User talk:Tiagress

This is Tiagress's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: UserBenchmark (June 15)

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 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:

This is not supported by reliable source coverage about the subject, but by a combination of the program's own self-published content about itself, and glancing namechecks of its existence in coverage of other things. The only reference here that actually counts for anything at all is #4 (Softpedia), but it doesn't count for much by itself if the rest of the sourcing around it is inadequate.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:UserBenchmark and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! NeenKaler, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the ZDNet and Sapphire Nation sources is that they're not coverage about UserBenchmark; they're sources in which UserBenchmark happens to have been used as the benchmarking tool to evaluate the performance of other things. To properly demonstrate notability on Wikipedia, however, what we require is sources in which UserBenchmark is the subject of the source, such as reviews of its performance and/or flaws as itself, which is why the Softpedia source is the one I singled out as more appropriate. Notability on Wikipedia is not a question of being able to verify that a thing exists because it gets mentioned in coverage of other things — it's a question of being able to show that the topic has been the subject of enough reliable source coverage that is actually about the topic itself. Hope that helps a bit. Bearcat (talk) 14:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, I just realized that I forgot to answer the other part of your question — popularity rankings on Alexa.com don't actually assist notability for the purposes of a Wikipedia article. We determine notability by the extent to which independent sources have devoted their resources to writing and publishing content about the topic, not by raw statistical measures — so it's entirely possible for a site with a lower Alexa ranking to be more notable than one with a higher one. (In the same way, we determine the notability of a YouTube "celebrity" by the extent to which media have or have not produced content about that person, not just by counting how many subscribers the person has on YouTube.) Hope that answers your question as well, sorry I forgot to address it earlier. Bearcat (talk) 22:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: UserBenchmark (June 27)

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 adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Largely unreferenced or only supported by primary sources

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:UserBenchmark and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 19:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:UserBenchmark concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:UserBenchmark, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: UserBenchmark (February 7)

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

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:UserBenchmark 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:UserBenchmark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~ Winged Blades^Godric 10:16, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion pending for File:UserBenchmark Logo.png

Hello, Tiagress. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:UserBenchmark Logo.png — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:UserBenchmark

Hello, Tiagress. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "UserBenchmark".

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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Denniss (talk) 08:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Userbenchmark

Hello Tiagress,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Userbenchmark for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but 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.

Hug^syrup 13:54, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Userbenchmark (November 27)

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.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Userbenchmark 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:Userbenchmark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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) 11:38, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Userbenchmark (December 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CaptainEek 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 organizations and companies). 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Userbenchmark 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:Userbenchmark, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, 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.

Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 16:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:UserBenchmark

Hello, Tiagress. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "UserBenchmark".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]