User talk:Logankilpatrick

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

[[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) has been paid by unknown.

Hi, and hint on COI

Hi, I know you from the Julia community and looked, didn't see you working for Juliacomputing.com, but you might want to add a WP:COI disclaimer (like I did at User:Comp.arch, to be on the safe side; this was a good reminder for me to update mine, as I'm planning my PR to Julia, the first were I had to recompile Julia).

>"Fun fact: ... I just drove all the way across the country in an electric car!"

Interesting... I do believe you're in the (huge) States. I have an electric car too and only driven a fraction of my small island country Iceland. comp.arch (talk) 12:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! I technically work for the Julia Language, so I am not sure why that would be a COI, but I added my affiliation on my user page.

Interesting you can work, I mean being paid for the Julia language (I mean not by JuliaComputing). I was aware of NumFOCUS, the (scientific) 501(c)(3) nonprofit charity, not sure what it paid for, maybe not specifically: "Being paid to contribute to Wikipedia is one form of financial COI" still FYI to be on the safe side: Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Since you're new, another FYI/trick, by adding four tildas (~) to the end of the your comment, as I do now in my edit, they get converted to a signature.

I added the template, that I see needs to be on this page, for you (incomplete), I take the COI rules (maybe way too) seriously for mayself and I'm even unpaid trying to help out with Julia. comp.arch (talk) 14:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand what you are saying. My role with the Julia Language has nothing to do with Wikipedia. I do this for my own enjoyment and satisfaction of contributing.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Keno Fischer (October 5)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

For demonstrating notability, you are required to present sources where the subject has received direct, in depth, significant coverage. Listed sources are talking about Julia, they verify that the subject is the creator of this language but they do not establish notability per WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Press releases and LinkedIn are not acceptable sources so avoid 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Keno Fischer 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:Keno Fischer, 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, 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.

Hitro talk 07:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Logankilpatrick! 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! Hitro talk 07:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NumFOCUS moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, NumFOCUS, 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. MarioGom (talk) 07:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:NumFOCUS has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:NumFOCUS. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 23:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NumFOCUS

The article 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.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Mikofski (talk) 17:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I moved NumFOCUS from draft to article. Thanks!

Your submission at Articles for creation: NumFOCUS (November 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon 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 organizations and companies). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This page has been moved back from article space to draft space. Please read the comments by the draftifying reviewer and address them. Do not resubmit this draft without addressing the comments of the previous reviewer. If you do not understand why this article was sent back to draft space, ask the reviewer rather than simply resubmitting.

You may ask for advice on how to improve this draft at the Teahouse or on the talk pages of any of the reviewers. (The declining reviewers may advise you to ask for advice at the Teahouse.)

If this draft is resubmitted without any improvement or with very little improvement, it will probably be rejected, and it may be nominated for deletion, or a partial block may be requested against further submission by the responsible editor.

This draft is written from the viewpoint of the organization, focusing on what the organization says about itself. Corporate notability or organization notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject.

Not every organization, and not every organization with 501(c)(3) status (or its equivalent in other countries) is notable, and this draft does not establish organizational notability. You may ask for advice about organizational notability at the Teahouse.

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:NumFOCUS 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:NumFOCUS, 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, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:NumFocus

Hello, Logankilpatrick. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:NumFocus, 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) 02:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]