User talk:Artfullearner

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arlene Rush has been accepted

Arlene Rush, 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

--TheImaCow (talk • contribs) 07:43, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Artfullearner. Thank you for creating Michelle Jaffé (artist). User:Netherzone, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

The section on collections needs to have citations to verify that she is in the various collections.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Netherzone}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Netherzone (talk) 16:55, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

December 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Vitamin C, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Zefr (talk) 23:08, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, @Zefr. I would like to clarify the reasoning. I had initially referenced a New York Times article, published in a September 27, 1979 article by Lawrence K. Altman in the New York Times, titled "Study Finds Big Vitamin C Doses Not Beneficial to Cancer Patients."

Upon re-reading the vitamin C page, this information would be relevant under the subsection "Large doses," where Linus Pauling "proposed that vitamin C would prevent cardiovascular disease, and that 10 grams/day, initially (10 days) administered intravenously and thereafter orally, would cure late-stage cancer." Especially following the sentence stating: "The theory that large amounts of intravenous ascorbic acid can be used to treat late-stage cancer is - some forty years after Pauling's seminal paper - still considered unproven and still in need of high quality research."

The study by the Mayo Clinic countered Dr. Pauling's assertion at the time, yet there is no mention of it within the page.

I'd be grateful for your thoughts on whether this information and the citation from the NY Times would be more appropriate in that section.

Thank you. Artfullearner (talk) 23:31, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello - the outdated Mayo source and the issue of high-dose vitamin C to treat cancer as long-abandoned are WP:UNDUE. Pauling was a two-time Nobel Prize recipient, possibly justifying mention. Zefr (talk) 23:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

There is also the issue of WP:MEDRS. Wikipedia rarely accepts any one clinical trial as evidence, as often the literature contains multiple clinical trials with contradictory results. For this reason Wikipedia recommends/requires either science journal reviews, systematic reviews or meta-analyses as references. Also, when a journal article is used as a reference, there is no need to identify the research group members by name, nor what institute they are at, nor the name of the journal, nor include media coverage of the article as additional references. All of that is seen as trying to improve the importance of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:58, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@Zefr @David notMD thank you both for clarifying! Artfullearner (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Susan James (musician) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan James (musician). Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 20:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Susan James (musician) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan James (musician). Thanks! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your feedback, it has been incredibly helpful! Based on your notes and suggestions, I've re-read the sources used as citations and corrected the issues you've mentioned in the draft for Susan James' article. These issues include fixing the inappropriate synthesis of sources, removing external links in the main article, and noting the source mentioning the artists James opened for. I've also removed content that could not be verified with a citation including the names of several artists she was said to have opened for. Thanks! Artfullearner (talk) 14:52, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@Artfullearner: Thanks for making those changes! Because of the comments left when the draft was submitted previously, I'm going to get a second opinion from another reviewer for this decision, which should happen in the next few days. (By the way, I'd recommend using the {{Reply to}} template on talk pages; it sends me a notification about your message, which wouldn't normally happen otherwise.) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69: thank you for your thorough review and also your valuable input on this current matter! It's incredibly helpful both for this particular article, and my general Wikipedia knowledge. I appreciate the time you're taking to go over the review process necessary to publish this page, as well as getting a second opinion based on the article's history. I agree that it is important in order to ensure that this article is up to standards and reflective of the subject's contributions to the music industry. Artfullearner (talk) 21:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Susan James (musician) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan James (musician). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:40, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Susan James (musician) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Susan James (musician). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan James (musician) has been accepted

Susan James (musician), 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)