User talk:Acpanaj2

Your submission at Articles for creation: Aquasome has been accepted
 Aquasome, 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.

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  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Aquasome 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! ~WikiOriginal-9~ ( talk ) 04:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Aquasome article
This is a good article, and it's very consistently sourced, but Wikipedia articles are supposed to use at least a few secondary sources (not studies) to demonstrate notability of the topic under Notability. I tagged the article for notability, so if you know of any secondary sources (even if they're just books or not available online) you should probably put them on there. If no reliable secondary sources can be found it's possible someone will be delete it through AFD. Mrfoogles (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * For more information the primary sources policy is here: Primary sources. It's sometimes easier to cite to studies directly but Wikipedia is supposed to be more a tertiary source: it lacks Original research, because everything is cited to a reliable source. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)