Elisha Justice, 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 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.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MmeMaigret (talk) 10:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created has been deleted as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has been in issue in the past at John Doyle (YouTube host). If you create another article that violates WP:BLP and WP:NPOV you will be topic banned from American politics and biographies of living people. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, if you add unsourced negative content, e.g. [1], you will be topic banned. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He's tweeted anti-christian rhetoric in the past. Ell22Moore (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shall I perhaps cite it once I add it again? Ell22Moore (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There needs to be reliable secondary sources discussing it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This warning has been logged here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:41, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish: Thank you for the warning. I understand Wikipedia's policies on BLP and attack pages. I want to clarify that my draft on Sam Parker is based entirely on reliable sources (ADL, IEHR, Utah Policy, Ballotpedia, FEC, Know Your Meme, Guardian, Salt Lake Tribune, Latin Times, Univision, and the Times of India). All claims made in the article are verifiable and cited. It does not include unsourced negative content on personal commentary; it reports well-documented events. If there are specific sections that appear non-compliant, I am willing to revise them so they are ensured to fully meet Wikipedia's standards. Ell22Moore (talk) 23:49, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calling someone a Holocaust denier sourced to a partisan organization that doesn't actually say that, or only using negative coverage in passing mentions is unacceptable. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source I put actually includes a Twitter thread where Parker, in response to a post that listed things the op thought the Jews did and also said the "Holocaust is a Lie", said "All True." Ell22Moore (talk) 00:05, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting what a basic 5 seconds of proofreading can do for you. Ell22Moore (talk) 00:06, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My intention was not to editorialize, but to summarize Parker’s documented public statements using his own words, as reported by secondary sources. If preferred, I am happy to rephrase the sentence to explicitly attribute the characterization (e.g., “According to IREHR, Parker endorsed a post claiming the Holocaust was a lie”) rather than using the label in Wikipedia’s voice. Ell22Moore (talk) 00:11, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:BLP, especially WP:BLPBALANCE. Also WP:COATRACK is worth a read. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I reviewed WP:BLP and WP:COATRACK. Based on the sources, the draft focuses on verifiable events in Parker’s life, and all controversial claims are attributed to reliable sources. Ell22Moore (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bub's Burgers and Ice Cream. Thanks! SomeoneDreaming (talk) 17:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Someone. I replied to your comment. Ell22Moore (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked the Bub's article yet, Someone? Ell22Moore (talk) 02:17, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SomeoneDreaming was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs more independent sources. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Monica Garcia (news anchor) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SomeoneDreaming (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ell22Moore! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SomeoneDreaming (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Despite it having 5 independent sources? Ell22Moore (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think that interviews are usually not independent enough for notability, but now I can't find the policy to say that.

I do think that the coverage seems pretty routine, though. Do you have any more substantive sources--preferably not interviews? SomeoneDreaming (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you're discussing the correct article because I don't remember any of those sources being interviews. Ell22Moore (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking for clarity from some other AFC reviewers, thanks for your patience. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to clarify that the sources cited for Monica Garcia are not interviews under WP:INTERVIEW. While they include quotes from Garcia, the articles are written, edited, and published by independent journalists (e.g., Arizona Republic, BizTUCSON, Adweek). The journalists decide what content to include, provide context, and frame the narrative. Garcia’s words are embedded in independent reporting rather than self-published content. These sources meet the criteria for independent coverage, as they are not controlled by the subject and offer third-party reporting on her career. Although some of the coverage is routine career reporting, it is sufficiently independent and reliable to establish basic biography content. Ell22Moore (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying and for your patience with me. I reverted my decline, so someone else will be able to review it now. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 02:47, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and for informing yourself. I appreciate your help in getting this review moving along. Ell22Moore (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ScalarFactor was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Guides do not establish notability. Ideally find some reviews published in reliable sources. The resources at WP:VG/S may be useful.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Woodoku and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ScalarFactor (talk) 06:50, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Express, US Mirror, PCMag, and Kotaku all establish notability. Ell22Moore (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by OrangeWaylon was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Roxanne's Taqueria and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

OrangeWaylon (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How? Ell22Moore (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Local news, routine coverage. The article could also be rejected for seeming like an advertisement. OrangeWaylon (talk) 19:14, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by OrangeWaylon was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Monica Garcia (news anchor) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

OrangeWaylon (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bonadea was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Roxanne's Taqueria and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 19:47, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Laci Kay Somers, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Laci Kay Somers, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:57, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ell22Moore. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Timothy Buckley".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AllWeKnowOfHeaven was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Richard Strocher (hoax persona) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you positive? Ell22Moore (talk) 01:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AllWeKnowOfHeaven were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bub's Burgers and Ice Cream and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 01:51, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? Ell22Moore (talk) 03:38, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bravelake was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Most of the sources are either WP:MILL or non-reliable. They do not establish that this is a notable individual.

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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Josh Lowry and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bravelake (talk) 03:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ell22Moore. I this article will be easier for us to work together on. I think it best to focus on what will establish clear notability, and to make sure it's noted on the AfD discussion. If you want to discuss the external link, let's do so on the article talk page. Please note that external links have special criteria for inclusion per WP:ELBURDEN. --Hipal (talk) 01:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I also think we can engage with this civilly. Regarding the external link, I think you are probably correct and I will back down. I believe that what I have done for the article, source-wise, pushes it just passed WP:GNG. Ell22Moore (talk) 01:58, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Anna Nyström (fitness model). Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Anna Nyström (fitness model). Thanks! Greenman (talk) 23:04, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, Flyingphoenixchips, left the following feedback:

This draft does not include any sources or inline citations. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. You should also use inline citations (footnotes) to show which source supports which specific statement.

The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

• provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements;
• are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
• are independent: not connected to the subject, such as press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

You must place an inline citation directly after:

• quotations;
• any material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged or is contentious;
• any material about living people.

Learn how to create inline citations in the:

• Source Editor: Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup.
• VisualEditor: Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor.

Many of the sources are low-quality fan wikis, bio-aggregator sites, and foreign gossip sites that don't independently demonstrate notability.

Next steps

• Edit Draft:Anna Nyström (fitness model) to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
• When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

• For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
• You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

• If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 03:32, 6 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ell22Moore! I noticed that you recently made an edit at James_Fishback and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. No worries, just thought you should know about the policy. BBQboffin^{grill me} 21:52, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I tend to mark a lot of my edits as minor. I'll try my best next time to truly distinguish whether an edit I make is minor or not. Ell22Moore (talk) 22:58, 30 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]