User talk:SimulateSaintly

March 2017

Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 21:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Micro Saint Sharp (February 7)

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

This draft does not satisfy software notability guidelines. It describes the software without explaining how it is notable.

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:Micro Saint Sharp 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:Micro Saint Sharp, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SimulateSaintly! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Micro Saint Sharp Draft

I honestly think your article is all ready for the mainspace, but sadly I cannot give it my approval as I am not part of the AfC WikiProject. However, if you are there, I hope you keep at that article, because frequent edits to a page will likely draw somebody there to rate the article. Good luck! UtopianPoyzin (talk) 02:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, after looking through the article and affirming that the content is right where it needs to be, the next step is to make the article look more like the rest. By this, I mean most articles about a certain software will have certain headers that you will see over and over. In this case, the headers would be something concerning "history", "overview", which will be the two longest bits, and the maybe a third/fourth header for "support" and "security", which are optional in the long run. You have all of the necessary pieces, however right now, there isn't enough history. Could not find any good background from my own research, but I assume that you are the one who knows more about what the program is, as you have written most of the article, not I. Anywho, just a small update as we wait for the article to be reviewed.UtopianPoyzin (talk) 02:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, you don't seem to have a user page. I highly recommend that you create one!UtopianPoyzin (talk) 02:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Micro Saint Sharp has been accepted

Micro Saint Sharp, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Nerd1a4i (talk) 20:24, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inquiry

Hello SimulateSaintly, I wanted to add more information about Micro Saint Sharp, but I felt like I should download it for more information. However, it appears that you already have downloaded Micro Saint Sharp. So then, I wanted to inquire about how well you know Micro Saint Sharp. When did you get it? What is your experience with it? Thanks! UtopianPoyzin (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello UtopianPoyzin. I know Micro Saint Sharp very well. I have been using Micro Saint and Micro Saint Sharp since 1989 (30 years!!!) I have built many models including patient transport in a hospital, armoring up a armored vehicle, supply chains, insurance industry business re-engineering, logistics, manufacturing plants, enplane/deplane scenarios, bank processes, underway replenishment of a naval ship, and human performance/workload models. I love solving problems using the tool! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.167.170.6 (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, impressive! Great work indeed! Okay, I will leave the editing to you on this front. If you don't mind me asking, are you a developer of the software by chance? UtopianPoyzin (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]