User talk:GoneDutch

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, PLBounds, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:PLBounds, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:PLBounds

[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:PLBounds requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages 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 deleted 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (December 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
we don't use any external links in the body of an article.
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.
Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, PLBounds! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (January 3)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Far too much of the content is unreferenced — where is all this information coming from? You should only summarise what reliable published sources have said, and from that it follows that every material statement should be clearly traceable to such a source.
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.
DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Schmid & Partner Engineering AG for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Schmid & Partner Engineering AG 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schmid & Partner Engineering AG until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Schmid & Partner Engineering AG moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Schmid & Partner Engineering AG, is not suitable as written to remain published per the AfD in which you participate. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" 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. Star Mississippi 00:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Schmid & Partner Engineering AG (March 29)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by RPSkokie were:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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:
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.
RPSkokie (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PLBounds the discussion to draftify closed three days ago. The article is not yet sufficiently improved. PLease don't resubmit it until you have put further work into it. Star Mississippi 01:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (May 29)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Scope creep was:
Article is full of external links in the body, which are illegal.
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.
scope_creepTalk 08:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your feedback, but I thought I had scrubbed all external links out of the article. I admit, I may have missed a few... Can you give me an example? PLBounds (talk) 14:12, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Schmid & Partner Engineering AG

[edit]

Information icon Hello, PLBounds. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Schmid & Partner Engineering AG, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SEMCAD (September 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Utopes was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
This reads like a promotion and is not written in an encyclopedic tone.
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.
Utopes (talk / cont) 07:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SEMCAD has been accepted

[edit]
SEMCAD, 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 Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs 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!

Utopes (talk / cont) 03:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sim4Life (November 3)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AirshipJungleman29 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:
Make sure you add references that meet 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Does not appear that any of the sources provided contain significant coverage of the product, instead of trivial mentions as a tool used in research.
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.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society

[edit]

Information icon Hello, PLBounds. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (November 30)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Cabrils 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:
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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:NCORP) but presently it is not clear that it does. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. You may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.
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.
Cabrils (talk) 00:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society. Thanks! Cabrils (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

It is correct practice to deploy {{Connected contributor (paid)}} at the head of the talk page of anything you produce for reward. 

{{Connected contributor (paid)
|User1=PLBounds
|U1-employer=IT'IS Foundation
|U1-client=Zurich Medical Tech
|U1-EH=yes
|U1-otherlinks=Declared on editor's user page.}}

It a useful example for you 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, will do. PLBounds (talk) 14:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, on the talk tab is this box:
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
  • PLBounds (talk · contribs) has been paid by IT'IS Foundation on behalf of The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society. Their editing has included contributions to this article. Declared on editor's user page.
Is this not sufficient? PLBounds (talk) 14:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (January 18)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Brachy0008 was:
There’s one external link in the body.
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.
Brachy08 (Talk) 05:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sim4Life (March 17)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Anuwrites 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:
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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs alot more sources that are reliable and independent to the subject. WP:COMPANY...Reada like an advertisement
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.
ANUwrites 23:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sim4Life (March 27)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Devonian Wombat was:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sim4Life (August 3)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Mgp28 were:
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:
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.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
None of the edits since 27 March have made this read less like an advertisement. Also, the coverage in most of the citations appears to be little more than an acknowledgement that researchers used the software, which I don't think is sufficiently significant coverage for WP:NPRODUCT.
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.
Mgp28 (talk) 10:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Sim4Life has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Sim4Life. Thanks! Mgp28 (talk) 10:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society

[edit]

Hello, PLBounds. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "The Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:04, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sim4Life

[edit]

Information icon Hello, GoneDutch. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sim4Life, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Sim4Life

[edit]

Hello, GoneDutch. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Sim4Life".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 11:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Schmid & Partner Engineering AG (August 16)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Superboilles were:
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:
Make sure you add references that meet 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.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
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.
Superboilles (talk) 14:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Virtual Population (August 17)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WeirdNAnnoyed 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:
Make sure you add references that meet 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
No solid evidence this particular computational model is notable. The sources are all discussing various research projects or applications of Virtual Population, not Virtual Population itself. Secondary coverage of the subject itself is needed.
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.
WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:06, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear WeirdNAnnoyed,
Thanks very much for your quick review of the draft article about the Virtual Population. I had not expected that it would be reviewed so soon and thought that I would have time to edit and add more references. I would like to add images, but for that I need to acquire the images and the permission to use them.
I however take issue with: Comment: No solid evidence this particular computational model is notable. The sources are all discussing various research projects or applications of Virtual Population, not Virtual Population itself. Secondary coverage of the subject itself is needed.
References 2 and 4 are peer-reviewed scientific papers published in Physics in Biology and Medicine that describe the development of the first 4 Virtual Family models and several of the remaining models that make up the Virtual Population whole-body computational phantoms. Reference 7 is another peer-reviewed article published in PLoS ONE that describes the development of the MIDA head model. References 3 and 8 are US FDA web pages about the Virtual Family and MIDA. Reference 6 is to a book chapter published about the development of the morphing functionality.
I will post this reply to your comment on the talk pages of both the draft and your user page. GoneDutch (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2025 (UTC) GoneDutch (talk) 10:54, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]