Hello, CDweller, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm Ozzie10aaaa 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.
When adding information, please try to WP:CITE a source for each statement whenever possible!
See your homepage for a brief tutorial. Here are a few links you might find helpful:
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!
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, ScalarFactor, left the following feedback:
This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:
provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements;
are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
are independent: not connected to the subject, such as interviews, 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.
Hello, CDweller!
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! ScalarFactor (talk) 22:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
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, LuniZunie, left the following feedback:
Hello! Thanks for the reply, but I don't understand why the criteria regarding reliable sources and lasting significance are not considered to be met for this article. Firstly, I have cited well-known Romanian sources and covered the subject in depth. I have mentioned PISA scores, their effect on participants, and other relevant aspects. I believe this topic deserves its own article, as it is well known in Romanian schools, and I created the page because no article on the subject previously existed. If this page was rejected, then why did Romanian Olympiad in Informatics pass this process? I don't mean this in a confrontational way, but it appears to rely on sources similar to those used in my article.
Hi! I'll recheck the page tomorrow when I have time, but from another quick glance I just don't see coverage on it (I see mentions of it, but not coverage). This may be down to the fact that the translations are poor, but I will recheck this tomorrow. – LuniZunie(talk)02:58, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Additionally, the AfC staff that some parts have been created by LLMs? Could you please tell me which ones are? From what I remember, I don't think I've used any to create large portions of the article. I'll rewrite them if that's the issue, but I really don't know which ones are faulty. CDweller (talk) 10:33, 4 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! I unfortunately don't seem to get to a conclusion with the other editors from the help desk. They still claim that all is LLM-generated without too much thought. I'll see how I can improve this article. CDweller (talk) 11:48, 5 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
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, DoubleGrazing, left the following feedback:
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.
Primary sources do not establish notability per WP:ORG.
Note that while universities by and large are notable, individual sub-units (faculties, departments, institutes, etc.) by and large aren't.
It doesn't really matter whether you translate the ro.wiki article, or create a new draft from scratch. There is no requirement for corresponding articles in the different language versions of Wikipedia to be identical. Indeed, that may not even be possible, given that each Wikipedia is an entirely separate project with their own guidelines and requirements, and what is acceptable in one may not be in another.
The reason why I declined this draft is that it provides no evidence that the subject is notable enough to justify an article. The draft cites only primary sources (mostly the university's own website), which cannot establish notability according to the WP:ORG notability guideline. The ro.wiki article is in this respect even worse, as it is almost entirely unreferenced, and makes only two citations, both to the university's website. Therefore if you were to translate that article instead, it would be also declined.
As I already mentioned at the time of reviewing, it is very seldom that an individual faculty, department, etc. receives sufficient coverage in independent secondary sources, unless there is something truly remarkable about it to draw the attention of journalists or broadcasters. I'm not saying it would be impossible to have an article on this faculty accepted, only that the odds are somewhat against it.
Thanks for the reply! I was wondering why the articles from the ro wiki had few actual references and were accepted even though no actual context was provided. My only question is what else can I add to make the article more legitimate? I thought the EuroQual, EUR-ACE and the individual ones where suffice to have it match the AfC criteria. CDweller (talk) 12:23, 10 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
