User talk:Adcoideas

This is Adcoideas'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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Your submission at Articles for creation: John E. Till (March 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

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 content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:John E. Till 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Adcoideas! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John E. Till (April 11)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Numerous assertions are not supported by reliable independent secondary sources. Subject may be notable, but draft needs references to substantial coverage about Till in published works.

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:John E. Till 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.

Paul W (talk) 19:16, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, thanks so much for the feedback! I will work on finding the best way of refining that. Would you suggest that it be better to condense the copy or to add in more references? I did feel that the references and links provided were substantial so I welcome any guidance in that realm. I utilized many of Till's medical journals, newspaper clippings and online articles. Perhaps I need more news coverage that is available via URL? Adcoideas (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adcoideas. If you can, I would seek to add further citations (or, maybe, make more and repeated use of the references you already have). You clearly have a lot of understanding about the subject and it may be that many of the "citations needed" can be addressed by using content from your existing references. It is not necessary to always have online sources. You might, for example, quote offline newspaper articles (so long as the journalist, date and title are clear) that others might be able to verify by accessing library records or newspaper archives. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the guidance. We have significantly enhanced the citations and copy to hopefully meet the requirements. Is there a better way for me to review this with you prior to coding in all the references? Adcoideas (talk) 14:26, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:John E. Till has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:John E. Till. Thanks! Lijil (talk) 20:59, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John E. Till has been accepted

John E. Till, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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!

Lijil (talk) 21:15, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Adcoideas. Thank you for your work on John E. Till. Another editor, Ldm1954, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

This page is a major mess. While he may be notable, it is full of incomplete and unverifiable sources starting with the first.

1. Cut, cut, cut. From the first paragraph after the lead as one example, growing up with 3 uncles on a farm is both not notable, and has an unverifiable source. 2. Remove all the details of what he thought. This does not belong. 3. Remove the bragging. Dry facts only. 4. Almost all the sources are before punctuation which is wrong.

5. The "Key Research Studies" is not encyclopedic, it is an essay on him. Probably remove.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ldm1954}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ldm1954 (talk) 04:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to John E. Till, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Removal of the COI tag in your edits when you have declared a COI is completely inappropriate. In addition, please read WP:MOS carefully. You cannot invent a style with sources before references, we do not allow this. A lot of volunteer editors have worked hard to rescue this article, as a paid editor you should have made less serious mistakes. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:38, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback, I will revisit and resubmit. Your understanding is appreciated. Adcoideas (talk) 21:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Adcoideas. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page John E. Till, 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 article subjects 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 Edit Request Wizard), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
• 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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]