User talk:Bifty

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (June 3)

[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 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please use inline citations and convert refs from bare urls.
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) 02:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Bifty! 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! GoldRomean (talk) 02:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (June 3)

[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 Cabrils 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:
Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:SPORTSPERSON) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. The image used likely breaches copyright (it appears you or someone has simply copied it from https://www.instagram.com/oscarzzworld/), which Wikipedia takes seriously, so should be removed unless clear evidence of its legal use is provided. The draft requires more reliable sources to establish Clark's notability (as defined). Climbing, for example, is a good source, but we need more. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being the subject (see WP:AUTOBIO) or being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere.
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.
Cabrils (talk) 06:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cabrils,
Thank you for the thoughtful review and your time, I have some coding background, so figuring out the wiki code wasn't too bad. I want to clarify that I am not the subject of the article, nor am I being compensated for this submission. I'm simply a passionate climbing enthusiast. I’ve been following the sport closely and have noticed that, unlike athletes in other major sports, many accomplished climbers still lack recognition on platforms like Wikipedia. As climbing continues to grow globally, I hope to contribute to the visibility of the athletes who are helping push the sport forward—even if some are early in their careers.
In researching Adriene Akiko Clark, I found several noteworthy mentions in reliable sources. Among them were articles covering a scoring controversy at National Championships and an incident where Team USA’s failure to properly check in athletes led to them being unable to compete at a World Cup—both of which received national coverage and involved Clark directly. While she is relatively new to the senior circuit, she is clearly emerging as a significant figure alongside more established climbers like Annie Sanders (who has a Wikipedia page).
I believe the article now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #1 and #3:
Criterion 1: The person has received a significant award or honor at a national or international level.
→ Clark won gold in Women’s Boulder at the 2024 IFSC Pan American Championships, an international event sanctioned by the International Federation of Sport Climbing (IFSC). This win earned her a spot on the 2025 U.S. National Team and qualified her for the IFSC World Cup circuit.
Criterion 3: The person has made a significant contribution to their field, as evidenced by coverage in multiple independent, non-trivial published sources.
I know Climbing.com was the more larger source, they are managed by Outside Magazine, and she has an IFSC athlete profile (is this a good reference?)
And there was a BFL Climbing Combine feature? https://www.climbingcombine.com/news/adriene-clark-scaling-new-heights-at-the-2022-bfl-climbing-combine
Thanks again for your guidance—I’m eager to continue improving the article if there’s anything else you'd recommend!
Best,
Bifty Bifty (talk) 06:41, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning the photo, I did talk to the photographer and they said it was ok. should I have them upload instead or provide a statement here that they are ok with it? Bifty (talk) 06:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the ping and helpful information. Please see my reply on the draft's talk page (where I have copied over this conversation for better visibility). Cabrils (talk) 03:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Cabrils!
I got a photo that is acceptable and worked with WikiCommons and the author to get it approved, also added more news articles that I could find, as well as pulled all her world cup rankings and organized it and world cup seasons in a way that works to scale as her career grows. Seems like it's coming together, and thank you for all your help! Bifty (talk) 02:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BFL Climbing Combine (June 5)

[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 GoldRomean 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.
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.
GoldRomean (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BFL Climbing Combine (June 6)

[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 Protobowladdict was:
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.
ProtobowlAddict talk! 20:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, ProtobowlAddict, could you give some clarity on what is missing from the entry, I made changes from the last moderator, but your rejection is the same as the other moderator, but If I could get some assitance into what could be done better, I could greatly appreciate it and make the changes to the article!
Warm regards,
Bifty Bifty (talk) 00:07, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (June 7)

[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 Sophisticatedevening 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 for sports persons and athletes). 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.
Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 16:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I have a significant amount of news articles. And I am just lost, I am doing this out of courtesy because I am a fan of Competition climbing, and give my free time to creating wiki articles for Rookies going pro. To me it seems team USA teammates that she compeetes with have the same or less references and are public. Can you advise what is missing please?
Bifty Bifty (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mao Nakamura has been accepted

[edit]
Mao Nakamura, 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!

Theroadislong (talk) 09:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Glad to see she was accepted! I hope to help get more of these rookies up before the 2028 Olympics! Just waiting for them to get more press. Bifty (talk) 23:10, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (June 11)

[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 SafariScribe 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 for sports persons and athletes). 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 02:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I used the same framework pretty much for Mao Nakamura, and Mao was accepted.., could you please advise? I've been asking in the talk what's needed, and I've refined, and refined, I just keep getting denials. Bifty (talk) 02:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (June 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 WikiMentor01 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.
WikiMentor01 (talk) 06:35, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Light Phone II

[edit]

Great work on Light Phone II! Any interest in nominating for Did You Know? It is a simple process. Thriley (talk) 18:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! Bifty (talk) 23:56, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adriene Akiko Clark (August 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 MediaKyle was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:
Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.
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.
MediaKyle (talk) 13:51, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kilter Grips for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kilter Grips 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/Kilter Grips 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.

WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 17:16, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WeirdNAnnoyed, I'm in the process of editing this page to make it suitable for Wikipedia. I will address the promotional tone. Bifty (talk) 20:43, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for your attention to the problem. Please note the sourcing in the article at present is completely inadequate, we usually require a minimum of 2 sources that are independent of the subject (not interviews) and that cover the company (not its products or people) in depth. As far as I can tell the article has none at present. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 20:45, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see, would it be possible to list it as a draft to give me time to edit the sources, and find more independent sources? Bifty (talk) 20:55, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]