Latest comment: 4 months ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.The reason left by Pythoncoder was:
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 it after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Valy Hedjasi 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.
Hello, Uditiyinfire!
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! —pythoncoder (talk|contribs)01:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello, @Pythoncoder. Thank you indeed for reviewing and advising. I want to explain that the subject of this article is one of the well-known male singers from Afghanistan, and it is not promotional in any sense. There are artists that are less known than him that already have biography articles on Wikipedia, so I wasn't sure why the subject was not considered suitable. I am a new contributor in Wikipedia, and my ambition is to develop the encyclopedia by constructing articles about real and notable Afghan singers. As to the notice of involvement of AI, I had used an AI tool to check some grammatical and linguistic errors that might have appeared in the text; I did not use it to construct the content. I'm sorry if it had raised an alarm. I'll edit the draft based on the feedback and resubmit when the issues are resolved. I understand that the subject is notable, and I think the article deserves another review. Thank you again for your time and guidance. Uditiyinfire (talk) 20:07, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for giving me this context. Even if your intention was solely use AI to correct grammatical errors, it also inserted a formatting error. Thanks for rewriting the draft; the new version is much better. My main suggestion now is to add a few more independent sources to prove that Valy is notable. Let me know if you have any more questions (for example, on the reliability or independence of a source). —pythoncoder (talk|contribs)22:04, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Dear respected @Pythoncoder, I understand your concern about the notability of Valy. But I would like to add one thing about media in Afghanistan. Media in Afghanistan is quite limited. Of course, he is a famous Afghan singer, but unfortunately, many media channels in Afghanistan do not possess substantial archives on the internet, and thus specific sources cannot be found on the net. He has also won awards from Ariana Television, which is a leading television station in Afghanistan as well as the biggest platform for honoring Afghan singers. Some episodes of such programs might also be found online. Moreover, he has millions of views for his songs. This also explains his popularity. In perspective, the Wikipedia page on Seeta Qasemi has a single source citation, which is a YouTube interview, despite which the page has stayed on Wikipedia for quite a number of years. This is a clear indication that sources from the Afghan media may be limited online yet the artist is by no means non-notable; rather, the sources simply are not digitized with international accessibility. Uditiyinfire (talk) 22:48, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Fair point. I count two secondary sources in the draft that count for notability (Payam-e-Afghan TV & Radio Free Europe), and I'm willing to let it through based on that third source. However, Valy Hedjasi is create-protected so it may take a couple days to get that lock removed. —pythoncoder (talk|contribs)23:10, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Dear @Pythoncoder,Thank you so much for your understanding and for assessing these sources. I am really grateful for your open-mindedness in considering this article based upon these independent sources that are available. I shall wait patiently for the page protection to be removed so that I may further improve this draft according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you so much for your time. Uditiyinfire (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Uditiyinfire, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm Mathglot and I've volunteered to be your Wikipedia mentor. I'm here for you whenever you need help with Wikipedia. It's great to have you on board to help create this online encyclopedia.
Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the "Suggested edits" module top left on your homepage, or the Task Center.
Help is available: as your Mentor, you can always find me listed in the "Get editing help" module bottom right on your homepage; there are also additional help links there. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or try the Wikipedia:Teahouse to get help designed especially for new users from a team of experienced volunteers. So go ahead and ask questions — we're here to help!
Hello @Mathglot, thank you very much for the warm welcome and for agreeing to be my mentor on Wikipedia. I appreciate your support and the links that you’ve given me. It is great that I am a contributor on this encyclopedia, since I am also eager to learn more of the ways of Wikipedia. Uditiyinfire (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
You're very welcome. There are a lot of rules around here (Wikipedia calls them, "policies and guidelines"), and one of them is WP:BE BOLD, which means, go ahead and try an edit. The worst that can happen is that you've transgressed some rule you never heard of, and someone will undo your edit (hopefully, with a helpful edit summary that explains why, but that doesn't always happen). Making mistakes is the way we all learn, so BEBOLD is a good plan. Just learn as you go, and try not to make the same mistake twice. Check out some of the links in your welcome message, and that will give you a good head start. Good luck, and ask questions! Mathglot (talk) 02:34, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much for your kind and encouraging message. It really makes me feel at ease and inspired to know that learning and even learning through mistakes is a process for a new editor such as myself. I really do appreciate your advice on how to be bold and your kind guidance. I will look at the sites you sent me and continue to do my best with each editing task that I take on. Uditiyinfire (talk) 15:09, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Valy Hedjasi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Dear @Pythoncoder, I am very grateful for this wonderful news and for all your assistance along the whole process of reviewing this article. I would also like to thank you for your valuable time and your helpful comments. It makes me very happy to know that this article has been accepted and developed, and that I will carry on with my efforts to improve it to meet the standards of Wikipedia. Uditiyinfire (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
And thank you for being kind and respectful throughout this process. I just finished dealing with another guy whose draft I declined for being LLM-generated, who responded with personal attacks and edit warring up until he was blocked. I wish you the best with your future editing endeavors. —pythoncoder (talk|contribs)17:19, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
You are very welcome, and I can fully understand, dear @Pythoncoder, that work with users who want to push their pov without observing guidelines and reliable sources can be very hard indeed and some users do not have sufficient understanding to avoid personal attacks and disruptive editing and can easily assume that they will push their own point just because on Wikipedia everyone can start contributing and editing, I've heard some of them do these things for making viral contents on short-video platforms. Also, dear @Pythoncoder, please have a look at my new draft: Draft:Shafiq Mureed that I have recently submitted. I would be very happy to hear your instructions and feedback on my edits Uditiyinfire (talk) 18:03, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valy Hedjasi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Uditiyinfire, don't take this personally; this is one editor who believes that this article topic is not notable (in the Wikipedia sense of the word) and therefore cannot be part of the encyclopedia. You may respond at the deletion discussion (linked above) if you wish, but a likely better use of your time at the outset is to find additional reliable sources that are slam-dunk candidates to prove WP:Notability, i.e., you should gather several (three is a good number) sources that have WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:SECONDARY, significant coverage of the topic (i.e., topic = Valy Hedjasi), and add citations for them to the article. Once you've added the citations, then go to the Afd and point them out. If there are no further sources in existence, then your task is harder: you must demonstrate at the Afd why the sources already in the article demonstrate notability. If you do respond at the Afd, then have a look at the useful essay Wikipedia:Arguments to make in deletion discussions first. Another useful essay is here. Good luck. Mathglot (talk) 09:39, 24 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Mathglot, I think this nomination for deletion is unnecessary because I have already discussed this article with @Pythoncoder, and he has already reviewed and approved the article. Therefore, I do not think it is necessary to reopen the same discussion again. Uditiyinfire (talk) 11:01, 26 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
My review is not the final word. Other users disagreed with my assessment, so discussing the page at AFD is the proper thing to do here, in my opinion. I advise that you let the discussion run its course (and argue affirmatively for why the page should be kept, if you wish) rather than trying to stop it on procedural grounds. —pythoncoder (talk|contribs)19:36, 26 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Uditiyinfire, to be clear: you are mistaken, and pythoncoder is correct. Approved or not, your Draft is now being discussed for possible deletion. If you wish to prevent that from happeniing, you should follow the steps I recommended previously. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Draft declinedThank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.
FeedbackThe reviewer, Nighfidelity, left the following feedback:
This draft is not written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove:
.jpg)
.jpg)
