Shaynarosenbloom
| This user is a student editor in Washington_University_in_St_Louis/Behavioral_Ecology_(Fall_2020) . |
Welcome!
editHello, Shaynarosenbloom, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hogna carolinensis
editHi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hogna carolinensis you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MeegsC -- MeegsC (talk) 13:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hogna carolinensis
editThe article Hogna carolinensis you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hogna carolinensis for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MeegsC -- MeegsC (talk) 20:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Hogna carolinensis
editThe article Hogna carolinensis you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Hogna carolinensis for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MeegsC -- MeegsC (talk) 17:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Elizabeth Maywood
edit
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 Elizabeth Maywood, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
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 deleted 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. TheChronium (talk) 17:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hi — I came across this article while patrolling the uncategorised articles feed, and wanted to propose deletion, before realising it had already been proposed (and turned down, probably rightly so). As I see it, the main problems with this article are the lack of obvious notability, and the inadequate referencing. You would need to demonstrate that this person is either notable as an academic (WP:NACADEMIC) or satisfies the general notability requirement (WP:GNG). The former requires academic merit and reputation; the latter, sufficient coverage in independent secondary sources. I would say that this currently fails on both counts. Wikipedia only reflects notability that already exists, it does not generate it where it doesn't exist.
- I've stopped short of moving for deletion, but only just, and there's of course nothing to prevent another editor going for it if they so choose. You should address the notability and referencing issues ASAP. Or if you want, I can move this into the draft space to protect it for a while, in which case let me know? Best, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)