User talk:Financewikinerd

Financewikinerd, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Financewikinerd! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Amanda Holden (March 11)

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

This draft has a disambiguated title.

If this draft is accepted, a disambiguation page will need to be created. (Review of the existing article or articles with the principal name indicates that a disambiguation page should be crated in place of the use of hatnotes alone.)

The disambiguation page should be Amanda Holden (disambiguation).

This page appears to have been written to praise its subject rather than to describe the subject neutrally. Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view.

If this draft is resubmitted without being reworked, it may be nominated for deletion. You may ask for advice about the tone of articles at the Teahouse.

Does the author of this draft have any sort of financial or other connection with the subject of this draft? Please read the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy and make any required disclosures.

You may ask for advice about conflict of interest at the Teahouse.

If this draft is resubmitted without addressing the question about conflict of interest, it may be Rejected or nominated for deletion.

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:Amanda Holden 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:Amanda Holden, 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 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) 06:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Gemma Hartley has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gemma Hartley. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:18, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Jamila Souffrant has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Jamila Souffrant. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jamila Souffrant (March 13)

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

It looks like the podcast might be notable, but I don't think the current sources demonstrate that Souffrant passes WP:BIO. In particular, I'm unconvinced by the WP:RELIABILITY of the current sources.

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

TipsyElephant (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paula Pant (March 13)

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

WP:INTERVIEWS and WP:SELF-PUBLISHED sources do not contribute to notability. Keep in mind that Wikipedia pages should have WP:NPOV and not be WP:PROMOTIONAL.

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

TipsyElephant (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Berna Anat (March 16)

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

Articles about people on Wikipedia must demonstrate significant coverage of the individual in independent, secondary sources. In all independent & secondary sources cited the subject is only mentioned in passing briefly.

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

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 00:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Hello Financewikinerd, I've noticed that you've submitted quite a few drafts for articles related to the FIRE movement. I thought I'd drop by your talk page and make some suggestions. Many of your drafts contain a large number of sources. In some cases you even cite as many as six sources for a single statement, which is a clear example of WP:REFBOMB. Right now your drafts include an overwhelming number of low quality sources that make it difficult to find the good sources. I would strongly recommend that you reduce the number of sources you use for any given statement to an absolute maximum of three sources (it's very rare for a statement to ever require more than three sources). I would also like to point out that many of your sources are not WP:RELIABLE according to Wikipedia's standards. I would recommend only using sources that are from staff writers (not contributing writers) on websites that have some kind of editorial board, but if you want a good rule of thumb check out the list at WP:RSP. A few examples of sources that I would avoid include articles written by contributors (Forbes is notorious for this), social media, websites like IMDb or anywhere you can purchase something like Amazon. I think it's also important to identify what is or isn't a WP:TRIVIALMENTION. If the source doesn't spend at least a paragraph discussing the person it's probably not worth referencing and most likely doesn't contribute to notability. All in all, I would recommend limiting the number of sources for any given page to about twelve to sixteen references so it's easier for reviewers to assess (we really only need WP:THREESOURCES to clearly demonstrate notability). TipsyElephant (talk) 19:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's helpful, thanks. Attempting to balance out the gender of who is considered notable in the FIRE movement, because it's virtually all men right now, which does not reflect the reality. I've found when I put in fewer citations it gets immediately knocked down as not notable, so was trying to offer more proof. Financewikinerd (talk) 18:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Having a large number of sources can lead to a draft sitting in draftspace for months because a reviewer may feel that combing through the sources is intimidating and time consuming. Having fewer sources will definitely make it easier for reviewers to assess the notability of the subject, but could simply mean that it makes it more obvious that the person is not notable. I would recommend picking a few of the best sources you can find and getting rid of the rest, but it's very possible that many of these people do not pass the notability requirements established by the Wikipedia community. If that's so, instead of creating a separate page for each individual you could simply add a good entry about female representation within the movement on the FIRE movement page. If there are other pages related to these people perhaps an entry about the person might be warranted. Alternatively, if these people have written books, hosted podcasts, or created some kind of media you could look into whether those things are notable rather than the person in question. You could then create a WP:REDIRECT for that person's name to that page or section of the FIRE movement where you wrote about the person. TipsyElephant (talk) 12:49, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Tanja Hester has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Tanja Hester. Thanks! –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:59, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jamila Souffrant (April 9)

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

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jamila Souffrant 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:Jamila Souffrant, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:32, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tanja Hester (April 19)

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

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.

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

The comment the reviewer left was:

As the previous commenter noted, many if not all of your sources are not WP:RELIABLE. The draft is a clear example of WP:NOTEBOMB with 66 references and very few of them being reliable. Please reduce the number of references to only those that are WP:INDEPENDENT and reliable WP:SECONDARY sources that have more than a WP:TRIVIALMENTION of the person the article is about. I would give WP:GOLDENRULE a quick read as well. TipsyElephant (talk) 12:38, 19 April 2022 (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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tanja Hester 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:Tanja Hester, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TipsyElephant (talk) 12:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paula Pant (April 27)

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

This is a clear case of WP:NOTEBOMB. Please reduced the number of references at the end of each sentence to no more than three, and remove any sources that are not WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:RELIABLE secondary sources with in depth coverage of the person. The tone of the article is also very promotional, please remove or reword phrases like "the first high-profile women in personal finance" and "high-profile controversy." TipsyElephant (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2022 (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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Paula Pant 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:Paula Pant, 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

TipsyElephant (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tiffany Aliche (May 10)

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

I've given a rundown of my thoughts of the sources on the talk page, but the short of it is that I don't think any of the current sources meet the expectations of the WP:GOLDENRULE. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2022 (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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tiffany Aliche 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:Tiffany Aliche, 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 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.

TipsyElephant (talk) 17:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kiersten and Julien Saunders (May 24)

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

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.

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. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kiersten and Julien Saunders 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:Kiersten and Julien Saunders, 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 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.

DGG ( talk ) 18:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gemma Hartley has been accepted

Gemma Hartley, 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

BuySomeApples (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Amanda Holden

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Amanda Holden, 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) 08:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Berna Anat

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Berna Anat, 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) 01:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Jamila Souffrant

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jamila Souffrant, 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) 05:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Amanda Holden

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Amanda Holden".

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. 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!} 06:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Tanja Hester

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tanja Hester, 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) 13:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Berna Anat

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Berna Anat".

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. 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!} 19:38, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Jamila Souffrant

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jamila Souffrant".

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. 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!} 04:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Paula Pant

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Paula Pant".

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. 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!} 20:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Tiffany Aliche

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tiffany Aliche, 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) 01:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Kiersten and Julien Saunders

Hello, Financewikinerd. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kiersten and Julien Saunders, 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) 09:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Tiffany Aliche

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tiffany Aliche".

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. 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!} 17:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Kiersten and Julien Saunders

Hello, Financewikinerd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kiersten and Julien Saunders".

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. 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!} 18:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]