User talk:F. D. Notlada

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello F. D. Notlada! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 15:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

January 2021

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Tracey Emin has been reverted.
Your edit here to Tracey Emin was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZBkxqNJC9g) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PopUp Painting (June 22)

[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 Rambley was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:
While potentially notable, some work needs to be done. More reliable sources are needed; a few blogs are cited as sources which are not reliable. Multiple claims in the article are unsourced. Light promotional tone throughout, particularly in the "Mission and values" section.
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.
Rambley (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, F. D. Notlada! 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! Rambley (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:PopUp Painting has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:PopUp Painting. Thanks! Rusalkii (talk) 20:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PopUp Painting (June 22)

[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 Jlwoodwa 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 to do it 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.
jlwoodwa (talk) 21:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PopUp Painting (June 28)

[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 Qcne was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Remove the Locations and the Public Reception sections. You can have a very short paragraph on critical reviews in mainstream 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.
qcne (talk) 19:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Qcne, thank you for your reply. I orginally had a short paragraph for the public reception section and another person reviewed it and said that it was boring to read and that it should include the sources themselves witu citations.
I am at a lost for this bit. I also do not feel that I have written this as an advertising piece it is quite neutral - do you have any advice moving forward ? i can however, delete the locations sections if you feel this would help with getting the page published. F. D. Notlada (talk) 20:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @F. D. Notlada. Basically, an article does need to be summarising existing secondary sources, but we're also not a replacement business directory nor should be modelled on the About Us page of a company's website. The Locations and Public Reception sections just don't really belong in a Wikipedia article in their current format. A brief sentence or two about public perception is all that's needed, but I notice your old version where you had a Community and Press section read very promotional, again the sort of content you'd see on their own website.
The language can be tightened up throughout too, make it formal and dry. Just pure factual descriptions based off you summarising in your own words what existing secondary sources state. qcne (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. The company has so many impressive facts its proving hard to make it all seem formal and dry. But, I will re think that section into a few sentences and keep the better citation links, based on your comments. Thanks! F. D. Notlada (talk) 20:44, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think, if you do remove/condense the sections and ensure its all formal and dry - we could be in a position to accept it. qcne (talk) 20:47, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. That would be great! Thanks for your time in responding to me. F. D. Notlada (talk) 20:50, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PopUp Painting has been accepted

[edit]
PopUp Painting, 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!

qcne (talk) 21:47, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wonderful! I'm so pleased. Thank you qcne for your help!! F. D. Notlada (talk) 21:49, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem :) qcne (talk) 21:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]