User talk:105.154.195.31

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

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 PewDiePie. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This is not independently notable from PewDiePie

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:Meme Awards 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:Meme Awards, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 105.154.195.31! 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! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:34, 17 March 2019 (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 AngusWOOF 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 PewDiePie. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This does not improve notability.

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:Meme Awards 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:Meme Awards, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:48, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: The PewDiePie Wikipedia is a silver padlock. Please unlock this so that it can be added to from information by the other draft. Thank! 105.154.195.31 (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

105.154.195.31, can you make this edit request on his talk page Talk:PewDiePie? And then provide a reference that isn't from his own website to show it is notable? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:21, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I went through your edits on Namecoin, Peercoin and InterPlanetary File System, and while they were quite good I recommend you note a few things; the first is that cryptocurrency news outlets, such as the Cointelegraph, are not considered Reliable sources. In general, reliable sources are required but these rules are especially and much more strictly enforced on cryptocurrency articles themselves. Due to your knowledge and clear contributions, however, I also suggest you register an account, which can help in discussions and editing with others, if that is in your interest. Dr-Bracket (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your interest in improving the article. But please do not restore largely unsourced or tangential content, that has been disputed on article talk and in previous edits. Of course you are welcome to improve the article, but please provide independent reliable sources for all content and discuss disputed edits on the article's talkpage. Just a suggestion, but I also recommend to edit in smaller chunks. This way possibly controversial content can be easier fixed or reverted, while possibly valuable additions can be preserved more easily. Thank you for your consideration. GermanJoe (talk) 23:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also recommend smaller chunks. I made this mistake when I was new, many many hours of my work were wasted as I learned those ropes. Dr-Bracket (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2019 (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 Scope creep 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:Saahil Goradia 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:Saahil Goradia, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.

scope_creep^Talk 11:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 105.154.195.31. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Meme Awards".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 05:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]