User talk:Sulfidescientist

This is Sulfidescientist'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.

Your submission at Articles for creation: George Hasko (February 17)

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

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.

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:George Hasko 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:George Hasko, 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, 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.

The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sulfidescientist! 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! The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:George Hasko concern

Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:George Hasko, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:George Hasko

Hello, Sulfidescientist. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "George Hasko".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Csaba Szabo (pharmacologist)

Hello, Sulfidescientist. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Csaba Szabo (pharmacologist), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. :Jay8g [V•T•E] 08:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I am not paid to edit this page and it does not promote any products or services. It was created some years ago and I noticed that it contained some outdated info that was improved by my edits. Perhaps the entry was becoming too long and I have shortened it now. If you find that some of the remaining entries are incorrect or not properly sourced, why don't you edit it or delete them. As far as I can see the statements on this page are correct and well referenced. Sulfidescientist (talk) 09:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hi Sulfidescientist! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Elisabeth Bik that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK sorry I did not realize that. I will change the marking of my edits then. But the edit that you refer to is fully verifiable, I added a reference link. It is 100% factually correct. Sulfidescientist (talk) 15:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]