User talk:Yevvvah

This is Yevvvah'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: Yevvvah (August 6)

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

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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Yevvvah 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.

jlwoodwa (talk) 06:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yevvvah! 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! jlwoodwa (talk) 06:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yevvvah (August 6)

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 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:Yevvvah 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Arshak Khachatrian

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 Draft:Arshak Khachatrian, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that a person must meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people to merit inclusion. To meet these criteria, there has to be evidence of significant coverage about them from reliable and independent sources.

A source is considered reliable if it has an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours mainstream news organizations, academic press, and reputable publishers of newspapers, books and magazines. Social media sites are automatically disqualified because they are by definition self-published, and lack the editorial review required for them to be considered reliable. The only exception to this rule is if it is the official social media account of an existing reliable source. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drm310, I have edited the Draft and now it has more references and sources inside the article, I have edited Arshak Khachatrian's info to be less promotional and neutral. Please check again and let me know what you think. Thanks! Yevvvah (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that an admin has already deleted it, sorry. You'll have to try again. Are you at all affiliated with this individual? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310 he is well known engineer and creator in Yerevan, Armenia and gives a lot of inspiration to our youth, so I decided to create an English version for him and then will add Russian and Armenian versions as well. Yevvvah (talk) 15:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources don't seem to be of sufficient quality. They are either sources affiliated with him (meaning they are not independent), citing works written by him (but not about him), interviews (which are primary sources), or just a listing of his credentials (not extensive coverage). This is likely why your draft was declined.

Please have a look at Wikipedia's definition of reliable sources. The standards for sources are quite high. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yevvvah (August 6)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello Yevvvah. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Yevvvah, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Yevvvah. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Yevvvah|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. C F A 💬 16:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA no, I do not work with Arshak Khachatrian. I live in the same city as him, and here he is very notable software engineer and photographer. There is no compensation for my edits, I just want to have about him here on Wikipedia. As you can see from the info and the references he has been an author to a book and has very active influence. Yevvvah (talk) 16:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have no connection with him, and he's not notable, you shouldn't have any problem editing other articles instead. You don't have the experience to write a biography, and if you continue, you may well be blocked. Ping @CFA Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]