User talk:Isaajibola

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Qcne were:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Qcne (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Isaajibola! 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! Qcne (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Abiola Arogundade moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Abiola Arogundade. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:36, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Abiola Arogundade (January 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TechnoSquirrel69 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.
TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Abiola Arogundade

Hello, Isaajibola. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Abiola Arogundade".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. plicit 23:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Zubaida Umar

Director General, National Emergency Management Agency Isaajibola (talk) 07:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Zubaida Umar moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Zubaida Umar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because your move edit summary suggests you meant to submit it for consideration at AfC instead of publish it to the mainspace. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Bobby Cohn (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Zubaida Umar (November 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Zubaida Umar instead.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers.

If the article either is ready for the encyclopedia or appears to be ready for the encyclopedia, the draft will be redirected to the article. However, the article could have been moved into article space instead.

If the article does not appear to be ready for the encyclopedia, the article may be nominated for deletion, and the draft will be kept.

This draft contains more information than the article. The article should be expanded from the draft by normal editing.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 06:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ways to improve David Jeng

Hello, Isaajibola,

Thank you for creating David Jeng.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice start! Since this article fall under WP:BL, please make sure every claim (including things related to his personal life) are properly footnoted and backed up by sources. Have a great day!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Mariamnei (talk) 08:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hello Isaajibola! The thread you created at the Teahouse, David Jeng, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Notification

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 173.79.19.248 (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

October 2025

Information icon

Hello Isaajibola. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Isaajibola. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Isaajibola|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. asilvering (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

I have a conflict of interest regarding the subject of David Jeng, as I am their representative. However, I wish to clarify that this article was written entirely without any form of payment, compensation, or inducement whatsoever. My edits are intended to improve accuracy and neutrality, drawing solely on publicly available sources and maintaining an independent, neutral perspective. I welcome specific feedback on any sections that may need revision to better comply with Wikipedia's neutrality standards. Isaajibola (talk) 10:08, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Jeng (November 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman 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:
See WP:BLP. Statements, starting with the date of birth, need to be sourced or removed. Sources also need to actually verify statements. External links should also be removed or converted to inline citations where appropriate.
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.
Greenman (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Jeng (November 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Aesurias 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 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Despite claiming in the edit summary that external links have been removed, the lede sentence contains two of them.
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.
aesurias (talk) 08:19, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Jeng (December 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by MCE89 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 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.
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:
Many of these sources are highly promotional, unbylined articles that rely heavily on quotes from Jeng. For example I am very doubtful that this is an example of independent reporting. Excluding those, I don't see evidence of notability here.
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.
MCE89 (talk) 11:25, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Jeng (December 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by MCE89 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 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.
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:
Many of these sources are highly promotional, unbylined articles that rely heavily on quotes from Jeng. For example I am very doubtful that this is an example of independent reporting. Excluding those, I don't see evidence of notability here.
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.
MCE89 (talk) 11:25, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kashim Tumsah (December 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 16:20, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kashim Tumsah (March 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AllWeKnowOfHeaven 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 it after they have been resolved.
AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI