Hello, Memevietnam98!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

• Editing
• Referencing
• Images
• Tables
• Policies and guidelines
• Talk pages
• Navigating
• Manual of Style

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

• Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
• It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
• If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
• Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
• When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
• If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
• Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello @ Memevietnam98. I'd like to apologize for reverting your edit to your sandbox. I mistook it for an edit to the actual article. Sorry! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay, no problem. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Wisconsin Democratic presidential primary, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you! Memevietnam98 ( talk) 07:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Memevietnam98, I moved the contents from your User page to User:Memevietnam98/2024 Florida Democratic presidential primary per WP:FAKEARTICLE. You can learn more about creating User subpages here, creating drafts here and about moving pages here. No worries but your main User page is really for writing about your interests and activities as a Wikipedia editor. S0091 ( talk) 20:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I appreciate for that! Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Alaska Democratic presidential primary, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your announcement! I'm very happy and appreciate for that! Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from International Women's Day into Draft:Criticism of International Women's Day. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{ copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 18:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I apologize for being copied without asking for copyright. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 04:38, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from pastdaily.com/2021/03/08/womens-day-august-26-1970-past-daily-reference-room, navneetsahu.wordpress.com/2015/11/06/international-mens-day,. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Criticism of International Women's Day may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) ( Talk) 19:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay, I accept. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Memevietnam98! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) ( Talk) 19:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your edit to Draft:Criticism of International Women's Day has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) ( Talk) 20:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Memevietnam98! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at TikTok that may not have been. " Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. QuietCicada chirp 17:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I'll notice Memevietnam98 ( talk) 01:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. DoubleGrazing ( talk) 14:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Wrong part. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 07:08, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tom Barrack, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foreigner. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt 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 for sports persons and athletes). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be a news report of a single event and may not be notable enough for an article in Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#NEWS and Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event for more information.

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:Owen Lloyd (swimmer) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt ( talk) 13:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 15:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:2024 Facebook outage. Thanks! TLA ^tlak 12:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC) reply

thank. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 13:11, 21 March 2024 (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 Wikishovel was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

New draft adds little to 2024 Facebook outage, which was redirected two days ago following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Facebook outage.

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:2024 Facebook outage and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Wikishovel ( talk) 13:18, 21 March 2024 (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 Pbritti 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:

Most of the sourcing is not from reliable sources. The lack of sustained coverage suggests that this was an incident which is worth recording on the History of Facebook article, but not its own 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2024 Facebook outage and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Pbritti ( talk) 15:56, 21 March 2024 (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 WindTempos was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Backrooms (web series) 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Backrooms (Found Footage) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

WindTempos ^{( talk • contribs)} 20:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You doesn't know my means. This article is independent than, and this is more information than the main, so I can go back and resubmit. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 00:31, 23 March 2024 (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 DrowssapSMM was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Backrooms (web series) 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Backrooms (Found Footage) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Drowssap SMM 01:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Again? My article page is actually independent from that, uh I mean you're not read all about that, there are many sources that doesn't belong from the main, so I'll resubmit about that. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 01:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi there! I think you might misunderstand the reason for the rejection. The proposed article and that article are about the same subject matter. It does not matter that your draft has more details on the Backrooms series - the article in the mainspace has, in my opinion, the correct title, and has been created earlier, so is a more appropriate source. In that case, you might like to improve that article using some of the information and sources you have drafted. This can be a bit disappointing but I'm sure some of the information you have looked into may help improve the article. Happy to chat if there's any confusion. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 07:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I have three lines:

• I have another sources that doesn't belong from the main
• I have clearly plot.
• At video games part, that's actually me did.

I accept that a lot of sources are from the Backrooms (web series) but compare to my lines, the article should be exist. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Respectfully but firmly: there is already an article for this, and there is no reason to create a new article when one already exists. It doesn't matter that you have drafted an article with more details. You can put those details in the existing article if you like. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 03:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Because my article is more sources than, the sources from Backrooms (web series) is just like "a half"??? Memevietnam98 ( talk) 03:28, 24 March 2024 (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 Vrxces was:

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Backrooms (web series), which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

As already stated, there's an article on this. You might like to merge it there. Also check out the manual of style as you have very a productive and enthusiastic approach which is awesome, but there are some aspects to tone and tense that may improve your writing. Happy to chat on my talk page if you have any questions.

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:The Backrooms (Found Footage) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 07:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I have three lines:

• I have another sources that doesn't belong from the main
• I have clearly plot.
• At video games part, that's actually me did.

I accept that a lot of sources are from the Backrooms (web series) but compare to my lines, the article should be exist. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:45, 23 March 2024 (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 Vrxces was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Backrooms (web series) instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

As below.

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:The Backrooms (Found Footage) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 03:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Ahh hell nah do you even read my description before???

• I have another sources that doesn't belong from the main
• I have clearly plot.
• At video games part, that's actually me did.

There are many sources and something else doesn't showed in Backrooms (web series) (actually I don't copy all) Memevietnam98 ( talk) 03:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm afraid that you are unwilling or unable to understand the reason these are being rejected. It has nothing to do with the content of your draft or its relationship to the other article: it is that there is already an article that exists, making the point of making a new article inappropriate. All the best. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

"An article", it is not "fully" at all. So why?

"inappropriate" well, I hope this is a joke, like I "can't" add informations in that page Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You would said that "you actually copied it" well, it should be used as "a half of information" because actually if you look again you will see the difference. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm concerned that your attitude to this or maybe a potential language barrier between us is making it really hard to explain to you basic Wikipedia policy. Of course I think what you're doing is helpful, but you need to be able to listen to constructive criticism when multiple people are telling you that how you're going about it is not the best way to do things. You may keep running into roadblocks time and time again if you're not open to understanding how policies work. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay, I'll make political article. These film articles just making us divorce. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I mean divide, lol I just used "divorce" Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Also solve me this article Memevietnam98 ( talk) 12:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

answer me? Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

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

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.

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 websites). 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:

very few reliable sources ( WP:YOUTUBE). other sources only have significant coverage of MatPat, a co-creator.

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:The Film Theorists and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

She was ^{a fairy} 04:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There are less news or information (or even no information) about The Film Theorists, so I rather took from the main channel. During my research, I just saw The Game Theorists news. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 05:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I have noticed that you have on numerous occasions resubmitted Draft:The Backrooms (Found Footage) right after it being declined without improving it. I wanted to warn you that doing this will not give the article a better chance of being accepted, and will in fact make the article more likely to be deleted. ( Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 07:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

After 5 submitted, there are many changes, including:

• "Continues part"
• Awards
• Infobox television

Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

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

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

No change since previous submission. Youtube is not a reliable source; there is honestly zero reason to be using Youtube as a reference here. Independent notability has not been established from the minimal references outside of the self-published videos present in the 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Film Theorists and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 07:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Number 1: No web site, no source, YouTube was the place The Film Theories created.

Number 2: Seriously, I have watched all of that and I can confirm.

Number 3: "No change since previous submission." My change since previous was: Episodes part, Format (minor edit)

Number 4: "Youtube is not a reliable source; there is honestly zero reason to be using Youtube as a reference here.", as my lines, "YouTube was the place The Film Theories created.", do you actually watched all The Film Theorist' videos?

Number 5: "Independent notability has not been established from the minimal references outside of the self-published videos present in the article." actually I'm inspired by MatPat so why not? Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It just like ERB, the channel was made in YouTube, and the sources of channel must also get from YouTube channel, so "honestly zero reason to be using Youtube as a reference here" is meaningless. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

In order for a topic to be notable enough to constitute an article, it must be extensively covered in reliable secondary sources such as news articles and the such. As the reviewer stated, reliable secondary sources independent of the subject were not used. ( Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 20:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

My sources is only IMDb 💀 Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Utopes was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Backrooms (web series) already exists. This has been repeated five times now, and at this point is just getting resubmitted with no changes from the previous versions.

Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 07:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I knew, that's why I have resubmitted over 5 times!

After 5 submitted, there are many changes, including:

• "Continues part"
• Awards
• Infobox television

Okay? Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I believe that you have not search history, I hope. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Content does not determine notability, only sources can establish notability so you can add as many sections, etc. as you want but it will not help without qualifying sources. Almost all the reliable sources were largely, if not entirely, about the series so notability was not met for The Backrooms (Found Footage). Please also be aware of WP:NOPAGE. Sometimes even when an article meets nobility, readers may be better served by the relevant content being included in an existing article rather it having its own article. S0091 ( talk) 14:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

S0091? Is that you?

Also okay. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 15:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Yep, I'm S0091. S0091 ( talk) 15:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

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

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Granny (2017 horror video game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic ( talk) 17:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You need "reliable sources" right? then check References and External links again.

You need to check what "reliable sources" means, it's mean how it believable to be appear in a article.

I was taken from DVloper's Twitter account, Google Play, Instagram

And about plot? I have watched YouTube videos, my experiences and fandom.

"This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject"

1. I actually made it "in-depth", uh it's that your problem?

2. "reliable" I explained in the above.

3. "secondary" my article is actually secondary in actual meaning.

4. "independent"??? I don't understand. This article is actually independent, uhh maybe I don't understand your problems' Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:58, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It's a generic response, the criteria they are referring to is about reliability. Reliable sources aren't wherever a game is mentioned by someone online, but been covered by a generally accepted mainstream source with an editorial process. You can find a list of the kind of secondary video game sources that we think are reliable at WP:VG/S. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 19:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your comment is easy to explain

First, YouTube doesn't mean it is a fake sources.

Two, I'm taking this from the main developer.

Three, there's a news. And references.

Four, I took this from the place where the game was released. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I am really sorry but I think this is just going to keep happening for you. All the best. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

If you hate me, say one word. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Granny (2017 horror video game). Thanks! S0091 ( talk) 17:47, 25 March 2024 (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 DrowssapSMM was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Almost none of this is supported by reliable 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Granny (2017 horror video game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Drowssap SMM 20:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Actually the "Almost none of this is supported by reliable sources." is meaningless, let's me explain

One: there are actually RELIABLE SOURCES, check the references again if you wants.

Two: I met the requirements: it is a stand-alone article, as well as secondary and in-depth Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:52, 27 March 2024 (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 Vrxces was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Non-notable article continually resubmitted without any substantive improvement on previous critiques of sourcing quality.

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:Granny (2017 horror video game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:37, 27 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm not gonna debate with you more, you're very conservative. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:53, 28 March 2024 (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 Vrxces was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Remains non-notable. Only additions since last submit are three paragraphs entirely from a single Bengali news source of unknown reliability and one paragraph from Times Now, a tabloid of dubious reliability per WP:NPPSG. The article still has the obvious and fundamental root problem of lacking any reviews from reliable sources, suggesting the game, for all its various appearances in random sources, is non-notable, and relies heavily on sources of low to no reliability. As ever, I understand the disappointment and am happy to help to find these 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Granny (2017 horror video game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 00:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Did you said Times Now "a tabloid of dubious reliability"??? Wow at this point I definitely you are hating on me, says Times Now a tabloid is definitely bullshit and no evidence.

"The article still has the obvious and fundamental root problem of lacking any reviews from reliable sources, suggesting the game, for all its various appearances in random sources"

Check the "Development and release" and "Reception" part again if you wants. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm not surprised again when you actually refused my article 2 times. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Most of the sources are either primary and/or not reliable, such as Google Play, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Ask.com, Amazon, and blogs. User-reviews should not be used, only critics, including Metacritic. I suggest removing those sources and rewriting it summarizing what reliable sources have written about the game and be mindful of original research/ WP:SYNTH. You cannot say things like "In 2018, the game became a big trend, when many people started playing, making fandom, especially on YouTube when where there are a lot of players." unless it is supported by secondary reliable sources. If no secondary reliable sources have not written about something, it does not warrant mentioning. S0091 ( talk) 14:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I wouldn't, here's why

1. User experience is random and "real"

2. Did you said "Google Play, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Ask.com, Amazon and blog" aren't reliability??? this is such a joke, I swear, Google Play is the place the game released, the place where the users can install and play, rating??? And YouTube is the place where its popularity went high, Instagram also I used for developer's, Ask.com is the place of critical game, Amazon are the same, thank you for Metacritic guess.

3. "You cannot say things like "In 2018, the game became a big trend, when many people started playing, making fandom, especially on YouTube when where there are a lot of players." unless it is supported by secondary reliable sources. If no secondary reliable sources have not written about something, it does not warrant mentioning", ok, you get a point but actually I can put it into the main top, if you continue to say it is non-reliable sources, just debate again. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 15:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You can disagree with it, but the community has already come to consensus on these type of sources: see user-generated content and WP:RSPYT. There is no debate to be had. While primary sources, which includes self-published sources, can be used (i.e. DVlope's YouTube channel), they should only be used very sparingly and very carefully. Continuing to resubmit the draft without addressing the issues, is considered disruptive and may result in the draft being rejected, meaning it will no longer be considered. S0091 ( talk) 15:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I have watched WP:RSPYT and I saw that it used to said "most of", so the sources from YouTube actually can use in this case, also it said that "Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability." which is true in this case, from DVloper.

"they should only be used very sparingly and very carefully", I agree with this, but I get more from Twitter sources than YouTube. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 05:10, 30 March 2024 (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 S0091 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

If resubmitted again without addressing the issues, the draft my be rejected. See also your talk page.

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:Granny (2017 horror video game) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 ( talk) 15:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Oh yeah I'm really not surprised again when you allied with Vrxces to rejects my draft again. I do not need to debate with this one. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 05:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Vrxces was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Article creator has continually resubmitted the article without substantive improvements to the concerns that several editors have raised about sourcing quality and notability. These concerns have also been discussed on the talk page in a way that the creator has consistently misunderstood or misrepresented. The article is at a state where due to the creator's approach and continual resubmission it is unlikely to reach a point of notability. I would strongly encourage the editor to gain greater familiarity with the standards around WP:GNG and WP:RS and what these mean in practice before drafting and submitting another article about media to avoid issues in future.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 06:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You're very conservative, super conservative, just like Donald Trump, "Article creator has continually resubmitted the article without substantive improvements to the concerns that several editors have raised about sourcing quality and notability"??? this is such a joke, I'm confused when you're doing this with anyone, I hope the person who met you in Wikipedia be fine and not be crazy not like me. "contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia." read the rules again, buddy.

"These concerns have also been discussed on the talk page in a way that the creator has consistently misunderstood or misrepresented" This is what you're doing, you're never heard, never see the explain, reject with conservative and the message is just as same as, you're hating on me (with no reason) and rejected me 3 times with SAME REASONS.

You have never said you're hating me, but I'll not debate as a Wikipedia editor, I have read some rules and reflect my article, it is suitable for an article and two both (you and S0091) allied and tried to fucked up my article, this is unfair, UNFAIR ENOUGH. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 08:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry that you feel upset about the closure of this article. Four separate editors have rejected the article for the same reason because the article has not rectified the consistent issue that there is no reliable coverage or reviews from sources like those discussed at WP:VG/S. Unfortunately the edits made to the article did not adjust this issue, and the article has not come closer to notability. It is a shame that we have not been able to come to an understanding but this is not from a place of malice or wanting to obstruct your efforts. I hope you are able to make other constructive edits to Wikipedia and in time create articles consistent with the rules around notability and reliability, but at this point there is a lot of work and understanding that needs to be done to get there. I understand you are upset but the accusations that I am doing this to hurt you or attack your article are not the case. I think that's about all I can say on this. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 08:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

"Four separate editors" you meant your four allies? I have mad at this one, closure of article for random reason is actually BULLSHIT! Yeah! I'm serious! I even edited parts that aren't even "minors" like you're hyping... Memevietnam98 ( talk) 13:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Literally closed to an article just showed contempt for the creator. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 13:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Vrxces, if you are already for an actual debate, open the article submission if you're not a conservative. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 13:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There is no debate and the article has been rejected. I think for your benefit and mine it's time to move on. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 20:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Say something meaningful bro. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 07:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Fine, I'll not doing anything about that article, but I'm still raging, it's simple. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 07:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Ok. Please remember to consider taking another look at WP:GNG and WP:RS when creating new pages to avoid this issue in future. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 07:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Fine, I'll listen to your announcement, I'll not doing this in the future. Thank you. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC) reply

1984 Maine Democratic presidential caucuses, 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!

Wikishovel ( talk) 15:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I'll try to improve another articles. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1980 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you for creating the article for the 2004 North Dakota Republican presidential caucuses! Keep up the good work :) WikiBunny2K1 ( talk) 13:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Then solve this page Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

My advice? Just publish it. Don’t go through the review process. All of my primary presidential articles never went through that yet they’re still up. WikiBunny2K1 ( talk) 21:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 01:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Memevietnam98. Thank you for your work on 2004 Wisconsin Republican presidential primary. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ SunDawn: Who are you? Please describe your personal Wikipedia. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Could you rephrase your question? I didn't understand your question. Thank you. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 18:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't know who you are so describe who are you in Wikipedia. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I do think think that it is not important. If you want to see things about me you can see my user page. And per your question on other talk page, I didn't care that you are a communist. Have a good day. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Toxic feminism (Internet affects). Thanks! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks, but I'm sorry, I'll not submit this draft, I'm sorry. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 11:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

This isn't an article rejection! Just a heads up that it may be helpful to review these policies before submission to avoid issues. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Would you reject it? I'm confusing. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 11:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I do not plan on reviewing AfC articles outside my area of interest or experience, but yes, I would consider if this article were submitted for AfC, it would be declined (not rejected) on the basis of WP:NPOV and WP:RS. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 21:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Reject = decline (they're not same meaning)

Do not try to denying that you would reject and then do it like what you have done in Granny article. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

No worries, as said above, I don't plan on reviewing the article if submitted. Take from it what you will! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

If you want, thank you. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 11:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2024 Alaska Democratic presidential caucuses is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Alaska Democratic presidential caucuses until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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

Esolo5002 ( talk) 16:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The article was ended, that's okay. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:50, 15 April 2024 (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 DoubleGrazing 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:

User-generated sources are not considered reliable.

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:A CN (YouTuber) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing ( talk) 09:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

"User-generated sources"?? all of those sources from the article didn't user-generated! did you meant this page right? ok now let me explain.

1. This page contains information images of the YouTube channel, which is considered a reliable source, see Wikipedia:Reliable source examples.

2. Even though it's a fandom, it has the most basic information a YouTube channel needs to have.

If you want to understand more, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Questionable and self-published sources, thank you! Memevietnam98 ( talk) 11:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Check a few sections down from the link you provided at WP:USERG to see what this user is discussing. They are referring to most of the sources in the article, including the YouTube and podcast sources. YouTube is not considered a reliable source as your link states unless it is affiliated with the official channel of a reliable organisation or news source. They are trying to help you by pointing you in the direction of adding secondary sources to the article, like reliable news sources. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 12:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not your lines 💀, you know I have tired because of your endless lines and you're not able to understand it. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:20, 18 April 2024 (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 Vrxces was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Most of the article is still founded on user generated content such as YouTube videos, wiki entries and podcast sources. These are not reliable sources. The article needs reliable secondary sources to substantiate its information, especially because the article is about a person.

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:A CN (YouTuber) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 12:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm not tryna debate you again, you're not able to understand, anyways, stop expanding fake information like that. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I mean you're not able to know what is a "user generated" means and would try to lock my article as same as Granny before, I have prepared about that. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Wait a minute, looks like I have to do something new... looks like "User-generated content" is real... Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I have resubmitted again, removed some "unneccessary" links according to you, but I didn't remove citation like YouTube, Discord, Podcast because simply it's important personal information. If you continue to say that it's "not a reliable source", I'm afraid you'll have to look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources again. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 14:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Glad we got there eventually. Well no, you don't have to necessarily remove primary sources (these are the ones by the subject) but you do have to find enough reliable news or secondary sources that are written by a journalist or someone credible to show that the person is notable enough to have an article about them. The article you wrote about the lady in the iron lung was notable because there were plenty of news stories about her. Is this the case here? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 20:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Lol you just showed how stalk are you to me. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry you see it that way. Anyway, if you want that article to progress, I'd see if you could find mainstream coverage of that YouTube user. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 10:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

It is similar to CoryxKenshin. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not quite, because the sources are mainstream: Kotaku, LA Times, IGN and The Verge. These are reliable sources listed in WP:RS and WP:VG/S. Does that sort of coverage apply to the user in your article? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 10:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't think it is already to put in the article. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Also please explain why Daily Mail has been banned in Wikipedia. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 10:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

See here. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk) 11:00, 19 April 2024 (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 Pbrks 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.

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:A CN (YouTuber) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

–  Pbrks ^{( t· c)} 15:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

2012 Texas Republican presidential primary, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

Crunchydillpickle🥒 ( talk) 16:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 09:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Davis Jr. (presidential candidate) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

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

AusLondonder ( talk) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Jimmy Carter 1980 presidential campaign, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

'''[[ User:CanonNi]]''' ( talk| contribs) 13:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 13:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

No problem. Keep up the good work! '''[[ User:CanonNi]]''' ( talk| contribs) 13:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Squid Game vs. MrBeast (video) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GSS  ^💬 15:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay. Memevietnam98 ( talk) 01:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC) reply