Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

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.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Alex Haditaghi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Phelanmarc! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Forbright Bank. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because 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. lp0 on fire () 09:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Phelanmarc. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the Edit Request Wizard), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. lp0 on fire () 09:43, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I show my list of photography clients. This isn't one of them, but I also see the opportunity to submit via AFC here so I'll do that instead so you all can edit or adjust to your liking. The page has a decent bit of antagonistic content on it as well. Phelanmarc (talk) 14:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I wasn't sure because your user page said your client list "includes" the items listed, which suggests there are other clients not on that list. I imagine the draft will be accepted at AfC. lp0 on fire () 14:36, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Yes, just let the AFC process handle it. There might be more government actions against the bank that I missed. Phelanmarc (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see your draft was declined for being promotional. I probably should have done this sooner but I thought I'd offer a few tips. Firstly, "key people" and "personnel" sections are usually considered to be too much like an advert, unless the people themselves are notable (roughly speaking, have their own articles).

Also, I think a lot of what people might think of as "sounding professional", Wikipedia views as promotional language. Try where possible to write simply and neutrally, without flowery language. For example The bank’s strategy combines digital retail products with specialty lending and a commitment to the environment reads like something the bank would write about themselves rather than a neutral description. Try to cite everything to sources independent of the bank, and some of that wording might disappear naturally.

Hope that helps :)

Oh also, the reviewer suggested thw article might be AI-generated. I don't think it is, but could you confirm please? lp0 on fire () 08:15, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just went through line by line to cut all the fluff and get to the point. It does read better/clearer. Phelanmarc (talk) 02:07, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 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.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Forbright Bank and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 04:17, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Phelanmarc. Thank you for your work on Forbright Bank. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not mentioned in target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MCE89 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:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

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:

I don't see any sources that contain the depth of coverage required to meet Wikipedia's strict inclusion criteria for corporations.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Forbright Bank and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

MCE89 (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I added bizjournals, and also now Banking Dive. A simple query shows that just on the FDIC downgrade alone and all the regulatory actions and acquisitions it's plainly notable. Phelanmarc (talk) 01:41, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]