Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiOriginal-9 was:

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 passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Not seeing enough independent, significant coverage to support a stand alone article for this.

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:Democratic Socialists of America National Political Committee 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.

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 16:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DirectorDirectorDirector! 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! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 16:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thank you for joinging the WikiProject Organized Labour! We are editors who collaborate to improve the coverage of all matters related to trade unions.

A couple of suggestions:

• If you've not done so already, you might wish to add {{User WikiProject Organized Labour}} to your userpage.
• You can leave questions or start discussions at the Organized Labour talk page about matters related to the project.
• If you feel like doing some clean up; we have a big list.

Once again, welcome. Goldsztajn (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DirectorDirectorDirector. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Democratic Socialists of America National Political Committee, 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) 14:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Labor Left, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Carey, Roger Cook and Lisa Baker. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL Bot. What would I do without you

Yea this is completely my bad. I went through and tried to replace these with the proper (Politician) or (<Insert State here> Politician) but missed these DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to the infoboxes of Australian election articles have been reverted by multiple editors, please take the hint and raise the issue at WT:AUSPOL rather than continuing to edit war. You have even acknowledged in your edit summaries that you are reverting against the consensus. I T B F 📢 15:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find that in that comment I'm specifically stating the other person did not reach consensus or run a vote. I will continue to follow the current standard and RfC on issues around minor parties until a new consensus, vote, or RfC is raised.

Feel free to raise the issue on WT:AUSPOL if you think the current standards need to change.

Again the edit usually stands for a long period of time before a small select few users you included go against the current standard. Please refer to RfC on this matter. DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For now I will refrain from editing any removal of Independents in the info boxes that have not been long established @ITBF and I have raised this issue on WT:AUSPOL to be discussed and if needed run a Polled and RfC process. DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]