Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Pbrks 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 organizations and companies). 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:National Green Front 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:National Green Front, 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.

– Pbrks ^(t • c) 21:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ChinthakaGK! 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! – Pbrks (t • c) 21:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ChinthakaGK. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((teahouse talkback)) template).[reply]

Do not ask for help at Help Desk and Teahouse. At HD, I left a note that your query will be addressed at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 09:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Noted

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

Sources do not currently show that the subject passes WP:GNG. Needs more secondary 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:National Green Front 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:National Green Front, 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.

Rollidan (talk) 10:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RollidanThanks for the advice. I have modified some and added new secondary source references and resubmitted. ChinthakaGK (talk) 17:42, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to 2022 Sri Lankan protests, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. UtoD 14:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly, let me know which source is not reliable here ChinthakaGK (talk) 12:13, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:UGC social media are only reliable in very specific instances and all content must be cited and sourced. Also you cannot give WP:UNDUE weight on minor topics or promote individuals or use wikipedia as a platform for individuals or groups which is violation of WP:SOAPBOX and WP:PROMOTION policies. -UtoD 21:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UtoDSince this hashtag is a very important event in this current popular revolution, I will include more credible sources and republish it. Unfortunately, Facebook and Twitter posts about the origins of the hashtag are social media, so I have no choice but to cite them. But it is a known fact that this was started by Dr. Kerner and several media outlets have interviewed him about it. So I've included one of them to quote it. It's not my exaggeration from my point of view, because it's true. Can you please tell me how to notify this in an acceptable way? ChinthakaGK (talk) 01:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. You are putting WP:UNDUE weight. Excessive weight for a single hashtag and then using it as a WP:SOAPBOX should not be done. UtoD 03:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UtoDThanks for further clarification. But the hashtag is the main reason for people to join the protest, encouraging them. It is a great shortcoming to continue this article without knowing that background. ChinthakaGK (talk) 07:50, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will mention all the major hashtags used in the protest to avoid the misunderstanding of WP:UNDUE weight. Also, will remove all social media references and keep the paragraph from a more balanced point of view, I hope this will be good. ChinthakaGK (talk) 08:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to 2022 Sri Lankan protests. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.--Chanaka L (talk) 04:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ChanakalYour comments are appreciated and I will try to add more citations from a trusted source and continue to improve. ChinthakaGK (talk) 05:51, 18 April 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 Gusfriend 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 does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs to be written in a more neutral tone. Too many of the current references use primary 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:National Green Front 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:National Green Front, 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 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.

Gusfriend (talk) 11:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

HenryTemplo (talk) 20:58, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 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:National Green Front 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:43, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ChinthakaGK. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "National Green Front".

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!} 18:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]