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

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:Anton Bantock 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lisacole! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 19:05, 29 December 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 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 (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.

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:Anton Bantock 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please add your messages to the bottom of the talk page, with a heading, or they may be overlooked.

• When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

• Much of your text was entirely unsourced, and the six references you do give include YouTube, an organisation closely associated with him, and two of his own books. Publications written by the person should be listed as such, in a separate section if preferred, with no references for the items, as you have in fact largely done. They should be used as references, though, since by definition they are not independent third-party sources as required here.
• The links to obituaries looks spammy, and I can't really see the point. In any case, external links should be in a separate section, so headed.
• He's probably notable as defined above, but we need to be able to verify what you claim, we can't take your word for his worthiness.

• You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

• I've seen worse, but He was a popular teacher throughout his career, well remembered for his eccentricity and creative teaching methods... His adventures were always chronicled in a series of letters that were sent home to Bristol during his travels, some of which have been turned into published books... to enhance the quality of life for the local people.

• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
• You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

• I didn't check.

Not reasons for deletion, but you should use wikilinks, eg Barnt Green, Birmingham, David Copperfield Frederick Delius and publication titles should be italicised.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article.

If you are writing about someone you knew as a friend, colleague or relative, you have a conflict of interest, and you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much, I think we will try to get a professional to do this, it is far too complex for me. Lisacole (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taking that route is almost certain to involve you in scammers who will take your money and NOT provide the article. Theroadislong (talk) 22:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]