User talk:Kay3233

Welcome!

Hello, Kay3233, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:APAC Tower, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 11:18, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:APAC Tower

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:APAC Tower, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 11:18, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: APAC Tower (September 2)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Kay3233! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 11:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong,

I noticed the article on APAC Tower was rejected for notability. I would like guidance on whether the coverage I have from independent sources is sufficient, or what additional sources would be needed.

I have few questions. 1. Do the awards (Fitwel 3-Star 2025, Thailand Property Award) count as notable recognition for the building? 2. Do independent news reports from Bangkok Biz News, RE Talk Asia, and AustCham Thailand establish enough secondary coverage? 3. Would mentioning prominent multinational tenants (Asia Pulp & Paper, Mazda Sales, TOA Electronics) help demonstrate significance? Kay3233 (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

The awards are not notable, D103 Group, press releases and APAC Tower are not independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong,

Thank you for your feedback. I understand that awards, press releases, and sources affiliated with APAC Tower are not considered independent.

I would like to clarify whether the following independent news coverage would help establish notability:

1. ThaiPublica – reporting on APAC Tower’s Fitwel certification: link
2. Thansettakij – reporting on the tower’s market impact and office demand: link1, link2
3. Thai Post – covering the topping-off ceremony and project significance: link

These articles are from independent media outlets and discuss the building itself. Would adding these sources meet Wikipedia’s notability requirements for the article?

Thank you for your guidance, Kay3233 (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:APAC Tower

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:APAC Tower, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. BombCraft8 ^{(talk) (contributions)} 11:40, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: APAC Tower (September 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:APAC Tower 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi again,

I am submitting an article on APAC Tower, a mixed-use complex in Bangkok. The draft has been revised to ensure a neutral point of view, with all statements supported by independent, reliable sources, including newspapers, industry publications, and award websites. Promotional language has been removed, and the content now focuses on factual information about the building’s history, location, tenants, retail component, and awards.

I would appreciate guidance or review from experienced editors to ensure that the article meets Wikipedia’s standards for notability, verifiability, and neutrality before publication.

Thank you for your assistance. Kay3233 (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Please don't use AI to communicate here. 16:23, 3 September 2025 (UTC) Theroadislong (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. I’m just new and need some guidance to the questions. Kay3233 (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

September 2025

Hello, I'm 331dot. An edit that you recently made seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. Your edit may have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi 331dot, thanks for the message. I’m will make sure my edits are my owns. Kay3233 (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello Kay3233. The nature of your edits 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:Kay3233. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Kay3233|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. 331dot (talk) 12:25, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi 331dot, thank you for your message. I’m not being paid or compensated for my edits. My personal interest is in skyscrapers and new developments in Bangkok, and I’m trying to improve coverage of Bangkok real estate topics on Wikipedia. Kay3233 (talk) 15:45, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

You seem to have a strong personal investment in this topic; to others it looks like you created additional accounts to evade scrutiny. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

I’m new here and still learning but Isee some skyscraper pages with only a few sources or even just one but they are published and not reject. Why is my draft different? that what struck me with. I have no intention to evade scrutiny. Kay3233 (talk) 18:22, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Please see other stuff exists; we consider each draft or article on its own merits, and not compared to other articles that themselves may be inappropriate and just not yet addressed by a volunteer. There are many ways inappropriate content can exist(I can go into them if you want), this cannot justify adding more. 331dot (talk) 18:44, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

If you would like to help us, you can identify these other articles you have seen that seem to be inappropriate so action can be taken. We are a volunteer effort, and we are only as good as the people who choose to help us. 331dot (talk) 18:46, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for explaing. here are some example that I found Empire Tower (Bangkok), The Esse Asoke, One City Centre (Bangkok) in Bangkok. Kay3233 (talk) 18:52, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Just as an example, the Bangkok Empire Tower article was created in 2008, long before current standards, and only sporadically edited since then. I am marking it as problematic. 331dot (talk) 18:59, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

I’m new here, so I wouldn’t dare call anything inappropriate. I’m just curious and learning about how things work. I just following some of their style. The Pano, The Esse Asoke, Centara Grand and Bangkok Convention Centre, EmQuartier. Kay3233 (talk) 18:58, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

If you want to use other articles as a model or example, use those that are classified as good articles, which have received community vetting. 331dot (talk) 19:00, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much @331dot I know now why Wikipedia is so good because of people like you who contribute and guide others. Kay3233 (talk) 05:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Have you used any other accounts? 331dot (talk) 12:26, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

I did have another account in the past, but I’m only using this one now. Kay3233 (talk) 15:46, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

@331dot, user has two older accounts, not one. Yak234 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI) and your soft-blocked APAC Tower (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI). Izno (talk) 16:59, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Kay3233, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Yak234 (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 17:05, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi again @Theroadislong thanks for the message. I’m very new to Wikipedia and still learning how the system works. I’ve used another account in the past, but I’m only using this one now. I’ll make sure to follow the rules going forward. Kay3233 (talk) 17:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean "in the past"...it was yesterday! Theroadislong (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

You’re right I meant very recently. I’ve only used the other accounts briefly because I notice my drafts get rejected almost immediately. So I thought it might be some system errors to the accounts. Do you think my current draft style has any chance of being accepted, or should I stop? Kay3233 (talk) 18:40, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:29, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I’m still logged in all the time but not sure what happened. I only made a small edit. Kay3233 (talk) 16:35, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:APAC Tower has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:APAC Tower. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm working on removing blogs and press release now. Thank you you for suggestion. Kay3233 (talk) 17:34, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 98 Wireless (September 17)

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:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:98 Wireless 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 11:15, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I will edit and make it to a neutral point of view. Kay3233 (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apac Tower (October 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Perryprog were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing
  

Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please try to show how this building meets the criteria listed in WP:42 (an equivalent stating of the criteria listed in the above box that starts with "This draft's references [...]". Currently none of your sources meet the "significant coverage" criteria, which is set higher than normal per the notability guidelines for buildings. I will also note that it is fairly uncommon for a building such as this to be notable, in which case this building wouldn't be a suitable topic for Wikipedia regardless of this draft's contents. (There's a lot of buildings out there, and we can't have articles for all of them!)

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Apac Tower 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Perryprog (talk) 17:34, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Perryprong for the comment. I will keep edit the references as you mentioned to match with the standard that have significant coverage. My question is: since my goal is to write about skyscrapers in Bangkok — and most buildings here are relatively new (and may not yet be notable) should I continue writing about Bangkok buildings, or do you think they wouldn’t pass anyway? Best Regards Kay3233 (talk) 03:56, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for asking that upfront—honestly, it depends and I can't say I know enough about Bangkok to be able to answer that generally. If you look at Category:Skyscraper office buildings in Manhattan, there's a good few. (Keep in mind that not all of these may be good references as articles, though there's a few high quality ones in there. The Rating can help in getting a loose check on if it's probably a good model.) This is probably partly due to Anglocentric bias but also partly because there's a much higher likelihood for there to be news coverage that meets these criteria because the density of news companies is significantly higher there than (I am admittedly assuming) probably most any other place in the world.

In general though, buildings that are old or have any sort of "history" are a good place to start. Newer buildings are much less likely to have non-routine coverage because at that point they're usually still just plain buildings. (There are exceptions to this, like projects with significant history or influence, and those are usually "you know it when you see it" type things—it might be getting international coverage is a good sign, for instance.)

If you want some definitely-good examples, this page has a list of a good few. Obviously we don't expect any draft to be of that quality (heck, I can't write at that quality), but it should give you some ideas.

That all being said—writing articles on Wikipedia is hard, and is something that's usually considered an advanced task. While there are some ways that difficulty can be lessened, that is mainly determined by the topic you choose to write on. Articles about species are very likely to be approved, as our notability guidelines state that any extant species is considered notable enough for an article. Writing about corporations on the other hand is extremely hard, as independent coverage of companies is not that common if it's not an already well known company. This isn't meant to discourage you though—just to make sure you're informed.

Hopefully this giant text dump isn't too overwhelming—just try not to be discouraged by this. Better coverage of non-English speaking areas is always welcome and we're certainly glad you're helping with that. :) Perryprog (talk) 04:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to explain all this. It really helps me understand things better — especially about coverage and notability for newer buildings. I’ll review the examples you shared and try editing this topic and another one that I'm working on to get more used to the Wikipedia style. Really appreciate your advice and encouragement! Best regards, Kay3233 (talk) 15:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 98 Wireless (November 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Carolina2k22 were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:98 Wireless 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.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Carolina2k22 • (talk) 06:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apac Tower has been accepted

Apac Tower, 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.

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.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

João^hola 06:08, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate your support, and I will do my best to keep contributing about skyscrapers. Kay3233 (talk) 03:48, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:98 Wireless

Hello, Kay3233. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:98 Wireless, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:07, 18 June 2026 (UTC)