User talk:Kilitzianf

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Kilitzianf, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Hello, Kilitzianf. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Kilitzianf! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Creating a Wiki Article, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Kilitzianf! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, I'm In Trouble, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Rotea Gilford[edit]

Draft:Rotea Gilford is 100% certain to be declined. HUGE amounts of the content either having little to nothing to do with Gilford, or no connection to why he might be notable (the section about his son). HUGE amounts are unreferenced. There is a lot of puffery/peacocking content: "Gilford was known for overcoming seemingly insurmountable barriers, achieving unprecedented results, and keeping the door open for others to follow." My suggestion is aim to cut the length by half. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for a biography. David notMD (talk) 19:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you continue to remove from the draft all content not directly related to Gilford. The more compactly relevant to Gilford, the better the chances are that a reviewer will accept rather than decline the draft. If declined, comply with the reviewer's comments before resubmitting. Many drafts are accepted after one or two declines, but if a reviewer sees that a draft was resubmitted with only minor changes, that can prejudice the new reviewer against accepting the draft. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rotea Gilford (August 10)[edit]

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No doubt this is improving, but enumerations of Gilford's Meritorious Awards and many other sections are too much detail and makes for a hagiography rather than an encyclopedia article. Passages like "In 1973, the leadership of the Officers for Justice, now fed up completely with the lack of fairness in employment practices, filed a Federal class-action lawsuit against the San Francisco's Civil Service Commission" and "Just when the mood in San Francisco was at its very lowest ... a ray of hope appeared" are off-topic and should be removed. Furthermore, flowery language is not in the style of Wikipedia and should be replaced.

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:Rotea Gilford 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:Rotea Gilford, 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.

— Bilorv (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kilitzianf! 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! — Bilorv (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Rotea Gilford[edit]

Hello, Kilitzianf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rotea Gilford, 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) 21:02, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rotea Gilford[edit]

Hello, Kilitzianf. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rotea Gilford".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]