Hello, Jacobmcpherson! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place ((helpme)) on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ♫ Douglasr007 (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images • create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page IAMSOUND, 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 or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the ((request edit)) 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 WP:Spam);
• 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.--Renat 10:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed (i.e. denied) your Third Opinion request. I can't find anywhere that you're having a dispute with another editor over the things that you listed in that request. More significantly, I can't find a place that any such dispute has been thoroughly discussed on a talk page, which is one of the prerequisites for obtaining a Third Opinion (discussion via edit summaries does not substitute for talk page discussion). Just to get questions answered about the topics you mentioned, rather than dispute resolution, consider the No Original Research Noticeboard and the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries are especially important when you are tagging pages for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/TFD/CFD/etc.). Please always note what you've done in a brief edit summary. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. What was the reason for moving Neil Krug directly to article space? Have you read our paid editing advice? To quote that, "you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly". Please use AFC in future. Thanks.--- Possibly (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same goes for Corbu (band). You moved it to article space here.--- Possibly (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and another.--- Possibly (talk) 17:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did use the process and waited before publishing the article Jacobmcpherson (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see your use of AFC at all in the above links. It's not a matter of "waiting". We do not want paid editors moving articles to article space on their own. Paid editors are also requested to use the talk page for changes to articles with which they have a COI. Can you commit to that in future?--- Possibly (talk) 19:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry who's "we" - is this a consensus based decision? Jacobmcpherson (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"we" is the community consensus, per WP:COI and WP:PAY. I think we need more editors to have a look at your paid editing, so I will refer this discussion to WP:COIN shortly. --- Possibly (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. --- Possibly (talk) 19:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC) Okay, sounds good. I think there needs to be more discussion around paid editors in general, considering I work in a different way than what Wikipedia implies. I do not automatically publish what people ask me to write, and there's often a lot of back and forth with people I publish for. Thanks for opening the dialog Jacobmcpherson (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The person who moved Neil Krug to Draft Justlettersandnumbers is a kind of special user we call an administrator. They generally know what they are doing, and have been vetted by the community. It is usually strongly inadvisable to revert their edits.--- Possibly (talk) 20:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the consensus come into play with this?Jacobmcpherson (talk) 20:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems clear that you are ignoring our WP:PAY consensus, so I guess it comes into play there. --- Possibly (talk) 20:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the consensus on that? We're having a discussion about it. I never disagreed with anything. Jacobmcpherson (talk) 20:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BY ,way of explanation, this is how Wikipedia works. We allow paid editors, but we have guidelines (WP:PAY and WP:COI) that we would like you to follow. When you step too far over the line (towards promotion and non-neutral actions) by editing articles directly, moving articles to mainspace on your own, removing maintenance templates, reverting moves to draft etc, you run a strong risk of being blocked, as happened below. If you stay within the guidelines, which are admittedly strict, you don't get blocked.--- Possibly (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~)).  Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Neil Krug, 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. --- Possibly (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I was trying to get clarification on Terms of Service, but was blocked instead

Accept reason:

Modified to partial and discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Appeal of partial block from article space by Wikipedia Paid Editor Jacobmcpherson. –xeno^talk 13:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please note I've modified this block to allow the user to seek additional clarification per Special:Diff/1011705716. At present, the block from editing articles remains in place, though I'm not sure Request reason remains applicable, and the partial block could be appealed at WP:AN. The block modification should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the block. –xeno^talk 15:43, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Jacobmcpherson: With the modification I've made above, the block from editing articles placed by Justlettersandnumbers remains in place; they mentioned in Special:Diff/1011705716 they were seeking certain acknowledgements. At present, you can post to their talk page or the linked thread. Wikipedia:Partial blocks are also appealable at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Please let me know if you have any questions or require assistance. –xeno^talk 16:17, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I've updated the request to accepted, you remain partially blocked from article space for which there is an ongoing appeal at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Appeal of partial block from article space by Wikipedia Paid Editor Jacobmcpherson. –xeno^talk 13:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Acousmana (talk) 19:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Acousmana (talk) 19:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Stefanotti 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/Robert Stefanotti (2nd nomination) 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.

Acousmana (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Acousmana (talk) 19:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Acousmana (talk) 19:46, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Cooney Fine Art 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/Daniel Cooney Fine Art 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.

Acousmana (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mathieu de Lophem 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/Mathieu de Lophem 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.

DanCherek (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requires disclosure of all of the client, the employer, and any affiliates. It seems right now you've disclosed an employer.

Please refrain from further paid edits for specific clients until the general issue of the specific disclosure of your employer's clients is remedied.

As noted at the ongoing WP:AN thread, further paid activities for specific clients (e.g. AfD contributions, article talk page contributions) without proper disclosure of all relationships may result in the original block being re-instated.

Let me know if you have questions. –xeno^talk 19:15, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged, also put a new note here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Appeal of partial block from article space by Wikipedia Paid Editor Jacobmcpherson Jacobmcpherson (talk) 16:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Request_edit is the one you're looking for. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Dr. Bill Dorfman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. DGG ( talk ) 01:08, 21 April 2021 (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 Justlettersandnumbers was:

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Reads more like a press-release than an encyclopaedia article.

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:All Things Go Fall Classic 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:All Things Go Fall Classic, 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.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson! 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! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2021 (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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tamara Deike 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:Tamara Deike, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 08:46, 15 July 2021 (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 TheBirdsShedTears was:

More on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Anh

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:Kim Anh 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:Kim Anh, 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.

TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 14:36, 22 July 2021 (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 Robertsky was:

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

For a WP:BLP, the typical article layout is in chronological order, i.e. early life and education -> career. Current writing style is rather promotional/PR like.

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:Emile Ghantous 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:Emile Ghantous, 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.

– robertsky (talk) 12:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback @Robertsky. Do you have examples of good BLP articles on Wikipedia? From my perspective, it's challenging because there's some published BLP articles which don't follow the format you suggested. Anything to help me get the structure sorted is greatly appreciated. Jacobmcpherson (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jacobmcpherson, you can go through the articles listed here for a sense on the typical structure of a BLP. – robertsky (talk) 00:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's really helpful @Robertsky, much appreciated! Jacobmcpherson (talk) 07:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All Things Go Fall Classic, 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!

Chris Troutman (talk) 00:50, 25 July 2021 (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 Bonadea 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Notability is not inherited, and having a lot of well-known patients does not make a dentist notable. Too many of the sources only mention Dorfman in passing, and most of the sources that focus on him are primary.

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:Bill Dorfman 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:Bill Dorfman, 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.

bonadea contributions talk 14:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neil Krug, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Neil Krug".

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:19, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Salem Ilese. Thanks! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Salem Ilese. Thanks! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:04, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Salem Ilese. Thanks! Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 20:47, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Salem Ilese, 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!

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 22:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. Please note, due to a technical error you may not have been able to previously vote, or you may have received this message twice or after opting out. This is a one-time notification. If you are having any issues voting now, please contact the election coordinators for assistance. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Bill Dorfman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:28, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Justlettersandnumbers Please help my understand why this speedy deletion is necessary, if I'm working to address the issues from the last submission and haven't yet re-submitted the article? Jacobmcpherson (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2021 (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 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:

Need in-depth coverage about him. Sources either do not mention Hein, are only mentions or not independent (for example interviews).

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:Gregory Hein 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:Gregory Hein, 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.

S0091 (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

>> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 23:30, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Corbu (band) 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/Corbu (band) 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.

>> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 23:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gregory Hein, 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) 11:32, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gregory Hein".

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fred Saint Foster, 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) 20:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jacobmcpherson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fred Saint Foster".

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]