User talk:Ipowlick

This is Ipowlick's talk page, where you can send her messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (July 25)

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:

Is this article about Lucy Davis, or about HH Azur? It appears to be about both, but Wikipedia does not have articles on two unrelated subjects. Please split this into two draft articles.

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 User:Ipowlick/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Ipowlick, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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) 01:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hi, Ipowlick, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia! Here are some links that may help you:

The Teahouse, a place to get advice about editing
Manual of Style, which shows you how to write articles
The Five Pillars, features which all articles should have

You may also be interested in WikiProject Equine, which writes and improves articles about horses, horse sports (including the Olympic disciplines), horse care and training, or WikiProject Horse racing, which focuses on horse races, racehorses, and jockeys. Please remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your username and the date. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. And again, welcome! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in

Hi, saw your edits and I would like to ask that you please disclose who you work for, because you appear to have a Conflict of interest. This does not mean you can't edit, but it means you have to disclose who is paying you to edit - even if you are just an intern and not precisely being paid, you are still working on articles under an employer's supervision. Say do on your user page here and on the talk page of any articles you are working on. Also, please learn how to use the citation templates (see WP:CITE for help) as your formatting is non-standard and creating a cleanup mess for other editors. (If you use just raw links, there is a program, ReFill that automatically does a lot of the formatting for you) We write with a neutral point of view here, and not with the promotional tone used in a magazine, so please also done down the flowery, promotional tone. We don't use phrases like "prestigious horse show" and so on. I did some cleanup work on a few articles you worked on. Please also be careful not to create articles about marginally-notable athletes and animals. We have some guidelines here that will help. I don't want to discourage you, but I did spend about an hour of cleanup work that I would prefer not to have to do. Thanks Montanabw ^(talk) 05:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lucy Davis (Equestrian) (July 26)

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

Notable subject but please remove peacock terms such as "top of her sport" "is a dedicated student" etc. Needs to be written in an encyclopedic format

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:Lucy Davis (Equestrian) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gbawden (talk) 09:48, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello Ipowlick. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, 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, 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:Ipowlick. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ipowlick|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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. — Diannaa (talk) 19:33, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

Hi, we now know from your fellow contributor that you are not writing here for pay, so that is no longer an issue. Do you mind if I resubmit your draft of Lucy Davis? I did a bit of cleanup work and broke it into sections. I've found that it's easier to expand an article if you start with a short lead section and a couple of short subsections, then go from there. (There's bound to be a lot of coverage on her as soon as the Olympics start, because she's new to that level.) White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi, thank you for understanding. Myself, along with friends, thought that an important way to get our sport more coverage and talked about more within the general public, is through Wikipedia. We are both competitive riders competing in the highest divisions in the hunter/jumper world. We simply want to expand horse sport and its' coverage.

I was, however, dismayed by the fact that many edits were removed. I spent several hours on McLain Ward's page, making it similar to Kent Farrington's, and found that most of my edits were removed today. Our intentions here are pure. We want increased coverage of horse sport. It was noted that these athletes were "marginally notable", which is first, completely false, and second, it proves the ignorance of what we can consider the general public. Most that are knowledgable in show jumping would consider HH Azur a major contender for the individual gold, and the US team has one of the strongest in recent history. I feel that any horse or rider going to the Olympics is more than "marginally notable".

I hope that these issues do not continue, as it defeats our purpose, and wastes our time. Thank you for your understanding. -ipowlick

The issue with your edits was that they were written in a promotional tone. (The horses and people are definitely notable. Montanabw was just warning you that sometimes articles with issues do get deleted, and if somebody hasn't reached the Olympics, Hickstead, Spruce Meadow or another big competition, their article will probably get deleted--it's annoying, but...) The McLain Ward addition was an issue because it's generally not necessary to list every horse a person rides. The best few will do. Actually, it's preferable to work the stuff about the horses into the body of the article instead of putting it in a table. On HH Azur, she is definitely notable, but the trivia got removed because it doesn't have anything to do with her competitive career. Overall, it's better to write more about what a horse did to make itself notable, like the major shows it's competed in/won, and leave the stuff about personality to brief mentions. Jumping style and tack used are OK to include if they are unusual or remarked upon in coverage like magazine articles.

I know how you feel; a lot of my first edits were removed as well. It can be hard to edit and write for Wikipedia at first because everything has to be sourced and written in a neutral tone. But once you catch on, it gets easier (I've written 79 articles here, mostly about horses and trainers/riders, but a few about shows or other things. Five have been listed as Good, meaning they were reviewed by a non-involved editor and found to comply with all policies). You can look at McKinlaigh for an example of how an article about an Olympic sport horse can be written. If you have any questions/problems you can ask on my talk/neigh page. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 01:32, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For Ward's page, I was simply doing a similar format as Kent Farrington's, whose hasn't been deleted..? I can promise McLain rides many many more than the horses I had put up, I simply did the horses that he regularly rides in Grand Prixs and tops the class with them, too. I'm not doing pages on riders that haven't been to the top of their sport. If I do a page on Liza Boyd, will it get deleted? She is a hunter rider. She has won the most prestigous championship three times. In a row. But doesn't go to Spruce. Please understand that these are ALL notable athletes. (you were not the one that stated this, but someone else told us that we were posting about "marginally notable" athletes and horses) Ipowlick (talk) 19:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC) ipowlick[reply]

The stuff on Farrington's page may need editing; I haven't looked at that one in a while. A lot of the rider biographies are not in great shape, unfortunately, because we only have a few people who edit horse articles routinely, and over 4,000 articles in the horse project.

If you want to make a page on Liza Boyd, she is notable enough. You can do it in sandbox space, like User:Ipowlick/Liza Boyd, work on it until you're ready, and move it to mainspace with going through Articles for creation. (That's what I normally do when creating new pages--AfC is a hassle sometimes.) White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ipowlick, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a promotional vehicle or a trade magazine. Anyone can edit, and anyone can undo other people's edits. The first thing required is a tough skin. We have our own style and our own writing protocols and people have to learn them (like, for starters, not uploading copyrighted images). We start with the neutral point of view that WAF noted above. Then we go on from there. When people are notable enough for their articles to be kept (and being named to the Olympic team meets our notability standard as outlined in more detail at WP:NEQUESTRIAN), but their own farm website is a marginal source to demonstrate other than basic biographical facts (for example, it's reliable for their birthday, but not for any superlative claims like "prestigious" show). We need reliable sources that are neutral and independent of the source. As far as riders who win things, see WP:NEQUESTRIAN for the standard. Winning at Devon, probably not. Winning the Maclay, probably.) For example, see Jessica Springsteen, who isn't yet on an Olympic team and, admittedly is also notable for who her dad is, but based on the accumulation of many wins would probably meet the notability standard on her own. An example of the quality we want to see is David O'Connor (equestrian), which is a GA-class article. (We wish we had a copyright-free image we could add to that article, by the way...) Hope this helps. The horse "biography" for Authentic (horse) needs work, but it has all the basic elements (pedigree, outside sources, etc.) The horse "biographies" can be modeled on the horse racing ones, for example, (to take a recent but not too-large article) Exaggerator. Montanabw ^(talk) 23:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. That makes sense. Going through everything, I have noticed that many notable pages are severaly outdated. For now, that is something I am going to work on updating. As far as photos, I have photos of my own that I am happy to upload for Wiki use free of copyright restrictions. I have photos of many notable riders from the past few years, and only in the hunter/jumper world. With the Olympics coming up I would love to see people be able to look up their favorite rider and have current information on them! Ipowlick (talk) 20:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's a TERRIFIC idea... a good way to get the hang of editing is to update and improve what's already there. Uploading your own photos is often the best way to avoid copyright trouble (See, e.g. Tiznow and Beholder (horse), where a WP editor took informal photos.), and though people complain about the quality, I think an ordinary photo beats the heck out of no photo at all. (I have even been known to upload images I took with my phone... sometimes gotta strike when the iron's hot!). Just remember to footnote as you go -- a lot of these older articles also have a "no citations" problem, particularly those that have been neglected since before the biographies of living persons policy came out. (FWIW, we treat horses like "people" in terms of sourcing and such). Also, we have a bunch of articles about assorted horse competition disciplines, and though many have images, some have poor images that could bear improvement... in short, with 3000+ articles tagged by WikiProject Equine (WPEQ for short), there's much to do! Feel free to ask me, or White Arabian Filly (we call her WAF), or anyone at WPEQ for help if you need it. ONWARD! Montanabw ^(talk) 22:30, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great!! I actually have a fair amount of published photography and am headed to Vermont this week to work for a professional horse show photographer. I love sharing my photos, so I am happy to do so! If you have any specific pages needing photos, let me know! For reference of my photography, my email page is http://irenepowlickphoto.weebly.com/ (None of my wikipedia work is directed by any publications I have contributed to) Ipowlick (talk) 02:03, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In short, pretty much anything that doesn't have good pictures or has no pictures, needs pictures. Let's see... a lot of the breed articles don't have great pictures, among them Welsh Pony and Cob, Friesian horse, Racking Horse, and American Saddlebred (for which we'd like a left-side conformation shot). A lot more are listed at List of horse breeds. For notable riders/trainers, we can do fair use rationale for images of dead people, but for those who are still alive we have to have a freely licensed picture. Anything you can upload would be helpful! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For photo advice

I am going to ping Ealdgyth to come over here and give you advice on photos going into Wikipedia and its related projects. She's a professional photographer and takes a lot of horse photos, has good advice for folks who both sell their work and upload images here. The photo repository is actually wikimedia commons, which you have already discovered, I think. The #1 thing is that photos uploaded there have to be FREE USE. In other words, you can have a "copyleft" where you get attribution and acknowledge that the photo is yours, but it has to be freely available by anyone, even for commercial purposes, and even if they modify it -- though they have to keep the same licensing that you put on it. This generally is the creative commons 3.0 license (or whatever the Commons upload wizard wants you to use this week). WAF is right that there is tons of stuff to photograph. When I first started, I used to take photos of stuff in my own tack room just so I had images with which to illustrate articles! It's better than it used to be, but, especially with living people who have articles here, getting free-use images is a challenge, so anything you can do is great -- show grounds, different events, etc.. Montanabw ^(talk) 21:04, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I generally do not put photos that are sellable as art up on Commons. I've done tack shots and when I do shoots for clients, I give them a small discount if I can do some "boring conformation shots" of their horse and use them on Wikipedia, but if it can make me money, I don't put it on Commons. Gotta eat somehow. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lucy Davis (Equestrian)

The article you submitted to Articles for creation has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 00:24, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lucy Davis (Equestrian) (August 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Lucy Davis (equestrian) 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lucy Davis (Equestrian) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:35, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The mainspace article is fairly short, and I'm looking into putting the details you wrote into it. I may or may not get on Wikipedia tomorrow because I have relatives coming, but I'm looking into it. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Back At It

@White Arbian Filly, Montanabw, and Ealdgyth:

Thank you guys for your thoughts on photos! I was working in Vermont for several weeks, and I'm settling back into a normal schedule since my summer is now over. I'll be working on updating pages for those who competed in Rio, as well as the Derby Finals, come their conclusion tomorrow evening. If you know pages that need photos, I'm happy to provide them. I shoot only hunter/jumper, but I'm happy to put up my photos. I am not a professional, so I really don't have any conflicts with posting my photos. Thanks for all of your help! Ipowlick (talk) 01:15, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~I think the page on hunt seat equitation has pretty bad pictures.~~ Apparently we don't have a separate page for that anymore, but hunt seat links to a lot of related articles. There are undoubtedly a lot of others I'm forgetting, but if you see a pictureless page, it probably needs some! White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 22:26, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lucy Davis (Equestrian)

Hello, Ipowlick. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Lucy Davis".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 06:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Adrienne Sternlicht, from its old location at User:Ipowlick/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. KylieTastic (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adrienne Sternlicht has been accepted

Adrienne Sternlicht, 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!

MapleSoy (talk) 05:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Shulman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Shulman

Lghall (talk) 22:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC) Lauren Hall[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pieter Devos has been accepted

Pieter Devos, 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!

Sulfurboy (talk) 05:35, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HelloESousa1 (talk) 16:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lillie Keenan (June 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MapleSoy 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lillie Keenan 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:Lillie Keenan, 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.

MapleSoy (talk) 02:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!Amberbroder (talk) 20:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lillie Keenan has been accepted

Lillie Keenan, 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!

MurielMary (talk) 10:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tripple X III has been accepted

Tripple X III, 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!

Primefac (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Explosion W (December 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nightenbelle 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Explosion W 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:Explosion W, 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.

Nightenbelle (talk) 17:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Explosion W

Hello, Ipowlick. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Explosion W, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Explosion W

Hello, Ipowlick. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Explosion W".

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!} 17:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]