User talk:TuxTheEditor
| This is TuxTheEditor's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dragonfly (options) (August 15)
[edit]
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:
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.
- in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
- reliable
- secondary
- independent of the subject
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dragonfly (options) 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.
|
Hello, TuxTheEditor!
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! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 15:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dragonfly (options) (August 16)
[edit]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 passing mentions about the subject)
- reliable
- secondary
- independent of the subject
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:
The comment the reviewer left was:
- Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
- Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
- Essay-like writing
- Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
- Close paraphrasing
The sources given don't show significant coverage of this term to warrant a Wikipedia article. Ref 1 (see https://tfal.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Option-Volatility-and-Pricing_-Advanced-Trading-Strategies-and-Techniques-PDFDrive-.pdf) only has two mentions of the term and both are very brief. The other two sources are not specifically about this type of trading strategy. In addition the draft is written in an overly compels way not understandable to a general audience. The draft also has a style typical of AI-generated articles, e.g. bullet points, bold, and several claims without sources given.
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:Dragonfly (options) 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.