User talk:Mathguy1978

June 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Wikipedia:Tools/Editing tools—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 03:47, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Promod Kumar Chandhok (June 4)

[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 Sophisticatedevening 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.
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.
Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 01:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Mathguy1978! 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! Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 01:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello, Mathguy1978. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Promod Kumar Chandhok, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 13:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Promod Kumar Chandhok

[edit]

Hello, Mathguy1978. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Promod Kumar Chandhok".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one 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 read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 01:25, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael Cohen (statistician) has been accepted

[edit]
Michael Cohen (statistician), 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.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MCE89 (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Promod K. Chandhok (December 14)

[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 Pythoncoder was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Wikipedia guidelines prohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:
Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.
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.
pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 15:58, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Promod K. Chandhok (December 21)

[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 Ldm1954 were:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to
Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
I cannot find evidence to support a pass of WP:NPROF. You claim with duplicate dources that he authored a widely used textbook, but there is no evidence in terms of reviews to support this. There are many irrelevant sentences, for instance that he reviewed papers, had grants, taught classes etc. All that is routine. Reread WP:NPROF.
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.
Ldm1954 (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]