Hi Uwjk360 sp2016! 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 78.26 ( talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Cat in a cat cafe in tokyo.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Group 1,

Well cited and it totally looks like a real Wiki article! This group used good sources, a professional sounding tone, and provided links for further information! One thing I would say is to either add to the “Video Game” section or take it out, just so it looks more clean or full? All writing in each section is clear, polished, and concise! It’s a really interesting topic but the article doesn’t need dozens of examples, so the sources used were all used relevantly.

As for questions: I’m curious if “victims” of Yandere characters’ love are aware that the girls are totally crazed? Are there any male counterparts to this in anime, video games, etc? Is yandere used exclusively for women? Why or why not?

Really well done!

Group 4,

This article definitely convinced me that this is a topic worth knowing about. The beginning description makes sense and does a good job of explaining what a pet cafe is. This article used a lot of sources and included lots of pictures, which I thought was a good added bonus!

The tone of the article sections do not sound Wikipedia-like, in my opinion. They are bit too conversational and use unnecessary words. For example in the phrase “lovely animals,” the word “lovely” is not needed. It takes away from how professional the claims you made sound! The bit about the Lion King sounded cute, but not as professional as a normal Wiki article would sound! The claim: “Playing with animals is a way to decrease stress and to get emotional therapy for individuals who live alone and isolated from the community” might need some backing up with facts or research! I might also break up each individual type of animal cafe and put them under a sub-subheading, so that the reading is broken up a bit more, is less confusing but still flows! There were also some grammatical errors scattered thoroughout the entire article. I would also avoid calling the reader "you," like instead of saying "You would like a cat cafe" you could say "One would like a cat cafe..." and list the reasons! Throughout the article the use of quotes and other examples were really good!

Overall, well done!

-- Claire

Group 1
It's a worthy knowing topic, and it covered a basic understanding of Yandere. I'm thinking it would be more effective and convincing to add some pictures of Yandere characters in anime and video games. Do they usually have similar characteristics and wear similar styles of clothes? And I am also wondering is it popular or common to have Yandere characters in anime and video games? Why or why not?

Group 4
Your wiki page is nicely done, it already looks like the final version. It's interesting to know that there are so many different types of pet cafes. I only knew about the dog and cat cafe before reading the page. I am wondering where do the owners of these cafes get the pets? For example, are the dogs in the dog cafe originally fed by the owner of that cafe, or does the owner just buy the dogs in order to start the business? How are the pets taken care of at night when the cafe is closed? Also I personally feel like the layout of the different variety section and history section is a bit awkward. It may be better if you could divide them into different sections and create subtitles for them. Uwjk360 sp2016 ( talk) 22:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)Jiajun reply

Thanks for uploading File:맛있는 녀석들.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:01, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:맛있는 녀석들 Poster.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Statements like "a cosmetics trend sweeping across the globe" are WP:PEACOCK(peacock) language.

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:BB Cushion 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) 18:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hozo. Thanks! Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:22, 25 July 2016 (UTC) reply

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please fix the references, clean up some of the sections for style, and resubmit. Also, shouldn't there be an accent on the e in café?

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:Pet cafe 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.

Bradv 19:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC) reply

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Airport Fashion 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) 10:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tokyogirl79 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

The sourcing is my only true reason for declining this. The sourcing here is fairly light, and some of it isn't really the type that should be used as a source at all. Here's a breakdown:

1. Southern Exposure. From what I can see this appears to be a reprint of the story itself. Unfortunately at this point in time short stories and books don't really gain any notability from being republished, at least in Wikipedia's eyes. It's something I personally find frustrating, especially in the case of academic publishers that decide to republish something because they do not do so frivolously. Sometimes we can get around this if the publication republishes it with an accompanying essay or critique, but without proof of this there's not much we can do.
2. Book publication. This is kind of the same as above, although I'll note that the editor of this volume and the name attached to the prior source are the same - which gives off the impression that this is the same source. Be very, very careful when pulling sources because a source is still one source even if it gets published elsewhere. (IE, Project Muse pulled a chapter from the book and published it on their site.) Like the other, this would really only show notability if the book goes into some detail beyond republishing the short story.
3. H-Net. This is a review of the above book, so it puts it into a kind of odd territory. I can argue that it could show notability for the short story since it does discuss it, however another person could argue that it only shows notability for the book that collects short stories and that this might not be in-depth enough to show that the short story is notable outside of the book or its author. It's a really tricky, tricky situation here and while I personally think this could be usable, it's not the strongest source to build an article on.
4. Encylopedia.com. This site might be seen as reliable, however that's sort of a moot point since it doesn't actually mention the short story itself and as such, cannot establish notability. This also poses some issues with original research, but I'll go into that in a little bit, as this rundown is going to focus primarily on notability. It could be used as a basic source to back up info, but you need to be very careful on how you use it.
5. Wikipedia. While of course I think the site is great, it's not a reliable source and shouldn't be used as a source in the way you use it here.

Ultimately we don't really have a lot in here to show that the short story would pass notability guidelines. It won an award from a major newspaper, which actually does contribute towards notabilty, but I don't know that the award is so major that it would give complete and total notability - most of those are typically along the lines of the Booker Prize or the Newbery Medal.

You need to find things that go into more depth about the work, especially given that you've gone into a little detail about the work and its significance. This leads me into the subject of original research, which is one of the most major differences between Wikipedia and a research paper. In the latter you can have as much OR as you want - in there it's a very good thing. However on here all claims need to be backed up by a source that explicitly states exactly what is being claimed.

For example, someone could argue that the Encyclopedia.com source doesn't actually back up the folk story claims since it doesn't explicitly say anything about it and that you're drawing your own conclusions. It doesn't mean that your conclusions are wrong - on the contrary I think that they're correct - however you still need to have sources that strongly back up the claims in the article, especially since you're talking about the work's significance. Sources in a section like that should be about the work itself, since Encyclopedia.com can't really back up the work's significance if it doesn't actually mention the work in question. (IE, drawing conclusions about its significance and claims would thus be seen as OR.) I'm mentioning this more as an aside though - I think the section is fine, it just needs to have stronger sourcing.

Now unfortunately I don't see much out there about this piece, which is likely because the work was published prior to it becoming popular to publish work on the Internet. It's likely that there are sources, it's just that they were never put on the Internet - which tends to happen even with stuff released as recently as 2000, especially with the academic world, since they're slow adopters at times. Now the other thing that likely poses an issue is that the work was originally published in Japanese, meaning that the main coverage for this is likely in another language. That can pose a barrier, especially in this case since written Japanese uses written characters that is far different from how English is written, making it near impossible to find something without searching in Japanese. If you know Japanese and can find foreign language sourcing, feel free to add it - coverage does not have to be in English.

I'm going to ask for some help from WP:JAPAN since I don't speak/read Japanese (my name is from my favorite Ace of Base song) and I really think that this should pass - it just needs better 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Will o' the Wisp (short story) 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.

Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:13, 4 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

1) your opening paragraph needs to give the context - that this is an article about Japanese drama 2) you need better sources - urban dictionary, etc. are not good sources, nor is TV Tropes nor My Anime List. Presumably this is a classic character that will have been covered in academic and cultural writing.

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:Yandere 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.

LaMona ( talk) 23:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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:Hozo 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.

LaMona ( talk) 23:17, 6 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I don't see enough reliable secondary sources talking about the subject, which means it's not generally notable. Perhaps a short paragraph of this content could exist at KakaoTalk but these emoticons shouldn't be discussed in a standalone article.

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:Kakao Friends 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.

Chris Troutman ( talk) 15:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Airport Fashion".

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!} 18:23, 27 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Hozo".

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!} 02:08, 7 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Pet cafe".

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!} 06:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Will o' the Wisp".

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!} 06:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Yandere".

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!} 06:08, 18 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Uwjk360 sp2016. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, " Kakao Friends".

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. 1989 03:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC) reply