User talk:GiantjohnO

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Alpha3031 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 after they have been resolved.

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

Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GiantjohnO! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Alpha3031, thank you for reviewing the article. Your observations were duly noted and acted upon. I have added more references from highly recognized and reliable sources as you mentioned. I do appreciate your effort to ensure that articles published on this great platform meet the required standard. I look forward to your positive feedback. GiantjohnO (talk) 04:32, 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 reasons left by DGG were:

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.

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:Tonye Irims 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:Tonye Irims, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 11:05, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback @DGG. However, if you kindly take a careful look at the references of the article, you will see that none of them are (just passing mentions). The references are detailed articles from reliable secondary sources that are absolutely independent of the subject.

However, considering your years of experience, it would be great if out of the kindness of your heart, you could help me attach these references accordingly and structure the article in a more encyclopedic manner.

https://www.capetalk.co.za/articles/436469/pre-paid-solar-power-in-residential-developments-the-way-to-beat-eskom-tariffs

https://theexclusiveafrica.net/2022/03/23/tonye-irims-wisolar-is-creating-1000-solar-engineers/

https://startup.info/tonye-irims-wisolar/amp/

https://www.tubetorial.com/tonye-irims-wisolar/

In total, I have provided 15 independent references from highly recognized sources. GiantjohnO (talk) 02:07, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is unfortunate that the standard notices tend to be overgeneral and not meet the case exactly; I apologize for not providing a fuller custom notice and explanation.

More exactly, the more extensive references are `the sort of promotional interview where the subject is allowed to say whatever they please. These are not really independent. It's promotionalism , and a great deal of business journalism in all countries makes use of it. It serves its purpose, of permitting people in business to advertise themselves, but it is not reliable or independent from the standpoint of an encyclopedia. In the early years of WP we tended not to notice such things, and many early articles are sources only with material of this nature. But now we do. It will be a long time before we can get to the half million that need review, but at the least, we do not add to them. The first of your additional suggested references is another example; last, tubtutorial, is a particularly clear example of advertising masquerading as journalism. DGG ( talk ) 10:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I can sense your willingness to help me, and I truly appreciate it. I took what you said into consideration and I have decided to remove references 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and include https://theexclusiveafrica.net/2022/03/23/tonye-irims-wisolar-is-creating-1000-solar-engineers/

I am willing to learn from your wealth of knowledge concerning this. Your effort in guiding me through the necessary steps to get this article accepted is truly appreciated. GiantjohnO (talk) 20:19, 5 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 Reading Beans 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.

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:Tonye Irims 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.

Reading Beans (talk) 10:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tonye Irims. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 00:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GiantjohnO. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tonye Irims, 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) 01:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GiantjohnO. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tonye Irims".

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!} 00:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Titus Odiase per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Titus Odiase. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]