User talk:Rawnc

Your submission at Articles for creation: DJ Mark London (May 21)
 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:

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:DJ Mark London 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:DJ Mark London, 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:DJ_Mark_London 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:DJ_Mark_London reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I will be adding the rest of the information over the coming days and resubmit once it is complete. I didn’t realize it had to be “complete” based on some predetermined amount of information. What is there is accurate...but there is more to add. I also thought I had more time given the message stated it could be 5 months before reviewed. That statement was very misleading. But I understand now. Will continue to add the information I have and find from credible sources. Rawnc (talk) 13:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:DJ Mark London


A tag has been placed on Draft:DJ Mark London, 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. Jalen Folf  (talk)  04:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Contested as suggested. Rawnc (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Still in progress
Do not delete...more information as suggested in original review is coming. Still working on this. Rawnc (talk) 08:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.Deb (talk) 08:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned before...this is NOT promotional. This is my first article and I am adding it. I was told on the pages it could be 5 months to be reviewed and to continue to add. Which I was following. Clearly the guidance provided is inaccurate and you should change that to not misinform people. I will be completing the draft. Rawnc (talk) 08:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Each source will have a reference, as even the original. Right down to the page. Edits are being added as the guidance instructed. Perhaps you are confusing the fact I added the external links first, because those are the easiest, with the incorrect assumption that this is promotional. That assumption is not correct. Rawnc (talk) 08:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * A tip - Don't add things like those in external links. Only really famous people can get away with that (and they shouldn't). If that's all you can find in the way of references, it won't do. You lodged your appeal in the wrong place; read the instructions again. Deb (talk) 08:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate your comment. That isn’t all I am adding. That was simply the easiest part of the document to add first. Most of the facts sourced is coming from books and interviews. I just haven’t added that yet. Again...I thought I had “could be as long as 5 months to be reviewed...there are 5,000 whatever reviews in the queue”. No idea it would be reviewed so fast based on that guidance.

I submit to contest the deletion following that link. I created this subject so others would see it as well. Rawnc (talk) 08:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Looking back at the history, I see that you submitted the article for review. You should not do that until the article is ready to be reviewed. Reviewers will look at it and, because it is so short and lacking in references, will see that it doesn't meet the criteria and will reject it straight away. Deb (talk) 10:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I understand now. In all of my years of corporate wiki editing, the idea of putting out a “stub” to get started...because most of us are writing here and there when we have time, because we don’t have hours to sit down at once...is very common best practice. As long as what you put in is complete and accurate. But here it’s different. I get that now. I tried to read the policies, which are honestly scattered all over the place and go deep down some rabbit holes...but anyway. I understand now. More content coming soon. Rawnc (talk) 12:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * It's because it's a wiki that they are like that, unfortunately. If you want the content restored, I can do that as long as you are happy for me to remove the external links. You can reply on my talk page or ping me from here (otherwise I probably won't see it). Deb (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I would like it restored just so I can get the code. I had looked all around just to try and find all of that. Can you just restore as a draft? It is a little frustrating that I get the approval denied, which is fine...I get it...there are rules. But dang...I don’t even get time to fix it. It goes from “denied...but you can do XYZ to address” to gone in hours. It may not have even been hours. I was driving and didn’t have time to even address anything. Even with the external links...I was following other pages as a guide for those. Rawnc (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)