User talk:J.T.W.A.Cornelisse

Regarding your revision this morning

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nuclear_energy_in_Belgium&diff=prev&oldid=835364568

There's nothing wrong with claryfying the decission to add conditions to the phase out, however in the edit essential information was lost like the fact that all deadlines had been missed. See the following discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rwendland#Recent_edits_regarding_Belgian_nuclear_phase_out

MCvarial (talk) 11:06, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You took something away, were you cross about that ?

Please could you inform me about your problems ?

I do not see anything I would not like.

Maybe you personally would prefer to go on with nuclear power? And that in these quite obvious outdated powerplants, with all the troubles in the past ? A country where the Belgium government has distributed iodine-pills under the Belgium population. With the notice that the maximum benefit is to be expected when pills are taken in, 4 hours before the nuclear disaster would start... How anybody could know that moment ? Who can tell ?

Only Belgians could imagine such jokes, I guess.

all the best J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 11:44, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doel & Tihange Nuclear Power Plants

Why are you editing out modifications supported by proper references? It seems you only read media and anti-nuclear propaganda, because some things you have added to both articles are only supported by press, while the website of the FANC includes more information and context. For example the objections on the Containment Filter Venting System are mentioned in documents on the FANC website. I recommend you read the FANC website and documents posted there and hope we can have a constructive discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SDeSchep (talk • contribs) 06:48, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the wiki was mentioned that the nuclear waste is piling up the site, whether this is outside in the open air, or in a special building, this is still the case. And the references you give, those could be a lot more specific. Now I need to spent some hours to read it all, and 99,9% is not connected to the things you like to add.

This wiki has a few people, that would like to rewrite it all, for pro-nuclear reasons. That has nothing to do with the neutral position of Wikipedia.

Your accusations, they do not have any meaning or value.

I do not read only media and anti-nuclear propaganda, but here there are a few people who like it the other way. I even worked as a scientist with isotopes. I have more knowledge than you ever can know.

Whenever the wanted valves are installed, you will be able to mention it, it present the valve are not there, and the installation ? When will it be there ? These are quite expensive valves, the very reason why they are still not there.

J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 11:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My issue is that you seem to be accusing people of thinking "too positive" about nuclear power. You exclude all context saying it is irrelevant. I would say the information provided by the nuclear safety authority has a larger value than that of a newspaper or politician.

My problem is not with the edits you make as a content in itself. I see no problem with adding the license withdrawal for nuclear waste or the safety systems modification. My problem is the one sided content you seem to prefer. You are also completely misinformed or uninformed on several subjects. For example, you talk about the containment filter venting system as "a valve". This is really more complicated and has made it necessary to construct an additional small building for each reactor. This has been done and the commissioning tests will soon happen. This is all mentioned in the documents on the FANC website. As you clearly care a lot about nuclear safety, I wonder why you refuse to read the documents provided. They give a broad insight in what is currently done at both sites to continuously improve nuclear safety and safety in general. Sometimes it is difficult to help you and provide further information, because nuclear safety is of course a sensitive subject for security reasons. I do suggest you go through the documentation on the FANC website for starters.

As you mention on the discussion page I am indeed a nuclear physicist and medical physicist. So I both studied nuclear power, radiation sources and the effects they have on the environment and the population. Therefore I prefer a proper discussion before further editing and I am willing to answer any of your questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SDeSchep (talk • contribs) 16:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here you did not sign with your alias. Why ? Are you so hasty ?

I do wonder is SDeSchep the same person as Mcvarial ? I guess you might be. Otherwise you must know each other for sure.

The license to process the nuclear waste other than the used nuclear fuel bars, was taken in some time ago, why do you try to let us believe that this other waste was never treated at the plant and later stored in Dessel ?

The used nuclear fuel bars and all other radiation debris are two complete different things, and the license to treat and store them are different too. Putting it under the carpet ? Why does that make the plant safer ?

This kind of behaviour does make me suspicious for sure.

I suppose you are more than involved by nuclear power, as you work there, studied it and more.

Besides this: newspapers have an very imminent roll in our society, you might not like it, but they provide us information plants would like to keep uncovered. Politicians like the German government, they are well informed too, better than most of us. When they expose their doubts about safety issues on the plants mentioned...

You might not like it, but are they lying ? These plants are old, and should be closed already.

Of course it is very expensive to start a new plant, and this is the very reason why the lifetime is prolonged. But safe ? The FANC is not particular autonomous in this. And than there have been questions about the safety culture at these plants. The very reason why in Tihange a new director was appointed.

You could be a part in this. Would that make you neutral ?

By the way, I studied medicine, worked with isotopes as a scientist, does that make me inferior to you ?

all the best wishes J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the same person as Mcvarial and I even have no idea who this is. The fact that you think we are one and the same does make me think you are overly suspicious and see conspiracy where there is none. Anyway, you should always look at the information which is presented and judge it on its merits. I edited the article anonymous, because I would think the reference matters more than the person who edits in the information. I registered after you labeled my edit as anonymous propaganda. This is a highly unethical thing to do and this touches the foundation on which Wikipedia is founded. For example, the references I have provided you with are from the safety authorities and the company responsible for the entire fuel cycle (when not in the core) partly owned by the Belgian Government (they have veto power on all decisions). Why did you not accept these sources? Why do you rate newspapers higher even though it has been proven many times that they publish huge flaws. They often lack technical knowledge, given the huge understaffing this can not be surprising. I have often asked for corrections to articles. Same goes for example for the incident that passed in Doel 4 where an error in the grid by Elia caused a turbine trip. I'm sorry, but relating this to a nuclear incident or even publishing it as a relevant issue is non-sensical.

Although these plants are old there is no technical reason to shut them down. The safety standards on all plants are continuously upgraded. A case in point is the construction of the containment filter venting systems. Even the most critical components, the pressure vessels, are irradiated below their original design capacity due to a better cycle planning of the nuclear engineers. This means that the lifetimes can be extended far beyond what was originally scheduled. I highly recommend reading the full dossiers on the pressure vessels of Doel 3 and Tihange 2 to gain better insight in what was presented. You rate highly the German opinion in this case, but having read their arguments it is clear they are cherrypicking AND not reading the entire dossiers. I cannot help to think this is for political gain, because they even fail to even make the distinction between fracture mechanics and plasticity. If you clearly have no problem suspecting intent to risk nuclear safety for money, you can surely not oppose political gain might be a motive for the German minister (which has always stated to be strictly anti-nuclear). Anyway, afterwards there were visits by a Germand an Dutch delegation to both plants which resulted in a further exchange of information of current state of the plants. No further comments were received by either governments.

The FANC is autonomous. A very good case in point is the strictness with which deadlines are imposed. All issues related to nuclear safety have to be treated within these deadlines or the units have to be stopped. The FANC has used all its authority to hold the operator to the highest standards in the nuclear industry, which is by far the most strict industry with regards to safety margins. This is another case where the internal audit was partially leaked to the press which fabricated a story based on partial evidence. Some people have been frustrated by the constant leaking of classified informationby the political nominees in the board of governers. This was the main issue in the audit, but was not corrected afterwards.

I do not understand your last comment. I am just trying to point out that I am well informed and even offer to answer questions you might have. I am sorry you feel attacked by my comments, because I am in no way saying that I am superior to anyone. I am here to provide information and context, not to force an opinion. I am not blind for the challenges which nuclear energy and plants operators face and therefore I do not want to remove information from the Wikipedia page. I do however wish to give a complete picture of the situation and there are several issues mentioned on both the Tihange and Doel pages which deserve further clarification. SDeSchep (talk) 21:08, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have also responded on your post on the admin noticeboard, see [[1]]

I have mentioned you on the article overhaul. Please read through the article and references provided and provide us with questions, suggestions and comments before the article is again edited. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Doel_Nuclear_Power_Station#Article_overhaul

Best regards. SDeSchep (talk) 08:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Type Museum has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Type Museum was changed by J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.872789 on 2016-10-21T07:59:10+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 19 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Monotype typefaces page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doel Nuclear Power Station

Dear J.T.W.A.Cornelisse, it seems you have been involved in edits on the article about Doel Nuclear Power Station, and with somewhat different opinions with another user, MCvarial.

I have asked for the article to be temporarily protected, so you can take some time to discuss the content on the articles talk page, which even without protection should be a standard way of resolving the different points of view you both may have. I hope you will consider this suggestion worth to try. With best wishes, Dan Koehl (talk) 17:39, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User MCvarial is just removing all he does not like. Started with this without any discussion. J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Monotype typefaces

Hi, I'm ONUnicorn. J.T.W.A.Cornelisse, thanks for creating Monotype typefaces!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It looks like you are only using two secondary sources. The article could use some more.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you do this ? What is the purpose of it ?

And how do you want this improvements?

All the references are the specimen blades of Monotype, the UK variant actually. It might not be in your cupboard but it is in mine. It would be possible to scan it all, but I do not have the time for that all.

If you want, just buy some specimen books on internet, they are offered every now and than... and do it yourself. Not all sources are available on internet. (and are sources on internet all that reliable ?)

Actually this is quite a handy source for me and my casting friends.

what do we need more ?

J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 16:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of placing the above message on your talk page is to let you know that there might be some issues with the article and give you suggestions as to how to make the article better. Wikipedia articles must be supported by secondary sources. The specimen blades are primary sources. It is ok to use them in the article, but the article still needs sufficient secondary sources, things that talk about the primary sources. The first part of the article (the Hot Metal section in particular), provides a lot of good information on Monotype typefaces, but you have not cited any sources for that information - you haven't told the reader where that information comes from, where you learned it. You have cited two secondary sources, but it's not clear what information in the article comes from those sources. If this wasn't an article about a typeface; if it was, say, about a music band or a company, with only two secondary sources and citations to the band's website or albums, it would be at risk of deletion for lacking notability. I have no questions about the notability of this topic however, but the article still needs to demonstrate that notability through citations to secondary sources. Does this make sense and explain why I tagged the article and how to fix it? ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I learn this all ? You might go to the Type Museum/Archive in London UK. There I got lessons from two of the last teachers of the Monotype School. Both men came weeks long to my home, and together we took the Monotype composition caster in my atelier apart, and did the adjustments.

This page is indeed based on a lot of primary sources, but I would not know, where you would ever be able to find some secondary info about these basic information. It might be possible to find a place in a Monotype manual where is explained how to use the data while casting and adjusting. But than again, you would not be able to find that somewhere on internet. Because it is all in a paper based book. And besides this you might consider this as a primary source too.

Recently there was a book published about the history of the Monotype Corporation But even here you will not find a lot of info about the many numbers in this wiki. This book b.t.w. is written by some people very involved with Monotype too, would that not be a primary source ?

But... these data and the almost complete list of Monotype fonts have proven to be a welcome source of information for lots of my Monotype friends.

Sometimes it is quite impossible to base a wiki on secondary sources. That does not make it useless, or invaluable. Besides that constructing this wiki was a lot of work.

I will do my best, but you might look into the matter too, and may be find a place for a new Monotype hobby.

best wishes J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 10:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have reported you

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:J.T.W.A.Cornelisse_anti_nuclear_crusading

MCvarial (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.Canterbury Tail talk 17:09, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Monotype System

Hi.

You seem to know quite a lot about the justification system. I did not find documentation (yet?), and I'm not sure about the precise terminology, but I saw on youtube a demonstration of achieving Kerning, by setting "negative" addition to the width, such that the matrix width exceeds the "foot" width, and this "protrusion" of the letter is supported on the previous sort in the case when printing. If you are familiar, I would greatly appreciate if you can add this information. Thanks, peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 05:30, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You might look at: www.metaltype.co.uk/wpress/ at the library part. Here you can find a lot of monotype-manuals in pdf. When you look for documentation.

when the ribbon is typed, than the 0075 and the 0005 holes change the position of the adjustment wedges.

this is done at the end of the line, making it possible to get all adjustable spaces cast with GS2 or GS1 at the same width

two codes are needed: 0075-S-a, followed by 0075-S-b-0005

while casting, these codes are read in the opposite direction, this is named "double-justification", the 0075 wedge is changed two times.

single justification: than the second code typed is: S-b-0005. this code will stop the pump, permanently.

while casting the code 0075-S-a will activate the pump,

the next codes with an S-hole will be adjusted to the a/b adjustment

J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much (and thanks for alerting me on my talkpage - i thought i added this one to my watchlist, but i missed it, so it's a good thing you did).

so, i'm glossing over some of the documentation found in this treasure trove. some of it is familiar, and some expands on things i did not know, and gives specificity to stuff i knew in more abstract terms.

however, so far, i was not able to find information regarding Kerning: all the data WRT wedges is about _adding_ width to the default width of the mould set up by the normal wedge, whilst kerning requires _subtracting_ from this value. i wish i could find this youtube clip: as far as i remember, it was mainly about using some macintosh program (presumably hand-rolled - i don't think it's a commercial product) to either punch the paper tape, or control the caster directly, pretending to be the paper-tape reader. either way, in this clip the guy showed sorts cast with the sort body narrower than the face, i.e., the left-hand side of the face was "hanging" (cantilever, if you will), and supported by the previous sort's body while printing, thus achieving the effect of kerning. i could not find anything in the documentation about it, and was hoping you'd know something.

in the meanwhile, i continue to scan this library you pointed to, so asking you was worth it, regardless of the kerning thing (which i'm still puzzled about)...

thank you so much, peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potassium iodide

You may not know since I think you do not edit medical articles much but we have a higher sourcing guideline for medicine: WP:MEDRS. In fact the source you reinserted does not meet our normal WP:RS either, but it certainly doesn't meet WP:MEDRS. Guy (help! - typo?) 23:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You do not know about me, I have a medical degree at the Leiden University (Holland), and before that I did some decades medical research. And you do not explain whatever is wrong here. J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 14

24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Your qualification is irrelevant: I checked your edit history and did not see many Wikipedia medical articles. The issue is that the source is unreliable. Feel free to restore the content but only with a suitable source per WP:MEDRS, which is a guideline many people are unaware of unless they are familiar with Wikipedia's medical articles. Guy (help! - typo?) 18:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that I am not very active on medical articles, does not mean that I lack the knowledge about the subject at all. Taking in Iondine-salts will halt the Thyroid-gland, and that is the reason why we take in this salt after a nuclear-disaster like it happened in Fukushima and in Tsernobyl. You never gave any reason why the sources would not be accepted. And whether you might have any medical knowledge is not very clear.

only pointing to this WP:MEDRS does not give me any reason, at all. Please could you give more details why the sources are not correct in some way ? J.T.W.A.Cornelisse (talk) 07:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Barnhart Brothers & Spindler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chicago Herald.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear power

Hello, I noticed you reinstated parts of the article on Nuclear power that I deleted or moved to other pages. The article is way too long, and very difficult to read as of now. I am in the process of cleaning up the article to eventually bring it Good article status. My objective is to cut about half of the article, not by deleting information, but by reorganizing it into other articles when appropriate. As much as possible I am moving material to the relevant specific page. I would really appreciate your help in this process. Thank you. --Ita140188 (talk) 13:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. The image was moved to another article, however some text was actually deleted. To avoid this in the future, I propose to split the History section to a new page dedicated specifically to the history. In this way we can keep all the details ans still have a main article that is of readable lenght. I will propose this in the page. --Ita140188 (talk) 04:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) While this book is by a very notable author, notability is not inheritied. You need in-depth coverage on the Book, not just to show it exists, and not just coverage of the poems. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:23, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems

Hello, J.T.W.A.Cornelisse. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems (December 6)

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

Wikipedia is not the place to add the collection of poems.

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:Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems 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.

― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, J.T.W.A.Cornelisse! 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! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems

Hello, J.T.W.A.Cornelisse. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lament for Dark Peoples and Other Poems".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]