Your submission at Articles for creation: Larus Foundation (June 4)

edit
Draft declined
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
Feedback
The reviewer, Tuesden, left the following feedback:
This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for organizations and companies. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:
  • provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, excluding routine coverage like product launches, staff appointments, or financial reports and listings in databases or listicles;
  • are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
  • are independent: not connected to the subject, such as press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.
Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Next steps

  • Edit Draft:Larus Foundation to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
  • When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
  • If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

Scam warning

Tuesden (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Teahouse logo
Hello, Mohd Ibramimi! 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! Tuesden (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

June 2026

edit
Information icon

Hello Mohd Ibramimi. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Larus Foundation, 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:Mohd Ibramimi. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mohd Ibramimi|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. Dreamyshade (talk) 03:05, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply