User talk:Joepolicarpio

This is Joepolicarpio's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yolanda L. Colson (September 1)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mcmatter 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Yolanda L. Colson 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.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 23:39, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joepolicarpio! 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! McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 23:39, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yolanda L. Colson (September 7)[edit]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Promotional. See also MOS:PHD and WP:COI. All statements need to be sourced (for example the awards). WP:External links also need to be removed.

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:Yolanda L. Colson 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.

Greenman (talk) 09:59, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the critique and information. I have attempted to cite as many reputable sources as possible, but there still remains a few claims without citation. I have accordingly added the "citation needed" tag to these sentences. Additionally, I have attempted to revise the tone to reflect a neutral point of view. 66.253.190.22 (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yolonda L. Colson (September 18)[edit]

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Yolonda L. Colson 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.

Gusfriend (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the critique and for this information. I have attempted to edit for tone, and also reviewed the Wikipedia page on peacock terms which I think I have resolved. If any do remain, would it be possible to have them tagged accordingly? Joepolicarpio (talk) 23:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article moved to draft[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Vaughn A. Starnes, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to Draft:Vaughn A. Starnes where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marc R. Moon moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Marc R. Moon, is not suitable 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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph S. Coselli moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Joseph S. Coselli, is not suitable 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. MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joepolicarpio -- I've accepted this as the subject is clearly notable under WP:PROF. I plan to do some editing to it in the morning to improve its formatting. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:57, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Joepolicarpio -- I suspect all these past/current presidents may be notable under WP:PROF but the way you are developing the articles isn't helping to show that. For example, Draft:Yolonda L. Colson needs drastically pruning; all the grants and most of the minor awards (everything except the presidency) would be better coming out; they make it look promotional. Textbooks, especially if authored not edited, and highly cited research papers are useful. If the subject has a Google Scholar profile that is useful to link, as Colson does: [1].

The original version was much better than the current version! I fear you have been given bad advice by editors who do not understand how the WP:PROF guidelines operate. If you would like, I can hack it down and accept it? Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:40, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yolonda L. Colson (January 3)[edit]

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:Yolonda L. Colson 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.

_Signed, Pichemist ^{( Contribs | Talk )} 14:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yolonda L. Colson has been accepted[edit]

Yolonda L. Colson, 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!

Theroadislong (talk) 10:54, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Vaughn A. Starnes[edit]

Hello, Joepolicarpio. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Vaughn A. Starnes, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 05:00, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Marc R. Moon[edit]

Hello, Joepolicarpio. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Marc R. Moon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 21:04, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Joseph Lamelas[edit]

Hello, Joepolicarpio,

Thank you for creating Joseph Lamelas.

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

Right now it doesn't seem that Lamelas doesn't meet notability as an academic. I think you could strengthen the page if you can demonstrate the the Miami method is noteworthy. Right now, I've only found the seminal paper cited 9 times on pubmed [2]

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 begin it with {{Re|Smasongarrison}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

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

Mason (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023[edit]

Hi Joepolicarpio! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Peyer's patch [3] that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Mason (talk) 20:12, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]