User talk:HERODOE

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
A cup of hot tea to welcome you!

Hello, Herohcreatives, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages that you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, If you need help visit the Teahouse or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Sm8900 (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: S. P. Ayodeji has been accepted

[edit]
S. P. Ayodeji, 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.

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!

Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ranjani Shettar

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ranjani Shettar, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ay Zed (May 20)

[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 music-related topics). 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:
Release announcements are promotional so not independent. The best source is The Guardian but does not say much and one qualifying source is not enough to establish notability. I also note there was a draft created last year that was declined a few times with last decline in April 2024. Nothing has changed since that time. S0091 (talk) 15:04, 20 May 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) 15:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: James Russell (June 25)

[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 Itzcuauhtli11 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:
Subject needs significant coverage in reliable sources. Sources cited on the article are passing mentions, primary or minor.
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.
— Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the earlier review. I’ve trimmed the article to a neutral stub version and kept only verifiable, factual information with citations from reliable sources. I will continue improving the article as more independent coverage becomes available. Kindly consider this revision for review. Herohcreatives (talk) 11:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: James Russell (June 25)

[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 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:
Lack of WP:SIGCOV in reliable, secondary 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.
Rambley (talk) 11:40, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

[edit]

Just a reminder that per WP:USERNOCAT, pages in your personal sandbox are not allowed to be filed in mainspace categories alongside actual articles. The page must stay out of categories while it's in sandbox, and may have categories added to it only when the content has been moved into a real article in mainspace. Since I've had to remove User:Herohcreatives/sandbox from categories three times now, don't readd it to categories again, because sandboxes can't be in categories. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Bearcat, for the helpful reminder. I apologize for adding categories to my sandbox page. I’m new to Wikipedia and still learning the guidelines. I will make sure to adhere to WP:USERNOCAT going forward. I appreciate your patience and support. Herohcreatives (talk) 12:52, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. I am copying this from WP:UPE as it seems like a means of making it clearer, as other than warning templates I do not think that there is anything the says this better.

If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. You may do this on your user page, on the talk page of affected articles, or in your edit summaries. As you have a conflict of interest, you must ensure everyone with whom you interact is aware of your paid status, in all discussions on Wikipedia pages within any namespace. If you want to use a template to disclose your COI on a talk page, place {{connected contributor (paid)}} at the top of the page, fill it in as follows, and save:
The employer is whoever is paying you to be involved in the article (such as a PR company). The client is on whose behalf the payment is made (usually the subject of the article). If the employer and client are the same entity—that is, if Acme Corporation is paying you to write about Acme Corporation—the client parameter may be left empty. See {{connected contributor (paid)}} for more information. Note that other editors may add this template for you. Paid editing without such a declaration is called undisclosed paid editing (UPE).
You are expected to maintain a clearly visible list on your user page of your paid contributions. Disclosure on user pages may be done using the {{paid}} template as follows: {{paid|employer=name of employer|client=name of client|article=name of article}}. If you advertise, solicit or obtain paid editing work via an account on any external website, you must provide links on your user-page to all such accounts.
If you propose changes to an affected article, you can use the {{edit COI}} template. Post it on the talk page and make your suggestion underneath it.

In addition, new paid articles should be puth through Articles for Creation (AfC). - Bilby (talk) 23:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bilby Thank you again for your time and the helpful explanation. I’ll definitely take note of everything you’ve shared.
Regarding the last paragraph, that has actually been my approach so far. For the article in question, I wasn’t involved from the beginning, I only contributed later on.
If you don’t mind me asking, how should I properly disclose my involvement when there is no payment involved? For instance, if I expand a stub into a full article, or if I write about a notable topic or individual simply out of interest, with no personal or financial connection, what is the right way to communicate that?
This was the case with my very first article, which I wrote as part of learning the editing process. Unfortunately, it has now been tagged for undisclosed paid contribution, even though there was no compensation or conflict of interest.
I’d appreciate your advice on how to handle situations like this and what steps I can take to clarify things moving forward. Thanks again. Herohcreatives (talk) 05:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, this situation appears very strange. But at this stage I have removed the tag. - Bilby (talk) 05:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kieran Donovan (July 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 Qcne 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.
qcne (talk) 19:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kieran Donovan (July 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 Gheus 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.
Gheus (talk) 02:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AI financial close (July 27)

[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 MCE89 were:
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 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.
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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Almost all of these sources are sponsored content.
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.
MCE89 (talk) 10:27, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AI in financial close (August 9)

[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 Caleb Stanford 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.
Caleb Stanford (talk) 04:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AI in financial close (August 13)

[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 Caleb Stanford 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.
Caleb Stanford (talk) 20:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tayo Nathaniel Fagbemi moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Tayo Nathaniel Fagbemi. 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. Onel5969 TT me 09:52, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bhasme

[edit]
Warning icon

Your user page, User:Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bhasme, has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be advertising which only promoted or publicized someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I hope you are doing well? First, my Username is Herohcreatives which is also the name I use across my social media page for the past 15 years. The user:Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bhasme, is not my username and that surface after requesting for the article (Ajinkya Bhasme) to be restored. Also on the draft space there is a tag on it which I don't normally see on draft page saying this article is an ongoing work and need to be submitted after work is done. I could not remove the tag because i do not know why it got there and from my learning so far as a newbie I understand you don't remove tag on any article unless don by an admin...this is the reason i continue to develop the article on that page (user:Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bhasme) even though I don't understand why that page changes my username from Herohcreatives to what you saw.
And to the "Promotional editing" if you can check my edit history I have always avoid promotional related work. Most of the challenge I encounter are notability issue which is the primary thing on this space before an article is considered for an inclusion. Once again that page you deleted for speedy deletion was not intended for promotion rather the link I clicked after requesting for the undeletion led to that page with this user:Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bhasme which is not my username. Ans I could not remove it because I see it as violation from my end. Don't flog me too much please, i am learning on the go. My edit count so far is less than 300.
Please, I look forward to your guidance after checking my stories above. Thank you Herohcreatives (talk) 12:48, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your username cannot be that of a company(as it seems to be based on your edits and search results for your username). You also made a paid editing disclosure, but name "various clients"; this is not acceptable, you need to make a disclosure for every client(or indicate that all your edits are for clients). The paid editing policy also requires you to link to any websites where you offer your services. 331dot (talk) 12:53, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick response and thanks for the clarification so far. Please, bear with me as I need further clarification. From what I am seeing now there are two conflicting username Herohcreatives (Original) and Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bahsme. Which of these two is not allowed? And for the page disclosure (When I still get compensation) I do declare the client name on the topic/subject userpage for clarification. I do not know i need to list that on my userpage. And recently I do all my edit voluntarily and I don't know if there is a procedure to declare that as well. Herohcreatives (talk) 13:07, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You only have a single username. "Herohcreatives/Ajinkya Bahsme" is a subpage of your user page(indicated by the forward slash). You will need to tell a new username that you want, one that is not your company. You need not use your real name. The company name can be a portion of your username(for example, "JohnDoe of Hero creatives")
If you make some paid edits but not others, you will need to disclose every client you've edited for on your user page(once unblocked) and add new clients that you take on. 331dot (talk) 13:13, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your time. You will be the first admin on this space to ever give me such attention usually others will just drop links for me to read further which has never helped so far. Once again I appreciate you. I hope to be like you one day and help newbies like me. I don't have issue using my real name except if it is not allowed on this space. Also, I observed most admin I have come across here do voluntary work (I never see a paid discloser on their page) and I will love to become one. Therefore, since July I stopped taking compensation for new work. Which has led me to developing stubs, update pages and more. And I don't know how to make that happen on my Blocked talk page
As for website, I do not have any other than facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn where I showcase my professional work (I graduated as a Graphic Designer and I have passion for Photography. I came to wikipedia because I work as an editorial designer and I publish articles in reputable journal across the globe.
Moving forward, I don't think my name will be available as it is a popular name (Humphrey) but can I combine my initials and my wife initials plus our wedding year (HD19) provided it's available. Or you can suggest to me. Herohcreatives (talk) 13:35, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HD19 is not available; please propose something else. You can run a potential choice through Special:CentralAuth; if no results come up, the choice is available(though this does not detect close variations that may be taken). You misunderstand- you shouldn't link to showcases of your work, you should link to websites(if any) where you offer your services or solicit clients. If you don't have a website where you do that, okay. I will remove the block once you're renamed if you agree to disclose all your prior clients and future clients- as well as continuing to use the draft process. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will come up with a new name....By the time I combine my children initials I should get something. I will drop it here for you to see. Also, about the article I am working Ajinkya Bhasme was it really promotional or it got deleted because of my username? Also, once I get a new username can you restore it or it have been deleted indefinitely? Right now I am not doing paid work, how should I address this on my user page?
Thank you once again Herohcreatives (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have two
HERODOE Or HD2019 Herohcreatives (talk) 14:01, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've renamed you. I restored the draft and placed it at Draft:Ajinkya Bhasme; draft space is the preferred locations for draft submissions(you can create drafts via the Article Wizard). I will remove the block, please edit your user page(User:HERODOE) to put your clients you previously edited for. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wao...you are wonderful! I appreciate you for your time and patience you took to walk me through this face. Now, I have added to my knowledge what to do and not to do when it comes to username and paid edit disclosure. I will list those previous client on my talk page as instructed.
Another question since the recent work you restored is a volunteer work I picked up how should I approach the disclosure?
Also, since this block was due to my ignorance I hope this will not restrict me for future privilege and responsibility on this space e.g The privileges after 500 edits?
Thanks again HERODOE (talk) 15:03, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not affect status like being extended-confirmed(500 edits).
If by "volunteer work" you mean that you are editing about someone that you are associated with, but not a client, you will need to disclose a conflict of interest.
Note that paid editing is not limited to specific payment for edits and includes any form of paid relationship with a subject(such as general marketing services) 331dot (talk) 15:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for the knowledge imparted I am grateful. Kindly check my User page if the instruction given is duly followed. If there is anything you would want me to improve, please feel free to say it. Thanks again! HERODOE (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]
Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because it has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username gives the impression that the account represents a business, organisation, group, website, or role, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must follow all these steps:

  1. Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement; and
  2. Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked; and
  3. Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked; and
  4. Provide a new username.

To do this, insert the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can search to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is still available.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kieran Donovan (September 12)

[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 Moritoriko 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:
Forbes is a contributor, others are self published profiles as well
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.
Moritoriko (talk) 14:25, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for your feedback I appreciate you. I will reach out and ensure more third party independent and reliable sources are provided HERODOE (talk) 14:38, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AI in financial close (November 21)

[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 Pegnawl was:
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Content is not up to standard WP:MOS and sourcing is not independent nor significant to the page topic; 'financial close' is barely mentioned across sourcing.
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.
Pegnawl (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PegnawlThanks for your review and feedback, I have taken note of your points and I will act accordingly to improve on the article. Thanks again HERODOE (talk) 11:04, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]