Hi Heliophysics! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Samwalton9 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I just read your new article Robert Pope (runner), nice job! Schazjmd (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Gab4gab. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Denmark Road High School, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You added a name to the notable alumni list without providing a citation to show she attended. Gab4gab (talk) 22:42, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Heliophysics, good catch on other names currently in the list lacking citations showing they attended. I didn't see that because I was only reviewing recent changes. I've now added a tag to the Notables section to alert editors that there may be problems. Gab4gab (talk) 15:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joy Singarayer, 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!

Femke (talk) 20:43, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Heliophysics (talk) 09:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and the case for notability is unconvincing. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist). Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 12:39, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to reply, though I'm not sure I've done it correctly, sorry! But in short, I think using some kind of minimum h-index threshold is not a good precedent to set. Heliophysics (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist). Thanks! Shocksingularity (talk) 03:15, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - will do! Heliophysics (talk) 08:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist). Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 10:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist). Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Heliophysics. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist), 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) 22:44, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I need to declare a CoI according to those criteria. I will do so and use edit requests in future.

At least in this instance it's obvious it was an oversight - I certainly do not hide my institutional affiliation, it's right there on my user page! Heliophysics (talk) 07:42, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 18 November 2025 (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 Fermiboson 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:

Ok, so I do know some things about this guy and this field, although it isn't strictly mine. I agree with Ldm that there is no way this is an NPROF pass. Having checked several of the sources, all they seem to do is mention his name in the process of talking about some cool photo they took. That is not WP:SIGCOV, and you're smart enough to argue about the problems with h-indices so you're definitely smart enough to read the policy page on what is sigcov and what isn't. As mentioned before, since the sources aren't sigcov, I don't see an argument for GNG. While his work in public outreach is commendable, I don't see an argument being made at all for it being paradigm-shifting, and the works he has created are not themselves notable and so I would hesitate to call them significant under WP:NCREATIVE. I therefore see no reason to override GNG.

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:James O'Donoghue (planetary scientist) 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.

Fermiboson (talk) 12:54, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]