User talk:Jamiebuba/Archive 1

Your submission at Articles for creation: Church View, Barbados (January 16)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rusalkii 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:Church View, Barbados 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:Church View, Barbados, 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 [//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:Church_View,_Barbados Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rusalkii&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Church_View,_Barbados reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Rusalkii (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Church View, Barbados (January 15)
 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:Church View, Barbados 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:Church View, Barbados, 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 [//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:Church_View,_Barbados 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:Church_View,_Barbados reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Kananaskis Country Golf Course, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sea Cow (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted
Hi Jamiebuba, I just wanted to let you know that I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User%3AJamiebuba added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~Swarm~ {sting} 22:40, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Ways to improve Ian Wendell Walcott
Hello, Jamiebuba,

Thank you for creating Ian Wendell Walcott.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

"For any individual (including therefore any diplomat) who meets the WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO criteria, we presume that an article about them is merited. When the person is alive the requirements of WP:BLP also apply.

Individual sources must be evaluated separately and independently of each other and meet the four criteria below to determine if a source qualifies towards establishing notability.
 * 1) Contain significant coverage addressing the subject of the article directly and in depth.
 * 2) Be completely independent of the article subject.
 * 3) Meet the standard for being a reliable source.
 * 4) Be a secondary source; primary and tertiary sources do not count towards establishing notability."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with. Remember to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 10:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ENCE


A tag has been placed on ENCE, 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 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. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Nomadicghumakkad, I wasn't the creator of ENCE instead I moved it to draft space. Jamiebuba (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of William Fondleroy Duguid


A tag has been placed on William Fondleroy Duguid 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 real person or group of people that does not credibly 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 "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.  DGG ( talk ) 10:20, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Newbury, Barbados has been accepted
 Newbury, Barbados, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Newbury,_Barbados help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Theroadislong (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome
 <div style="background-color: Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~) ; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started.  Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 11:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)   Hello, Jamiebuba, and Welcome to Wikipedia!
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Getting started
 * Introduction
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Finding your way around
 * Table of contents
 * Directories and indexes
 * Department directory
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Editing articles
 * How to develop an article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Getting help
 * Frequently asked questions
 * Cheatsheet
 * Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
 * The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
 * Help pages
 * Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
 * 1) 084080;font:bold 120%/1.6 sans-serif;border:1px solid
 * 2) CEF2E0;color:
 * 3) FFC000;padding:0.2em 0.4em;">How you can help
 * Community Portal
 * Join a WikiProject
 * Follow Wikipedia etiquette
 * Practice civility
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

New page reviewer granted
Hi Jamiebuba. Your account has been added to the " " user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember: The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed,Rosguill talk 19:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging  pages for  maintenance so  that  they are aware.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
 * If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is WP:CIR/Copyvio concerns about User:ClaudeJTurner. Thank you. OhKayeSierra (talk) 04:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I mention you in passing in the thread. Wanted to give you a heads-up as a courtesy. Thanks, OhKayeSierra (talk) 04:46, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Alabi Oyinkansola for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alabi Oyinkansola 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 Articles for deletion/Alabi Oyinkansola until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Fram (talk) 10:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft:YWCA INDIA
Hello, Jamiebuba,

I'm concerned that you have been given the New Page Reviewer right if you seriously think this one sentence draft could be considered "promotional". All it does is identify the subject of the draft article, it isn't promotional, it doesn't include any links or advertising. Please do not be so harsh on incomplete draft articles which should not be tagged so soon after they have been created. It's also ridiculous that it's been submitted for AFC review in its current state but that is something AFC is used to and can handle. Please do not bite the newbies. Patrol main space and allow room in Draft space for articles with mistakes as new editors learn how to edit. Liz Read! Talk! 00:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I have also untagged Draft:Media Kurakani which was also newly created. The draft creator is clearly actively working on this article to improve it and address problems. Again, your time would be better spent in main space, not patrolling pages created by new editors unless there are issues of vandalism, copyright violations or BLP-violating content. Liz Read! Talk! 00:52, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * So that these comments aren't seen as completely negative, you were correct about Draft:Priyadharshini Rajkumar, Draft:Twizaz and Draft:CryptoGlobally, they were clearly promotional and some were outright advertising. I don't think Draft:Why Re-Logic Sucks was promotional, it was actually an attack page that was wholly negative so I'm not sure why it was deleted as a CSD G11. Liz Read! Talk! 01:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Liz Thanks for your comments. It isn't my intention to BITE the newcomers. Why I tagged Draft:YWCA INDIA for deletion was because I had seen it clearly wasn't notable and at that point the best thing to do was to have left it for someone who has AFC rights to review and decline. If i had the right, i would have declined instead of tagging, I will be much more careful next time when reviewing. Thanks for the advise. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:37, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Jamiebuba

Thank you for creating Brighton, Barbados.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 06:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @North8000 I am will try to add more sources... some of the sources i have found are most just a mention of the town. Can I add those as well? Jamiebuba (talk) 06:43, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest putting them in. A source is never really excluded, they just get excluded as counting towards meeting sourcing criteria.  Eventually you also might want to look at the sources and double check your choice of the word "town".   Maybe it was just a general area or a neighborhood.   Either way, your article will be a place for people to go who are wondering about the same thing. Happy editing!  North8000 (talk) 12:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @North8000 Thank you, I really appreciate. I will add those shortly. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gline Clarke has been accepted
 Gline Clarke, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Gline_Clarke help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Bkissin (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Church View, Barbados
Hello, Jamiebuba. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Church View, Barbados, 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&#32;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) 01:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gurdwara Bibi Veero Sahib


The article Gurdwara Bibi Veero Sahib has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No references, and not enough content to be encyclopedic. This has already been moved to draft space once, so that it cannot be moved to draft space again, and so that there will still be a draft after this is deleted."

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 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 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I wasn't the one who created it but i guess because i had moved it to draftspace and that it is why am being notified. Jamiebuba (talk) 21:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gustavo Martinez Pandiani (June 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 Kvng 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani 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:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani, 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 [//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:Gustavo_Martinez_Pandiani Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kvng&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Gustavo_Martinez_Pandiani reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~Kvng (talk) 20:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi - You tagged me about a page for speedy deletion. There was another page for Omar Sakr - a Gaza football agent - which was deleted for not being notable. I was not involved in that page, but had set up a disambiguaiton entry. The page which was Omar Sakr (writer) and is now Omar Sakr is fine. Cheers Missyjack (talk)

Martha Cecilia Pinilla-Perdomo moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Martha Cecilia Pinilla-Perdomo, 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 " " 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.  scope_creep Talk  23:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Curbon7. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Robert Walpole, 8th Earl of Orford, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Curbon7 (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @Curbon7 I didn't review the page. I had initially moved it to draft which left a redirect that was Autopatrolled and marked for deletion. I think the article creator removed the redirect and re-copied the page to the page which the redirect was on and marked as patrolled. I've requested for page mover to help me make clean moves in future without it being marked as patrolled. Cheers Jamiebuba (talk) 11:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vera Lúcia Campetti


The article Vera Lúcia Campetti has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Ambassadors are not presumed notable; non-notable diplomat. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL."

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 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 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. Curbon7 (talk) 14:08, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Naval Surface Warfare Center Port Hueneme Division, Virginia Beach Detachment
Hello Jamiebuba. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Naval Surface Warfare Center Port Hueneme Division, Virginia Beach Detachment, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See Public_domain. If you believe it isn't notable enough for a standalone article, the option remains to revert it back to a redirect. Thank you. DatGuyTalkContribs 11:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Flutterwave edit
Jamiebuba Please refer to the talk page of this article for futher edit. It will also help editors to prove reliable source for the refrences. Neither "Rest of the World" nor "Tech Africa" are identified as reliable sources on Wikipedia. Thanks Opelogbon (talk) 22:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * @Opelogbon
 * First, Please DO NOT make any more reverts. Tech Africa may not be on the list of Reliable sources but it is well recognized and known for good journalism in that region alongside with Business Insider which you all claim are not reliable funny enough all of those sites are on GNEWS. If you have any possible Conflict of interest with the subject, refrain from editing it. From your contributions it seems all you do is edit pages that have COI or possible PAID traits.
 * Can you explain why you blanked a whole section on Olugbenga Agboola which was properly sourced?
 * Jamiebuba (talk) 22:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should have opened the discussion on the talk page before reversing the edit in the first place. First, Techpoint Africa didnt claim itself as source for the story. You may wish to read the content as well as the guidelines of Reliable sources. A newspaper can only be a source for article when it is the editorial work of the newspaper and not content lifted on social media without editorial verification. The Business Insider report you cited reported a reaction from the company and not an admission of the rumours on social media. You may wish to read the content of the report. I do not have any Conflict of interest and like I stated on your page, I created the controversy section for this page. The same unreliable source used in this page was used in Olugbenga Agboola as well, hence the need for the removal. Should you have any Reliable sources with editorial input, please feel free to make them available and include in the section. If not, the edit will be revert and you may wish to draw the attention of other editors to this. Thanks Opelogbon (talk) 22:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It is also important to highlight that Techpoint, disputed every allegations in the social media rumour through a fact check. To now use that as a source for the allegation is being inaccurate. I have seen the RedWarn you issued on my edit and I am happy Wikipedia is an open space for all editors, I will be waiting for you to take action without cause. Thanks. For your attention TransporterMan Opelogbon (talk) 22:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rockley, Barbados


The article Rockley, Barbados has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Sources to not demonstrate this is a independently notable place. It clearly exists, but is very small and may be just a neighborhood of Bridgetown. Searching doesn't find any better sources."

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 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 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. MB 06:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bairds, Barbados has been accepted
<div style="border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:#E6FFE6; padding:1em; padding-top:0.5em; padding-bottom:0.5em; width:20em; color:black; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Bairds, Barbados, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Bairds,_Barbados help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Theroadislong (talk) 11:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for retrieval of a page deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onoja1 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Gourmet Hound (Webcomic)
Hello, Jamiebuba,

First, thank you for all of the work you do reviewing drafts. I admire AFC reviewers so much, it's a difficult job to do. But I removed the CSD tag from this article that would have resulted in its deletion. Here's how I saw this case. This very new editor, who hasn't even been active for 24 hours, writes a draft that gets rejected and then it gets tagged for deletion. All in their first day of being an editor on Wikipedia! Now, we've immediately lost them as an editor,, I mean who would stay working on this project if this is his first try at editing and it is immediately deleted?

This article, while it might have been one-sided, like a fan report, wasn't advertising and there is no urgency to delete it. So, instead, let's let this new editor learn more about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on what is a good source and how to write balanced articles by working to improve this draft about a subject that they care about. Readers don't ever see pages in Draft space and so there is really only pressure to delete drafts that are blatant advertising (like "I have a Digital Media Agency" or "I am a successful unsigned musician, buy my mixtape!"), BLP violations and copyright violations. But drafts that are just bad or not up to our standards? Well, they serve as a practice ground for editors to get better at editing and creating new articles.

Those are just some of my thoughts on this particular CSD tagging that I thought I'd share. Thanks again for all of your contributions. They are appreciated! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 07:45, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your candid opinion, I couldn't agree more with you. Jamiebuba (talk) 08:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Page mover granted
Hello, Jamiebuba. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJamiebuba granted] the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when  is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:
 * Requested moves
 * Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! ~Swarm~ {sting} 07:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Carolyn Miller submission
I thank you for the quick review of the article on Carolyn Miller, but I am a bit puzzled about why you have rejected it on the grounds of notability. I had reviewed the notability criteria rather carefully, and I have included more than a few independent sources indicating her notability. Among them were her named chair, her multiple awards by the top professional societies in her field, including a lifetime achievement award. Beyond the independent cited comments in other articles that attested to the groundbreaking and foundational work of her articles were the multiple translations and reprints of her articles, and even more were the special sections devoted to discussing her article "Genre as Social Action" in two journals as well as an article analyzing the influence of her "Humanistic Rationale" article. These are far more than passing mentions. They are whole articles and sections of journals. In her field there is no more substantial site of discussion and recognition. Her "Genre as Social Action" is the most cited in the major journal it appears in and her ":Humanistic Rationale" is the most cited article in her field of technical communication, Three of her  articles have been discussed as among essential works in her field. All these items and more have been documented in the Wikipedia submission. I am not sure what else you might be looking for. Methodical 01:09, 30 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbazerman (talk • contribs)

Page mover granted
Hello, Jamiebuba. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJamiebuba granted] the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when  is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:
 * Requested moves
 * Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! ~Swarm~ {sting} 07:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Carolyn Miller submission
I thank you for the quick review of the article on Carolyn Miller, but I am a bit puzzled about why you have rejected it on the grounds of notability. I had reviewed the notability criteria rather carefully, and I have included more than a few independent sources indicating her notability. Among them were her named chair, her multiple awards by the top professional societies in her field, including a lifetime achievement award. Beyond the independent cited comments in other articles that attested to the groundbreaking and foundational work of her articles were the multiple translations and reprints of her articles, and even more were the special sections devoted to discussing her article "Genre as Social Action" in two journals as well as an article analyzing the influence of her "Humanistic Rationale" article. These are far more than passing mentions. They are whole articles and sections of journals. In her field there is no more substantial site of discussion and recognition. Her "Genre as Social Action" is the most cited in the major journal it appears in and her ":Humanistic Rationale" is the most cited article in her field of technical communication, Three of her  articles have been discussed as among essential works in her field. All these items and more have been documented in the Wikipedia submission. I am not sure what else you might be looking for. Methodical 01:09, 30 October 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbazerman (talk • contribs)

Access Healthcare moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Access Healthcare, 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 " " 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. Jamiebuba (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Brigette Peterson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brigette Peterson, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Brigette Peterson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Copyright
Please remember to check for copyright violations when reviewing AfC drafts. You recently tagged Draft:Dr. Andrew S. Rubin, Phd for CSD G11 deletion when a large portion of the article was lifted directly from the subject's online profile. Thank you, -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Ponyo I will keep that in mind when reviewing. Thank you Jamiebuba (talk) 06:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Reviewing for copyright violations is listed as the very first step in the draft review workflow and results in an immediate quick fail; it's extremely important that this step is not skipped. I don't see you listed at WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. Are you part of the AfC project?-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes I am part of the AFC project and my name is on there. Jamiebuba (talk) 18:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see it now. I had only scanned the first section.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani
Hello, Jamiebuba. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani, 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&#32;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, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani
Hello, Jamiebuba. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gustavo Martinez Pandiani, 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&#32;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, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Martha Cecilia Pinilla-Perdomo
Hello, Jamiebuba. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Martha Cecilia Pinilla-Perdomo, 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&#32;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) 00:01, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Compensation Jeshi nope
Hi Jamiebuba, no I am not being paid whatsoever by anybody and have no links, I just know his work and like it. Regarding sources, there are feature length interviews by major newspapers such as The Guardian and major music mags. There are also several awards he has been nominated for and lots of minor features in major newspapers which I have added since! Jaymod23123123 (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Jaymod23123123 Can you explain why you moved the draft to mainspace while it was awaiting review? Jamiebuba (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Jamiebuba Frustration — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaymod23123123 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Please wait for your draft to be reviewed by an AFC reviewer. Jamiebuba (talk) 21:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Jamiebuba Fair enough for next time! Either way I think regarding the edits I've now made, its hard to argue that The Guardian is a small unimportant newspaper and that pitchfork, dazed, clash, the fader etc. aren't important music mags plus you have smaller references in Telegraph etc. Also can we merge the drafts at all? talk

Harnhill
Why did you move Harnhill to Harnhill, England? Firstly per WP:PLACEDAB and WP:PRECISION there doesn't appear to be any other uses, secondly WP:UKPLACE disambiguation is generally by county not country unless the settlement and county use variants like Worcester, England or the settlement is in more than 1 county like Bures, England.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:35, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Request for assistance on Carolyn Miller Draft
Request for assistance to improve draft artic;e Cbazerman 21:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear Jamiebuba, I would like your guidance as to what you would consider an appropriate reliable independent source. In this last version of my article on Carolyn Miller I thought I had worked hard to locate substantial reliable independent sources to indicate Professor Miller’s prominence and accomplishments. These included major reference works for our field which have extended discussion of her work, all from substantial presses:

Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. 2009. Genre. In 21st Century Communication: A Reference Handbook, edited by W. F. Eadie. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 1: 262, 263. ISBN:9781412950305

Selber, S. & Johnson-Eilola, J. (Eds.) (2004). Central Works in Technical Communication. Oxford University Press. pp. 47–54. ISBN 978-0195157055

Bawarshi, A. S. & Reiff, M. J. (2010). Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press, p. 62. ISBN 978-1602351707

Farrell, T. B. (Ed.) 1998. Landmark Essays on Contemporary Rhetoric. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 123–141. ISBN 978-1880393109

Dubinsky, J. M. (Ed.) (2004). Teaching Technical Communication. Bedford/St. Martin’s. pp. 15–23. ISBN 978-0312412043

Jones, D. (Ed.) (1996). Defining Technical Communication. Arlington, VA: Society for Technical Communication, pp. 113–118. ISBN 0914548921

I did not include a sixth major reference work which has extended discussion of her work because I edited the volume, though I did not write the chapter— Tardy, C. & Swales, J. (2008) Genre. In C. Bazerman (ed.) Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum..

I had also included special issues of important, refereed journals in our field devoted all or in large part to discussing her work: Dryer, D. (ed.) (2015). Special Issue: Rhetorical Genre Studies. Composition Forum Vol. 31, http://compositionforum.com/issue/31/ Canadian Journal for the Study of Discourse and Writing Vol. 30, 2020; https://journals.sfu.ca/dwr/index.php/dwr/issue/view/8 And I also included articles from important journals that discuss the prominence and importance of her work Alred, G. J. (2003). Essential Works on Technical Communication. Technical Communication 50:4, 585–615.

Freedman, A. (1999). Beyond the Text: Towards Understanding the Teaching and Learning of Genres. TESOL Quarterly 33 (4): 764–767. doi: 10.2307/3587890.

Smith, E. O. (1997). Intertextual Connections to 'A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing'. Journal of Business & Technical Communication 11 (2): 192–222.

All this is in addition to the mention of the republication and translation of her work. I also did not include current citation figures because they constantly grow, though I did include a link to the Google scholar page (currently almost 13,000 in total, with her most prominent article over 6,000.)

I have read carefully the Wikipedia pages on notability and reliability. Concerning notability, I left this note on the talk page of the revised draft indicating that Professor Miller has met at least five of the criteria of notability, documented in the draft, though only one is required. --- Since this was initially declined, I am adding some further substantiation, plus I note that she meets the following criteria for notability (academics), all documented in the article.

1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers).

4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.

Cbazerman 21:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)5. The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon. -- Concerning reliability of sources, I note that the sources I cite include

Secondary sources-the references works mentioned above, all of which are published by credible publishers (Oxford, Erlbaum, Bedford/St Martins, Parlor Press, Society for Technical Communication), all of which have their own review processes.

Published. All the cited sources are published by credible journals or publishers.

Reliability and peer review—all the articles and special issues are in reliable, peer-reviewed journals. These journals are discipline or specialty wide and so do not reflect a narrow view. Actually they reflect several different fields: Writing Studies, Technical Writing, Communications, and Teaching of English as a Second Language.

Citation counts—available through the google scholar link. I could put current citation counts in the article proper if you think appropriate, but as I said these change. Also one of the articles (by Smith) discussing her work specifically is about the use of her work by other scholars.

So I would appreciate it if you could Cbazerman 21:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)give me more specific guidance as to what source I might additionally include? Thank you, Charles Bazerman

You moved my new article to draft space while I was editing so it duplicated
I don't agree its not ready for mainspace. I found significant coverage of her in multiple reliable sources. While I was editing I noticed you moved it but it still created my edits in mainspace. Please don't move it again  D r e a m Focus  12:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Creation of pages on Yaglom software
Your rejection is done on very formal criteria. The new page is similar to the existing pages of respective software, e.g. Kig_(software) and is not more "like an advertisement" than those pages on other Interactive Geometry Software products. The article inform a potential user about main features of the package and significant distinctions from other software. Yaglom is awarded by the Community choice award for about 25K downloads from 53 countries worldwide (https://sourceforge.net/projects/moebinv/files/binary/stats/map?dates=2015-10-12%20to%202023-01-10). It is in the interest of general public to be informed on this educational free product. I hope the above reasons are sufficient for reconsideration of your speedy rejection. V.V.Kisil (talk) 23:03, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Request on 17:31:31, 6 January 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Tojoroy20
Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

References are credible enough and not just a passing mention of the subject. Sources discuss a lot about the subject and the subject's work, rather than entire articles being based on the subject. Most of the sources are media articles, and are based on accurate information.Some articles may not be directly about the subject, but they do not disprove the facts mentioned. Information about Slayy Point is also available on wikidata.( I would be like to know exactly which sources are not considered reliable or In depth )

Request on 17:33:43, 6 January 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Tojoroy20
Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Article revision
Hi! I updated my article based on your comments, please review it if you can! Thank you so much again and happy newyear!! Ashley Andersons (talk) 03:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello Happy New Year to you. I had another look at your draft, the problem is not the content, it is the sources please see Reliable sources and Notability to understand. Jamiebuba (talk) 13:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Got it, thank you so much! I added a few news sources but if it is not enough, I will look for more sources. Thank you again for your quick responses and help! ￼ Ashley Andersons (talk) 04:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

RE: Rita De Crescenzo moved to draftspace
Hi, why are sources considered unreliable? Some of them are important Italian newspapers, obviously being the biography of someone known only in Italy it is not possible to find sources from the NYT, CNN, Fox News etc., but newspapers such as ANSA are certainly reliable (Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata, similar to the American Associated Press). I await clarifications Yeagvr (talk) 21:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Whereas I've been waiting for an answer to my question since December 21st, I've removed the page from drafts. If you have other reasons to give that demonstrate that it is objectively necessary to move the article to drafts, I will do it myself and I am fully available to solve any issues. Thank you. Yeagvr (talk) 20:12, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Davide Lo Surdo
Hello, i have been working for practice on the the Draft Davide Lo Surdo and i suppose now it’s acceptable. Can you tell me if i did right?

Thank you, God bless you 91.80.4.190 (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

The Article Culture of Bhuragaon should not be deleted
I have written the article above mentioned article. And all the words of mine not from any ai or news articles. There may be some similarities, but that doesn't mean the article was copied from a extarnal website. Thesaurabhsaha (talk) 10:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

The Article Preze v Sturgis
I have replied to your message on my page you have not responded. Draft:Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools This article should have never been moved to drafts, and I request you move it back to the main space. It has more references and was a more detailed article than other Supreme Court Case files. I have been on wiki for 16 years. Why you placed it in drafts makes no sense. Please move it back to the main space.Jsgoodrich (talk) 23:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * @Jsgoodrich Sorry for the late response. The article you refer to was almost completely unsourced and in mainspace. Since you have submitted for review as recommended am sure a reviewer will get to it soon. Also didnt see your reply on your TP, next time always trying pinging in. Cheers Jamiebuba (talk) 03:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * A supreme court case is a single source document.  You need to look at the Supreme Court Cases before you move them to drafts, or make changes.
 * Here are some articles that if you notice have one reference the case itself, as the article you moved.
 * Dunaway v. New York
 * Clerke v. Harwood
 * Brown v. Van Braam
 * Davidson v. City of New Orleans
 * Cook v. Gralike
 * I could provided hundreds of cases that are one source which is the Supreme Court Case.
 * You need to move the article back, as you moved it in violation of the terms of an article. It is important that when you are reviewing an article you understand more than what you think the wiki guidelines are. You need to look at the community.  So I have now asked you three times to move it back, if you don't want to do that. I will ask the community to re-evaluate your permission to review articles.  Part of the process is to fix your own mistakes.  Jsgoodrich (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jsgoodrich Like I've told you before now, you've submitted the article for review in AFC you can either wait for approval or move it yourself which is not advisable. I'm quite certain i didn't make a "mistake" moving a large chunk of unsourced contents to draft, compared to the ones you've listed as being similar. I am not saying the subject is not notable but it just needs to be sourced. So feel free to have the community re-evaluate my permission. I will not be cajoled into accepting an article just because you feel you are right. You have only one option which is to wait it out for an AFC reviewer to accept or decline. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Then I will be asking for your permission to be reviewed and removed. You made a mistake not understanding that all the information came from the Supreme Court Opinion. You made the mistake and you need to fix it. Jsgoodrich (talk) 17:33, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Jamiebuba, I agree with you that the article was lacking sources, but it's been improved now, so I've moved it back to mainspace. Please be careful about what you advise other editors as a new page patroller. AfC is not Jsgoodrich's only option: he could have moved it himself at any time and nowhere is this stated to be "not advisable". In fact, per WP:DRAFTOBJECT, once he objected, you should have reversed the move yourself. Being a new page patroller right doesn't give you the right to insist that a page remains in a certain namespace. Moving a page to draft, like all actions, is subject to consensus, and if someone else objects then your move plainly does not have consensus and needs to be discussed. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 06:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jsgoodrich, I apologize for the complication but like I said the article was very well notable, but had almost no sources as at the time I moved it to draft, this you must understand. In the future it is necessary to provide INLINE citations for articles such as the Luna Perez article. @Joe Roe, Thanks for stepping in, we keep learning everyday and I understand WP:DRAFTOBJECT now. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * And again, Supreme Court Articles normally don't have more than one source. The opinion it's self. You should go look at the stub articles on the Supreme Court Project. Most of them only have two links the Opinion from the court of Appeals and the Opinion of the court. Very few in the project are as news worthy as this one was.  So again while INLINE citation are nice, you will notice in the project for Supreme Court case they are not there.  Jsgoodrich (talk) 14:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft article on Günter Lierschof
I have considerably updated this draft and provided in-depth sources, including a de:wiki link to a notable student of this artist/art professor. I trust you will find it acceptable now. Allensbacher (talk) 03:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wilfred Abrahams has been accepted
<div style="border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:#E6FFE6; padding:1em; padding-top:0.5em; padding-bottom:0.5em; width:20em; color:black; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> Wilfred Abrahams, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Wilfred_Abrahams help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Alyo (<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">chat</b>·<b style="font-family:courier; font-size:small">edits</b>) 08:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Olivio Kocsis-Cake
Last elections - results?Xx236 (talk) 12:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)


 * , He didn't make it to the parliament. I will be updating that on the article. Jamiebuba (talk) 07:04, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Access Healthcare (1)
Hello, Jamiebuba. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Access Healthcare (1), 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&#32;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) 14:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Draftifying
Hi, please ensure that when you move something to draftspace, it is only ever a newish article. Articles like Bruce Kimmel from 2005 should not be draftified. It can be perceived as a way to game the deletion system and get longstanding articles deleted through G13 rather than normal means. If you have issues with articles older than ~3 months, take them to the typical deletion avenues. Please see WP:ATD-I. I have restored Bruce Kimmel; feel free to take it to AfD if you'd like. I hold no opinions on its validity. Anarchyte ( talk ) 10:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Draftification
Hello, Jamiebuba,

Please use care when moving an article from main space to Draft space. Do this only when it is appropriate. Don't just look at the condition of the article, see how recently it was created and see who the article creator is. If they are an experienced editor, they might just have started working on the article and it is better to let them improve the article where it is than have it draftified.

If you think the article is in bad shape, maybe just leave them a talk page message or if it is in really bad shape, PROD it or nominate it for deletion at AFD. Draftifying articles is usually best done for articles created by very new editors who don't realize that their articles could quickly be nominated for speedy deletion. Thank you for all of your contributions to the project. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 21:51, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for this, it is an helpful insight. Jamiebuba (talk) 04:22, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Gwendolyn Masin
Hi there Jamiebuba, could you let me know why you reverted every one of my edits made to the page Gwendolyn Masin? Thanks! Sav95 (talk) 8:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Re:Draft:Malcolm Collins (author)
I am following up on my submission that you declined. I was wondering how I could prove he was more notable or had the appropriate notability? There are plenty more sources on the web, it just seemed repetitive. They are boldly the featured in every article, the couple's work with the pro-natalism movement has gotten them worldwide press and he has written 5 books. I would be open to any recommendations on how to meet the qualifications for notability, I am sure they are out there.Frenchfriesaredelicious (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Draftification
Hello, Jamiebuba,

In my work deleting CSD G13s, I'm coming across drafts that you moved to Draft space improperly back in December 2022. Unless it is the outcome of an AFD discussion, draftification is only to be used on recently created articles and in one case, you move an article from 2006 from main space to Draft space. This is improper and I hope this was just a glitch and you have since learned not to do this. Please find other ways to improve a substandard article like editing it or tagging it for problems or seek one of Wikipedia's deletion processes. But moving an inadequate older article to Draft space is no longer considered an appropriate way to handle it. Again, I'm looking at drafts from six months ago so hopefully you have stopped doing this. Thank you. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 16:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi @Liz, Yes i have discovered its not appropriate to move articles older than 2 months to draft. I have since either improved or taken to AFD. Initially when I did that I was a bit confused. Also what is the best action to take on articles that are possible COI or UPE, especially articles that were in draft but moved by an editor without waiting for review? And what if the article is itself notable but only has UPE issues? Can you advise? Thanks. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:42, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Paul W Draper
Hello Jamiebuba,

I saw that you reverted my addition regarding an article written by Paul W Draper. You didn't add a comment as to your reason for doing so. I'm new and would appreciate your assistance.

Thank you! Lovemagichistory (talk) 02:47, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Rock N Roll Circus
Hi @JamiebubaThanks for taking a look earlier at my submission. Can you recheck what I have submitted as have edited it a lot more and see if that is acceptable please for Rock N Roll Circus (Event Company). Thank you for your help. Thy678 (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)