Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sarah (talk) 04:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Tictocdocs,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you'd like to drop by the Teahouse and discuss the article, the experienced hosts at the Teahouse would be glad to see if they can offer improvement suggestions... and that may lead to the article becoming accepted. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 04:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eddie Rosenstein, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. 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) 20:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tictocdocs. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Eddie Rosenstein.
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Eddie Rosenstein}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hello Tictocdocs. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice. Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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, 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:Tictocdocs. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Tictocdocs|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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Tictocdocs, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Tictocdocs|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The only secondary source that could have detailed coverage is 404, so cannot be analyzed. No other secondary detailed coverage, a ton of non independent sources which do not speak to notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCREATIVE.
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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eddie Rosenstein 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. John from Idegon (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
