User talk:PyFGanas2020

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (August 23)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:

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 User:PyFGanas2020/sandbox 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 User:PyFGanas2020/sandbox, 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, 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=User:PyFGanas2020/sandbox Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KylieTastic&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:PyFGanas2020/sandbox reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright, notability, promotional editing, and advice on starting to edit
It is almost never suitable to copy material from other places to Wikipedia. The main reason for that is copyright, but even when copyright is not a problem, material published on other kinds of web site is very rarely suitable for Wikipedia for other reasons, such as not being written from a neutral point of view, not being on a subject which satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and so on.

The content you posted to your sandbox appears to have been copied from allthetropes.fandom.com. (Substantially the same content is also at tvtropes.org, but allthetropes seems to be the original source.) The licensing terms of that web site require attribution, which you did not provide, so your posting the material to Wikipedia was a copyright infringement. Unlike the vast majority of copyright infringements on Wikipedia, the one you made could be easily corrected by providing attribution in an edit summary, but it is scarcely worth doing so, as the draft is unsuitable as a Wikipedia article for several other reasons, including the following. (1) KylieTastic's statement that the "submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article" is actually a major understatement. I have searched for evidence of notability, and I did not find even one reliable independent source that gave any significant coverage to the topic, which means that the topic very clearly does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines, rather than just that the present form of the draft does not contain suitable references to show that it satisfies them. Indeed, the text you posted itself says that the company "isn't really quite well known yet". Wikipedia requires the topic of an article to have already received substantial coverage, which means that subjects which are not yet well known are unsuitable. (2) The tone of the draft is promotional, which is not allowed by Wikipedia policy. It is not blatant spam, like many unsuitable drafts we get, but there is enough of an unmistakably promotional tone that, considering that it is never going to be suitable as an article anyway, because of the notability issue, there does not seem to be any justification for keeping the draft. I shall nevertheless add attribution to the editing history, rather than deleting it, but I advise you that putting more time and effort into editing it will almost certainly be a waste of your time as it is never likely to become a Wikipedia article, so you will be better advised to put work into other editing instead.

I am sure that coming along to start editing Wikipedia, only to see your first attempt deleted, is a discouraging experience. My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start.

I sincerely hope that this early set back doesn't put you off contributing to Wikipedia. Pleased do continue to contribute, but please consider the advice I gave you in the last paragraph. JBW (talk) 20:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:PyFGanas2020/sandbox


Hello, PyFGanas2020. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 00:26, 7 March 2021 (UTC)