Hi LilyXChloe! 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! JarrahTree 11:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to the article Draft:Impel. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, wikis, personal websites, and websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. These sources may express views that are widely acknowledged as pushing a particular point-of-view, sometimes even extremist, being promotional in nature, or relying heavily on rumors and personal opinions. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you. Sam Kuru (talk) 01:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. Is it because it's a USA Today article? I guess I thought that was a good source. LilyXChloe (talk) 14:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They sure used to be; not as much today. Regardless, the "article" in question prominently notes "Members of the editorial and news staff of the USA TODAY Network were not involved in the creation of this content". This is simply a paid placement blog, where USA Today trades what little dignity and reputation they have left for a cash grab.Sam Kuru (talk) 22:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I guess I didn't notice that part. Again, I appreciate your feedback. LilyXChloe (talk) 11:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe 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 draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:Impel 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LilyXChloe! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 14:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LilyXChloe. 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:LilyXChloe. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=LilyXChloe|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. Just posting this prewritten message in case you didn't see my post at the Teahouse(please see it before replying) 331dot (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not getting paid to edit Wikipedia in any way!! I will admit that I am from Syracuse. I was just interested in creating a page from scratch. I am new to Wikpedia and trying to learn how it works. LilyXChloe (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I asked is that you claim to have personally created and personally own the copyright to the company logo, which typically only a company employee could do. If you didn't intend to do that, you must immediately without delay go to Commons and request deletion of the logo.

Images are not relevant to the draft process, which only considers the text and sources. Images can wait until the draft is accepted. Logos are typically uploaded to this Wikipedia directly (not Commons) as a non-free "fair use" image. 331dot (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I realize I messed that up. I took it from their company website and it wouldn't let me update it without saying it was mine. I will fix that now. How do you add a photo to a page, then? Do you have to create the graphic yourself? LilyXChloe (talk) 03:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you connected to the company? You have yet to answer that question. Drmies (talk) 03:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not. LilyXChloe (talk) 03:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I find that hard to believe. And if you are but you are hesitant to disclose it, you're making a mistake. Declaring a COI isn't even a big deal; refusing to disclose is blockable if one has a COI. Drmies (talk) 03:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about images right now, they aren't necessary to the draft submission process. You made 8 edits in June to work towards getting autoconfirmed, then started writing about this company in September. How did you come to write about this company? 331dot (talk) 08:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the logo from the article, but you must immediately request its deletion from Commons. By improperly uploading it you are making it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution, and if you aren't associated with the company you are putting this project in legal jeopardy by the improper presence of the image. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Do you also operate the User:Bdicoccosix account that posted here and spoke in your voice? 331dot (talk) 17:58, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LilyXChloe! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Page denied, 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) 03:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]