Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Vanderwaalforces 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:
Currently source does not cover him significantly, please see WP:SIGCOV.
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:Dancho Danchev 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.
I just came across your comment on my first Wikipedia article that I've ever written.
I have included a lot of news media coverage for my topic which is the cybersecurity expert Dancho Danchev on the article's Talk page here Draft talk:Dancho Danchev which you can check out. I then tried to summarize all of these articles and include his mentions in the media in the actual draft article but I wanted to ask whether this is the correct approach and whether or not I'm doing this correctly?
My topic which is cybersecurity expert Dancho Danchev is that he's a very well known and respected cybersecurity expert and I wanted to find out whether I'm doing all the news media articles referencing or mentioning him correctly in the actual article? He's very well known and respected in the cybersecurity area and I believe that the draft is correctly falling in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security page. Is this correct and what should I do more to improve it before submitting it again? Ahsks873 (talk) 18:30, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Ahsks873!
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! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:42, 2 November 2023 (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 Paul W were:
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.
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.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Subject may be notable, but article needs substantial editing to remove the promotional tone (needs to be factual and neutral - see WP:NPOV - the first two paragraphs of the biography section should be immediately deleted for a start), and to present the subject's life/career in a more chronological order up to the present day.
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:Dancho Danchev 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.
I just saw your comment. The topic of my article is cybersecurity expert Dancho Danchev who is very well known and respected in the cybersecurity area. I also wanted to find out what else I should improve in my article to make it quality for publication as this is my first Wikipedia article draft that I have ever done. He's referenced and mentioned in a lot of news media articles and a lot of cybersecurity books including various other sources which I posted here - Draft talk:Dancho Danchev with my goal is to have the article draft get accepted and published as I believe it falls in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security category on Wikipedia. My question is what else I should work on to improve my draft before submitting it for publication? Ahsks873 (talk) 18:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Ahsks873. The individual may be notable but the article needs a lot of work. It should be rewritten as a chronological account of Danchev's career, starting with early life and education and moving through to the present day, with all key events and claims properly cited by inline references (avoiding unreliable sources - social media, blogs, etc). Please look at other examples of biographies of living people (BLPs) and avoid content/styling that reads like a LinkedIn profile or corporate CV. I know nothing about his area of work, but nonetheless it is immediately apparent that the article in its current form will not be accepted for publication on Wikipedia. Best wishes Paul W (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
I just saw your comment. I have known cybersecurity expert Dancho Danchev for many years in the cybersecurity area based on this publications and news media references and mentions. This is my first Wikipedia article that I have been ever working on and I was surprised that he didn't have a Wikipedia article page because he is a very well known and respected expert in the cybersecurity area. I have included all the news media references and mentions of him here Draft talk:Dancho Danchev and my goal is to have the Wikipedia article accepted and published as it falls in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security category on Wikipedia. I also wanted to find out what else I should improve in my Wikipedia article to help make it more easy to read and get my Wikipedia article approved and published? Ahsks873 (talk) 18:39, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Ahsks873. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Dancho Danchev, 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.
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.
The comment the reviewer left was:
very poorly sourced... facebook Discogs linkedin.
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:Dancho Danchev 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.
I have published all the news media articles referencing and containing mentions of him here - Draft talk:Dancho Danchev and this is my first Wikipedia article with my goal is to have it accepted and published in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer security category on Wikipedia where I believe it will get accepted. The topic of my article is cybersecurity expert Dancho Danchev who is very well known and respected in the cybersecurity area. As this is my first Wikipedia article that I have been ever working on I also wanted to find out what should I improve in my article to have it accepted and published? Ahsks873 (talk) 18:43, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
