User talk:Coffeebeans777

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Coffeebeans777, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm Ozzie10aaaa and I've volunteered to be your Wikipedia mentor. I'm here for you whenever you need help with Wikipedia. It's great to have you on board to help create this online encyclopedia.

When adding information, please try to WP:CITE a source for each statement whenever possible!

See your homepage for a brief tutorial. Here are a few links you might find helpful:

Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the "Suggested edits" module top left on your homepage, or the Task Center.

Help is available: as your Mentor, you can always find me listed in the "Get editing help" module bottom right on your homepage; there are also additional help links there. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or try the Wikipedia:Teahouse to get help designed especially for new users from a team of experienced volunteers. So go ahead and ask questions — we’re here to help!

Once again, welcome to Wikipedia!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:33, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Hurricane Wind and Fire 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:
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:
YouTube is unreliable and I could not access the Facebook source (either way, Facebook does not establish notability), so do not establish notability. Reference 2 does not significantly cover the subject. Also, please add reliable sources to verify unsourced claims.
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.
🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 16:08, 22 December 2025 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Coffeebeans777! 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! 🌀Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) (contribs)🔥 16:08, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
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:
This is just WP:ADMASQ for Loco Espress.
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 it after they have been resolved.
DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Information icon Hello, Coffeebeans777. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Aydoh8 were:
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:
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.
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:
Issues from previous decline haven't been fixed
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 it after they have been resolved.
Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 16:35, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
Hello, adjustments were made for this article as requested. The article shows factual information and is not a promotional article. Please review latest submission, thank you! Coffeebeans777 (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Latte Flight has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Latte Flight. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 17:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Latte Flight (March 13)

Draft declined
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
Feedback
The reviewer, JustARandomSquid, left the following feedback:
This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:
  • provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements;
  • are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
  • are independent: not connected to the subject, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.
Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.
I'm not convinced about these three sources. Number 1 might be ok, but 2 realistically only contains 3 sentences directly about the topic, whereas the standard for in-depth coverage is generally around 3 paragraphs. 3, meanwhile, is some weird AI-generated local newsletter — surely not a reliable source?

Next steps

  • Edit Draft:Latte Flight to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
  • When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
  • If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

Scam warning

JustARandomSquid (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI