User talk:Davidoaye
July 2020
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Landfill, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Graham87 05:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Graham! I wasn't sure what the rules were on that -- I saw that Wales was linked just below, and it seemed consistent to link India, but also definitely wasn't an important part of the piece! Cheers.
An article you recently created, Dan Feyer, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Roller26 (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dan Feyer (January 1)
[edit]
You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)
If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement again, it will almost certainly be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a partial block may be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.
This draft, as written, does not appear to indicate that the appropriate notability criterion is satisfied. In particular, this draft does not appear to indicate that WP:NBIO is satisfied. If one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page or in AFC comments which criterion is met, and resubmit. It is the responsibility of the submitter to show that a subject satisfies a notability criterion.
You may ask for advice about the notability criteria at the Teahouse.
In particular, see and refer to WP:NBIO for notability, which is the guideline that the subject should be evaluated against.
This draft has been declined because of notability concerns. This draft should be resubmitted by addressing the notability concerns in AFC comments or on the talk page of the draft. Do not resubmit this draft without explaining how it satisfies a notability criterion. Do not simply add references, or make minor changes, without explaining how it satisfies a notability criterion.
You may ask for advice about the notability criteria at the Teahouse.- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dan Feyer 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:Dan Feyer, 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 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.
|
Hello, Davidoaye!
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) 16:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Erik Agard has been accepted
[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Missvain (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Concern regarding Draft:Dan Feyer
[edit] Hello, Davidoaye. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dan Feyer, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dan Feyer has been accepted
[edit]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.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Welcome!
[edit]Hi Davidoaye! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions to TBPN. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and in particular, the article needs at least three reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the subject. There's useful information about how to choose good sources and avoid bad sources here. 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. SunloungerFrog (talk) 11:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- thanks! I think I'll leave this, I was seeing a lot of talk about them and thought they were more notable, but even just trying to research them there wasn't enough to make a page -- I should have started it in draftspace in the first place. Thanks! Davidoaye (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- You're welcome - it'll be in draftspace for about six months before it's deleted (unless you edit it in the meantime), so you've got time to come back to it in case you find more material. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:00, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:TBPN
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Draft:TBPN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it exhibits one or more of the following signs which indicate that the page could only plausibly have been generated by large language models (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) and would have been removed by any reasonable human review:
- Communication intended for the user: This may include collaborative communication (e.g., "Here is your Wikipedia article on..."), knowledge-cutoff disclaimers (e.g., "Up to my last training update ..."), self-insertion (e.g., "as a large language model"), and phrasal templates (e.g., "Smith was born on [Birth Date].")
- Implausible non-existent references: This may include external links that are dead on arrival, ISBNs with invalid checksums, and unresolvable DOIs. Since humans can make typos and links may suffer from link rot, a single example should not be considered definitive. Editors should use additional methods to verify whether a reference truly does not exist.
- Nonsensical citations: This may include citations of incorrect temporality (e.g a source from 2020 being cited for a 2022 event), DOIs that resolve to completely unrelated content (e.g., a paper on a beetle species being cited for a computer science article), and citations that attribute the wrong author or publication.
Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. Pages created using them that did not undergo human review may be deleted at any time.
If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, 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. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find creating new encyclopedia content yourself difficult, please share this with other editors at the Teahouse, and they may be able to help. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your legitimate contributions. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 09:08, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. asilvering (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)- Hey! I don't have multiple accounts and don't know who these other accounts are. I did start working on an article about TBPN, I should have done that in draftspace which is my mistake, but I realized while writing that there wasn't enough out there for an article. I had a nice conversation about that with SunloungerFrog and haven't touched it since. It wasn't written by an LLM but I didn't contest the deletion because I was fine with it being deleted, but I'm now being accused of being a sockpuppet, violating a block before it existed, and having my other articles taken down as well.
- I'm finding the "guide to appealing blocks" incredibly confusing, I'm not even sure how to get this message through to anyone or if I'm writing this in the right place. I'm an occasional editor and enjoyed trying to contribute but honestly not sure I can put in the effort to figure out this system. Davidoaye (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Davidoaye, sorry I missed this earlier. If you need to get in touch with someone, it helps if you type the @ sign and select their username (the software should automatically pull up their name for you in a drop-down) so that it sends them a ping. Regarding the sockpuppetry, can you please explain how you came to edit about TBPN in the first place? When you say
having my other articles taken down as well
, which articles do you mean? -- asilvering (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2025 (UTC)- @Asilvering, oh, thanks, that's v helpful!
- I basically started seeing a bunch of references online to TBPN and was searching for some information on what it actually is. I went to wikipedia because that's where I go to find out what stuff is, and when I didn't see an article I figured "I guess I should be helpful and start one," but then when I googled for references I couldn't find much.
- Other articles taken down: the article I started on Jack Clark was moved to draftspace immediately after as well: Jack Clark (AI policy expert) on grounds of notability and possible conflict of interest.
- Let me know if there's anything else I can say or explain. I enjoy editing on Wikipedia and would like to be able to keep doing it. Davidoaye (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, it looks to me like you've just ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time - we're extremely skeptical of people who are writing articles on companies and businesspeople, since those are very, very often the result of WP:UPE. You came back after a long hiatus to immediately make two articles that set off UPE alarm bells, so that's the "wrong place". Your articles actually aren't very promotional at all, but then someone came after you who almost certainly is UPE and definitely is sockpuppeting, and they made promotional articles on one of the topics you'd just written one of your drafts on. So there's your "wrong time". I would not normally block for just this, since it's pretty easy for someone to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but I also screwed up while investigating your case, and got one of that editor's drafts confused as one of yours. (The person who reported you made the same mistake - but it's 98% my bad, since they're not an admin and were just working on memory and couldn't see any of the evidence.) You have my sincere apologies, and I'll unblock you in a moment.
- Please don't actually turn out to be UPE after all, or I'll feel twice as foolish. (I already feel pretty foolish, so that'll be rough.) If you need an explanation on how to be a legitimate paid or WP:COI editor, I'd be happy to explain, and I won't block you for fessing up. -- asilvering (talk) 19:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
- @Asilvering Thanks for the explanation! That totally makes sense, I really appreciate it. And I really do appreciate how difficult your job is, I've read a bunch of articles over the years that felt like paid placement and it drives me mad, it makes sense to me you have to be super vigilant about that. Davidoaye (talk) 19:47, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Davidoaye, sorry I missed this earlier. If you need to get in touch with someone, it helps if you type the @ sign and select their username (the software should automatically pull up their name for you in a drop-down) so that it sends them a ping. Regarding the sockpuppetry, can you please explain how you came to edit about TBPN in the first place? When you say
Jack Clark (AI policy expert) moved to draftspace
[edit]Thanks for your contributions to Jack Clark (AI policy expert). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. 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. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:36, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
- Hey! I'm not sure how to format this correctly: I don't have any conflict of interests on this. I started the article as a stub because he's in the news a lot, other people have added to it since. If you say he's not notable that's up to all of you, I'm very confused on the notability guildelines because a lot of people who don't seem very notable to me have Wikipedia pages, but I'm not that deep in Wikipedia world to know how you decide these things. Davidoaye (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Davidoaye (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
- Hey! I don't have multiple accounts and don't know who these other accounts are. I did start working on an article about TBPN, I should have done that in draftspace which is my mistake, but I realized while writing that there wasn't enough out there for an article. I had a nice conversation about that with SunloungerFrog and haven't touched it since. It wasn't written by an LLM but I didn't contest the deletion because I was fine with it being deleted, but I'm now being accused of being a sockpuppet, violating a block before it existed, and having my other articles taken down as well.
- I'm finding the "guide to appealing blocks" incredibly confusing, I'm not even sure how to get this message through to anyone or if I'm writing this in the right place. I'm an occasional editor and enjoyed trying to contribute but honestly not sure I can put in the effort to figure out this system. Davidoaye (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Accepting unblock, see above. -- asilvering (talk) 19:10, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
As you can edit no other page while blocked, this is the correct place.
Are you associated with the TPBN podcast or some broader effort to edit about it? Please see WP:MEAT; even if you yourself have no other accounts, we must treat it as if you do since you are doing something that others have been blocked for doing. You don't seem like you really want to make other edits, if you don't wish to edit further, there's no need to unblock you as blocks only prevent editing. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 7 September 2025 (UTC)