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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Ben Etiaba 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eucharia Ukwueze! 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! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eucharia Ukwueze. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Eucharia Ukwueze. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Eucharia Ukwueze|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. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I am not directly or indirectly compensated for this edit, and I am not in any way affiliated with the subject. Eucharia Ukwueze (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You claim to have personally created and personally own the copyright of this professionally taken image of Mr. Etiaba. Either that's true, and you need to disclose your connection to him, or you improperly uploaded the image, infringing on copyright and putting this entire project in jeopardy. Which is it? 331dot (talk) 22:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced the Image from his social media posts but I was struggling with uploading it and must have improperly uploaded the image. Eucharia Ukwueze (talk) 22:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Do you happen to know under which license it was published, if any? If no license was provided, the image is (assumed to be) copyrighted, meaning you shouldn't have uploaded it at all. Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright has more information if you want. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the license was explicitly given(which would be unusual, though not impossible, for a social media post), you must immediately, without delay, request deletion of the image from Commons. The majority of images on the internet are not suitable for upload to Wikipedia, unless the copyright is explicitly compatible with Wikipedia. You can't assume.

Images are not relevant to the draft process, which only considers the text and sources. You don't need to worry about images until the draft is accepted into the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 00:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! Thank you for clarifying that Eucharia Ukwueze (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what license it was under? If you don't, I can request deletion of the image for you. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am yet to understand how to search what license it was under, currently reading some resource on that. Also, I already made a request for deletion. Eucharia Ukwueze (talk) 13:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, you have no connection to him? 331dot (talk) 00:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eucharia Ukwueze! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Wikipedia article can't be cited as a reference, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eucharia Ukwueze! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Draft Declined due to not being Neutral, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Elijah Kolawole Olusehinde. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ibjaja055 (talk) 03:14, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Eucharia Ukwueze (talk) 09:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This subject does not pass the criteria for politicians nor the general notability criteria. Best,

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:Ben Etiaba 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 18:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]