Welcome! edit

Hello, Dinman01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is it possible to have this page re-activated? Dinman01 (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you are referring to the article described below, it was deleted per a deletion discussion, which means that it should not be recreated unless you can address the concerns raised in the discussion. If you can do that, you should write a new article as a draft using the Article Wizard and submit it for a review. 331dot (talk) 20:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I am referring to the article below. I would like to re-create and will attempt to address the concerns raised in the discussion. Thank you. Dinman01 (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of Kent W. Colton for deletion edit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kent W. Colton, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent W. Colton (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 24 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

@MicrobiologyMarcus:I received notification of my article Kent W. Colton being declined because submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Are you able to provide a little more detail so that I can revise before editing and submitting again?

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kent W. Colton (March 4) 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 MicrobiologyMarcus were:  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.
microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 19:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
 
Hello, Dinman01! 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! microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 19:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I re-submitted the article Kent W. Colton on March 9th and it is currently under review status. Is it possible to have an expedited review since it is a re-submitted article?
@MicrobiologyMarcus: Dinman01 (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is no way to guarantee a speedy review, be it for a new draft or a resubmitted one, they all go into the same category. Drafts are reviewed in no particular order by volunteers. Do you have a particular need for a speedy review? 331dot (talk) 20:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your prompt reply. There is no particular need for a speedy review. I will remain patient. Dinman01 (talk) 03:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hey, most people (myself included) don't do reviews or re-reviews upon request. That said, when I've reviewed pages that have addressed their issues, I'm happy to evaluate. I'll take a look at it when I'm doing AfC reviews next but I won't promise that I will approve it or decline it (sometimes if it's close and I've WP:INVOLVED having reviewed it before, I will let another reviewer make a close call determination, especially if the prior declination was based on WP:N—although a cursory glance above shows I may have had WP:IC or WP:PROMO concerns originally). If I see some areas to improve on or something that's lacking, I'll try and come back here to provide concrete feedback. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I've left some maintenance tags in the article, and I've converted your referenced authored section into a plain wikilist using the {{cite book}}, though you may want to review and see if {{cite journal}} may be more applicable. Note that in that template, you can use digital object identifiers to create links to the authored works as you would in the references section.
Overall however, I feel that the article is still extremely promotional in wording and my opinion is that is does not meet WP:NBIO. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply