Hello, Merquill!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

• Editing
• Referencing
• Images
• Tables
• Policies and guidelines
• Talk pages
• Navigating
• Manual of Style

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help. Has a list of maintenance tasks you can do.

Tips

• Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
• It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
• If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
• Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
• When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
• If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
• Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, MCE89 (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Torrin A. Greathouse, 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!

MCE89 (talk) 17:33, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information! Merquill (talk) 22:07, 1 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 MCE89 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:

Typically to show that an author meet our inclusion criteria, you would need to show that they have either authored multiple books that meet our inclusion criteria for books, or that they themselves have been the subject of multiple pieces of in-depth, independent, reliable biographical coverage. Given that Ali has only authored one collection, she's probably unlikely to meet the inclusion criteria at this stage. However, you could definitely consider writing an article about Theophanies instead.

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:Sarah Ghazal Ali 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.

MCE89 (talk) 09:11, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Merquill! 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! MCE89 (talk) 09:11, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I took your advice and submitted a draft article for the book Theophanies. Merquill (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Theophanies (book), 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!

GoldRomean (talk) 22:25, 2 March 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, Pegnawl, left the following feedback:

This draft reads like an advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a platform for promotion or marketing. Drafts that are exclusively promotional may be deleted without notice.

Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:

• promotional language: see Words to watch;
• personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader;
• informal language.

Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject.

If you have a conflict of interest (e.g. you are the subject, an employee, or a relative) or are being paid to edit, you must disclose this to comply with Wikipedia's Terms of Use.

Requires more neutral style, encyclopedia tone WP:MOS

Next steps

• Edit Draft:Whiting Foundation 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.

Pegnawl (talk) 00:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whiting Foundation, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions, well done! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

• See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

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

• 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.

Next steps

• Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
• Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
• You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
• Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
• The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
• For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MCE89 (talk) 08:24, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Merquill. Thank you for your work on Rifqa (book). Another editor, SaTnamZIN, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SaTnamZIN}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SatnaamIN (talk) 07:19, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on The87press requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications is prohibited on Wikipedia. For further information, see section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, 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. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. JTtheOG (talk) 23:26, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: Hi there, this was indeed written with a human, I won't contest the deletion because I appreciate the work you do, but let me know if there is anything you'd like me to do. Happy to move to Draft space and rewrite it, and so on. Thanks! Merquill (talk) 23:29, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, no less than a dozen citations give me 404 errors. Are you sure you are able to access all of those sources? I hope this is true and will take your word for it, because you seem to do very nice work. JTtheOG (talk) 23:32, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oh my god... this is so embarrassing, if you want to let it delete and I can rewrite from scratch? I see exactly what you're saying, for example Wesleyan partnership should be https://www.weslpress.org/wesleyan-university-press-partnerships/, this was not my final sourcing draft. yikes. Merquill (talk) 23:35, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: okay, rewrote for my own conscience, totally get if still deleted, so sorry about that, and thanks for catching it. Merquill (talk) 23:49, 27 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: just putting here explicitly on my page that I understand, I accept full responsibility & any consequences for my actions. this won’t happen again & all future contributions will be written and checked manually. again, I am truly so sorry Merquill (talk) 00:51, 28 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd just like to leave one final reminder that our new guidelines prohibit the use of LLM tools for article creation, except for very basic copyediting to check for spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. We've seen an increase in AI use and there's been an increase in scrutiny on articles. I trust that you weren't aware of this, so I understand if you weren't fully compliant at the time. Are you confirming that LLM tools were used in this case? JTtheOG (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: yes correct, I didn't understand at the time how limited LLM use is under the guideline, or the extent to which it is not allowed for article creation/rewriting--looks like this happened since or around when I signed up for wikipedia, so this is poor judgement on my part. but to answer your question directly, yes, an LLM was involved in checking parts of the draft, but the citation problems are still fully on me: my real-correct list of sources was on-hand--and so I had the correct wesleyan source, but it got tangled in exploratory searching I did earlier. My rewrite got moved to draft--woo, excited to keep working long-term--and going forward I won’t use LLM tools for article creation or rewriting. Sorry again for the mess, and thank you again for catching it. I hope my accountability is helpful / appreciate anything to come. Merquill (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I very much do appreciate your explanation and your commitment to continue under the new guidelines. There's sort of a cat-and-mouse game that happens when we catch people red-handed and they just try to lie it away. We try to assume good faith and it definitely sucks to be falsely accused of LLM use, so it can be a quite tiring process. So your honesty and good will is refreshing, if anything. JTtheOG (talk) 21:34, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Merquill. Thank you for your work on Andrea Abi-Karam. Another editor, JTtheOG, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

These articles are always very well-written and organized. Congrats!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|JTtheOG}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

JTtheOG (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: thanks so much, really appreciate it (: Merquill (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. On a related note, I'm kind of interested in creating similar articles on Hispanic, Hispanic-American, and women writers at some point, though I'm sort of busy at the moment. Do you mind sharing a bit of your article creation process? Are the reviews the first thing you look for? JTtheOG (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: ooo I love this question, and I’d love to hear about any writers you’re interested in — I’d be happy to contribute where useful, or just excited to read. For process, yes, book reviews are usually one of the first things I look for, along with prizes/awards + other independent coverage...I also try to read a lot of lit/ + adjacent venues like Poetry (magazine), Los Angeles Review of Books, and even them.us, and I also find writers through publisher/book club subscriptions, but for article creation I do try to make sure there is enough coverage before drafting. maybe similar to you, I’m especially interested in improving coverage of writers who are underrepresented on Wikipedia, but I’m trying to be more careful now about not moving too fast as well! Merquill (talk) 21:14, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'll keep you posted if and when. Might I suggest joining WikiProject Women in Red? You can add your new articles there to any applicable events. JTtheOG (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: !!! looking forward and just added myself and tagged a few pages for #1day1woman (: Merquill (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining up! See you around, JTtheOG (talk) 22:14, 29 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:The 87 press (logo).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon Literary Partnership, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

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 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.

• See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

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

• 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.

Next steps

• Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
• Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
• You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
• Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
• The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
• For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

grapesurgeon (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]