User talk:JSInDepth

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Hello, JSInDepth, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: VuWall (December 4)

[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 KylieTastic 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.
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.
KylieTastic (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, JSInDepth! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: VuWall (December 6)

[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 OnlyNano 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.
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.
OnlyNanotalk 03:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: VuWall (February 17)

[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 SafariScribe 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:
Trivial sources doesn't help in determining notablility.
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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: VuWall (April 18)

[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 BuySomeApples 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 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.
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.
BuySomeApples (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! 🌊 oceanloop 22:39, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the feedback! Sorry about that. I'll make sure to include summaries going forward. JSInDepth (talk) 22:48, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WorkJam (software company) moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to WorkJam (software company). 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. Gheus (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for letting me know. I thought the reference from Time Magazine was notable. But if I go back to that contribution I'll look for other sources. I can't seem to find the draft though. It looks like someone else deleted it. Can you help? JSInDepth (talk) 16:36, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: WorkJam (software company) (September 8)

[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 GGOTCC was:
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 comment the reviewer left was:
Several sentences do not have citations at the end, and appear to be personal analysis of the information. It is fine to cite an entire paragraph with one reference, but stand-alone sentences need references 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.
GGOTCC 16:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: WorkJam (software company) (September 8)

[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 CNMall41 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:
Sources showing notability must meet WP:ORGCRIT. Everything here is routine.
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.
CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: WorkJam (software company) (September 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 Stuartyeates 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:
Not seeing the in depth coverage in independent sources that we require.
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.
Stuartyeates (talk) 05:35, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for the comments. I added more sources with proper formatting (I think) from Yahoo Finance, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune (magazine), Time (magazine), Forbes, and Newsweek among others. Is that enough or do you recommend additional sources? I'm just not sure what else to include here. I'd appreciate any guidance. Thanks JSInDepth (talk) 14:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]