User talk:SloppyTots

Your submission at Articles for creation: Smoker's Paradox (March 20)

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

CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SloppyTots! Having an article 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! CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:32, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hi SloppyTots! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Hydrocarbonate (gas)

When you created an article like this please take the trouble to format it properly - bolded entry in title and, more importantly, "References" section and reflist. PamD 09:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! And some issues with Smoker's paradox.

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for spending time writing a new article in the scope of WikiProject Medicine! Unfortunately, there seem to be various issues with your new article. Most importantly, in my opinion, many sources are not what are considered to be good resources for medical articles (mostly too many primary sources), and much of the article's content seems to be a product of your own synthetic work. I write about these issues in the talk page of the article, and I'm hereby inviting you to discuss. I must admit that unfortunately I'm considering requesting deletion of the article. By the way, are you familiar with the watchlist? Make sure you have the articles that interest you in yours. NikosGouliaros (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

valid points. Primary refs are an issue. Not aware of a holistic review on the topic; probably best if you initiate deletion of the page. Best, SloppyTots (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC) SloppyTots (talk) 17:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Smoker's paradox for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smoker's paradox is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smoker's paradox until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

NikosGouliaros (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you for the barnstar! (Only saw it today). Let me know if you have further queries that can be resolved by checking in Cook or Forster related books. And if you can think of more about our friend Dömling, please add it :) —Kusma (t·c) 21:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Josef von Fodor has been accepted

Josef von Fodor, 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!

- The9Man ^(Talk) 16:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello SloppyTots! Your additions to Irving London have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🇨🇦 (talk) 21:07, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles F. Chandler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of New York. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Scientific American links

Hi. Can you please reconsider what you are doing by adding Scientific American links to many articles? They do not appear to be compliant with Wikipedia:External_links#What_can_normally_be_linked and are in violation of WP:NOTLINKFARM. If there is information in the sources that is missing from our articles, then please add that, but just adding links just is not helpful to anyone. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 08:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi SmartSE, thanks for the feedback. I'll definitely be more selective with future contributions/references. Regarding the Northamptonshire page, I have the opinion the Washington article I referenced provides a very nice sketch in more detail along with an image, which could be interesting and useful for a reader wanting to explore the topic in depth without an overload of information on the Northamptonshire page. It is unfortunate that Google Books opens to the first page of the respective volume, but a quick scroll to the page number / date makes the reference accessible to the general public. I understand your point nonetheless.
To make something constructive of this, did you find any of the information within the Scientific American article worthy of adding to Washington's paragraph? Do you feel it would be better placed on George Washington's page or Northamptonshire?
Regards, SloppyTots (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

In general, I'd be pretty cautious about using sources that are almost 150 years old. I presume that you're doing so because they've recently come out of copyright? Personally, I think that Washington is already given due weight in the Northamptonshire article and I'm not sure that the article contains any useful information. The main point I wanted to get across though, is to please not just add references or links and I see that you have taken that on board so thanks. SmartSE (talk) 16:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Please note that disambiguation pages like Fight Fire with Fire are meant to help readers find a specific existing article quickly and easily. For that reason, they have guidelines that are different from articles. From the Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts you should:

• Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
• Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
• Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry that mentions the title being disambiguated
• Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
• Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
• Do not insert external links or references - Wikipedia is not a business directory

Thank you. Leschnei (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Johann Andreas Rosenberger moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Johann Andreas Rosenberger, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) 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} 20:14, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Lind sight

Hi, I moved your talk to here, best to keep content discussion on the respective talk page. In a nutshell, a primary source can not be used to support a claim that something is an "important event". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:29, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Great catch. Thanks! SloppyTots (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

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) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Johann Andreas Rosenberger

Hello, SloppyTots. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Johann Andreas Rosenberger, 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) 21:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Johann Andreas Rosenberger

Hello, SloppyTots. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Johann Andreas Rosenberger".

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. If 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!} 21:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)