User talk:GeorgiaKenn

Hi - I'm rather anxious I've submitted my draft for review incorrectly? Hoping an administrator is able to help me with this? Thanks Georgie

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox/Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) (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 Theroadislong 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. 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:

would need to pass WP:NBAND

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 User:GeorgiaKenn/sandbox/Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:GeorgiaKenn/sandbox/Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 08:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GeorgiaKenn! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 08:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mighty kind of you - thanks so much! Much appreciated since I'm extremely new to the platform GeorgiaKenn (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hush Puppy (band) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hush Puppy (band). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see - apologies, I assumed it'd perhaps be worth mentioning due to the fact that both artists are from Western-Australia? As well as signed to the same music label? GeorgiaKenn (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hush Puppy (band) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hush Puppy (band). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Hello GeorgiaKenn. 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:GeorgiaKenn. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=GeorgiaKenn|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. Theroadislong (talk) 10:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - your concern is understandable! Apologies if my writing has conveyed this type of message, I'm wishing to assure you that I am fortunately not paid or compensated in any way for this article - georgie GeorgiaKenn (talk) 10:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for confirming that you are not paid for editing this article. I will also post another query below, regarding any conflict of interest (COI) you may have. Please read it carefully, and action as necessary. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hush Puppy (band) (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 Idoghor Melody 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 music-related topics). 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hush Puppy (band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hush Puppy (band), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 12:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, GeorgiaKenn. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band), 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 organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate and understand your concern - fortunately, I am not being compensated in anyway for the creation of this article. And have also made an extensive effort to construct it in an non-promotional tone as to abide by wikipedia's rules. Am simply writing about a chosen topic I have interest in/am able to create to the best of my ability because of such. Thanks. GeorgiaKenn (talk) 06:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, but that isn't what's being asked. Compensation comes under the paid editing query which was already covered earlier. Now I'm asking whether you have a relationship of any sort with the article subject. This could be (but isn't limited to) you being a member of the band, or knowing some of them personally or professionally, or having some sort of interest or stake in the band's success. If you have a relationship that could give rise to a COI, please disclose it now, or else simply confirm you don't have one. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for elaborating on this :) fortunately I do not have any form of relationship with anyone associated to this artist. I have attended a latter performance of this artist as a 'ticket-holder' (much the same with my other edits of artists wikipedia articles), but fortunately do not know anyone assosiated with the topic personally. Thanks again. GeorgiaKenn (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime - thank you for keeping Wikipedia a professional space :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 06:28, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GeorgiaKenn If you have no connection, can you please enlighten us as to how this is your own work? PRAXIDICAE💕 20:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was a photograph taken of the act by photographer 'Jess Winterburn' - who I shot an email to asking for permission to use which she kindly agreed to :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 04:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band)

Hi again, I've looked at the sources in your article Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) (which, BTW, should have stayed at its earlier title, with just 'band' in the brackets), and I don't think they are enough to establish notability per WP:GNG; meanwhile, there's nothing there to indicate band-specific notability per WP:BAND, either. Would you like me to move it back to drafts, so you can continue with the AfC review process until such time as it is accepted? The alternative is to take this to AfD for deletion discussion, but if that goes against it, the article will be automatically deleted, and this will count against any future attempt to recreate it. Let me know? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi deer, apologies, will happily revert the title back to its original bracketed disambiguation :) also, reading what you've linked me - it appears as though the article meets the notability criteria? Would you mind highlighting why you believe otherwise? I am not at all attempting to be difficult, I'm simply interested for future reference on how to construct articles appropriately. Your comment about scheduling the article for deletion regardless of what I chose to do was rather harsh - but at the end of the day you have much more experience on this platform than myself, so if you're wishing to do so I guess I have no choice but to try my best to understand and accept your decision. GeorgiaKenn (talk) 07:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article citations I've provided have a percentage of websites considered reputable by Wikipedia - but again, if you believe this needs to be a larger percentage, I understand :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say I was going to move for deletion "regardless of what [you] chose"; I said that was the alternative to draftification. The problem is this: the article cannot stay published, because the subject isn't notable (more on this later). Non-notable articles are taken to AfD discussion, and if the consensus there is that they shouldn't be kept, they will be deleted without further ado by the administrator closing the AfD. One way to prevent such deletion is to keep this in the draft space until such time as it is ready for publication. But you moved this into the main space, therefore before I move it back, I wanted to make sure that you're happy with this, not that we end up in an edit war, moving it back and forth.

As for notability, GNG requires significant coverage (not just passing mentions, etc.) of the subject (not about indirectly related matters, such as their songs or gigs) in multiple secondary sources that are reliable (per WP:RS) and independent of the subject. I would argue that none of the sources cited meets these criteria. If you think differently, please point out the THREE sources that in your opinion are the strongest. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Too late, it has meanwhile been moved to drafts. I think you got lucky, it could well have ended up in AfD. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:38, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, okie dokie love. I believe three citations of significance may be numbers 16, 8 & 1. What would you recommend I adjust about the article while it remains back in the draft space? Hoping this is more to do with the lack of notability of my chosen topic and not my writing skills :) Noted, thanks love GeorgiaKenn (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all interested in an edit war, if you do not believe it belongs on Wikipedia's mainspace, I'm happy to abide by what you say. I'd like to be informed of what I can do to improve it so you're happy moving it back into Wikipedia's main space for me :) It is fortunately to my knowledge that it meets the criteria :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of the three sources you mention,

1 is admittedly reasonably okay (although it should really talk more about the band), and IMO probably the best of the lot, but it alone isn't enough
8 doesn't seem to mention the band; the picture, if that is them, doesn't count
16 also doesn't even mention them, and is in any case not an independent secondary source

If you're saying that those are the strongest sources you have, then I rest my case. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright deery - I understand. Would you recommend I work on my sources before resubmitting the article? I also just realised that in the visual/audio references of mine it would be much more helpful if I also note the minute mentioned so the reader would not have to watch/listen to an entire interview? Please go easy on my love, I'm learning, trying my best! Thanks for your help <3 Citation 8 mentions one of the artist's members former projects which I was citing to ad validity to the statement. As well as 16, mentioning the award nominated piece of said former project. GeorgiaKenn (talk) 08:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - 16, mentioning the artist also signed to the same label GeorgiaKenn (talk) 08:02, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to sources, it's useful to remember this distinction: you can use a source that provides only a passing mention (or in some cases even no mention) to support statements, but they don't contribute towards notability; that requires significant coverage. From this it therefore follows that not every source cited has to contain significant coverage, but you do need to cite multiple sources that do (often said to be three or more, although this is a convention rather than a hard rule) in order to show notability.

And yes, I would very much advise you to work on your sources before resubmitting, as otherwise this will just be declined again. And once it has been declined too many times (which number varies), it may be rejected altogether.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent - I'd like to think my resubmission's citations are more appropriate - thanks again deery :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 09:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 08:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you'll notice I've narrowed down my citations AV links :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 09:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate this information - I'm just confused as to why the removed information would be appropriate to have on a live wikipedia article? If you wouldn'y mind elaborating? GeorgiaKenn (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) 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/Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 12:09, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is rather disheartening - but I appreciate the heads-up. If you wouldn't mind highlighting the issues? As it is in fact to my knowledge that guidelines are met/ GeorgiaKenn (talk) 12:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issues are that the band fails WP:NBAND and WP:GNG how do YOU think they pass? Theroadislong (talk) 12:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for ensembles - points; 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11 and 12 - are met :) GeorgiaKenn (talk) 12:25, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but that is clearly absolute nonsense! They are not met in any way shape or form. For a start they have not released any albums, no national chart placing, no major music competition, no rotation by major radio or music television network? Theroadislong (talk) 17:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked to the best of my ability to make sure my writing adds value to Wikipedia (as I'm sure you do as well) - I've managed to research my topic enough to find that the criteria is in fact met :) if you may kindly view my citations you'll notice that the points I've stated above are in fact correct in regards to WP:NBAND GeorgiaKenn (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{help me}} GeorgiaKenn (talk) 14:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest, I'm a little disappointed to see the events following our conversation on IRC - I was under the impression that you were going to take a step back and work on the draft more to ensure it met our notability guidelines, not create a duplicate draft and submit it in the hopes that it will somehow slide past our reviewers? If you keep up the shenanigans the draft might be nominated for deletion, which I know you do not want. Take a break from the draft, then gather more resources and make another attempt. There's no point in draftifying if your actions just result in the page being deleted anyway. Primefac (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your frustration - and I apologies. I had a mix-up and wanted to leave the new one in the review process, as opposed to the similarly titled one which I put back in my draft space. This was done in hopes I was able to keep receiving help from reviewers in the AfC section as opposed to having it's deletion from the live space discussed. Admittedly unprofessional of me, but it was breaking my heart seeing my writing being discussed in such a way - again, sorry. This new submission was an attempt to receive further feedback on the same article without having it's deletion discussion on blast in the live space <3 thanks love GeorgiaKenn (talk) 04:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hush Puppy - (band) (May 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing 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 music-related topics). 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:

Identical to the previous version Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band), which you took out of AfD on the basis of wanting to work on it further, and now you submit an identical draft under new name, without any further development. More to the point, the notability issue has not been addressed, as the 17 references are identical AFAICS.

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:Hush Puppy - (band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hush Puppy - (band), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 08:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) (May 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Praxidicae 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 music-related topics). 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.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian 'Surf-Rock' Band), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

PRAXIDICAE💕 16:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

? the draft was not ready for review yet... I'd appreciate if it wasn't submitted without my consent - thanks GeorgiaKenn (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that can be edited by anyone, your consent for submission is not required. Theroadislong (talk) 06:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...this is becoming tiresome GeorgiaKenn (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up query

Hi, GeorgiaKenn. Thank you for coöperating with the sockpuppet investigation. I've asked one follow-up question. I'd request that you answer it before you continue to edit elsewhere. Thanks. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 07:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Sammanson per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sammanson. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 11:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a matter of self-accountability, I'll note that I had gone back and forth on whether to disable talkpage access here due to Sammanson's history of deception, but had decided not to... but apparently misclicked when I went to uncheck that box. However, having watched this account's subsequent statements in #wikipedia-en-help ^connect, I'm not convinced it would serve any beneficial purpose to reënable TPA. But any admin is welcome to do so without contacting me, if they feel it worthwhile. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 12:49, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hush Puppy (Australian band) (July 11)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: also created by sock

Theroadislong (talk) 11:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian band)

Hello, GeorgiaKenn. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian band), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 12:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Hush Puppy (Australian band)

Hello, GeorgiaKenn. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Hush Puppy".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft 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 get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]