Jump to content

User talk:ScienceBecky

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your submission at Articles for creation: Superelectrophilic anions (February 20)

[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 Serial Number 54129 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
SN54129 15:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, ScienceBecky! 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! SN54129 15:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Superelectrophilic anions (March 13)

[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 Mako001 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 07:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wilhelm-Ostwald-Institute (March 22)

[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 Numberguy6 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
Numberguy6 (talk) 22:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Superelectrophilic anions (April 17)

[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 Noahfgodard was: 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.
Noahfgodard (talk) 22:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I've read the technical guidelines and would appreciate some more concrete advice on what seems to be too technical in my article.
For example, if you compare my article with the one on Metal carbonyl, the target audience is pretty similar. I would be interested to know where my article is too special compared to that.
Thank you for a reply. ScienceBecky (talk) 09:59, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Superelectrophilic anions has been accepted

[edit]
Superelectrophilic anions, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:15, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wilhelm Ostwald Institute for Physical and Theoretical Chemistry, 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 B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! 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!

Sagotreespirit (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve André Anders

[edit]

Hello, ScienceBecky,

Thank you for creating André Anders.

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

It will be helpful to integrate this article into Wikipedia by linking it from other sites.

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|Klbrain}}. 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.

Klbrain (talk) 17:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering

[edit]

Hello, ScienceBecky,

Thank you for creating Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering.

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

This institution is notable but would be great to have some more references that are not from the institution itself? thanks

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|Aszx5000}}. 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.

Aszx5000 (talk) 15:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jens Beckmann moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Jens Beckmann. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥(ContainThisEmber?) 14:01, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thank you! ScienceBecky (talk) 14:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jens Beckmann Page possible COI

[edit]

Hello ScienceBecky,

I noticed you have created the page Draft:Jens Beckmann which appears to be related to your username. If you are connected to the subject of the article, please see WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI. This is not a accusation of any wrongdoing, having a Conflict of Interest on Wikipedia is only a description of a situation.

If you have a conflict of interest I suggest you remove your page and wait for someone not directly connected to the subject to create the article. Thanks, Hihyphilia (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hihyphilia,
I understand the question and the source of confusion. I'm not in any way related to Jens Beckmann. Just writing about him and his work, because it's very interesting. Thanks for your question.
Becky ScienceBecky (talk) 14:14, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jens Beckmann (September 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 Utopes was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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.
Utopes (talk / cont) 06:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]