Record chart is a Wikipedia article and not relevant to the notability guidelines for musicians or the related WP:CHARTS guideline, which are based upon consensus by the Wikipedia community. If you believe it a chart meets the inclusion guidelines outlined at WP:CHARTS, you can start a discussion on the talk page to get consensus to include it but note it states Charts which rank material from a single vendor or network are generally unsuitable for inclusion in articles. As for WP:user-generated content, regardless of the publisher, those are generally considered unreliable and cannot be used to establish notability. For Forbes specifically, see WP:FORBESCON which states article's written by contributors are considered user-generated so generally not reliable. You are correct that a source writing about a topic may inherently promote that topic regardless if the coverage is positive or negative. Even so, sources must meet the reliable source criteria and must be independent to count toward notability. S0091 (talk) 14:00, 25 September 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 OlifanofmrTennant was:

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.

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:Ink Boy 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

OLIfanofmrtennant 17:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Niphkeys. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it 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. Ibjaja055 (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page University of Ghana, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:List of Awards and Nominations Received by Patoranking. Thanks! Greenman (talk) 07:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Greenman that section of Patoranking's profile hasn't been updated in a while. He has received multiple awards and nominations and i am working on improving this after gathering all information. Heatrave (talk) 23:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Yusif Meizongo Jnr. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. 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. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message.

I agree that there are sections of the article that sounded promotional but that was not the intention. Fortunately, I received help from an editor to correct that and hence i believe that is fixed. The topic is very notable as he is one of the few perfumers in Africa.

I will like you to review your decision as this article has been adequately cited. That industry is very niche and may not have 1000s of citations but meets all the notability requirements as stated by Wikipedia Heatrave (talk) 23:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Heatrave. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Yusif Meizongo Jnr, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

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.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what is your relationship to Yusif Meizongo Jnr? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing i have no relationship with the subject. Maybe you can say that we are both African but I like to write about African stories and increase the representation of our people on the platform. He happens to operate in a niche category of Fragrance makers, something i find interesting because I didn't know we had people in this space. Heatrave (talk) 06:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The photo used in that article, which you uploaded as your 'own work' – it has clearly been taken at close quarters; can you tell me how you came to take that picture, if you've no personal or professional connection to this person? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:31, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing OK i get the confusion. I didn't take the picture. Possibly a mistake on my part. It is the work of the subject found during my research for the article. How can I rectify this? Thank you for bringing it to my notice. Heatrave (talk) 06:48, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'll edit it out of the article, and request that it is deleted. Please don't upload images belonging to third parties, as this violates copyright law. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing thank you for the rectification. I appreciate it. Heatrave (talk) 07:03, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing can i use a third party picture and attribute? Or does that also violate copyright? Heatrave (talk) 07:09, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is no. That's because images uploaded into Wikimedia Commons are made freely available in the public domain. So if you upload someone else's content, even with attribution, you are taking away their copyright, and they are unlikely to be very happy with that.

There are some very limited 'fair use' exceptions, eg. company logos and music album covers can be used in the articles on those topics, and of course some things are not in copyright to begin with (mainly if they've been released under a compatible Creative Commons licence, or are so old that the copyright has already expired), but these are relatively rare exceptions.

All that being said, I'm not really an expert on this, so if you have questions about copyright or what can be uploaded and how, you can ask at the Commons help desk. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:24, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing thank you for your assistance. Heatrave (talk) 07:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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/Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TimtrentTimtrentg why has this been nominated for deletion? Heatrave (talk) 09:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please visit the deletion discussion, where your opinion is welcome. The rationale is there. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:51, 21 October 2023 (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 Timtrent 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 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:

The references consist of interviews with the subject, some with commentary, and gossip column-like material, coupled with apparent churnalism. It requires complete re-referencing in order to move forwards.

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:Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:44, 21 October 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 Qcne 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:Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Qcne (talk) 19:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Qcne Thanks for your feedback. Please can you provide assistance on improving references for the article. Thanks in advance. Heatrave (talk) 19:39, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Heatrave Articles about people must pass the WP:NPEOPLE test. Most of your sources are interviews with Yusif, which can not be used to establish notability. The sources you use must be:

- Reliable: Your article should rely on strong, reliable sources that are published by reputable institutions. Primary sources can be used for basic facts (such as a date of creation), but they should be supplemented with strong secondary sources that offer analysis, review, discussion, or interpretation.

- Independent: Your sources should be independent of the subject, for example not self-published or from the subject's own website, and not interviews with people directly connected to the topic.

- Show significant coverage: Your subject should be discussed in detail in the sources you find. The sources should provide in-depth information or analysis about the subject, going beyond basic facts or promotional material.

- From multiple places: Ideally we would like to see three separate reliable, independent, secondary sources that discuss your subject.

- Not original research: Wikipedia articles should summarise existing knowledge about a subject, not present new research. This means you should avoid drawing your own conclusions or analyses from the sources. Stick to summarising what the sources say in a neutral tone.

If you cannot find sources that are appropriate, then I am afraid there can be no article about Yusif at this time.

Let me know if you have any questions. Qcne (talk) 19:44, 23 October 2023 (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 MicrobiologyMarcus 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:Albert Kwame Kyei Baffour 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish)} 15:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MicrobiologyMarcus thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately I disagree with the part on the notability of the subject. The article doesn't focus on the subject but mostly on his work. It is very common in the creative art industry especially in films for the people behind the film to be receive less headlines and coverage than the actor. Most of the sources used have made mention of his contribution to the works. It is against the guidelines of Wikipedia to state something without claim and hence I stuck to mostly his works.

With regards to the tone and NPV, i have tried as much as possible meet the requirements. However if you can highlight where i need to improve, i will be more than happy to do that. Heatrave (talk) 23:48, 25 October 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 Johannes Maximilian 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:Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 12:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved this article back to draft, as it is woefully inadequate for mainspace. Yes, the person has directed/written some things. But, the sources used all mention this person in passing. There's nothing in the sources that rise above passing mention. Please carefully read WP:SIGCOV in particular where it says "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention". --Hammersoft (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just realized that this draft is a copy of Draft:Albert Kwame Kyei Baffour, which was also denied submission for insufficient sources. Moving forward, please pick one or the other to develop, not both. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Observing a number of notices on your talk page here, and seeing various attempts at drafts, it would appear you are having significant difficulty in understanding sourcing for articles. Please understand the following is intended to help. You'll need to read a few things. First, it would be a good idea for you to review our General Notability Guideline. You should also read through Wikipedia:Reliable sources and this which will help you understand the difference between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. In general, we try to focus on using secondary sources here.

I would suggest that you stop moving things to mainspace for the time being, and instead focus on properly developing drafts. I would also encourage you to stop re-submitting drafts that have been previously declined when you've added very little or nothing at all, such as you have done at Draft:Yusif Meizongo Jnr.

If you have any questions about any of this, please let me know. I'll be happy to help. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:05, 27 October 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 Vanderwaalforces was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Patoranking. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

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:List of Awards and Nominations Received by Patoranking 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:20, 1 November 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 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability: The ghanaweb source reads like a pure puff piece, the third source has no depth of content about 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:Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 13:15, 3 November 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 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.

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:Yusif Meizongo Jnr 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 19:38, 3 November 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 Theroadislong 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.

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:Ga Traditional Council 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:25, 3 November 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 Vanderwaalforces was:

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.

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:Maison Yusif 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanderwaalforces is it a problem with all the sources or just a few? Some of them are actually reliable.

But thank you for the feedback. Please be more specific so i know what exactly to work on. Heatrave (talk) 19:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Heatrave There problem here is that the sources cited are majorly promotional pieces. (PS: You don't have to start arguing that, it's something I know). So, you can't show notability in that manner, we need citations to sources that are reliable, independent of the subject and covers the subject significantly or at least close significance. Nothing currently like that in the sources currently cited. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:15, 6 November 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 WikiOriginal-9 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:Albert Kwame Kyei Baffour 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 23:50, 17 November 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 WikiOriginal-9 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:Ink Boy 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:31, 18 November 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 Asilvering 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:Maison Yusif 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

asilvering (talk) 00:42, 24 November 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 BuySomeApples 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:Ink Boy 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 01:31, 24 November 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 BuySomeApples 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:Maison Yusif 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 01:39, 24 November 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 Hey man im josh 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:

Unclear what's supposed to main this company 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:Maison Yusif 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Samuel Kwame Boadu, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Samuel Kwame Boadu (1) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Kwame Boadu. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Heatrave, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Heatrave|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae I do not have knowledge of a pre-existing article and do not have knowledge of a said financial motivation. Perhaps the previous editor did but i have not received any such financial incentive for this edit. Heatrave (talk) 23:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say anything about any other article. If you have no connection to any of the subjects you've written about, please explain how this, this, this, this, this, this and about 100 others are your own work, yet you have no connection with any subject? GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae the pictures are taken from a public repository for the events that the subject performed. I understand the confusion is from the "own work" label, but i am not a photographer, neither did i take those photos. Heatrave (talk) 23:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you uploaded them stating specifically that it was your own work and you had full copyright. Why should we believe anything else you say? GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae I did a previous search before writing this article and did provide all citations to back any statement. The subject was recommended. If there is a previous thread or article that was done for the subject and subsequently deleted, then i have no idea. I adhere strictly to all wikipedia guidelines and have not received any payments for this edit. Please advise on next steps. Heatrave (talk) 23:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ask any of that in my previous question. How are the dozens of photos you uploaded your own work? GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae the subject was already mentioned in previous articles such as Spoken Word in Ghana, Ajeezay and Spoken Word. I had to research carefully and provide the right sources. The pictures are not mine and can be deleted for copyright if that is the infringement. But nobody has paid me for this edit. Heatrave (talk) 23:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be unable to actually answer direct questions. That's concerning. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Praxidicae those pictures are not my own work. Heatrave (talk) 23:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So again, you repeatedly - to the tune of literally dozens of photos - uploaded items where you literally had to click to certify they were in fact your own work and you had permission, so why should anyone believe after your promotional editing and blatant lies about copyright, that you're suddenly telling the truth about everything else? Seems a stretch. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 23:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. 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 Naraht was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Even if he had been part of the 40 under 40, that doesn't represent Notability for the purposes of Wikipedia.

Naraht (talk) 03:36, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Rhymesonny, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 19:40, 1 December 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 Timtrent 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:Elroy Salam 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:20, 1 December 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 Taking Out The Trash 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:

I went back and forth quite a bit here. On the one hand, the article subject has definitely made a name for himself and appears to be noteworthy. On the other hand, currently the list of awards is the longest section of this submission, and most of the references relate to the various awards the subject has received. I'm skeptical whether subjects would be considered notable solely based on having received a large number of awards (I can't find any specific guideline on it, but it raises some red flags). My recommendation would be to expand the other sections of the submission to describe the subject's career and life in more detail, in contexts other than the awards they have received, and provide sources that describe the subject in more detail (again, beyond just validating his acheivements

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:Fadda Dickson 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Taking Out The Trash (talk) 17:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Taking Out The Trash thank you for your feedback. I have expanded the career section to the best of the citations i could find. I want to leave it to the rest of the community to expand the article once approved. Heatrave (talk) 18:32, 2 December 2023 (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 Ratnahastin were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This 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:Fadda Dickson 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ratnahastin (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2023 (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 BuySomeApples 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:Unorthodox Reviews 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rhymesonny, 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cerebellum (talk) 01:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cerebellum thank you for approving the article and I am excited to continue contributing to extend the scope of Wikipedia. Heatrave (talk) 03:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rhymesonny 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/Rhymesonny 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.

GRINCHIDICAE🎄 19:04, 13 December 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 Jamiebuba 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:Chijindu Kelechi Eke 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Jamiebuba (talk) 09:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jamiebuba thank you for your response. Please help me understand how the references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article so i can fix it. Thanks for your feedback. Heatrave (talk) 10:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ga Traditional Council, 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.

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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Toadette ^{(Happy holiday!)} 15:30, 21 December 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 MicrobiologyMarcus 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:

Likely notable for US President Lifetime Achievement award; however Lifetime Achievement Award from the Nigerian-American Multicultural Center cites to a bare url. Better source is needed.

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:Chijindu Kelechi Eke 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 16:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @MicrobiologyMarcus thanks for your feedback. If notability has been established, don't you think it's best to accept the article and suggest a fix to the Url? Rather than reject the article solely because of the URL Heatrave (talk) 18:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Heatrave: Likely notable. Personally, I still had my doubts that it met notability, and then given the bare url for a reference, that tended towards a decline instead of approval. The rest of the sources on the article are okay for citing facts, but they are no more than passing mentions and don't contribute to SIGCOV. Happy to re-review if you can find coverage from a independent secondary and reliable source, that would assuage my notability concerns, feel free to ping me. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 18:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, § Film Awards will do it for notability. I've gone back and resubmitted for you and accepted. I didn't do any citation fixes for you, I've tagged the problem link. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 18:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MicrobiologyMarcus thank you for your feedback. I will find a suitable url to fix that issue. Heatrave (talk) 18:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chijindu Kelechi Eke, 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 20% 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 18:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samad Davis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Two Can Play That Game. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fadda Dickson, 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Mach61 (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]