User talk:Tarselli

Welcome!

Hello, Tarselli, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Pharmagra labs, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! role^player 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Pharmagra labs requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. role^player 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tarselli. You have new messages at Roleplayer's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A tag has been placed on Brevard Ultimate Club requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. McGeddon (talk) 09:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tarselli, thank you for your suggestion in WP:WikiProject Women Scientists#Low-hanging fruit. However, the idea behind this section is that the article has a lot of references already and someone could simply read the references and extend the article. By contrast, Carmen Drahl had no references and was speedy deleted because it had no credible indication of importance. If you can find a lot of references and restore the stub, you're welcome to put it back in WP:WikiProject Women Scientists#Low-hanging fruit. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tarselli, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Elysia and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• In your article you refer to Aspergills sp. Apart from the spelling mistake there are several Aspergillus sp. species. Which did you mean?
• It's usual to start a biography along the lines of

Sarah O'Connor (b 1900) is an [nationality] [profession]...

• Also, I've moved the article as it's Wikipedia's style to use straight quotes rather than curly ones.

Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This source suggests it may be Aspergillus fumigatus, but I'll leave it to you. Cabayi (talk) 16:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cabayi, thank you for your review and suggestions! I will try in future to start biographies in the approved format. Furthermore, with the Aspergillus sp. - I tried to use the "species" formalism as a way out, since Dr. O'Connor has worked on multiple different species in that class before. If you think it more practical to choose one, I can look at her most recent work and center on one.

Tarselli (talk) 08:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it may be better to link to Aspergillus rather than any specific species within the genus. Do you have a source for her date of birth - I've had the subject of an article go ballistic on me in the past for including the dob, despite it being a matter of public record. Cabayi (talk) 09:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, no, I only have her date of graduation from undergraduate study. If you believe it best to delete until I can confirm another way, I will do so.

Thanks for creating Emily Balskus, Tarselli!

Wikipedia editor Ajpolino just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for the article on an interesting scientist! Please make sure everything you add to an article is verified with a reference. Also, we generally try to avoid long lists of academic awards. Notable academics tend to have accrued a number of awards (Balskus' CV has a whole page of them!), but of course Wikipedia is not an academic CV repository. Instead we try to make prose articles describing the subject. Otherwise, great article! Glad to see someone interested in writing about science/scientists! If you have questions/concerns as you get started around here, feel free to ask at my talk page or at WP:TEAHOUSE. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment on Ajpolino's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Ajpolino (talk) 21:33, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tarselli, it's your Wiki Expert, Elysia. Just wanted to let you know that I moved Wendy Young (chemist) to Wendy Young. Since there aren't any other articles about a Wendy Young, it isn't necessary to disambiguate your title with the (chemist) addition. I also fixed your categorization. Happy editing! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:20, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've made lots of contributions lately! I just wanted to let you know that I dropped a couple of "citation needed" tags to the Marcey Waters article. In general, it's a red flag if a paragraph or a section ends without a final citation :) Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elysia - Thanks for the clean-up work. Wendy Young was an alpine skier I found in another Wikipedia, hence the (chemist) suffix. Perhaps you and Will could go over how to make Category appear in a graceful format at the bottom; I could not figure it out on my own.

Thanks!

Tarselli (talk) 16:29, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tarselli. The best advice I have for categories is to enable what's called HotCat. Its default state is off, but I love having it enabled for categorization. You can enable it by hitting "preferences" in your upper right toolbar, then clicking the "gadgets" tab. HotCat is under the "editing" header (for me, it is the fourth box down). Check that box, then hit "save" at the bottom of the page. Once you've enabled HotCat, look at the link above (Wikipedia:HotCat) to get an idea of how it works. I find it very easy and intuitive! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:54, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Holy heck, HotCat seems like a real time-saver. Thanks for the rec! Tarselli (talk) 18:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	You are an article-creating machine! Thanks for making Wikipedia more representative by chipping away at its biases, one awesome woman's biography at a time! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:16, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cathy Tie has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

inadequate evidence for notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 09:32, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cathy Tie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cathy Tie 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. DGG ( talk ) 04:29, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you created a new article in the past 7 days, or substantially improved an existing one? Did you discover a really cool and interesting fact that you want to share with the world? You may be able to create a Did you know for Wikipedia's front page! If you're interested, let me know! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Elysia (Wiki Ed), I responded by email with three potential DYK taglines for my articles. Happy to re-post here, if that's easier, or to use a template if one exists. Tarselli (talk) 12:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tarselli! I don't work on Thursdays, so I just saw your email. So you are interested in creating a DYK for either Sarah O'Connor, Darlene Lim, or Aude Oliva. Based on Wikipedia:Did_you_know#Eligibility_criteria, specifically the length requirement, Sarah O'Connor is not quite long enough (1059 characters, needs to be 1500). Also the article has to have been created or expanded 5x in the past 7 days. Darlene Lim is eligible. It was created recently enough and it is long enough (3553 characters). Aude Oliva was not created or expanded recently enough. So I think you should take Darlene Lim and run with it. The detailed instructions are Did_you_know#Instructions_for_nominators but they're a bit confusing so ping me if you need help. You would type in Darlene Lim and then click "create nomination" to proceed with making the template. You'll have the option to create multiple "hooks" for the article (ways to rephrase the interesting fact) and a reviewer will help you decide which one is best. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tarselli, I undid your DYK edit [1] because you added it under the wrong heading. You put it under "articles created or expanded on Dec 7" when it should be under Dec 3 (the day the article was created). Go ahead and put it in the right spot :) Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping, User:Elysia - I think I did it better the second time. Tarselli (talk) 18:30, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked the formatting of your hook because "Darlene Hook" should be bolded and linked per WP:DYKHOOK. I also noted that on the article Darlene Lim, the Background section ends with uncited content. Whoever reviews your hook is going to go over the article and point out issues like this, so you should go ahead and address that now. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Elysia (Wiki Ed). I find that happens a lot - someone comes in behind you to "helpfully" edit, and instead adds a lot of superfluous sentences w/o citation. So it goes. I've added back some cites, per your request. If you see any other roadblocks ahead, please advise. Tarselli (talk) 21:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of William Gould Young at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SL93 (talk) 05:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please check back when you get a chance. Some of the references don't match the article's text. SL93 (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tarselli,

Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for creating Catherine Angell Sohn! I edit here too, under the username Rosguill and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

It's unclear that the article's subject meets the general notability guideline, as there doesn't appear to be coverage of the subject in independent, reliable sources. It is further unclear to me whether or not the awards listed are sufficient to meet WP:ANYBIO. It's a borderline case, so I'm letting the article through new page patrol with a notability template on, but be advised that the article may be nominated for deletion if additional coverage in reliable, independent sources cannot be found. For more information of other ways of demonstrating notability, see WP:NBIO, WP:NACADEMIC.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Gould Young, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Gould Young was the first faculty member at UCLA to be inducted into the National Academy of Sciences, after which the university's chemistry building was renamed in his honor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Gould Young. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, William Gould Young), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

– Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your first DYK!! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Doris M. Curtis Outstanding Woman in Science Award.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work on Doris M. Curtis Outstanding Woman in Science Award, I've added a category and noticed other editors have been busy on the article too. Keep up the good work. Regards

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hughesdarren}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 09:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Darlene Lim, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that NASA exobiologist Darlene Lim studies underwater volcanoes and desert stations in the Canadian High Arctic to prepare humans for missions to Mars? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Darlene Lim. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Darlene Lim), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Amakuru (talk · contribs) 00:01, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Memorial Hall (University of Massachusetts Amherst), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Ritchie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Ivan Amato, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		For your work in creating women scientists articles.

Kj cheetham (talk) 08:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Aicha Evans and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Aicha Evans, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

MurielMary (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tarselli! Having an article 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! MurielMary (talk) 11:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I wanted to share with you this link that someone helpfully shared with me in Live Chat:

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

It lists many sources and whether they're considered reliable or unreliable. For example, Ars Technica gets a "Generally reliable in its areas of expertise" but TechCrunch lists "No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply".

Hopefully this is an acceptable use of your talk page. I'm not really familiar with the culture of Wikipedia but please know that I mean no offense. I wanted to share since I noticed that you are working on improving the Draft:Aicha Evans article. Thank you for your work on that. I think there is a strong case for the subject's notability... if the FT doing a whole article on her, the WSJ calling her "high-profile," and Forbes and NYT also reporting on her appointment as CEO isn't enough, then I can't imagine a lot of new articles make it through. Good luck. Enby (talk) 22:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Enby, thanks for writing in and no problem about using my Talk page this way. I didn't realize that about TechCrunch; good to know. I know you and I are trying to work towards the same goal - get Ms. Evans recognized for her amazing contributions. Seems we're encountering headwinds, but I'm undaunted. Please continue to work on the article following the feedback we've both been given. I will, too. Tarselli (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed that the article was successfully improved and published. Congratulations and good work! Enby (talk) 16:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aicha Evans, 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MapleSoy (talk) 18:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Devon W. Meek, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. scope_creep^Talk 15:59, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the article and provided deeper sourcing. Hope this helps! Tarselli (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed that you have added Category:Guggenheim fellows to an article. When adding categories, please make sure they already exist and follow the category guidelines. In this case, you added a category that has been deleted as a result of a deletion discussion which is why I have removed it again. Regards SoWhy 19:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reminder, and I understand. Tarselli (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 August 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article N. Howell Furman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that analytical chemist N. Howell Furman was part of a secret team of Princeton scientists – including Albert Einstein and John Archibald Wheeler – who "disappeared to Shangri-La" to work on the atomic bomb? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/N. Howell Furman. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, N. Howell Furman), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it posted to the page for Scope creep, but I wanted to let you know that I accepted the draft for Devon W. Meek as he seems to pass WP:NPROF. The Guggenheim Fellowship was good start to establishing notability and I went ahead and added a link to his h-index on Scopus, which is respectably high. That said, it's always very important to make sure that you flesh out everything and add plenty of reliable sources to back up the claims and further establish notability. Always assume that you will be the last person to add something to the page, so you want to make sure it's complete and sourced enough to avoid deletion. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• It may seem to be a little arrogant to write that last part, but it's a mentality I try to stick to with my own work to avoid deletion as much as possible. And because I've looked back on my earliest edits and cringed pretty hard, so I want to avoid that. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Devon W. Meek, 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tarselli. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ivan Amato".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cathy Tie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cathy Tie (2nd nomination) 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.

FalconK (talk) 02:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Geraldine Harriman has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability, despite claims of notability. Not sourced to RSes. WP:BEFORE shows no RS coverage of "Geraldine Harriman" - just a few press releases. Not at all clear this subject passes WP:GNG or any more specific guideline.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michelle McMurry-Heath is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle McMurry-Heath 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.

DGG ( talk ) 09:55, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]