Latest comment: 3 months ago3 comments2 people 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, Zzz plant, 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.
Hello, hotels can definitely meet general notability guideline but it's not yet clear to me that this one does. It would be helpful if you can point to the three best sources that offer the hotel in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources completely independent of the hotel itself. There is a bit of a promotional tone here, it reads more like a travel guide book entry than a neutral encyclopedia entry. I recommend you collect a list of good sources and then try to summarize the facts of what are said in those sources. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link).
Thank you so much for your vey quick response. I understand all the points raised, I tried to make the tone more neutral but this is one of my first times creating a Wikipedia page.
I have now amended the page and please find the top 3 references below that in my opinion shows the hotel is unique in design, recognised as a sustainable hotel in London and receives coverage from independent and high-authoritative online outlets such as the Forbes.
I have also added my COI disclosure to the Edit summary as I work for an agency (80 DAYS) whose clients include One Hundred Shoreditch. JuliaKA26 (talk) 09:09, 7 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello, JuliaKA26!
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! Zzz plant (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 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, Zzz plant, 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.
It would be helpful if you can point to the three best sources for this topic to demonstrate how it is notable. The tone also needs to be adjusted for neutral POV; right now it reads more like an advertisement or hotel entry versus a factual encyclopedia entry.
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Latest comment: 3 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, ChrysGalley, 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:
I think this is actually quite close to being OK, but a bit more work is needed.
1) I would ditch the Forbes source - it is Forbes Contributor, which means "paid for" PR - it's a press release dressed up as a magazine article. It's not formally banned but we can't use it for notability.
2) You do appear to have notability from the other sources, which is usually the problem here, so the other sources look good, however if you find newspaper or other coverage that would help.
3) The tone is pretty promotional in places. So we have "with the Lore Group taking the reigns", a fabulous spelling mistake but we don't need that tone, please just dial that all down.
4) The design and architecture look to be among the aspects that give notability, so it would not harm to have 2 or 3 more sentences from the material. Articles are supposed to be summaries of the reliable source, rather than name checks, and there is more material in 2 of the sources.
Normally the above would not be grounds for decline, this is only being done here due to the COI: it's not plausible to get volunteers to fix the work of paid contributors.
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:JuliaKA26, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JuliaKA26|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hey there, apologies for that! I was under the impression that adding a disclosure to the Edit summary section that I work at an agency that works with the hotel is enough to disclose COI but I have now added the paid disclosure to my user page regarding my contributions towards the Lore Group properties (One Hundred Shoreditch, Lyle DC and Riggs DC). Can you help me what I shall do if I were to create another page for another client? Is it possible to add multiple such disclosures? Our agency works with a lot of hotels and we are likely gonna be supporting them with Wikipedia page creations in the future. Appreciate the guidance and I shall not make any edits until I hear back from you. Thank you! JuliaKA26 (talk) 06:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yes, you're right, our policy currently does allow disclosing in an edit summary (although I'm trying to change that!). The problem is that it's by far the least obvious way of disclosing, and also if the disclosure is only added in a later edit, then chances are a number of people will have already looked at the draft before the disclosure is made, and therefore you're having queries like this posted on your talk page.
Anyway, thank you for disclosing on your userpage (my preferred location, FWIW). And yes, it is fine to combine all your clients (or rather, all Wikipedia articles/drafts to which your COI relates) into a single disclosure. If you expect there to be many more of them, it may be better to switch to the list variant of the disclosure template; I can do that for you, if you'd like, in which case just let me know. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:59, 8 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hey again, very much appreciate the help! If you don't mind sharing a list variant of the disclosure template that would be lovely! Can you confirm if the new draft for One Hundred Shoreditch is still under review then? I fully appreciate it can take up to a longer time for it to get reviewed.
And any chance you have a view onto the Lyle DC page as well? I added the disclosure the same way to the Edit summary but now with my user page being updated with a reference to Lyel DC too, hope it means that's alright and whoever is looking over that page will see my disclosure.
Latest comment: 1 month ago7 comments2 people 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, PhilDaBirdMan, left the following feedback:
This draft appears to be a duplicate of an existing article. Wikipedia does not permit multiple articles on the same topic.
I felt maybe the hotel itself could have a page, given while it is the same building as the former bank, it is a completely different entity now but if you think the existing page should be edited, I shall do that.
I will also ensure the language is more neutral so it doesn't sound promotional.
Can someone help me what shall I do with this draft if I ended up expanding the copy of the Riggs Bank page as instructed? Shall I just delete it altogether? Thank you for the help in advance! JuliaKA26 (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 18 days 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, Dafootballguy, 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.
Latest comment: 16 days 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, Hurricane Wind and Fire, 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.
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:
Notability is borderline but should be fixed by adding one more source that meets WP:42 (webpages from the companies that designed/built the building are not independent).
The lead and Facilities section are still largely promotional. In the lead, all we need is a brief mention of when the hotel was built, any major events, maybe the number of rooms, and mention of the restaurant. The facilities section can expand a little more on that but does not need more than a one or two sentence overview of the restaurant (simply saying it is an American restaurant is enough). We should remove the amenities section and we don't need anything more than just the first sentence of the event space section.
Latest comment: 18 hours 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, Aeon Sentinel, left the following feedback:
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:
