User talk:Mgenzac

This is Mgenzac'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: Louis A. Perrotta M.D. (January 28)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still not enough to satisfy our standards.

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:Louis A. Perrotta M.D. and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 19:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I have completely reformatted and revised my article. My inexperience with Wikipedia was evident as I submitted a biography and not an encyclopedia entry. My apologies. I am hopeful my new page has more suitable information and references. Thank you for your time. Mgenzac (talk) 16:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Louis A. Perrotta M.D. has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Louis A. Perrotta M.D.. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 21:13, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Louis A. Perrotta has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Louis A. Perrotta. Thanks! NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Louis A. Perrotta has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Louis A. Perrotta. Thanks! NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear NewYorkActuary Once again thank you for your insight. I have added two more references that display the controversiality of the subject's research article which is only relevant in the time period it was written. Addition of the C. Wong article was only to establish point of reference, for the reader, as to the procedures that were accepted as standard of care in 1943, not to specifically state my subject's name. As far as his career, the research article is the most documented portion of it, but the career as a whole was notable compared to other physicians at that time and now. Thanks again for your comments, they are encouraging me to find more citations. I would also like to address the concerns about my references that were left in the comments on my page. The Fleming reference actually does mention specifically the total control over labor and delivery afforded by the technique of spinal anesthesia, and mentions the study and the subject by name. While she as a midwife believes this to be medicalization of the process, it is important because many things can go awry during childbirth. Establishing a modem of control is essential and necessary. The subject's research article was published separately by at least 3 major medical journals of that year and was commented on in yet another, by three other physicians. The timing (1943) of the subject's article is what renders it both controversial and pertinent. Thank you again for your input.--Mgenzac (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Louis A. Perrotta has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Louis A. Perrotta. Thanks! NewYorkActuary (talk) 10:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Louis A. Perrotta has been accepted

Louis A. Perrotta, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tony Sayegh has been accepted

Tony Sayegh, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

TheSandDoctor (talk) 02:52, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mgenzac. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mgenzac. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 23)

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

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 User:Mgenzac/sandbox 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mgenzac! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 23)

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'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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

IMDb is not a reliable source and we don't use external links in the body of an article.

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 User:Mgenzac/sandbox 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) 17:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Gia Walsh, from its old location at User:Mgenzac/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. ~Liance^talk 18:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. It's been awhile since I was on here so I was trying to remember all the rules. I appreciate your help! Mgenzac (talk) 18:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Thanks for creating a draft!

Hello Mgenzac, welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Liance, and I've been editing here for a while. I wanted to thank you for submitting Draft:Gia Walsh to WikiProject Articles for Creation and helping to grow the encyclopedia! We appreciate your contributions and hope you stick around. I can see you've already started writing draft articles, so here are a few more resources that might be helpful:

The Teahouse - ask Wikipedians for general editing help
Articles for Creation Help Desk - ask reviewers for draft article help
Creating your first article
Referencing for beginners
Wikipedia Manual of Style

I highly recommend visiting The Teahouse if you are unsure about anything Wiki related. It's a place where experienced editors answer questions and assist newcomers in the editing process. In addition, please do not hesitate to reach out on my talk page if you have any specific questions. Once again, welcome! I hope you enjoy your time here. ~Liance^talk 18:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Mgenzac (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gia Walsh (June 23)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Notability is not inherited.

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:Gia Walsh 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]