User talk:Mattedia

Gravity constant - Alternative
I found an edit by you that added Alternative Section (now removed) in the gravity constant wiki. However, the Tarkowski reference'd article did not have the equation added. Where did you get the n=(1/alpha)^(21/2)*root(3/8)? I got that to work better with (anomalous moment)^(3/2), so ^(63/4) for precision. I want to quote your (or that reference) in my paper to given credit, so can you help? That work is powerful, and useful. Arno Vigen, TX I work at Airespring to get to me directly.

Specifically, your logic says 7th order, but I calculated this by 2 separate processes - a) 3rd order and b) 4th order which is very appropriate. The 3rd order being on the electron, and the 4th order being on the gravity curvature. As such, I believe your 7th order is very appropriate.

Trojan wave packet
I removed your original research and inappropriate content from Trojan wave packet. Rather than simply trying to add it back immediately, I suggest you get the opinions of others. Two places that might be good for this are the physics project and the original research noticeboard. While you appear to have some knowledge about this subject and I understand you have spent some time on the parts that I removed, you will benefit from learning what kind of content is unacceptable and consequently will waste less of your time. Tim Shuba (talk) 18:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Matt Kalinski


The article Matt Kalinski has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable scientist. A mere 37 citations of his most-cited paper doesn't cut the mustard in physics.

While all 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 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 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. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Matt Kalinski for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matt Kalinski is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Matt Kalinski until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

cold fusion
Your additions to cold fusion need to cite a reliable source, so that editors will know they are not original thought.LeadSongDog come howl!  07:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I moved to Talk:Cold_fusion. Maybe someone will find something to salvage. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I commented again on the talk page. I'm sorry, but "directly implying" means it's original research, and wikipedia is not a publisher of original research. Either you find published sources that address the theory directly and show its notability, or it will be removed again. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:07, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Matt Kalinski for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matt Kalinski is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Matt Kalinski & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. IRWolfie- (talk) 00:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Adam Kujawski for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adam Kujawski is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Adam Kujawski until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. IRWolfie- (talk) 10:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Notability
Hi, not to put a dampener on your enthusiasm, but on wikipedia we have certain requirements for the existence of articles. Please have a read through WP:GNG and WP:ACADEMIC so that further article creations are not put up for deletion, and thus your effort is not wasted, good luck, IRWolfie- (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Wave packet edit war
Please discuss the issue in the article's talk page as invited. As it stands, the edit is unsound, and meaningless. You may have noticed that particular section is on a wave packet centered at the origin and not translating at all, let alone translating at a high speed. This is an article on the non relativistic Schroedinger equation, not wave packets in relativistic limits. If you had wave packets of the KG eqn and had a particularly tasteful NR limit, it might be worthwhile to add in that treatment, or link it to it. But Please refrain from reflexive reverts of reverts. I consider this type of off-mainstream tendentiousness as bordering on vandalism. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 18:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Third Force (Electrodynamics)
Hello, Mattedia,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Third Force (Electrodynamics) should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Third Force (Electrodynamics).

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Imaginatorium (talk) 09:01, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, Mattedia. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Second Quantization (talk) 12:53, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matt Kalinski


A tag has been placed on Matt Kalinski, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. Second Quantization (talk) 12:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC) CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Stop recreating
Stop recreating an article which was already deleted several times. Stop pushing your nonsense into articles and stop trying to promote yourself in irrelevant topics. If you continue to do this I will request that administrative action be taken. Second Quantization (talk) 08:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

RE: Stop recreating
I do not know know what "to promote" means in the context of wikipedia neither anything I write is "nonsense". It sounds slightly like there would be "promotion" after PhD like Promotion in German or habilitation. I have US PhD from private university. It only collects facts and is not for publicity. I got no 1 cent for my wikipedia activities. I only know those topics well and like to contribute. --Mattedia (talk) 07:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I can merely vouch for the obdurate nonsense aggressively insisted upon in wave packet recently. The idea is to propose such changes in Talk pages first and reach consensus, not to foist unsound inspirations on the hapless reader. In addition, the Trojan wave packet add-on requires interaction, and so it should be best referred to coherent states. Self-promotion need not entail monetary remuneration, one hopes one appreciates. It is better recognized than proven to absolutely everyone, well-meaning and not. Please leave that page alone, at the very least, unless you can come up with something constructive. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Nothing I added to wave packet is nonsense. I work on those problems almost 30 years. --Mattedia (talk) 07:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Scattering cross-section, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lens. 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) 09:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Ionization, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 12:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Riemann–Silberstein vector, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matrix. 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) 10:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Second law of thermodynamics, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 22:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
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) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

March 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=708396790 your edit] to Graviton may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * is so-called cosmological constant giant theoretical value.

Large primes
Hi, I reverted your edits to Largest known prime number. They were against the policy No original research but let me also explain a little more. 10n+k has no fast primality test so the fastest current method to prove primality would be ECPP. The ECPP record is 30950 digits with http://ellipsa.eu/public/primo/primo.html. Primo typically uses time roughly proportional to n4 at n digits. Primo probably wouldn't work at millions of digits but if it did then the size of the largest known prime at 22,338,618 digits would take an estimated time of 500 billion years to prove on an Intel i7-2600. All known primes above 30950 digits have forms which are far easier to prove, for example Mersenne primes which can be proven with the Lucas–Lehmer primality test. The record took a month on an Intel i7-4790. It took me below 1 ms with a one-line PARI/GP script to find a factor of 101000000+13. I know it was just an example but an encyclopedia shouldn't say "unknown" about something so simple to find out. Also, there is no good reason to think primes of this form will be more common than for random numbers. You gave some examples with relatively small k but a random number x has estimated chance 1/log(x) of primality per the prime number theorem so the examples are not special. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matthew (Matt) Kalinski


A tag has been placed on Matthew (Matt) Kalinski, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. OnionRing (talk) 09:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
This article Matthew (Matt) Kalinski appears to be a recreation, under a different title, of an article which is itself currently protected against recreation. Please note that titles used to circumvent the protection policy are often given the same level of protection as the original title the author is trying to circumvent, or are added to the title blacklist.

If you feel that the topic of the article meets our inclusion guidelines, please request a deletion review or use a request for unprotection instead.

Please note that repeated recreation of an article against a consensus to delete it is considered disruptive and is grounds for blocking. Thank you. OnionRing (talk) 09:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Notations
Hi! I've noticed that you have written the subsection The classical theory of the g-factor from Electron magnetic moment article. Could you explain the notations Ne and Nm in those formulae for charge and mass distribution? Could you also provide a citation to a journal article that addresses the topic of classical distributions?--82.137.14.173 (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced
Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Geodesics in general relativity, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 15:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Mosely snowflake
Hi Mattedia! I noticed that you did a lot of editing on the page Mosely snowflake. I'm not sure that Mosely was the first person to discover the shape: it was published in the book "Alt.Fractals: A Visual Guide to fractal geometry and design", ISBN 9780955706837 in January 2011. It appears in chapter 9 "Not the Menger Sponge", on pages 21, 62, 63 and 64.

The construction of the two variants was also blogged about in April and May 2011, with photos of 3D printed models:
 * http://alt-fractals.blogspot.com/2011/05/koch-snowflake-sponge.html
 * http://alt-fractals.blogspot.com/2011/04/impossible-snowflake.html

Unsourced, again
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Gravitational time dilation, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 08:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Cycloatom moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Cycloatom, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Akhiljaxxn (talk) 12:39, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cycloatom (December 4)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:

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:Cycloatom 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:Cycloatom, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Cycloatom Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DGG&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Cycloatom reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 DGG ( talk ) 05:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Gravitational constant, you may be blocked from editing. - DVdm (talk) 01:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at List of prime numbers. - DVdm (talk) 00:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cycloatom (March 27)
 Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Cycloatom Articles for creation help desk] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by 力 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This appears to have been barely discussed over the 20 years since Wagner, Su, Grobe, et al. published the concept, and there is no follow-up to their work. The topic is not notable.

User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 03:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Cycloatom
Hello, Mattedia. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cycloatom, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. 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 occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Mersenne prime
Can you provide a published reliable source for the theorem you have added, please, so that other editors can verify this addition? Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 21:42, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Agnieszka Gertner-Polak moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Agnieszka Gertner-Polak, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 01:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Agnieszka Gertner-Polak (April 20)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was:

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:Agnieszka Gertner-Polak 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:Agnieszka_Gertner-Polak Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SafariScribe&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Agnieszka_Gertner-Polak reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 12:27, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Agnieszka Gertner-Polak has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Agnieszka Gertner-Polak. Thanks! Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 12:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Agnieszka Gertner-Polak (May 4)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:

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:Agnieszka Gertner-Polak 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:Agnieszka_Gertner-Polak Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Greenman&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Agnieszka_Gertner-Polak reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 20:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)