Hiram Edgerton, 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 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Storchy ( talk) 08:27, 1 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 S0091 was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Kodak instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

You are welcome to improve the content at Kodak or if you believe the article should be split, start a discussion on the article's talk page.

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:History of Kodak 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.

S0091 ( talk) 19:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Kodak03! Having an article draft 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! S0091 ( talk) 19:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Kodak03. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 organizations 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 {{ request edit}} template);
• 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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

Given your User name its best to make it clear one way or the other. S0091 ( talk) 19:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I have no affiliation with Kodak. I will change my username to reflect this. Kodak03 ( talk) 20:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Yeah, that's probably best just to avoid any confusion. To be clear, that is not why I declined the draft. To me it really is a matter of if it should be a stand-alone article rather than incorporated into the existing article and glad to see you expanded the existing. It can always be forked later and as you can see the article needs other improvements as well. You could probably cleanup other sections as well (remove content, consolidate, etc.) if you are interested in doing so. If you are super ambitious, you could try getting it to WP:Good article status if not eventually a WP:Featured article, which gets featured on the Main page. Either way, thank you for your contributions! You have certainly make Wikipedia better. S0091 ( talk) 20:14, 18 January 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 Jamiebuba 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:JK Imaging 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.

Jamiebuba ( talk) 22:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Norwalk Havoc Robot League, 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 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Newystats ( talk) 05:00, 22 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, Rocfan275. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " JK Imaging".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC) reply

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Great job with removing the duplicated article text on the Houston Oilers. Respect! OnlyNano 17:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For tackling ancient COVID cruft. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kate Gleason you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kj cheetham -- Kj cheetham ( talk) 00:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The article Kate Gleason you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kate Gleason for comments about the article, and Talk:Kate Gleason/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kj cheetham -- Kj cheetham ( talk) 17:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

	The bahnstar award
	Make that three 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I will cherish this forever. Rocfan275 ( talk) 23:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I noticed you had been editing COVID-related articles recently, so I wanted to let you know about Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. It's a chat page on wiki where a group of editors hang out and talk about improving medicine-related articles. It's a great place to ask about finding appropriate sources for biomedical information or how to write about medical content. If you're interested, please put the page on your watchlist (or bookmark it on your computer, if that works better for you) and drop by to check it out whenever you feel like it. There's also Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19 if your interests are more specific to COVID content. Thanks for your help with these articles, WhatamIdoing ( talk) 21:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the invitation. My interest is in coverage of the pandemic itself, not the disease. I will take a look at WikiProject COVID-19. There is much cleanup work left to be done to bring these articles to an acceptable state for a future audience. Rocfan275 ( talk) 14:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree. Basically all of the "COVID-19 pandemic in..." articles are in very bad shape. I hope you can make some good progress on them. Thank you for your work. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 17:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mount Marcy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York Department of Transportation.

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Rocfan275 for collecting more than 5 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's FEB24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing 14,300 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – – DreamRimmer ( talk) 17:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

On 22 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kate Gleason, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kate Gleason would wear her most feminine attire available as a strategy to sell bevel gears? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kate Gleason. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Kate Gleason), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 —  Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Rocfan275. thanks for your work on the article. You might also be interested in Draft:Clarissa Street which I split it into two drafts given it was too broad and the creator was more focused on an article about The Pythodd (see also the Pythodd talk page). I removed the content related to the Clarissa/the neighborhood from The Pythodd Room before accepting it but some it might make sense for Pythodd or vice versa, some content in the Pythodd make more sense for Clarissa Street. S0091 ( talk) 18:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I think a full article on the Clarissa Street neighborhood is feasible for Wikipedia. However, there might be a problem with the title of the draft. The neighborhood has gone through multiple names, originally being called the Third Ward after the city council district it was located in. Today the area is more widely regarded as part of the Corn Hill neighborhood, a name popularized by the annual Corn Hill arts festival. I have written a blurb about his neighborhood at Rochester, New York#Geography. I am taking a short break from editing but will give this more attention upon my return. Rocfan275 ( talk) 02:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC) reply