Jeymar Alfarero

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pier 70 (June 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were: 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:Pier 70 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 reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Jeymar Alfarero! 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) 19:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Pier 70

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Pier 70, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KylieTastic (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024

Hello, I'm REDACTED403. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Pier 70, San Francisco seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -REDACTED403 (talk) 14:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Pier 70, San Francisco

Hello. I notice that you have recently edited Pier 70, San Francisco and, in doing so, added a number of references which are incomplete, that is, they do not give sufficient information to the reader in order for him/her to be able to go to the reference and verify what it says. For example, you added [E]fforts to preserve Pier 70's historical significance gained traction, leading to collaborative initiatives between the Port of San Francisco and private developers to revitalize the site but your reference for that was simply Cite web |title="San Francisco’s Pier 70: A New Lease on Life." San Francisco Chronicle. |url=sfchronicle.com, https://www.sfchronicle.com |website=https://www.sfchronicle.com. If you'll look, you'll see that the URL is not formatted correctly (it requires "https://" prior to it) and is not even close to complete, because the URL merely points to the Chronicle's home page, not the place where they make the statement about Pier 70. If you take a look at other references in the article, ones that other editors have added, you'll see that the URL points to exactly the page on which the reader can verify the statements made. It would be good if you could please go back and fill out these references so that we can have a more complete encyclopaedia. If you have any questions, please ask (here is fine) and i or another editor will try to answer them. Happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 05:37, 30 June 2024 (UTC)