User talk:JamesH97

Hi JamesH97! I noticed your contributions to Washington Yacht Club and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Jprg1966 ^(talk) 23:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Quince (company). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it has no sources and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. I have converted it 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 the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Endrabcwizart (talk) 03:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

hey-thanks for your help. I wasn't 100% sure which parts were seen as promotional but fixed a few areas, including describing unicorn status and their business model's reliance on social media platforms. I added a few sources (sources include mainstream newspapers like WSJ and Bloomberg). I also included a recent negative news story they have faced recently. While these changes do not make it a long article, I think it might be out of draft territory. But let me know if I have missed something JamesH97 (talk) 05:03, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Darth Stabro. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Wharton School, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 23:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

thanks, added some supporting sources! JamesH97 (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Princeton University Graduate School, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:02, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

fixed! JamesH97 (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello JamesH97,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged GlossGenius for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

ArthurTheGardener (talk) 16:00, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks User:ArthurTheGardener - I'd like to take more time to improve the article if that's ok! It was not my intention for it to be promotional. I'm still learning the ropes of Wikipedia--so if there was something specific about it that read that way please let me know and I'll fix it and take it into account when writing other articles! JamesH97 (talk) 23:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, JamesH97,

You can try talking to the administrator who deleted the article and see if they will restore it in Draft space. You can see who deleted it by looking at the top of the deleted article. It's always safer to work on articles in User space, like your Sandbox, or Draft space. If you have questions about editing on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Liz-sent them a message! I'll also check out the Teahouse! JamesH97 (talk) 22:32, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

You appear to have written your text with a LLM such as ChatGPT, please don't do that. LLM outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing

You should read reliable sources and summarise them, instead of using a large language model.

When you write about a business , you must follow the guidance below:

• you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

• You appear to have lots of references, but that's only because you are using over-referencing. Why does based in Manhattan need three references? Your four sentences all have a minimum of four refs, all saying the same thing. Some of the references, like Techcrunch, Forbes and Cosmopolitan are of dubious quality anyway.
• I can't access all of your references, but those I can are mainly interviews with the sisters or press releases, rather than genuine independent third-party sources.

• The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

1. significant coverage in
2. independent,
3. multiple,
4. reliable,
5. secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

• Coverage in reputable third-party sources can help, but as stated above, your sources are not all independent or of good quality.
• You are lacking real facts, and those that might be true, like the funding, are sourced inappropriately.
• To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, turnover or profits.

• You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

• I've seen worse, but in particular a link to their app is clearly unencyclopaedic and promotional.

• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
• You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

• I didn't check

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources.

I'm prepared in principle to restore as a draft, but you need to reassure me that you can find independent verifiable sources and real facts to establish notability, and that you will write in your own words without a bot Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:29, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi Jimfbleak- thanks for this guidance!

No problem..I sometimes use llms as search engines, so this may have been where the issue came from! I will be careful to make sure I don't fall into the trap of accidentally over-closely paraphrasing from there, and will ensure that the words are completely mine, not from an LLM or an article!

I think I can establish notability with the following two sources:

This article by Courtney Rehfeldt in Athletech gives a good overview of the company's purpose, and includes several facts like the company's $70M in funding, the founder's being a Princeton Grad (as well as having worked for Goldman Sachs), and notes several investors like Bessemer and Imaginary Ventures Athletech article

An article by Yasmin Gagne in Fast Company describes the purpose of the company, and contains facts including the number of businesses using the platform (60,000) and the funding from L Catterton ($28M). Fast Company article

It looks like these secondary sources are all reliable, and independent of the subject. They also include significant in-depth coverage and are solely about GlossGenius.

There's an in-depth (significant coverage) article in Business Insider written by Bianca Chan as well. This one notes the company has over 100 employees. According to Perennial Sources there is not consensus on Business Insider's reliability, but it does not say the source is unreliable. Whether this source can count hinges on one's classification of the source. Business Insider article

As you saw from the last draft, other sources exist-There's a Forbes article by Jeff Kauflin (not "contributors" but actual staff--another editor was describing to me how there is a significant distinction) that contains facts including the HQ being in NYC and notes that the platform facilitated over $2B in transactions Forbes article

I also found a few sources on GlossGenius in Axios, which is green on Perennial Sources (indicating reliability). While these are more brief, they note some facts like the $510M valuation Axios article Axios article 2

While these are reliable and independent secondary sources, the Forbes and Axios sources do describe other companies and are shorter, sometimes just covering a specific transaction/funding milestone. So while they contain important info, they may fall short of the significant coverage requirement. I think the first two however (and possibly the third) solidly fulfill the notability requirements.

Question-must all of the sources in an article fit all four criteria of notability? (making it inappropriate to include information that is only included in reliable sources with short/insignificant coverage for example?) Or, provided multiple sources fulfilling all four of the criteria *exist*, is it OK to cite an article that is.

Also, when an executive is interviewed by a newspaper, does this count as independent coverage? The Notability page notes that interviews "by" an executive are not independent. However, there are multiple interviews *of* the executive of this company *by* newspapers (such as thisone in Entrepreneur [not a "contributor" piece] or this one in Business Insider). Do these count as independent? If so I suppose these could also help.

Let me know if I am thinking about notability correctly here! JamesH97 (talk) 02:20, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

A single source doesn't have to fulfil all the notability criteria. Interviews are rarely acceptable because an executive talking about their own company at the least a COI and may be inclined to embellish or exaggerate. Anyway, you have obviously thought about the points I mentioned, so I'll restore as draft shortly Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:02, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks Jimfbleak! I'll incorporate all this into improvements to the draft! JamesH97 (talk) 02:23, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Inversion Space. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and The sources only report on routine announcements on future plans. . I have converted it 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 the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:07, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of Harvard Business School alumni, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:48, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

fixed! JamesH97 (talk) 23:00, 11 January 2026 (UTC)