User talk:Expatceo

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steve Cadigan (September 14)

[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 S0091 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:
The Forbes article was written by a contributor rather than staff so not a reliable sources (see WP:FORBESCON) and the Kirkus review was through Kirkus Indie which does paid reviews so not independent. His website is a WP:primary source so should only be used sparingly and not helpful for establishing notabiity. S0091 (talk) 16:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
S0091 (talk) 16:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Expatceo! 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! S0091 (talk) 16:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steve Cadigan (September 15)

[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 Pythoncoder 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.
pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 07:41, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making edits generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Draft talk:Steve Cadigan. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 07:43, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Steve Cadigan (September 15)

[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.
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) 11:41, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]