User talk:DoctorBeeblebrox

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the [ reviewer's talk page]
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Snowysusan (talk) 09:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, 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] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get | live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Bjelleklang -  talk 16:59, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Reply from Bjelleklang
Hi! Not all articles goes through the review process before being published, so the number of sources per article may vary quite a bit, just as the examples you linked. A number of the articles with few/no sources are tagged similarly to Pps-1350, so that others may spot the lack of sources. Although the article from Space News is probably ok, the others mostly contain brief mention of the company, or some of it's products which in my opinion isn't enough. Also, two sources are a minimum to establish notability. The Year in Reviews from Aerospace America have very little information on the company, mostly about new contracts, testing of new propulsion systems or first flight of the various propulsion systems. Feel free to get a second opinion, but I don't think those are enough to establish notability. Please also note that other Wikipedia articles can't be used as references. Please reference the sources found in those articles instead. Hope this helps a bit, and if it helps I'm also available on IRC if you prefer a live chat. Bjelleklang -  talk 18:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If you can find either a scientific journal that have a bit more coverage of the company, or another mainstream media similar to the Boston Globe article, I will accept the article. I also changed the BG link from busek.com to bostonglobe.com. Bjelleklang -  talk 19:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Busek, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Bjelleklang -  talk 06:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

Webster Hubbell
Please see WP:BLP. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Chelsea Clinton, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Besides WP:BLP, you should probably read WP:RS. Please don't do stuff like this again (sourced from a tabloid with no credibility and a spamlink to a book lacking a decent publisher) or you will be blocked. Drmies (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Busek Logo.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Busek Logo.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the 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. ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)