User talk:Clau20004: Difference between revisions

Line 108: Line 108:

:I have gathered reliable sources I could find, including newspaper articles that are now cited in the article, which i have images for. I have also added links where necessary, removed promotional language, and worked to maintain a neutral point of view. Any further guidance on improving the article to meet Wikipedia’s guidelines would be greatly appreciated.@[[User:Timtrent|Timtrent]]@[[User:Bakhtar40|Bakhtar40]] [[User:Clau20004|Clau20004]] ([[User talk:Clau20004#top|talk]]) 09:42, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

::For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is ”about them”, and is ”independent of them”, in ”multiple [[WP:SECONDARY|secondary sources]]” which are ”[[WP:RS]]”, and is ”significant coverage”. Please also see [[WP:PRIMARY]] which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and [[WP:SELFPUB]] which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

::That is the best help I can give you 🇵🇸&zwj;🇺🇦 [[User:Timtrent|FiddleTimtrent]] [[User talk:Timtrent|FaddleTalk to me]] 🇺🇦&zwj;🇵🇸 10:57, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

== Links to draft articles ==

Hello, Clau20004, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Klaus Bytzek, may not conform to some of Wikipedia’s content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 🔥YesI’mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 12:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Klaus Bytzek. 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 for review” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 🔥YesI’mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 12:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Clau20004. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 🔥YesI’mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 12:41, 21 December 2024 (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:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Bob Hiltermann instead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Clau20004!
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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

– The9Man ^Talk 10:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Dave Rossi. 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 the draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Bakhtar40 (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Konrad Spillmann. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and fails WP:GNG.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

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

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

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

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 10:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Konrad O. Spillmann 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/Konrad O. Spillmann 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.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 09:31, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have gathered reliable sources I could find, including newspaper articles that are now cited in the article, which i have images for. I have also added links where necessary, removed promotional language, and worked to maintain a neutral point of view. Any further guidance on improving the article to meet Wikipedia’s guidelines would be greatly appreciated.@Timtrent@Bakhtar40 Clau20004 (talk) 09:42, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

That is the best help I can give you 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 10:57, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce links to draft articles in actual articles, as you did to Gallatin, Tennessee. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. – Arjayay (talk) 10:24, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply