Draft talk:Radarkpop
Add topicContested deletion
[edit]This page should not be speedy deleted as unreviewed LLM content, because... I am contesting this WP:G15 speedy deletion tag because I wrote this entire draft myself from scratch. No AI was used to generate this text.I suspect the nominator is relying entirely on an online AI detector, which Wikipedia policy (WP:Signs of AI writing) explicitly states is unreliable and cannot be used as the sole reason for a speedy deletion. There are no chatbot conversational artifacts here, and every single source I cited is real and verifiable.Please decline this speedy deletion and look at the text and sources manually. I am a real human editor just trying to build this page, and I am happy to make any manual edits needed to improve it. --Panecashio (talk) 12:43, 10 September 2026 (UTC)
 | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this draft. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Hello. I am opening this section to correct my previous statements regarding my connection to Radarkpop. I previously did not realize my relationship with the platform constituted a Conflict of Interest under Wikipedia's guidelines, but I now understand the policy better.
I want to officially disclose my COI regarding Radarkpop. Moving forward, I will not edit this draft directly and will only propose changes or request a review through this Talk page and Thank you. Panecashio (talk) 23:10, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
COI Edit Request: Review New Sources to Overturn Rejection
[edit] | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. Set |answered=no to reactivate the request if necessary. |
Hello. As previously declared, I have a COI regarding Radarkpop a PR website (already in my userpage).The draft was previously rejected due to weak sources.
I respectfully ask a neutral editor to review these specific pieces source to consider overturning the rejection status of the draft:
Thank you for your time and objective evaluation. Panecashio (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Panecashio:
- Paid editors and editors with other kinds of COI are allowed to create and edit drafts about topics they have a COI with (unless they have some kind of topic ban, but you don't have a ban so that's irrelevant here).
- In order to overturn a draft rejection, the usual route is to appeal to the rejecting reviewer; those volunteers who respond to COI edit requests are not necessarily draft reviewers (and vice versa).
- The Articles for Creation help desk is a better place to ask for advice, since that is monitored by multiple volunteers who do AfC draft reviews. However, there is no point in your bringing these links there, because:
- The source you present (it's just one source, not two, as you will see if you follow the two links) is a press release, which means it doesn't show any notability. It is neither secondary, nor independent, and it doesn't provide any significant coverage. I'm afraid it is useless for Wikipedia's purposes. --bonadea contributions talk 07:33, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Bonadea I see and thank you for the advice, So what should i do next? Panecashio (talk) 08:30, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
- I agree with the advice you have been given previously by others: stop writing about Radarkpop at Wikipedia. You are wasting your own time by trying to add information that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. --bonadea contributions talk 11:14, 16 September 2026 (UTC)