Thank you for contributing to our articles. If you are interested in making more contributions on cell biology and biochemistry topics, you might want to join the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject (signup here). You will be most welcome. - Tim Vickers (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. I left a few comments here and made some changes. You are very welcome to improve those articles. Few editors work in this area. More hands are needed. Biophys (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits to clathrin, do you think you can cite a source for the information you've added, so that others can verify what you've written? Thanks SmartSE (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the very late reply. If you got the info from the RCSB Protein Data Bank website, can you add references to the article so that readers can see where you got it from? Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners should help if you're not sure how to do it. If you don't understand, drop me another note and I'll try to get back to you a little quicker than this time! SmartSE (talk) 21:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I removed the drugbox you added to Tylenol because it is already on Paracetamol and maintenance would be difficult, as I noted on Talk:Tylenol#Drugbox removed. Please tell me if you disagree. Thanks for your work, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. From where did your new figures originate for Lewis acids and bases? And the statement that "there are generally thought to be four types of Lewis Bases and 6 types of Lewis Acids."? --Smokefoot (talk) 13:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Recently I have been trying to understand why AlCl3 will remove a Cl from CH3C(=o)Cl in the Friedel-Crafts Acylation. But so far, I have found no good explanation of Lewis Acids strengths, or even classification! We learn all about pKa in Organic Chemistry, and why certain B/A Acids are stronger than others (Size, Electronegativity, Hyperconjugation and Resonance Stabilization of Conjugate-Bases, etc)... but I have never seen anything that describes that for Lewis Acids and Bases. The Hardness scale is not very well documented -- even in wikipedia. If you know a better website please direct me so I can read some more. But as of now the best one I have found (and to answer your question, the one that I got the images from) is:

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/12_lab/lab.html

Hope this helps! -Evans

looks like that source is owned by someone (i.e., a .com source), which probably means that you need to be careful about copying their graphical work. Presumably they got their ideas from some textbook, which I encourage you to pursue. Otherwise your contributions will be removed by me or some other editor concerned about copyright violations. I would be glad to help. Again: editors here, many pretty good organic chemists, get nervous about sources with a .com.

with regards to your question on the Friedel-Crafts reaction, recall that the acylium ion (RCO⁺) is heavily stabilized by the "nonbonding electrons" on oxygen. The nature of "AlCl3" under these conditions is quite unclear, but most chemists pretend that it is a monomer. There is probably a crystal structure of an acylium salt, possibly with AlCl₄^- as the gegenion. We need an article on acylium ions, BTW.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The question still remains, how do you determine Lewis Acid strengths? If you are given a compound and asked about its pKa, there is a good chance that you could make an accurate guess based on (as I said earlier) things like Size, Electronegativity, Hyperconjugation and Resonance Stabilization of Conjugate-Bases, etc. But that description only works when you are looking at HYDROGEN DISASSOCIATION. What are the factors that determine ELECTRON PAIR REACTIVITY? Does anyone know?

All I was really going for in adding the section on categorizing Lewis Acids and Bases was putting up a flag to see if anyone knew about them -- or could make it more clear to me (and anyone looking at the page) how exactly we can predict their reactivities?

Drago-Wayland equation? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 05:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.

I couldn't see the point in your changes to Electromotive force, and there was no edit summary to give me a clue, so I reverted. You're up next, per WP:BRD. Dicklyon (talk) 18:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The reason that I changed the definition of electromotive force from the quotation "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow." to voltage, is because a potential difference is "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow." I just went back and took another stab at it by adding a symbolic representation, giving units, and putting in a blurb that emf is not a "force" because that could confuse people who are just learning the topic for the first time! If you want to take a look at some of the other E&M pages, it would be great to get another set of eyes on the changes I have made. I have really been working hard to go through the E&M pages and fix up the definitions to make them more standard (both in terms of terminology and layout).

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Nabla symbol, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. I think you got the definition of del wrong, and there was no clue why you added that, so I reverted it. Dicklyon (talk) 18:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrozenMan. A couple of tips, based on what I see in your edits:

• Links should be added to the "see also" section of an article only if there is not already a link to the topic within the body of the article, and one cannot easily be added. A perfect article would have no see also section; everything would be linked inline.
• Links do not have to be piped, and should not be piped unless necessary. eg. [[ductal gland]] is fine. There is no need to write [[Ductal_gland|ductal gland]]. Spaces in link targets are fine. Case is significant, except that the first letter can be either upper or lower case with no effect. Suffixes can be added by putting them just outside the square brackets, with no space: [[gland]]s produces a link like this: glands.

--Srleffler (talk) 06:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the heads up!

One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 17:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Your upload of File:Baddeley working memory.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another one of your uploads, File:Baddeley phonological loop.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:41, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Anatomy! We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of anatomy articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are involved in editing anatomy articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing wikipedia articles are:

• Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
• You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing anatomy articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
• We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
• Lastly, why not try and strive to create a good article! Anatomical articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!

Feel free to contact us on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. I wish you all the best on your wiki-voyages!

I've been noticing your recent edits, and they're much appreciated! If you have time I'd be very grateful if you could update your chances with a source, too. Unfortunately so much of the anatomical information on wiki is unsourced, but thanks for your numerous recent changes. Cheers, --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fossa (anatomy), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fossa navicularis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:19, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- It's ok bot, the disambiguation page was intentional.

Hi FrozenMan! Thanks for your many edits to anatomy articles! I'd be very grateful if you could provide a source when making a change -- not because they're incorrect, but because one of the principles of Wikipedia is verifiability, and in the future it will be very useful to any editors who want to improve the article or explore a topic further. From an academic point of view it's also pretty interesting, because exploring sources is usually quite educational. One method I use to make sourcing very easy is to have a notepad file on my computer of common sources I use, such as this:

<ref name=GRAYS2005>{{cite book|last=Drake|first=Richard L.|title=Gray's anatomy for students|year=2005|publisher=Elsevier/Churchill Livingstone|location=Philadelphia|isbn=978-0-8089-2306-0|coauthors=Vogl, Wayne; Tibbitts, Adam W.M. Mitchell ; illustrations by Richard; Richardson, Paul|page=951}}</ref>

That way, I can just copy/paste the source when editing and change the 'page' number, and voila! Easy

Thanks again for your edits! --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrozenMan! I stumbled upon the article for fossa (WikiLink above), and noticed a comment request, with link to another page, in the middle of the article space, rather than its talk page. I think it was you who added it, but could be wrong. I used the page history to help me figure this out. Anyway, Is it OK if I add it on the article's talk page, or if it was you who wants this request completed, would you rather post it to the article's talk page yourself? Here's the comment request (including page that was linked to), I removed:

"Someone should go through this page and add the rest... (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=fossa)"

Thank you! RupJana (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, to the message you left on my talk page. Re: other editors will see it. A comment can't be in the article itself, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, where people read it too gain knowledge. As I did. When I saw your comment I knew it didn't belong there because I read the basic guidelines on editing, but I didn't plan to edit any on that day.

I edit Wikipedia a few times a month at most (a bit more just recently), but read it more often that, to gather information. There are more people who do the same, but most don't edit articles at all and wouldn't know what to do, or even understand what you put in the middle of the article.

A comment telling others to do something to an article they most likely came to learn about, would put them off . I t to other editors in an encyclopedia, or even in a published medical journal. The talk page of an article, or specific project page; for example, "Medicine", is where these type of comment should go. I think they're called "portals", the special projects, such as "medicine" as well as a host of others. Especially if you don't have time to do it/something yourself, just post to the talk page and someone is bound to show up, and help add those links and more.

Though chances may be slim, other editors more interested in Wikipedia:Gnome work, and/or knowledgeable in that subject, will know where to look, and may welcome the job quickly enough. I asked you if you wanted to move it yourself out of courtesy to you, and so wrote you on your talk page so you wouldn't have to wonder where your comment request went. Also to help myself learn to use the talk pages of others, and to sign my posts/comments.

With all the fancy Wiki-markup language, and so many policies, it can be daunting. Each editor will add to articles as he/she deems fit to do so. Many just edit spelling/grammar, others do what is called "clean up".

Again, and getting on with the subject.... adding it to the talk page is the best way IMO, and where editors will' find it.

I will now sign this post with four tildes, and it will be magically formatted with my user ID, user talk page link, and date and time (I hope). Good luck editing! RupJana (talk) 09:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for creating Monocarboxylate transporter 2 and Monocarboxylate transporter 3. In case you haven't seen this, please check out BioGPS which automates the creation of Gene Wiki articles including the {{GNF Protein box}}. Type in the gene symbol or Entrez gene id, "search", select the human gene, change the "current layout" (near the top right hand side) from "My layouts" to "GeneWikiGenerator". If the corresponding Wikipedia does not yet exist, it will allow you to create both the PBB template (top) and article (bottom). This tool can save you an enormous amount of work compared to creating these articles manually. Cheers Boghog (talk) 07:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

omg. amazing. can you recreate the ones i made because im not sure that all the info i entered was correct. FrozenMan (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:ProteinBoxBot occasionally updates the contents of PBB templates. If there are any mistakes, these will be eventually corrected. Boghog (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The locus coeruleus derivative image looks good.

I previously marked-up the same area on the very low magnification micrograph (commons), as you may know. If you click the link and mouse over the image you'll see annotations I added when I created the image.

I changed the authorship on your upload. It is a derivative work and (generally speaking) should be categorized as such for two reasons:

1. If the original should have (copyright) problems the derivative would be problematic. This is important so that the WMF does not get into trouble.
2. The author of the original should be recognized as per the licence.

I can tell you with certainty that the original has no problems -- as I created it. But you cannot say that... as you probably don't know me yet and don't know where the image came from.

In any case, it is nice to see another person at WP:MED. I have hung out there for a long time-- but haven't spent as much time there recently due to other commitments. Nephron  T|C 22:33, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Josve05a was:

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

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:Inclusion Cell and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

(t) Josve05a (c) 09:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Teahouse, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! (t) Josve05a (c) 09:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I made a page for "Inclusion Cell" because the page "I Cell" was a disambiguation page that referred to two different terms "I Cell (Gastric)" / "Inclusion Cell (Lysosomal Disease)" --neither of which had pages. I think it should be split into "I Cell (Gastric)" and "Inclusion Cell (Lysosomal Disease)". If my page was rejected, will someone please make it properly?

FrozenMan (talk) 00:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan! I'm Timtrent. I have replied to your question about a submission at the WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. Fiddle Faddle 06:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Vascular resistance page, your edit caused a cite error (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) 00:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please join the conversation here [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Pedrin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsubstantiated.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rathfelder (talk) 21:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me, I created the article a long time ago. It was actually supposed to be spelled "Pendrin." The article should be deleted as there is the correct article here: Pendrin.

FrozenMan (talk) 22:18, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and deleted it. Did you mean to leave a reference to it in Pendrin though? It doesn't look like you did. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Fixed it. FrozenMan (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FrozenMan. If you are interested in aquiring the set of administrators' tools and the other responsibiies that go with them, you may wish to read WP:RFAADVICE. Do follow all the footnotes too. Also if you take a look at this and can check all the boxes, chances are 99.9% certain of a pass and I would nominate you. FWIW, you would probably need to make an average of around 400 - 500 edits a month over the next 12 months.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good!FrozenMan (talk) 02:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Inclusion Cell".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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}} 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 06:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.

We welcome you to have a look the journal. Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter. Feel free to participate in the journal.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

• Publish an article to the journal. Even a medical student like you can make a submission.
• Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
• Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
• Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
• Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
• Join the editorial board.
• Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
• Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
• Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
  • Ceština, Deutsch, Español, Français, Italiano, 한국어, Português, Slovenšcina, Suomi, Svenska, Ελληνικά, Русский, العربية, 日本語
• Technical work like template designing for the journal.
• Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to updateswijoumed.org. If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at haggstrom.mikaelwikiversityjournal.org.
• Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reachwikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

Diptanshu^Talk 05:46, 12 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.[reply]

It's not a Wikipedia page, it lacks sources. Would you please finish it?Xx236 (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lewis Acid and Base Bond Types.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Leyo 09:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How are hatnotes necessary? Per WP:DAB#Usage guidelines, hatnotes generally are not necessary, especially when "shameless" is generic. Searches can type in the word or click the link to the UK series. --George Ho (talk) 05:08, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your question. The purpose of a hatnote is to help users who may get confused about two articles. If you read the usage guidelines it gives a good description when it says, "For example, Treaty of Paris (1796) should include a hatnote point to the disambiguation page Treaty of Paris (disambiguation), since many users might not know that there is more than one treaty with this name, and we cannot predict what external search engines will link to." As is the case with the TV Show Shameless, if you search for "Shameless TV Show" into a search engine, which result would you get? This often will depend on your search history and your location around the world. Additionally, some users may not know the difference, or that there is even an American remake of the British show in the first place. The hatnote simply clears up the potential for that confusion.

Thanks for creating Transcription factor II G, FrozenMan!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for creating this article - it's appreciated. It's just been reviewed. Could you please look it over and see if you can help address the improvement tags? Thanks in advance for any help you can offer. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 20:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Template:Infobox cell has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 21:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Focus Investment Banking, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Theroadislong (talk) 10:19, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I deleted this page because the wording was very promotional. One of Wikipedia's core principles is neutrality, and our articles aren't here to promote things. If you want to rewrite the article please use more objective language, Wikipedia articles shouldn't read like the company website. If you work for this company then I suggest you also review the guideline on conflicts of interest. Hut 8.5 21:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The page seemed to be written to convey to the reader that the company has an enormous range of valuable expertise. Most of it was given over to an enormous list of clients the company has had recently, to show how many impressive clients and sectors the company has worked with. This is the kind of thing I would expect to see in a sales brochure but not the encyclopedia. The small amount of prose reinforced this - the company works with a "broad range" of industries, the company's specialties are listed, and we are told that the company is part of a "global network" of "leading advisory firms".
  I will send you an email with the contents. If you are going to try to rewrite it I suggest you also review the notability guidelines for companies. If the company doesn't meet those then an article on them is likely to be deleted eventually. Hut 8.5 19:07, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please find more external news sources so that it isn't something that is WP:MADEUP

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:Gold Card (card game) 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:Gold Card (card game), 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 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.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:03, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan! 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! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:03, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Gold Card (card game), 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. HasteurBot (talk) 01:42, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FrozenMan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gold Card".

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) 21:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Im a Bangladeshi Teenager named Tahmid Shahed Bhuiyan Tahmid Shahed Bhuiyan (talk) 05:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Transcription factor II G has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I'm having trouble figuring out what this is referring to. Google and Pubmed come up mostly empty. I don't think this is a likely search term, so not sure where else to redirect. Likely doesn't meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ajpolino (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a follow-up to say if you're still around perhaps you could clarify what the topic is supposed to be? I can't find anything that matches the title. Happy to help expand the article or move to a different title if I can figure out what the topic is. I hope you're staying well! Best, Ajpolino (talk) 21:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Transcription factor II C has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per the similar deletion of Transcription factor II G earlier this year. Deletion reason for that was "I'm having trouble figuring out what this is referring to. Google and Pubmed come up mostly empty. I don't think this is a likely search term, so not sure where else to redirect. Likely doesn't meet WP:GNG". Applies here too.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I can't locate the source for the diagram you created here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Baddeley_phonological_loop.jpg#filehistory

You mention it's from a paper Baddeley published in 1986, but can find no record of it, and it's not listed in the article bibliography.

Could you double check this? I really need the diagram for my thesis. Hoping it's not too much trouble.

Best wishes,

S.

Hi Evans,

I'm Matthew a radiologist in training and really found the GIF of the substantia nigra helpful (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Substantia_nigra.gif)

Do you have any suggestions for goo 3d anatomical sources? Particularly neuroanatomy?

Thanks Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.155.20.81 (talk) 08:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Total, Average, and Marginal Product.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused. Superseded by File:Total, Average, and Marginal Product.svg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:39, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spiderone 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Glitter (Polish TV series) 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.

Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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:Glitter (Polish TV series) 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KylieTastic. How can I prove that the show is real? HAHA! I watched it on Netflix (I'm just trying to help out making the page). FrozenMan (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Articles announcing the release of the show can not be used to support its notability. Multiple significant coverage or review from reliable and independent sources should be included to prove that the subject passes WP:GNG. In addition, a large portion of this article is identical to text in this site, please rewrite or remove everything marked red shown on this site other than the reception quote.

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:Glitter (Polish TV series) 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.

Tutwakhamoe (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 00:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]