User talk:Mgkurth

Your submission at Articles for creation: BES III (science) has been accepted

BES III (science), 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 .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 23:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Mgkurth, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mgkurth! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of XYZ physics

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 XYZ physics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and 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.

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 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. JMHamo (talk) 10:22, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of XYZ physics

The article XYZ physics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable, fails WP:GNG

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. JMHamo (talk) 22:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to XYZ physics, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 03:59, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi again and thanks for your message on my talk page. I see that another editor has done some work helping with the article and removed some of the tags. For example, the "context" tag was restored because the article had no clear simple introductory statement of what it is about (see WPLEAD). That has been rectified, although I would still suggest it could be improved. Wikipedia articles are meant to be understandable by non-experts on a subject (see WP:TECHNICAL), so should not read like a journal article but provide clear and simple explanations in 'layperson's' language, which is why the "technical" tag remains on the page. Wikipedia articles should also be referenced to reliable, secondary sources rather than primary research, so we are looking for what third parties have said about the topic (see WP:IS), which is another area you could look into for improvement. I hope that helps explain some of my concerns, please feel free to ask here if you have more questions. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 08:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)