User talk:Danthemedguy22

This is Danthemedguy22's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: G. J. Marchand (May 30)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Pbritti was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This subject has been a nexus for sock/meatpuppets for years. The salting of this ground was done with a purpose: to prevent paid contributors from creating an article. If the subject is truly notable, someone uninvolved will likely create an article.

Pbritti (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Danthemedguy22! 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! Pbritti (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: G. J. Marchand (June 15)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

You need to demonstrate why this BLP would fit into an encyclopedia. In what ways would this submission further improve the encyclopedia? While I appreciate the fact that you're declaring and trying to cooperate, I still have some concerns. Please clarify your relationship with the subject.

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:G. J. Marchand 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.

HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 01:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Please tell me what needs to be done in order to move forward. Danthemedguy22 (talk) 19:58, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft

Sorry for the late reply since I'm a very busy person in real life. We are busy volunteers who are not here to promote your boss, organization, or anything else. While people like us are painstakingly creating hundreds of articles on animal species, we only get bothered by people interested in promoting themselves and nothing else. We are here to build an encyclopedia. This is an educational resource, not Facebook or LinkedIn. If you want to contribute, please keep in mind that you need to have this goal in mind: what are you doing to actually contribute to the encyclopedia? If you believe that your draft does contribute to the encyclopedia and helps enhance its usefulness for readers using Wikipedia, then by all means go for it.

That being said, I've been reading the long ANI archives relating to Marchand. The community has agreed that admins taking actions due to off-wiki disputes would be highly inappropriate, and the AfD was nominated by the same admin. It looks like want to start from ground zero all over again and give this a totally fresh start. You had also declared your COI and tried to be as respectful and neutral as possible, which we really appreciate here on Wikipedia. However, you also need to know that you do not own the article, and should not edit it by yourself if it does get published in mainspace. Marchand has had some controversies, and anyone can mention any of that as long as there are reliable sources cited.

In terms of notability and how useful this article is to the encyclopedia, I'd say that this draft looks promising but would need a bit of work before it can be pushed into mainspace. There is a large list of publications, and his surgical methods look worth mentioning. Medical students and specialists who are in this specific area of surgical sciences would likely find this article to be useful. As for his Guinness Records, mention it once or twice at most, but don't brag all about them everywhere because that would be blatant self-promotion.

Make some improvements, add some more noteworthy suggestions, and don't make it promotional. Good luck. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 19:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Herpetogenesis: Thank you for this detailed explanation. I agree that no one can own this article, and that there are certain risks involved, such as negative controversy being included. I also have added some more notable papers and research on more neutral topics, particularly on neonatal medicine. Hopefully these can help. Please notify me whenever the improved draft might be ready for publishing. Danthemedguy22 (talk) 00:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danthemedguy22: You're heading in the right direction, but you need to declare your conflict of interest using the proper templates. It needs to go on the draft's talk page and your user page. This is absolutely mandatory; no exceptions. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Herpetogenesis: I have declared using all of the proper templates. What is the next step forward? Please also move it to Draft:Greg Marchand because the middle initial is not completely necessasry as WP:CONCISE states. Danthemedguy22 (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Herpetogenesis: would you mind taking a look at Wikipedia:Teahouse#How to improve a draft? Danthemedguy22 (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just replied. Although we still have some valid concerns, you can still resubmit whenever you'd like. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 23:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Herpetogenesis: I have updated the draft with many news and media references on diverse topics. I believe that with a strong combination of media and academic sources, Marchand should be notable enough. Danthemedguy22 (talk) 23:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danthemedguy22: With the media mentions, and more scientific papers, I think it's good to go. I'll have a closer look. HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 00:19, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Greg J. Marchand has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Greg J. Marchand. Thanks! HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 23:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gregory J. Marchand has been accepted

Gregory J. Marchand, 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.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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!

HᴇʀᴘᴇᴛᴏGᴇɴᴇꜱɪꜱ (talk) 00:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]