User talk:Danifel

A tag has been placed on Alastair Westgarth requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, as it exhibits signs of having been generated by an AI model with no clear human review. Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia and output must be carefully checked. For further information, see the section G15 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think these signs were incorrectly identified and you assert that you did carefully check the content, 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. Additionally – if you would like to create an article but find it difficult, please ask for help at the Teahouse. lp0 on fire () 20:42, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I reviewed the article, the text is accurate, and the person is notable. Danifel (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

We have a guideline against writing articles with AI. Also, the tone was incredibly promotional, the sources prpvided were insuffficient to establish notability, and some of them were fabricated. How many other articles did you write like that? lp0 on fire () 07:53, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

There is nothing fabricated. Danifel (talk) 12:41, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

There were three nonexistent URLs. lp0 on fire () 12:47, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

I may have made a copy paste mistake. Will recreate the page and test every link. Alastair had already been mentioned at both the Loon and Starlink pages as their CEO, all I did was create the content behind it, and do some basic research about what happened to him recently. Danifel (talk) 12:51, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Please don't use an AI to help you write the article, per WP:NEWLLM. Also, you need to find sources showing significant coverage of him as an individual, not just covering companies of which he is the CEO. lp0 on fire () 12:56, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Will do. Examples: https://www.vox.com/2017/12/6/16691796/alastair-westgarth-internet-balloon-project-loon-google-alphabet-recode-100, https://techcrunch.com/2021/06/01/former-head-of-alphabets-loon-joins-starship-technologies-as-new-ceo/ and https://businesschief.com/leadership-and-strategy/who-project-loons-new-ceo-1 Danifel (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

And also: https://moneyinc.com/alastair-westgarth/ Danifel (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Those still don't look like they establish notability. Money Inc is a self-published group blog so isn't reliable; the Vox article is trivial coverage; I'm not sure about the other two but I doubt they're enough, especially considering WP:TECHCRUNCH. lp0 on fire () 13:16, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Danifel. Thank you for your work on Suzanne Holland Hobbs. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please add more sources and establish notability as per WP:BIO. Thanks and have a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 13:38, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

I added a few references Danifel (talk) 02:47, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Danifel. Thank you for your work on Clyde Curlee Trees. Another editor, Lijil, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for contributing to the Wikipedia! I just reviewed this article and have approved it after heavily editing it and deleting sections that were not supported by independent, reliable sources. It takes a little while as a new editor to figure out what sources are OK, but generally the website of a company or organisation is not an independent or reliable source. Read WP:SIGCOV for more info about good sources. You'll see that I found quite a few sources for the article - I found these searching http://archive.org using the full text search. Don't use the search box at the top, for the Way Back Archive, that's for websites. Its the search box below. If you click in the search box you'll get more options. Use full text search to search for mentions of named people in old books, magazines etc. It looks like you're interested in writing about people who lived in the 20th century, and this is often a good place to find sources. You can also try http://books.google.com. Also please make sure to avoid promotional language. You used quite a lot of phrases that are not neutral in this article. I've removed them, but for your next article have a look at WP: BROCHURE for some examples of this type of language to avoid. Gushing language like he became a driving force behind its expansion, introducing new business practices, acquiring industrial equipment, and guiding the firm through a period of rapid growth or establishing itself as a leading American medallic manufacturer or the longest‑running and most influential are not neutral and unless independent, reliable sources (not the company website) say these things they are not appropriate in an encyclopedia article. Anyway, thanks for contributing, happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lijil}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Lijil (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Danifel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Frank Sherman Clowney Jr, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:09, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Danifel. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "John Lawrence Pool Jr.".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one 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}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 00:26, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Danifel. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Frank Sherman Clowney Jr".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one 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}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article 444 East 58th Street is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of It is a wonderful world -- It is a wonderful world (talk) 23:20, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Sutton House (Manhattan) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of It is a wonderful world -- It is a wonderful world (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article 444 East 58th Street has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of It is a wonderful world -- It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:40, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Sutton House (Manhattan) has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of It is a wonderful world -- It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:45, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Danifel,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)