Your submission at Articles for creation: Eleonora Kopalinsky (August 2)

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 SafariScribe were: 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.
Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
 
Hello, Rsfisher132! 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! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dorothy Pile has been accepted

edit
 
Dorothy Pile, 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.

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!

Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Women in Red

edit

Hi there, TheResilientEngineer, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to see you have already created three biographies of women engineers and now intend to cover many more. You should be able to improve your biographies by following the guidance in our Primer. In particular, you should base your articles on reliable independent sources rather than on links to items closely associated with the subject. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey @Ipigott thank you for the guidance. I'm an academic and the style of referencing is different to what I'm used to. I'm trying to get better. I have two observations/questions. 1)people don't write "secondary sources" about women because....the way the world is. and 2) the criteria for notability particularly for academics is systematically exclusive to women because they don't get to be head of departments for example. Particularly historically. I'm not sure this means that they are not notable, but I'm not sure how to navigate this issue.
Perhaps I need to be more specific about screening which women to look into? I was trying to do all of the past presidents of the Women's Engineering Society but there are very few "reliable secondary sources" for these women because they are not deemed to be relevant beyond the society's own journal.
Any advice would be great. Thanks! TheResilientEngineer (talk) 19:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I sympathize, TheResilientEngineer, with the difficulties you express. You will see the same points have frequently been made in press reports and research papers. There has fortunately been some recent progress in awareness of the need for women to be covered more extensively in biographical dictionaries, critical assessments and specialized journals but much more needs to be done. One of the reasons Wikipedia looks for secondary sources is that many individuals, both men and women, are keen to promote themselves and their colleagues on the basis of their qualifications and achievements but if these are not covered independently, there may indeed be a lack of notability. As you gain experience, you may find support through The Wikipedia Library but for now I think you should try to concentrate on women who have received informative coverage in at least three recognized independent sources. Women engineers certainly deserve further attention. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Ipigott thank you for the guidance and encouragement! TheResilientEngineer (talk) 22:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

September 2024 at Women in Red

edit
 
Women in Red | September 2024, Volume 10, Issue 9, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 316, 317


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

  Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter/X

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Your submission at Articles for creation: Veronica Milligan has been accepted

edit
 
Veronica Milligan, 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!

Zeromonk (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

National Cycle Route 46 moved to draftspace

edit

Thanks for your contributions to National Cycle Route 46. 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. GrabUp - Talk 11:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your submission at Articles for creation: National Cycle Route 46 (September 10)

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 KylieTastic were: 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.
KylieTastic (talk) 08:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your submission at Articles for creation: National Cycle Route 46 has been accepted

edit
 
National Cycle Route 46, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Utopes (talk / cont) 19:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Women in Red October 2024

edit
 
Women in Red | October 2024, Volume 10, Issue 10, Numbers 293, 294, 318, 319, 320


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

  • Unsure how to expand a stub article? Take a look at this guidance

Other ways to participate:

  Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Nomination of List of National Academies for deletion

edit
 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of National Academies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of National Academies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 until the discussion has finished.

UzbukUdash (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fellows of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Alex Brown, Frank Caruso and David Moss. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

October 2024

edit

  Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button   located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, TheResilientEngineer,
Please sign all of your posts on talk pages, noticeboards and deletion discussions. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Women in Red November 2024

edit
 
Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

  Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

Your submission at Articles for creation: Danielle Zaikoff (November 1)

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 Thilsebatti 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.
Thilsebatti (talk) 13:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)Reply