User talk:Enora Le Quéré

Enora Le Quéré, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Enora Le Quéré! 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 GreenMeansGo (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia

Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity (April 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Primefac 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 submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

While this isn't quite a neologism, the entirety of the references are from the researcher who developed the technique. With no other reliable sources that actually discuss this technique, there is no indication that it is notable, usable, or even recognised by the scientific community. Please add additional independent reliable sources that discuss the subject in detail.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Primefac (talk) 12:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Primefac,

Thank you very much for your recommendation on my draft on the VERA approach, this comment makes perfect sense. There are many scientific papers discussing about this new approach and the importance of its findings, this is how I also got to be interested in this method myself as a researcher. I now added this information in the text with 5 example references discussing VERA in detail without the developer (Karakostis et al.) being in it (but variably citing Karakostis et al 2016 to 2021). I re-submitted it just now. I would be grateful to know if you think this is sufficient. I am quite new to writing/editing for Wikipedia and I would be happy to have any more comments and advice!

Sincerely,

ELQ (University of Rouen) Enora Le Quéré (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity (April 21)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

independent sources are required.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Theroadislong,

I just submitted a revision for my Draft text on the "V.E.R.A." approach, only a few minutes ago. Following Primefac's recommendation 10 days ago, I have added 6 examples of independent sources (peer-reviewed scientific publications) *not* authored by the developers of this approach (VERA), which extensively discuss this approach in scientific independent peer-reviewed articles, confirming the information provided in my Wikipedia draft. However, I just received a message (a few minutes after my re-submission) that you rejected the re-submission using the same argument ("no independent sources"). Given that this new decision came within <5 minutes of my new submission (which is unlikely enough time to evaluate the 6 new independent sources added and the text), I am wondering if perhaps this immediate rejection could be a mistake somehow? If not, could you please specify how many additional sources should be cited (besides the 6 included) and/or what additional information is required?

I would like to highlight that none of my personal works are cited in my Draft and I am not directly involved with the development of this method in any way.

Thank you for your time. As I am new to this, I would be grateful for any advise. Enora Le Quéré (talk) 16:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity (April 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mako001 was:

No actual changes since previous decline. Do not resubmit without making substantial improvements.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 06:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment! I have added additional independent secondary sources (scientific peer-reviewed articles) to my Draft and further reduced the number of sources associated with the producers of the method "V.E.R.A.". I would be grateful to know if there is any further margin of improvement in this aspect, as I am very new to editing in Wikipedia. Thank you again. Enora Le Quéré (talk) 10:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity (September 21)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by SmokeyJoe was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: On the specific topic of “Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity”, which is a new scientific method, all sources commenting on the quality or use of the method appears to be extremely small, and on eliminating sources the come from the method inventor/developer, Karakostis, there are none.

To discuss, let’s use the talk page. There are possible outcomes other than this topic being a standalone article.

SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:59, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best to to discuss is at Draft talk:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity

Hello, Enora Le Quéré. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Validated Entheses-based Reconstruction of Activity".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 09:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]