User talk:April Fain

Hello, April Fain, 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 Human Brains Foundation, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Human Brains Foundation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you may be building a WP:WALLEDGARDEN of articles, for which further scrutiny will be requested. Thank you, 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Totally don't understand. I spent 11 hours reading all the pages and pages of stuff about WIki and topics in textbooks aren't even allowed? I understand the need to police Wiki, but on the other hand, it is not accessible to normal people due to the amount of work involved. It means, that mostly publicists, marketing people and people with CoI will be the ones to invest the hours it takes. And, that's contradictory to the purpose of Wiki, I think... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:55, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Grawe's Consistency Theory Model.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Keri (talk) 15:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PNG file taken from the textbook cited in the article.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:56, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:SCOAP Theory.jpg is based on the same concern about the other image you uploaded. DMacks (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you should read Conflict of interest, as your edits suggest that you are close to the subjects that you are creating articles for. Mikenorton (talk) 15:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, don't understand. Of course, anyone involved in a Wiki articles are close to the subject.... otherwise it wouldn't be worth all the effort. For example, how does a Coaching certification or theory get published. Why is MBA in WIki or why is Evolution in WIki? Both represent a certification or a theory... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:59, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. As it stands, this page qualifies for speedy deletion as making no "credible claim of significance or importance", but instead I have moved it to User:April Fain/Human Brains Foundation where you can work on it.

First, please understand that Wikipedia is not a "notice-board" site for people or organizations to tell the world about themselves. If you are connected with this organization you have, from Wikipedia's point of view, a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and should carefully read that guideline and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. In brief, you should not edit directly, but may submit a draft for review, or make suggestions on article talk pages, declaring your interest. Note that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4), and in some jurisdictions by laws against covert advertising, to disclose your interest in any edits where you have a COI.

Second, Wikipedia is quite selective about subjects for articles. The inclusion criterion is called Wikipedia:Notability, and is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Facebook, Youtube, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? See also WP:Notability (summary).

The COI and notability rules apply to articles about people and non-commercial organizations and "good causes" as well as to commercial companies - see Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause.

There is good advice at WP:Your first article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but of course I read that site.... I'm not connected to the org but of course I want employers to see what my SCOAP Certification and training (delivered by this foundation) means... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 16:02, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

If you have read WP:Your first article you will have seen the stress on references. References are needed because of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, summarised as "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source". ("Published" because, in principle, a reader should be able to check where Wikipedia's facts come from). Independent references are needed to establish notability, as explained above. That is because Wikipedia does not ask "Is this important?", but the more objective question "Is there evidence that people not directly connected with this think it important?"

The most important thing for you to do now is to improve the independent referencing of your article, otherwise many of them are likely to be nominated for deletion. There are more detailed notability guidelines for academics at WP:Notability (academics), and for books at WP:Notability (books). The references to a WP:Walled garden above refer to a concern that these articles are about a small number of people and their activities, all within a closed system. The key question is, have their ideas had impact, and attracted comment, outside the group?

A small detail: when posting on talk pages (but not in articles) it is conventional to indent successive replies by adding one or more colon characters to the start of paragraphs, as I have done here, and also to make clear who said what when by "signing" your comments by ending them with a group of four "tilde" characters ~~~~, which the system will turn into a "signature" of your username and the time and date, like this: JohnCD (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, April Fain. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The issues re: your contributions have been very well explained above--to say that they're not understood really does suggest the problem of conflict of interest editing. Thanks, 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Possible walled garden by new user. Thank you. KrakatoaKatie 22:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It looks like you already received a message about this further up your Talk page, so this message is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello April Fain! I just wanted to drop you note that will hopefully help you with Talk page discussions going forward. The most important to remember in Talk page discussions (including on your own page) is to "sign" all of your posts using four tildes, like so: ~~~~. I've gone ahead and signed your earlier replies above, but it would be good if you could remember to use the ~~~~ to sign your Talk page posts from now on... In addition, it is helpful to use a colon, like so: :, to "indent" your replies (it looks like you've figured this part out on your own!...). If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SCOAP, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Andy Habermacher, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Theo Peters, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Argang Ghadiri, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Klaus Grawe, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Consistency Theory Model, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SCOAP-Profile, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Neuroleadership - A Journey Through The Brain for Business Leaders, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 01:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see below...

Hi April. I work on conflict of interest issues here in WP, and saw the posting at ANI. As you can see I have gone through and tagged each of the articles you've created so that your COI is disclosed at each of them, and have also nominated each of them for speedy deletion. I am sorry but in my view none of them are subjects for Wikipedia. The sources are just not there. I posted at WP:COIN as there are a cadre of editors there who are used to working on COI editing and their expertise will be useful in reviewing the articles if they survive speedy deletion.

I realize all this may be somewhat bewildering - I am sorry about that.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work, and managing COI is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. That is so, so important, and I am sorry that you stumbled into COI editing without understanding what was going on. I appreciate your boldness very much! That is of the esssence of Wikipedia. If you would apply your skills and boldness where you don't have a COI, Wikipedia would surely be the better for it.

Happy to discuss, if you have any questions, and good luck to you. I am watching this page so you can just reply here, if you would like to talk. Best regardss Jytdog (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To help you understand the initial reaction to your articles, let me explain that Wikipedia suffers a great deal from people who want to use it for promotional purposes. Sometime these are directly commercial, a user promoting his own book, company or pop band, or (worse still) a paid agent writing promotional articles for hire. Unless this is controlled, Wikipedia ceases to be an encyclopedia and becomes another "notice-board" site like Facebook, and its articles are worth no more than Facebook pages. Therefore, a great deal of volunteer time and energy has to be spent on patrolling new pages and entries.

Apart from the commercial spammers, there is also a large class of new users who think Wikipedia is the ideal place to publicise something new. Self-published authors, for instance, are routinely advised to "use social media to spread the word" and think Wikipedia should be part of their campaign. This is a misunderstanding of the role of an encyclopedia, which is to summarise material which has already been published in reliable sources. The fundamental policy Wikipedia:No original research includes:

"If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery."

Your articles have been raised at the conflict of interest noticeboard, not as a condemnation of you, but in order to attract uninvolved users who can help to decide whether some of these subjects do in fact pass the WP:Notability criteria, and how best to proceed. You are welcome to comment there (remembering to sign your contribution with ~~~~), and also to find third-party references to show that the article on SCOAP, for instance, is not original research.

There is inevitably a steep learning curve with Wikipedia, but do not be discouraged, it is worth persevering. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 08:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SCOAP Theory.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 16:02, 5 July 2015 (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 Sulfurboy was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:SCOAP Theory and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• 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 get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! April Fain, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:SCOAP Theory, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, April Fain. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "SCOAP Theory".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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}} 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2016 (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 Robert McClenon 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 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft has no references. Notability cannot be established without references. If this draft is resubmitted without providing references, it should be nominated for deletion. This page has been declined or rejected as an abandoned draft. If it is not edited further within six months after it has been declined or rejected, it will be deleted as a disused draft.

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:Human Brains Foundation 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:Human Brains Foundation, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, April Fain! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, April Fain. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Human Brains Foundation".

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Interstellarity (talk) 16:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]