User talk:Dmufmunu

This is Dmufmunu's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Hello, Dmufmunu, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

Finding your way around

Editing articles

Getting help

Frequently asked questions
Cheatsheet
Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
Help pages
Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

Community Portal
Join a WikiProject
Follow Wikipedia etiquette
Practice civility
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Your submission at Articles for creation: Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology (IPPP) (April 8)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

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:Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology (IPPP) 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dmufmunu! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Thanks for creating a draft!

Hello Dmufmunu, welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Liance, and I've been editing here for a while. I wanted to thank you for submitting Draft:Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology (IPPP) to WikiProject Articles for Creation and helping to grow the encyclopedia! We appreciate your contributions and hope you stick around. I can see you've already started writing draft articles, so here are a few more resources that might be helpful:

The Teahouse - ask Wikipedians for general editing help
Articles for Creation Help Desk - ask reviewers for draft article help
Creating your first article
Referencing for beginners
Wikipedia Manual of Style

I highly recommend visiting The Teahouse if you are unsure about anything Wiki related. It's a place where experienced editors answer questions and assist newcomers in the editing process. In addition, please do not hesitate to reach out on my talk page if you have any specific questions. Once again, welcome! I hope you enjoy your time here. ~Liance^talk 20:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am very disappointed to see the edit has been rejected because of lack of referencing. I invite you to follow any of the links from the page and search for "IPPP".You should find a mention of the institute. Reference 1 clearly states the year of foundation and the joint-venture between STFC and the university. The link to CERN clearly mentions the IPPP as a collaborator on HEPData. The link to James Stirling mentions him as director of the institute in the relevant years. The statements are all backed up by links and references. Dmufmunu (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology (IPPP) (September 9)

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:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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.

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:Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology (IPPP) 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry. But all the references are "independent, reliable, published sources" and none of the references are created by anyone affiliated with the IPPP. Which in particular were deemed unreliable? Dmufmunu (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have 2 references: The first is a press release for the STFC so not independent as your submission states "a joint-venture between the then UK PPARC (now STFC)"; the second is the hepdata website with a passing mention "developed at IPPP". There is nothing independent, and nothing "in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)" and almost all the content is unsourced. KylieTastic (talk) 20:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I cannot prove we are a joint venture between a university and a research funding council without referencing either the funding council or the university.

I believe you will find the HEPData website is hosted at CERN. Independent of the IPPP. If they say "developed at the IPPP" it is because they as a third party to the IPPP acknowledges the project is developed at the IPPP. Dmufmunu (talk) 20:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe if you follow any of the inline links also to external sources you will find the statements verified by a simple in-text search for "IPPP". Dmufmunu (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the content is supported with third party links, which mention the IPPP specifically. Dmufmunu (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can reference these things, that is fine, but it does not help show the topic is notable as Wikipedia guidelines set out. All new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). Your user page says your a professor: I'm sure you would never accept a student just submitting a paper without proper references, we don't either. Also see our Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines, which states all conflicts should be disclosed. KylieTastic (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are mixing here elements of a discussion of "notable" and "references". You have not substantiated any of your conjectures about missing references. I invite you again to follow the links and the references. I cannot accept your comments about the references before you have demonstrated you have even looked at them. I agree the text could be expanded, but since your comments on the references are unsubstantiated, I find it hard to see you would accept any text at all. Dmufmunu (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not mixing anything up: nobility and references are firmly linked on Wikipedia. You are ignoring the key points given: Wikipedia has Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines one of the key ones is Wikipedia:Notability. The decline notices and my answer have told you the same thing: To show notability in most cases requires: "significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple, independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS)". Being linked to from other articles is not a reference, Wikipedia does not class any wiki including itself as a reliable source. if those articles have the required sources they have to be used directly. So it still stands that your submission has just a press release and a footnote mention as sources. As the IPPP was established in 2000 I would really hope that you have enough achieved enough interest, at least in the physics community, to generate the independent sources required. KylieTastic (talk) 21:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]