User talk:Avocadopiu

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Your submission at Articles for creation: George William Robertson (November 27)

[edit]
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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Geni and wikitree.com are not reliable sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 17:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Avocadopiu! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 17:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:George William Robertson

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Avocadopiu. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:George William Robertson, 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) 20:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

[edit]
Hi Avocadopiu! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 14:17, Saturday, July 15, 2023 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

Your submission at Articles for creation: Republic of the Sword (June 23)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by GoldRomean was:
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
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.
GoldRomean (talk) 19:48, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hello Avocadopiu! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Question on article submission, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Republic of the Sword (June 28)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Carolina2k22 were:
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
This article is clearly still not complete, with work in progress notes listed at least two times, at the end stating "WIP" and at the start stating it is a work in progress. AfC drafts should be complete enough to move them away from being a draft. The article needs to be improved to meet Wikipedia's requirements (as additionally listed in this decline reason), and should have notes all work in progress notes removed before re-submission.
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.
Carolina2k22 • (talk) 09:42, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Avocadopiu/Damiga

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Avocadopiu/Damiga requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ScalarFactor (talk) 18:43, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antônio da Silva Prado moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Antônio da Silva Prado. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 10:34, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't add citations when in translating the page on mobile, I can only do so after when I'm editing the translated page, is there a specific time limit I need to add citations in? Avocadopiu (talk) 10:58, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, you can work on the draft and submit it for review. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 11:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Antônio da Silva Prado (July 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Kovcszaln6 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 provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs references to multiple reliable sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Kovcszaln6 (talk) 12:40, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]

Information icon 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. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! CREditzWiki, editor (talk) 15:51, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most veteran editors of the site don't really use edit summaries. For example, User:Torimem. Besides, most of my edits are not controversial and credited with a source, I only do edit summaries for controversial edits such as this one Avocadopiu (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. I am not a veteran editor, and did not know of this. I will keep this in mind when I leave this in the future. Thank you! CREditzWiki, editor (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine to be steadfast in your beliefs, but if they're not widely accepted, don't force them upon others. Besides, everybody has their own style and opinions. Adding edit summaries, no matter how short, still take time, especially if you're completely revamping or creating a page. I tried to add in edit summaries at first, but as my passion for Wikipedia grew, I made more and more edits and realized somewhere in reworking the First Brazilian Republic, that I was losing a lot of time by adding in edit summaries for each of the edits I was doing. Avocadopiu (talk) 06:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]