User talk:Barts83eu

This is Barts83eu's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madeleine Wood (February 24)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not satisfying our simplest 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Madeleine Wood and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 02:44, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madeleine Wood (February 24)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what independent sources have published about subjects and has essentially no interest in what anybody or any organisation says or wants to say about themselves on Wikipedia we need reliable sources independent of 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Madeleine Wood and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Barts83eu, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Theroadislong (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Madeleine Wood concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Madeleine Wood, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Data Sources - Aviation Philippines

Hello, not sure how does it work? Is there anyone here who works with data related to aviation traffic in the Philippines? Barts83eu (talk) 11:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MV Trans Asia 1 (May 9)

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

This is the English language Wikipedia; we can only accept articles written in the English language. Please provide a high-quality English language translation of your submission. Have you visited the Wikipedia home page? You can probably find a version of Wikipedia in your language.

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:MV Trans Asia 1 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.

Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 14:08, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

submittted with language tag

(in Cebuano) Barts83eu (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Automation of work by Large Language Models (May 11)

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

As the other comment said, this is a strong topic for an article, but due to the breadth of the topic it will need significantly more sources to outweigh what we already have. Two of the provided sources are listed as "Questionable" on WP:RSP (arxiv preprints which have not been peer reviewed)

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:Automation of work by Large Language Models 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.

ASUKITE 15:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to K Line. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 18:40, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MV Diamond Highway (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Asilvering 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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There doesn't appear to be anything notable about this ship? The news coverage is just about two times it was on fire.

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:MV Diamond Highway 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.

asilvering (talk) 01:31, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pier 88 (June 4)

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

half of the sources are promotional or sponsored.

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:Pier 88 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.

– robertsky (talk) 09:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NO they were not sponsord, just there most press focused on the actual opening ceremony and attandeance of the VIPs, as opposed to functional information rwgairndg routes or prices ... Barts83eu (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that I missed this before declining the second time. But my decision still stands. Out of the 4, https://tourist-arrival-philippines.netlify.app/ is on a self-hosting platform (netlify.app), which in some cases can be considered as a self-publishing platform. https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1962377/cebu/business/pier-88-economic-gateway-to-the-north is marked as a sponsored content at the end of the article, ergo promotional. removing these two sources, the current text can be largely considered as unsourced. The content itself is also written from a promotional angle, with plenty of puffery woven in. – robertsky (talk) 13:18, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pier 88 (June 8)

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

no improvements since the previous submission.

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:Pier 88 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.

– robertsky (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Method, Motivation for WIKIpedia edits

Hello, I am grateful for the existance of the common, peer-reviewed Wikipedia. I belive this is a needed and pragmatic approach of organizing knowledge outside academia, media.

I edit in good faith in the area I perosnally find interesting and see need of haveing INDEPENDENT referene. Barts83eu (talk) 04:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pier 88 (June 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CurryTime7-24 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:Pier 88 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.

CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:12, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please be more specific and list the issues Barts83eu (talk) 03:28, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This port represents a significant new addition to our infrastructure.

Naturally, investors and stakeholders are excited about it because of its potential hence their influence on the media.

Please note, this enthusiasm is in line with the robust economic growth and youthful demographic of our country.

Why should this not be a topic of discussion or reference? Particularly when sources like Wikipedia, which you yourself have acknowledged as being more reliable than traditional media, are available for information verification. Barts83eu (talk) 13:30, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MV Diamond Highway (June 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gorden 2211 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 passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

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.

The comment the reviewer left was: