User talk:Elohothedon

Problems with upload of File:National Open University Of Nigeria.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:National Open University Of Nigeria.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Intercontinental hotel lagos

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Intercontinental hotel lagos, 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, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia: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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 12:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm Reify-tech. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Glossary of HVAC terms, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Reify-tech (talk) 12:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ewoma Oyegwa (April 29)

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

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 content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

See Referencing for Beginners and the instructions on footnotes. In-line citations are required in biographies of living persons.

Please revise this draft with properly formatted footnotes before resubmitting. You may ask for advice on references at the Teahouse.

This draft, as written, does not appear to indicate that one of the biographical notability criteria is satisfied. If one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page or in AFC comments which criterion is met, and resubmit. It is the responsibility of the submitter to show that a subject satisfies a notability criterion.

You may ask for advice about the biographical notability criteria at the Teahouse.

In particular, see and refer to WP:NBIO for notability, which is the guideline that the subject should be evaluated against.

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:Ewoma Oyegwa 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:Ewoma Oyegwa, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elohothedon! Having an article 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Akpo Oyegwa Refrigeration Company

The article Akpo Oyegwa Refrigeration Company has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable company -- sources are notices and PR

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 22:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ewoma Oyegwa

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

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 by following the instructions at this link. 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!} 19:30, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Specdo

Hello Elohothedon, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

While your contributions are appreciated, I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Specdo, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specdo (2nd nomination).

Deletion discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. Our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. The most common issue in these discussions is notability, but it's not the only aspect that may be discussed; read the nomination and any other comments carefully before you contribute to the discussion. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Significa liberdade}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade:. Regarding the article that I created, Specdo, what are the main areas I can improve on? ElohoTheDon 10:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC) . Thanks! ElohoTheDon 10:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade:. Improvements have been done on Specdo article.

Citations have been added.

ElohoTheDon 07:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC) . Thanks! ElohoTheDon 07:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Specdo

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Specdo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specdo (2nd nomination). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello Elohothedon. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Specdo, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Elohothedon. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Elohothedon|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Specdo, give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Elohothedon, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Elohothedon|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As an editor and contributor to Wikipedia, I uphold the principles of neutrality, accuracy, and integrity in my contributions. My sole aim in editing and creating content on Wikipedia is to enhance the quality and comprehensiveness of information available to users.

I want to unequivocally state that I do not have any financial stake, vested interest, or personal gain associated with the promotion or portrayal of any specific topic, individual, organization, product, service, or entity within Wikipedia articles.

My contributions are made in good faith and align with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I prioritize providing well-researched, unbiased, and verifiable information to enrich the collective knowledge base of Wikipedia readers. ElohoTheDon 13:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Specdo

I have deleted Specdo under speedy deletion criteria G4. Once an article has gone through the AFD process, you are not allowed to copy and paste the deleted content back into article space. Moreover, this is the second time an article on this musician has been deleted at AFD. I have protected that title so it cannot be recreated in article space.

That said, if you think Specdo meets the notability requirements for musicians, and that you can demonstrate it through citations to reliable sources that are independant of Specdo and have substantial coverage of him, and you think that the arguments made in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specdo and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specdo (2nd nomination) can be overcome, and if you agree to use the articles for creation process, you can ask Explicit (the admin who closed the most recent AFD) to undelete it and move it to draft space. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Charleston White moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Charleston White. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and issues in NPOV. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Justi yaya 01:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elohothedon, I think the majority of the article is not supported by reliable sources, with many of the claims being based off personal opinion and should not be written using wikivoice. Justi yaya 01:14, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Custom signature fix needed

Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Changes to Wikipedia's software have made your current custom signature invalid.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error or obsolete HTML tags.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, you can fix your signature, or you can do nothing.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
Remove anything in the Signature: text box.
Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (Do not click the red "Restore all default settings" button, which will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Click the Learn more button next to the error to learn how to fix the error.
Update your signature to fix the error.
Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.

Solution 3: Do nothing:

In accordance with a recent request for comment, all invalid signatures will be changed to the default, which looks like "Example (talk)", one month from now.

If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charleston White (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TechnoSquirrel69 was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Charleston White 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.

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charleston White (February 13)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Neutrality issues still have not been addressed. It's also currently unclear why the statement of "Despite the controversies" has 6 references attached. If there are controversies, these should be explained in writing, and cited with reliable, independent sourcing.

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:Charleston White 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.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tech Nation

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tech Nation, 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 Wikipedia: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 deleting administrator. – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:57, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DreamRimmer:. Please restore the article so that you can improve on it ~~~~ . Thanks! Elohothedon 15:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am not an admin, so I can't delete or restore pages. @Jimfbleak was the one who deleted it, so you might want to reach out to them; I think they can restore it in your user space with some cleanup. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for message. Please remember to give a heading.

You said Please restore the Tech Nation article to my user space so that you can improve on it. Why do you expect me to improve it? It's up to you to do that.

If you have a conflict of interest and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at Elohothedon. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Elohothedon|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

Some of your text is unsourced, and some of the refs appear to be interviews or press releases.

The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

It's all about what the organisation claims to do, little about the organisation, not even where it is based. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, funding or expenditure. You provide none of these, for all we are told it could be two people working in a shed.

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

All you have written appears to be promoting their policies, and you give opinions like Tech Nation aids tech entrepreneurs and startups... allows tech professionals with exceptional skills or promising potential to live and work in the UK... a rigorous endorsement process... aims to strengthen the UK's technology ecosystem[10] by attracting top talent from around the world, fostering innovation, and driving economic growth. And all this despite there being no evidence that it has any headquarters, staff or money, or that it has helped anyone.

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

I didn't check.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. If you still wish to proceed, let me know, and clarify any COI, and I'll restore it as a draft. It probably won't be today. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:22, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak:. I apologize for the mix-up; that was an error on my end. I actually intended to write "so that I can improve on it" and not you doing the improvement.

I do not work directly or indirectly for the organization, and I am not being paid directly or indirectly by the organization I am writing about.

The details you have stated have been well noted and acknowledged; however, I do not wish to proceed further with the Tech Nation article.

Elohothedon 12:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC) . Thanks![reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charleston White (March 4)

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

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.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No clear indicators of notability - where is the significant (ie in-depth or extensive) coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources with a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking? "Some individuals applaud his candidness..." - Who? Cite them. The prose is non-encyclopedic, reading in places like extracts from newspaper coverage, while offering no clear sequence of events.

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:Charleston White 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.

Paul W (talk) 15:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Charleston White

Hello, Elohothedon. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Charleston White, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Charleston White

Hello, Elohothedon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Charleston White".

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!} 15:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kogbagidi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kogbagidi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kogbagidi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

7G🍁 (🪓) 11:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

7G🍁 I noticed that an article I worked on has been nominated for deletion.

Before drafting the article, I conducted a thorough search and found reliable sources from nationally recognized newspapers that verify the subject's notability. These sources provide substantial coverage, and I believe they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Elohothedon 19:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC) . Thanks![reply]

Eloho Oyegwa moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Eloho Oyegwa. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ednabrenze (talk) 08:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ednabrenze This is well noted. ~~~~ Thanks Elohothedon 11:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gbolabo Awelewa for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gbolabo Awelewa is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gbolabo Awelewa until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ednabrenze (talk) 06:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]