User talk:CyclopedicWoman

Welcome!

Hello, Hafsterix, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! – SchroCat (talk) 17:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Raghib Ali moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Raghib Ali. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, it is promotional and reads like an advertisement, you may have a possible Conflict of Interest and it was clearly intended to be moved to draftspace. 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. bonadea contributions talk 10:43, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raghib Ali (November 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing 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 content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This has a number of issues related to referencing:

There is too much unreferenced information, with several paragraphs without a single citation. In articles on living people, pretty much every statement must be clearly supported by an inline citation to a reliable source, or else removed. As a bare minimum, each paragraph has to have at least one citations, and also end in one, and that's only enough for short paragraphs without any potentially contentious information and where the same source genuinely supports everything in the paragraph.

Nearly all the sources cited are primary and very close to the subject. While primary sources can be used to support straightforward, non-contentious information, some statements are likely to require independent verification.

In the 'References' section there are six numbered items, but those appear to replicate the sources cited via footnotes, and aren't therefore required.

Below them, there are several items under the heading 'Media coverage'. These are not needed. Either cite them as sources, if they support something in this draft, or else get rid of them. Media appearances where the subject is being interviewed, is commenting on things, or articles written by the subject, are not useful for anything; ones where a secondary source is discussing or analysing eg. work done by the subject can be cited as sources, and may contribute towards notability.

There are a couple of inline external links in the lead section. These are not allowed; convert them to inline citations, if relevant.

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:Raghib Ali 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:35, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CyclopedicWoman! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:35, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]