User talk:Mundele665

Welcome!

Hi Mundele665! I noticed your contributions 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! CNMall41 (talk) 02:58, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jackie Elward (May 11)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No WP:RS, WP:IS provided.

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:Jackie Elward 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.

QEnigma talk 04:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mundele665! 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! QEnigma talk 04:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Draft:Jackie Elward, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.
In this edit you created a bizarre edit, potentially with your own interpretation of the method of making a review resubmission. You also remove some review history. This is disruptive editing and has caused work for others to correct. Please just use the submit/resubmit buttons in the templates, and do not make your own template structure up. This is a formal warning against disruptive editing. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:26, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jackie Elward (May 11)

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

Five of the eleven footnotes are primary sources that are not support for notability, and of the six that are reliable sources, two are reduplicated more than once, so there are really only four sources.
Note that city councillors (especially in cities with populations of only 44K) are not "inherently" notable just for existing as city councillors -- to become notable enough for a Wikipedia article under WP:NPOL #2, a city councillor has to be shown to be a special case of significantly more nationalized notability than most other city councillors, but four hits of purely local press coverage is not nearly enough to demonstrate that.

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:Jackie Elward 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.

Bearcat (talk) 14:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jackie Elward (May 12)

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

Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN, and, despite some press coverage, I am not persuaded that Elward passes WP:BIO

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:Jackie Elward 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.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 09:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mundele665. 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:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

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. On Wikimedia Commons you state that you are the copyright owner of the picture of Elward which you uploaded. This suggests that you are the photographer, which further suggests that you have a conflict of interest when writing about her. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 09:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the note. I do have a personal connection to Jackie Elward and am submitting the draft through Articles for Creation in accordance with Wikipedia’s COI guidelines. I won’t be editing the live article directly and appreciate your feedback on the submission. I’m also connected to many Congolese Americans involved in politics and public service, and part of my interest in this work is helping raise awareness about their contributions. I’m not receiving any compensation and am contributing in good faith to help improve coverage of notable individuals from underrepresented communities. Mundele665 (talk) 03:52, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]