User talk:DriverSafety

Welcome!


Hello, DriverSafety, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful: 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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place  on this page and someone will drop by to help. Happy editing! Sam Sailor 17:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard is warmly recommended)
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
 * Ask questions at Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
 * And feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

Are you ready for editing?
 The Adventure

Files need to be uploaded
Hello, DriverSafety. I noticed that your recent edit to Driving simulator added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. Sam Sailor 17:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC) If, please ping me by adding to your message, and signing it.

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:09, Thursday, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:17, Thursday, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:18, Thursday, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:24, Tuesday, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:50, Monday, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:51, Monday, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:53, Monday, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:20, Monday, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi DriverSafety! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:31, Monday, October 22, 2018 (UTC)

referencing
Learn how to reference. Then go fix what you did at Driving simulator David notMD (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * References 1,8,9,10 link to the VS website. Instead, the information should be the original publications. The Driving simulators section has no references. Good luck to you, but I have nothing further to add. David notMD (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Newspaper and magazine articles are OK as references as long as not written by people associated with VS. David notMD (talk) 12:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Virage Simulation, from its old location at User:DriverSafety/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. -Liancetalk/contribs 19:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Did some work to get the draft into Wikipedia format, fixed one ref. I suggest you continue to work on the article while waiting for a review. David notMD (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please add the required WP:PAID declaration to your User page. David notMD (talk) 04:05, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * This draft is in the review queue, but it is possible/likely that an Administrator will tag it for Speedy deletion as being solely promotional in nature. There will be a brief period to contest the SD, but as written, the SD may prevail. If not SD'd, may fail review as not achieving Wikipedia's definition of notability for corporations. David notMD (talk) 12:18, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Reviews of drafts: the notice says eight weeks or more. Can be much more. About 1/3 of the submitted articles have been on the list more than eight weeks, some dating back to April! After an article is approved it takes some time before search engines such as Google list the Wikipedia article when a search is made on the topic. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

PAID
I put a PAID template on the Talk page of your draft. That will remain if the draft is accepted. If the draft becomes an article, you should add to your User page that you have been paid to edit the article in question. David notMD (talk) 14:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If not accepted, you can delete any mention of paid from your User page. Also, you are not required to keep content on your Talk page. The preference is to create an archive and move older stuff there, but some editors just delete stuff. David notMD (talk) 14:49, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Use of multiple accounts
Hey DriverSafety. I hope you're doing well. I'm Kevin, and I'm a Wikipedia administrator. I noticed your question at the Teahouse about the Pierrot2007 account. As the editor at the Teahouse noted, it's not possible to delete an old account, but I've gone ahead and redirected the User:Pierrot2007 userpage to your userpage. I'm guessing you won't want to use the Pierrot2007 account in the future, but if you do, please know there are some rules about when you can do that. (It's not important to concern yourself with that if you just use one account.) Sorry about all of this hassle – this note is just an administrative requirement. Best, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 03:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kevin,

Thank you very much for answering my question. I think Wiki is a great resource and I wish to always respect the rules. Unfortunately, I am not always sure what they are or how to implement them. But everyone so far has been quite helpful. Thanks again.DriverSafety (talk) 13:41, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Message to administrators/editors. I am a bit clumsy with accounts, passwords etc. (I have been known to pay the same utility bill multiple times). A fair amount of time elapsed between my first entry into the Wiki community and my second. On that second occasion, I mistakenly opened a second account and never again intentionally used the first one. Recently, I visited the Teahouse and asked to have the first account removed. Kevin informed me that I could not do so but that it was not a problem if I only use one account. I now notice that there is a message on my talk page that says I am "a user of multiple accounts". It is far more accurate to state that I opened a second account by mistake and cannot close it. Is there any way to remove or qualify the message --user of multiple accounts -- as it is potentially misleading and may imply something negative to the community. I am currently being paid to write a page for my company and I do not want my early inexperience and clumsy entry into the Wiki community to reflect poorly on my current efforts to demonstrate transparency. Any advice will be appreciated. Thanks.DriverSafety (talk) 12:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Virage Simulation (September 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 Theroadislong was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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:Virage Simulation 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:Virage Simulation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" 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, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Virage_Simulation Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Virage_Simulation reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

My advice given the decline (which is softer than a rejection or a Stop submitting), is to make the article shorter. Delete any mention of model numbers, and reduce the number of citations about using the simulators for research. Remove the image. David notMD (talk) 20:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

You posted the below on my User page rather than my Talk page:

Hello David notMD,

Thanks for keeping in contact with me. I have seen references to the fact that an article under review may have an "assigned editor". Is this a standard procedure for all article submissions that are being considered? DriverSafety (talk) 13:52, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that reviewers select what they want to review. David notMD (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Virage Simulation has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Virage Simulation. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Virage Simulation has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Virage Simulation. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 18:21, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

WP:CORP
Addressing one reviewer's comment(s) does not necessarily mean that all issues are resolved. A new reviewer may decline the application for a different reason. As Theroadislong added to decline comments, the company may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. See WP:CORP. David notMD (talk) 21:26, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I am in process of improving an article that I nominated for Good Article status and is now under active review. I wish you well, but do not have any more time to aid with your draft. David notMD (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Predatory journals
There is concern within Wikipedia of referencing to articles published in what are disparagingly referred to as "predatory journals," meaning journals that do not actually conduct peer-review, and exist to gather profits from submission fees. There is no agreed upon list, either within Wikipedia or independently, but the essay Vanity and predatory publishing touches on the topic. David notMD (talk) 19:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Virage Simulation (January 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 Chris troutman was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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:Virage Simulation 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:Virage Simulation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" 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, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Virage_Simulation Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chris_troutman&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Virage_Simulation reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chris Troutman ( talk ) 01:47, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Second decline
DriverSafety (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC) I was saddened to see that Virage Simulation got a second decline. The first-time issue - promotional rather than neutral point of view - appears to have been remedied. The second reviewer declined on shortfall of references. Perhaps people independent from the company will write about it, and that can be added as references. Drafts are allowed to remain drafts for six months, then deleted (creator notified first) if there has been no progress. Essential here is not revising the content, but searching for more refs. David notMD (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello David not MD,

Thank you for monitoring and following up on the process of my submission. Your input has always been greatly appreciated. I have a nagging doubt about the ability of reviewers to get behind firewalls. The two Montreal Gazette articles essentially featured my company as an innovator in the field of simulator training without any mention of any other company. These articles more than meet the notability standard. Are you sure that the latest reviewer actually read the articles?

Also, the notability standard does not specify a minimum number of significant mentions.

One last point, one of the distinguishing features of our company is its dedication to transfer-of-training research that independently validates the effectiveness of our programs. Transfer-of-training studies present a high degree of difficulty from all research perspectives. Two articles describing several transfer-of- training evaluations done by independent researchers were published by the Transportation Research Review (definitely not a predatory journal). One of these articles won the 2017 Deborah Freund Paper Award given by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington DC. I acknowledge that I cannot erase suspicion of bias given my employment status. But, at the same time, I need to ask, do not these facts speak for themselves? Could I not rewrite the article placing these facts in evidence, hopefully with a little guidance from you or another editor?

Thanks for your attention.DriverSafety (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * A second decline is not a death-knell, especially as the reviewer had an entirely different objection than the first. You could politely put your questions to the declining reviewer and see if your objections and offer to add more referencing would tip the review to in favor. David notMD (talk) 19:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Making the article shorter (Stub) does not make the references better. While two declines is not a deathknell, any reviewer who takes on a third review will look to whether the rationale of the second reviewer's Declined was met. Meaning the addition of references specific to Virage, describing Virage at length. David notMD (talk) 03:24, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Best you can do is add more valid references and hope for a favorable reviewer. I must point out that the topic is entirely outside my expertise (biochemistry) and I am neither administrator nor reviewer. David notMD (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Virage Simulation
Responding to your query at my talk page: general notability is subjective, by design. I don't define down that standard as much as others do. I was able to find one of the Montreal sources and, having been disappointed, decided not to bother searching for the other one. I added a few URLs to that draft just to help but it's your job to bring the references to reviewers. Based upon your comments and specious reasoning, I think your conflict of interest blinds you to what Wikipedia expects. As I've stated before, the majority of your sources talk about the larger subject of driving simulations and those sources mention Virage, at best. Virage's simulations aren't the majority of the content of the source nor does any source really examine Virage as a company. I need content that focuses upon Virage, where Virage is in the title, where there's significant coverage. While I understand your fiduciary interest in turning all these mere mentions into notability, I'm not sold. I would not be interested in reviewing a later draft and I think you would benefit from a different set of eyes. Reviewing drafts is one of the least satisfying chores on this website, in large part because indignant neophytes seek to argue with us reviewers about our judgement. I once had a draft editor accuse me/Wikipedia of favoring one sailboat manufacturing company over another. I recommend you abandon this draft and try again in ten years when, perhaps, there will be better coverage. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 04:00, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Chris, I am a neophyte to Wiki but I am certainly not accusing you of anything or feeling indignant. I find your reactions quite strong and a bit startling. I have never, in my long career of writing, been accused of specious reasoning, reasoning that is superficially plausible, but actually wrong. I would be most interested in how you came to that conclusion. Also, your assumption that you understand my fiduciary interest is unfair considering that you do not know me, my professional motivation or my work history. Recommending that I return in 10 years...Wow. Until now, every contact I have had with Wiki members has been positive, polite, balanced and helpful. Chris, I do not understand why you have reacted this way to me. I appreciate your attention to my submission. I will not ask for any more of your time.DriverSafety (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologize for having given offense; it was accidental. Suffice to say that I don't enjoy these conversations, no matter how well meaning you might be. An example of your specious reasoning on my talk page: "These two articles were published by the peer-reviewed Transportation Research Review (definitely not a predatory journal). One of these articles won the 2017 Deborah Freund Paper Award given by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine in Washington DC." That an article won the non-notable Deborah Freund Paper Award doesn't make it a good source. Even if the source is reliable, the coverage remains focused on simulations, not Virage. Sentences of yours like "These two articles essentially featured Virage Simulation as an innovator in the field of driver training using simulators, without any mention of another company. I believe that these articles meet the notability standard." indicate that you didn't read WP:NCORP. From what I read, Virage is a mere mention regardless if there was content about other companies. The term in-depth means exactly that. My recommendation to come back in ten years isn't a blow-off. I literally mean that there might be better sources in ten years. I think five years would be too soon to expect some decent coverage on this subject. I often tell editors writing biographies to come back when the subject is dead. Again, not a blow-off; most coverage about people isn't generated until after their death. I have thusly donated my time and effort to explain things that I would have hoped you already knew. This is always the problem with editors too close to the subject, trying to push a draft without objectivity. I have always said that we are best off editing where neither we nor anyone else cares about the subject. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 23:00, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Chris, Apology accepted and clarification appreciated. I can easily imagine why you would not find "these conversations" enjoyable. I do not enjoy arguing to win points. But arguments that clarify misunderstandings, however laborious, seem to be necessary (but, unfortunately, not always sufficient).

I will re-read the Wiki Notability guidelines once again, very carefully. I had reviewed these guidelines several times but apparently missed something. Just to be clear, two references in the submitted article are "in-depth" pieces entirely about the company. First, Mennie, James (June 7, 2009) The Montreal Gazette. "Steering a course to the future", is a half-page feature exclusively about the company, with a photo and interviews with the company president and other key staff. The text above the headline reads: The Engineers at Virage Simulation believe...". Second, La Presse, another Montreal daily newspaper, has another in-depth feature on the company by Prime, Martin. "Virage Simulation une expansion soigneusement planifiee".[trans. Virage Simulation, a Carefully Planned Expansion] also with interviews with the president and other details about the company. These are not mere mentions. The entire subject matter of these two reliable references in major metropolitan newspapers focus exclusively on the company under discussion.

One last point about the article that won the Deborah Freund Award. It was an academic article, so it could not be promotional and highlight the equipment. But the article was not about simulations in general. If that were true, other simulators or programs would have been studied and reported on. The article described a specific innovative and exclusive training programs developed by the Virage company and then validated in four separate studies by third-party researchers. The focus was not on simulations, as you say, because the results would not necessarily generalize to any other simulator program.

I will now review all my sources, rewrite the article, vet it through third parties to correct for any unintended bias, and resubmit. Chris, thanks for your input.DriverSafety (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Reliable source/Noticeboard - Are newspaper articles about a company considered independent references?


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Reliable source/Noticeboard - Are newspaper articles about a company considered independent references?, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tatupiplu'talk 16:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Reply to Your Query
Hello, thanks for the message! Just so you know, please use my talk page to reach out to me in the future, that way I will get notified of your question. Anyway, down to the matter at hand, that draft looks good to me; if I was an AFC Reviewer, I would've accepted it. all your sources look on point, etc. You migh t want to either resubmit it or ask, the most recent reviewer, for more details. Hope this helps, if not, I'm willing to help more! Puddleglum  2.0  21:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I would love to help you! I am not super experienced with article creation, but we can do it! I'll get to work! You can just respond here to make this discussion easier too follow. You might want to read this to get a better understanding of talk pages. (Totally optional though). Thank you! Puddleglum  2.0   23:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

New message from Puddleglum2.0
Puddleglum  2.0  18:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

New message from Puddleglum2.0
Puddleglum  2.0  19:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

New message from Puddleglum2.0
Puddleglum  2.0  16:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Quick Note
Hello, I just wanted to let you know that I moved the discussion about draft help to the draft talk page, if you would, please continue it there. Thank you! Puddleglum  2.0  19:42, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Virage Simulation concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Virage Simulation, 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) 01:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Virage Simulation


Hello, DriverSafety. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Virage Simulation".

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 and remove the, , or  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! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC)