User talk:Darrkkk

Welcome!

Hi Darrkkk! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Jacona (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kai Lohmann (October 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hey man im josh 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 for sports persons and athletes). 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:

Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Article does not currently meet WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG.

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:Kai Lohmann 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.

Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Darrkkk! 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! Hey man im josh (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kai Lohmann has been accepted

Kai Lohmann, 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 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

The-Pope (talk) 05:38, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Hi, I don't know why you did this, but in any case I've reverted it. I also don't know why your edit note says "Deleted repeated word" – does that describe the edit accurately, in your view? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

dont know how whatever I did happened but I meant to delete "chosen" where it said "... Was chosen selected with... Sorry about that, have no idea how everything else happened Darrkkk (talk) 09:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]