Greenlotussanctuary

July 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, I'm Rdp060707. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Antipodes parakeet, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ----Rdp060707|talk 08:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Greenlotussanctuary, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Greenlotussanctuary! 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 Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Reversed sexual dimorphsim has a new comment

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Reversed sexual dimorphsim. Thanks! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your submission at Articles for creation: Reversed sexual dimorphsim (November 17)

Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This seems like just a regular form of sexual dimorphism, which does not (according to the article) mean "males are bigger". Only one of the three sources given here uses the term "reverse". If more sources using the term "reverse sexual dimorphism", and showing it is distinct from regular sexual dimorphism, are given this would be much more likely to be published. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 04:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

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:Reversed sexual dimorphsim 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 04:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic