User talk:Thelightang

Hello, Thelightang, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Mazen Kalassina, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! GPL93 (talk) 17:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Draft:Mazen Kalassina, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. GPL93 (talk) 17:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Please note that Wikipedia is not the place for you to post your résumé, curriculum vitae, or similar material. It is also unlikely that anyone will ever see it, and anyone can alter the info you post. Please read this policy page describing what Wikipedia is not. Your résumé or CV will soon be deleted as this constitutes advertising, which is not allowed. You may also want to read our policies on conflicts of interest and autobiographies. Thank you. Deb (talk) 21:37, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I noticed that the draft Draft:Mazen Kalassina was recently deleted under G11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion).

I understand Wikipedia’s policy on neutrality and would like to rewrite the article with a stricter encyclopedic tone.

Would it be possible to userfy the deleted content (move it to my user sandbox) so I can revise it properly and resubmit through the Articles for Creation process?

I’m committed to following COI and sourcing guidelines.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Thelightang (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Did you read my message above? It doesn't look like you did. Please read it again and ensure that you don't try to create articles about yourself in future. Deb (talk) 07:41, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Fade258 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

It requires more reliable and independent references to 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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mazen Kalassina 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.

Fade258 (talk) 15:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Okay. Will include the other sources. Thanks. Thelightang (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Thelightang! 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! Fade258 (talk) 15:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

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 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.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Still reads like an essay. All contestable information in the article must be attributable to an independent, reliable source. Please ensure that all external links are removed from the body of the article. Please fix the WP:CITATIONOVERKILL within the King Charles section.

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:Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence 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)} 20:51, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Will revise it again. Thelightang (talk) 10:53, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence 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.

GoldRomean (talk) 00:12, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! But I am curious, can you point what section exactly reads like an essay, and where the loosened ends are concentrated. I have revised the article several times and still getting the same review. Thank you. Thelightang (talk) 08:08, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Plus I don't even have or want to have an opinion in the matter or an original research. Just trying report to as factual as I can. If it does sound opinioned, then its a mistake or a spill, having been steep in other kinds of writing. Thelightang (talk) 08:38, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

It is structured a lot like an essay (background, examples, future/implications), with lots of examples that are unncessary. Personal explanations such as "These examples illustrate how symbolic meaning is shaped by cultural and institutional context. In the absence of shared frameworks for interpretation, the physical gesture may not carry any specific meaning and may be viewed as purely decorative." In short, the focus should be, what is symbolic behaviour in AI, not it's impact, examples, etc. although they could be included, if that makes sense. GoldRomean (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Will revise it. Thelightang (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Will revise it, using this as a guide. Please, if there is anything else (or thoughts) I should know that will be helpful. I'd be more than happy. Thanks again. Thelightang (talk) 23:29, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

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

This appears to conflate symbolic computing with symbolic behaviour. These are two very different things.

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:Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence 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.

Stuartyeates (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Will look into that. Thelightang (talk) 05:14, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JesusisGreat7 was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

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:Symbolic Behaviour in Artificial Intelligence 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.

Jesus isGreat7 ☾⋆ | Ping Me 08:02, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

This is what every reviewer has said. And I have stripped its content till the very last portions you are seeing now. At this point I think all the reviewers are just hopping on the last review of the reviewer. And the fact that different reviewers review it every time, you all won't agree on the same thing. One of the last reviewers pointed out something to adjust, to fix that, I removed the entire section, only to be met with the same review from another. One other commented on the conflation of certain concepts in the conceptual development, got fed up with trying to edit, I removed the entire section. I don't know if there is a score point for how many articles a reviewer declines, or the process is intentionally made difficult. Right now I believe or think that if I submit an empty article, the review might, "sounds like an essay." Meanwhile I have returned to study other articles on wikipedia, studied their style of writing, just so I know where it is being missed. Still here I am with the generic review. A good percentage of articles on wikipedia fall into this fate if this is in fact the paradigm. God bless you friend! Thelightang (talk) 08:25, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

The article Mazen Kalassina has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Questionable notability, probably paid contribution.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:31, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mazen Kalassina 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/Mazen Kalassina 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.

Ednabrenze (talk) 14:40, 8 December 2025 (UTC)