User talk:Spiritletters

This is Spiritletters'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: The Toven (February 13)

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 Sulfurboy was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Sulfurboy (talk) 06:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spiritletters! Having an article 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 06:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Spiritletters. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Spiritletters, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond the various links above, and in the reply to your Teahouse question, one further point regarding your draft is that you have a number of misplaced external links in the text. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Toven has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Toven. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing sources

See Help:Referencing for beginners. Doug Weller talk 16:42, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doug Weller,

I received what looks like a link only and it is noted. However, the article was rejected not for references or citing, but for not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I specifically am asking to address this issue only for now. The other issues raised can be addressed accordingly.

(talk page stalker) @Spiritletters: your sources all appear to be Wikipedia articles, which we never use, and their website, which can't be used to show notability. I'm wondering if your Wikipedia links were meant to go to the news media mentioned. Doug Weller talk 16:41, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Doug, Good solid point. Yes, news media mentioned (unless its biased or slandering with malicious intent like some) As well as Wiki articles and the news media links that were used to verify the notability of the article to begin with. Thanks Spiritletters (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Spiritletters (talk) 17:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jayo Felony and DJ Rectangle are significantly notable considering all things, which is why they both have publications on Wiki. The Toven has collaborated and or contributed with both figures on key works. That in of itself alone warrants a stand alone draft article for The Toven.

February 2020

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. creffett (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Spiritletters! You created a thread called Notable vs Sufficiently Notable-What is the standard? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sagon Penn

The article Sagon Penn has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Clearly fails WP:PERP / WP:BLPCRIME

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. bonadea contributions talk 20:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bonadea

Looks like you stalked and butted in here also. Proposed deletion for what? Please be more specific.This is the only person in the history of United States to Kill an officer in SELF DEFENSE AND BE ACQUITTED!Facts! This is not a NORMAL situation.

Anyone who has a problem with a person standing their ground and defending themselves as stated by the courts should not be allowed to recklessly propose deletions.

Clearly fails WP:PERP / WP:BLPCRIME ?

Article was improved. Author of proposed deletion Please be more specific with proposed deletion concerns?

1. This person was accused of a crime and later ACQUITTED and therefore the issue of guilt is MOOT so the drafting is fine.

2. Ted Bundy has a Wikipedia page right? And so many others, therefore A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article is inconsistent and an incorrect attack against the article. Nor is this a Normal incident but rather the FIRST of its kind right?

3.Are their any great wiki volunteers that wish to help improve these facts and or the article? Hopefully someone butts in for a good cause even though the page was well drafted. Feel free to chime in. Injuries and death surrounding this landmark event are not condoned however the facts are the facts and the law is the law. Kindly.

Sand Diego's FIRST Citizen Police Review Board was enacted as a result. To some people in America that would make Sagon Penn a Unintentional HERO for STANDING HIS GROUND.

Get over the fact and except them for what they are I guarantee that Sagon Penn page will have its published article in wiki whether now or later.

Since when did proposing to Delete a verified groundbreaking piece of american history become apart of the makeup of core values of Wikipedia?

The draft was appropriately created and is now under attack.Kindly the indisputable truthSpiritletters (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As clearly explained in the original notice above, you are free to contest the proposed decision by removing the deletion template from the article. Please read the instructions above to find out exactly what you need to do. The article could still be nominated for deletion through a deletion discussion process in which case you would not be allowed to remove the nomination, but the "proposed deletion" template can be removed. The explanation of my deletion rationale is in the links I provided in the notice itself.

Answer

Dear Bonada,

The real question is why did you single the Sagon Penn page out for deletion to begin with? Its very interesting you would do that right after butting into a discussion regarding The Toven draft. Do you have personal feelings about Sagon Penn? It could seem to the millions of wiki USERS that he is being targeted yet once again by attempting to delete his very NOTABLE historic altercation! Kindly 16:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)Spiritletters (talk)

On a different topic: I assume that my fellow editors are intelligent and that they read the information presented to them. Please extend the same courtesy to others, and please make sure to follow the links used in other editors' replies to you. Also remember at all times to comment on content and edits, and never on contributors – that is part of assuming good faith which is a core policy. On a different talk page you accused me of "running away" from an argument, when the reality was that it was nearly midnight in my time zone and I had to go to bed; you could not know that unless you were to look at my user page (which I wouldn't expect anyone to do), so that's where "assume good faith" comes into play. In addition, just like you and everyone else here I am a volunteer, and I and you and everyone else is free to leave a discussion at any time. At this point, I am leaving the discussion about the proposed deletion of Sagon Penn. --bonadea contributions talk 06:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

Dear Bonadea

I am confused about what point your attempting to make here. If it was bedtime why did you, in your own words ″butt into″ the discussion between theroadislong and I regarding The Toven draft? Then instead of responding to my question you mysteriously navigated to my Sago Penn article and selected it for Deletion. Maybe you can answer this question? KindlySpiritletters (talk) 16:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought, maybe misguidedly, that I could help explain the situation, which is why I participated in the user talk page discussion. That's how Wikipedia discussions work – they are open for everybody, in general. As you saw, other people also opted to join in to try to explain Wikipedia's policies, which are admittedly a bit obscure and convoluted at times (but we have to stick to them nonetheless.) As for your second question, I can see from my edit history that I posted mmy contribution to the talk page discussion at 22:09. About ten minutes later I posted the proposed deletion notice at Sagon Penn. Your questions to me at Theroadislong's user talk page were posted more than an hour later, and at that point I was no longer online. Hope that helps. I'm glad you don't see what "point" I was trying to make, since I wasn't trying to make a point, simply give you the information about how you could contest the deletion, and about the crucial "assume good faith" policy, since that is something that you will always be expected to follow, and I couldn't see that you had been given that information before. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:03, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bonadea

I am not understanding your point. Why did you select Sagon Penn for deletion? The discussion you butted into was not about a Sago Penn topic? It interestingly. By The way...Penn was was a martial arts expert and community leader from Southeast San Diego who taught Karate to under privileged kids BEFORE the Incident! Kindly Spiritletters (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Toven Draft

Hello Theroadislong,

You moved this article back to draft without proper basis as at the very least it meets the guidelines below

WP:OTHERS Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:

1.Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture.

THE SAN DIEGO READER PUBLICATION

Has covered The Toven since 2014. As you know, it is a fact that the following source below was intentionally deleted by a journalist at the publication because the article which covered multiple works over a period of 8 years is missing and wiki has failed to assist with recovery. You, or other wiki staff have publicly identified the missing link as being key but have failed to help recover it.

"The Toven". www.sandiegoreader.com. Retrieved 2020-02-13.

However, I have the contents of the deleted articles in PDF format. How should I submit to you or wiki as evidence???

"The Toven". www.sandiegoreader.com. Retrieved 2020-02-13.

SAN DIEGO READER DELETED ALL THE FOLLOWING LINKS COVERING WORKS BY THE TOVEN, SINCE THE DRAFTING OF HIS WIKI PAGE

1.https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2018/jun/19/rapper-xxxtentacion-killed-florida/ 2.https://www.sandiegoreader.com/videos/2018/jun/19/2270/ 3.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTqu-djbq7A 4.https://www.sandiegoreader.com/bands/toven-the/

The only article they couldn't delete (below) was because it was written by a former employee who is now deceased.

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/jan/06/according-aversioncom-cd-review/

The following are multiple publications frequently published by the publications blurt music staff on their own THEREFORE this draft qualify's for inclusion under WIKI'S OTHER category

How shall we proceed? Thanks 17:26, 6 April 2020 (UTC)Spiritletters (talk)

I can't help you I'm afraid your draft Draft:The Toven has no reliable independent sources and until you find some it cannot be accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC) Dear Theroadislong

Are you now claiming that the San Diego Reader is not a independent reliable source? and that this page does not qualify under wiki OTHER category below? Please provide an answer asap or escalate this question.

Others[edit source] Shortcut WP:MUSICOTHER Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:

1.Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture.

Definition of a source The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:

2.The creator of the work (the writer, journalist)

If this source above isn't credible why do they have a wiki page

ThanksSpiritletters (talk) 18:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

It may well be a reliable source but if the articles have been deleted and they are not archived somewhere, (PDFs on your computer are of no use) then we cannot use them to establish notability. You can ask for other opinions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Theroadislong (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2020 (UTC) I figured they were a reliable source and so did the person that deleted it obviously. Something vitally important is that your initial response to the draft on 2-13-20 coincides with the link source below which was RETRIEVED that same day meaning you or user Sulfurboy would have had to see the article BEFORE it was deleted. It is no coincidence that the article was deleted the SAME day the both of you reviewed this draft sir.

"The Toven". www.sandiegoreader.com. Retrieved 2020-02-13. https://www.sandiegoreader.com/bands/toven-the/

Are you stating that either of you ever saw the article before it was deleted and also, why would a pdf version of the article which is clear evidence be non sufficient? THE BELOW LINK PROVES THAT A ARTICLE EXISTED. "The Toven". www.sandiegoreader.com. Retrieved 2020-02-13.

Please answer before referring me elsewhere because the two of you are heavily involved in this matter and the circumstances to follow. Spiritletters (talk) 19:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what you are trying to imply here, but even if we could see the sandiegoreader articles it would still not meet the criteria..."Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture". I suggest you get other opinions. Theroadislong (talk) 19:25, 6 April 2020 (UTC) You made the following statement regarding wiki's OTHER category

"if we could see the sandiegoreader articles it would still not meet the criteria..."Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture" However you failed to explain why? was that a personal opinion or fact? You left out important details, I will wait for your response? Thanks Spiritletters (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Because it's a single source, not multiple publications. Theroadislong (talk) 19:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC) Dear Theroadislong

Because its a single source? That's your answer? The OTHER criteria category (below) your referring to does NOT call for multiple sources are you now claiming it does? Its under the OTHER category for a reason. It clearly says ″meet at least ONE of the following criteria″.

Others[edit source] Shortcut WP:NMUSICOTHER Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:

Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture

You made the statement now please support it with facts hereto. I will wait for you thanksSpiritletters (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The criteria says "publications" plural? Theroadislong (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2020 (UTC) Dear Theroadislong

The criteria says "publications" plural? Yes, it does say ″publications″ but does not specify that those publications have to come from multiple different publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture, now does it? Again it is name the ″other″″ category for a reason right? otherwise the category criteria would not have been created. Please provide a reliable source to verify this other category issue we are having, perhaps direct clarification hereto from another source other than you. I will wait for you. ThanksSpiritletters (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Sorry to butt in here, but two of the links that Spiritletters listed in their first post work fine, and a third one is available through archive.org, so it is easy to verify that they don't come close to WP:SIGCOV and also don't meet the criterion "[i]s frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture". Spiritletters, you will need to find significant coverage in multiple independent sources, not brief and trivial mentions in one and the same publication. The articles and you listed don't constitute significant coverage, they would not do that even if they had all been published in different papers, and the youtube link appears to be one of the musician's songs – not a reference for anything. --bonadea contributions talk 20:09, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea,

Butting in or tag teaming is a tactic often used at selectively convent times to shift focus I understand. However, Now that you have butted in

1. please identify by attaching the first two links that you are referring to so I know exactly what your referring to.

2.explain in detail what the wiki ″OTHER″ category is reserved for via example article.

3. Constitute significant coverage? where did that word come from and what is the relation to the ″OTHER″ category criteria which is the topic of our discussion?

4.Other criteria refers to ″Is frequently covered in publications″ says nothing about ″significant coverage″ are we making things up as we go again?

I will wait for a response here where you butted in at. KindlySpiritletters (talk) 21:29, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments in article space

Just a heads up that we do not leave comments like these on published articles. we do that for drafts, as drafts are not visible to the world. If you want to discuss a published article, then post your discussion to the article's talk page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. however, I did. Maybe you can visit his talk page where the response is and answer for him since he is silent about.Spiritletters (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sagon Penn and The Toven draft page discussions

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please drop the claims that other editors have motive or are "butting in". They are unsubstantiated. Nobody is out to get you. We are all just doing standard wiki work examining the notability and quality of articles. Taking a more kind and civil attitude will help you in your discussions. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry their are no claims to drop sir! Read below as I will reiterate once again.... the subject of the claim stated himself that he was ″butting in″

Please re-tract your statement and apologize as I will have you stand corrected.

SEE BUTTING IN BELOW

talk page stalker) Sorry to butt in here, but two of the links that Spiritletters listed in their first post work fine, and a third one is available through archive.org, so it is easy to verify that they don't come close to WP:SIGCOV and also don't meet the criterion "[i]s frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable music sub-culture". Spiritletters, you will need to find significant coverage in multiple independent sources, not brief and trivial mentions in one and the same publication. The articles and you listed don't constitute significant coverage, they would not do that even if they had all been published in different papers, and the youtube link appears to be one of the musician's songs – not a reference for anything. --bonadea contributions talk 20:09, 6 April 2020 (UTC) KindlySpiritletters (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Spiritletters

Thank you for creating Sagon Penn.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

I did the curation / new article review on the article. Nice work! I had to take a good look at notability guidelines and the references for this article for this one. Most likely there should be an article on the event rather than on him. The references are really only about the event and him in the event. You may wish to consider transitioning this to an article about the event and aftermath. But I'm marking this as reviewed, happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

North8000 (talk) 23:27, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed one or more maintenance templates from Draft:The Toven. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. You removed an AfC rejection template, perhaps accidentally. See Special:Diff/949180252. Instead of removing the tag, you should have discussed the matter with the rejecter, Sulfurboy, or the AfC help desk. I shall restore the template. Thank you. —Unforgettableid (talk) 07:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unforgettableid, Wrong person. Sulfurboy (talk) 07:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sulfurboy! I did link to your user page, but my message wasn't targeted to you. I was writing to Spiritletters. That's why this thread is on Spiritletters' talk page, not your talk page. :) Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 09:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Toven

Hello, Spiritletters. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Toven, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Toven

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

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. 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!} 18:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bigger Vibes

Hello, Spiritletters. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bigger Vibes, 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) 03:01, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:La Jolla (Song)

Hello, Spiritletters. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:La Jolla (Song), 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) 02:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Toven

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

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. 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!} 01:52, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Liz!

I've been down sometime just catching thank you for reaching out. obviously the draft das since deleted. The draft was revived and I have worked on it and considered recent changes in notability of the subject. Would you mind assisting to improve the quality of the draft if needed as per standards? in particularly with the song 'Frank Sinatra' by the subject of the draft (The Toven) at which I believe I have provided strong notability for. Any thoughts? I would appreciate your engagement. Spiritletters (talk) 13:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Toven Spiritletters (talk) 13:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:La Jolla (Song)

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

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. 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!} 02:00, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Toven has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Toven. Thanks! Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 10:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Toven (January 12)

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

Because the iTunes chart fails WP:BADCHARTS, the subject doesn't qualify under WP:MUSICBIO. I'm not convinced that nominations for San Diego Music Awards qualifies under WP:ANYBIO. Also, while the coverage from pacificsandiego.com is good, it's also a WP:LOCAL newspaper so I'm not sure that's enough for notability. Please wait for coverage from outlets like Billboard and a gold record.

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:The Toven 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.

Chris Troutman (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]