User talk:MrWylerTyler

Welcome!

Hello, MrWylerTyler, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Cordelia nic fhearraigh, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! TheLongTone (talk) 16:20, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cordelia nic fhearraigh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cordelia nic fhearraigh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. TheLongTone (talk) 16:20, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Barry Ward (Actor).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Barry Ward (Actor).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. January (talk) 16:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mark Huberman

The article Mark Huberman has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. The Banner talk 23:27, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mark Huberman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Huberman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Huberman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 12:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunburn (1999 fim)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sunburn (1999 fim), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.flixster.com/movie/sunburn-1999/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunburn (1999 film)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Sunburn (1999 film), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Sunburn (1999 fim). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Sunburn (1999 film).jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sunburn (1999 film).jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Levison Wood.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Levison Wood.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Dylan McGrath Chef.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Dylan McGrath Chef.jpeg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright notice

Hello MrWylerTyler, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Legan, County Longford have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Legan, County Longford) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Legan, County Longford, MrWylerTyler!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this. Unfortunately the sources aren't reliable; please add some WP:RELIABLESOURCES.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 05:24, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hilary Woods

Hello, MrWylerTyler. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Hilary Woods, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Hilary Woods to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks,

TheLongTone (talk) 13:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seamus O'Rourke moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Seamus O'Rourke, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 06:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Vincent Tee

The article Vincent Tee has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:BASIC/WP:ENT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. KH-1 (talk) 00:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seamus O'Rourke (June 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nomadicghumakkad 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrWylerTyler! Having an article 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! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seamus O'Rourke (July 15)

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

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 content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NACTOR/WP:NAUTHOR. The individual's website and interviews are all considered primary sources and are not independent or reliable.

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:Seamus O'Rourke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Dan arndt (talk) 07:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seamus O'Rourke (October 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mikehawk10 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Individual is notable based on the sources (WP:NAUTHOR). However, I don't see a lot of actual content on the individual himself actually present. The majority of the career sections are quotes pulled from long book reviews. If we could actually get biographical details from them or if we could understand what the memoir's contents are without using puff quotes then it might be acceptable.

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:Seamus O'Rourke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

— Mikehawk10 (talk) 02:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Seamus O'Rourke has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Seamus O'Rourke. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to all the reviewers. Please release this article. I am neutral on Seamus O'Rourke, I have no connection to him. He is a growing public figure in Ireland. The article includes references, is not in any way controversial or does it contain any inaccuracies. Surely the point of wikipedia is to let this be published and the article will be refined, improved and developed over time by other contributers. This is just to get it off the ground. MrWylerTyler (talk) 12:04, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The basic notability of subjects needs to be established before articles are published (otherwise, we open the floodgates to numerous unsuitable articles). At the moment, the article is too sketchy, with around half of the prose relating to two reviews of a book, and very little other background. If you can expand it using reliable, independent sources, it should eventually be accepted. Paul W (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seamus O'Rourke (May 20)

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

This draft is sparse on details about the subject, his life and career (see previous reviewers comments too). More information is needed (which will need to be reliably evidenced by substantial content in independent sources) so that notability can be properly assessed. Simply saying he is "noted as a director and actor of Irish theatre," isn't enough ("Noted" by whom?). What works has he directed, where and when? What roles has he played, where and when? What critical reaction did these works receive?

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:Seamus O'Rourke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Paul W (talk) 12:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing. I would ask you to please release this article. It is over a year now since I attempted to launch a page on Seamus O'Rourke.

I am neutral on Seamus O'Rourke, I have no connection to him whatsoever. He is a growing public figure in Ireland. The article includes references, is not in any way controversial, nor does it contain any inaccuracies.

Surely the point of wikipedia is to let this be published and the article will be refined, improved and developed over time by other contributers. This is just to get it off the ground.

I will see if there are any recent references to Seamus O'Rourke, update the article and then re-submit. Please release this. MrWylerTyler (talk) 11:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the existing references...

1 = mainly interview so primary source (not reliable - see Wikipedia:Interviews)

2 = subject's own website (not reliable)

3 = single passing mention (not significant coverage)

4 = again, mainly interview so primary source (not reliable)

5 = perhaps the most reliable source if you use material that isn't interview-based - the biography could be expanded a bit using extracts from this

6, 7 = again, single passing mentions (not significant coverage)

8, 9 = Book reviews (in local newspaper and industry publication) - hardly material that would satisfy WP:AUTHOR; are there any national newspapers or other reviews?

Wikipedia has minimum standards/guidelines that govern the initial publication of content (the approach is "achieve standard then publish", not "publish then achieve standard", so that the project is not diluted by dross in need of improvement). This is not about "getting it off the ground" - it is about establishing that it is sufficiently airworthy to enter the runway.

Key is the general notability guideline: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (emphasis added; WP:GNG). If a subject's article cannot pass that initial threshold, then it does not warrant inclusion. I would urge expansion of the article to include, if it exists, more reliably sourced background to the subject's life, career and achievements so that notability is clearly established. Paul W (talk) 09:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References 1, 2 and 3 are three seperate sources to verify that he is a director, writer and actor. There is no other claim being made there. His own website is referenced, however, it is countered against two independent references.

Referecnce 4 is with respect his age, which is calibrated against the date of the article. I know 1965 as his birth to be true from the book 'Standing in Gaps', but I can't reference that online. This reference is accurate to the statement put forward.

Reference 5, 6 and 7 are independent reviews of work in which he was involved. This qualifies the statement on what he is 'noted' for.

Reference 8 and 9 are reviews of his book standing in gaps. The Irish Farmers Journal is a national newspaper.

Sources are reliable and independent of the source, be it interview or not, he is not in control of the publication beyond his participation in it. This is only to provide minimum information that is accurate, non controversial and is appropriately referenced.

I intend to submit this again. I have to fundamentally disagree about the function of Wikipedia, it is supposed to be a database for information to be shared, improved and added to over time. MrWylerTyler (talk) 17:21, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seamus O'Rourke (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 HenryTemplo 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

HenryTemplo (talk) 19:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Seamus O'Rourke

Hello, MrWylerTyler. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Seamus O'Rourke, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Seamus O'Rourke

Hello, MrWylerTyler. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Seamus O'Rourke".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]