Science Hill (Yale University), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just moved Rene Paul Chambellan back to where he was because that is how he spelled his name. To be sure I checked with his grandson who confirmed i. but the "thanks" still stands, it was just slightly misapplied. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, Carptrash. Happy to leave it as it is. I made the move because it seemed like a majority of scholarly materials and biographic/encyclopedic records preferred the diacritic (see this in particular), although the Library of Congress authorities do also omit it. Any chance you have a written source that can confirm Chambellan's preference? Nickknack00 (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a note from his grandson. if you really need a resource, I can get you to where we discussed it on Facebook.

"He never used the accent on his first name. Look at all his signatures and it isn't there. In our family, both he and his namesake, many times would be pronounced "renie" instead of the proper Rene. It's not the end of the world. I'll take a look at the page when I get home from work and make the change unless you have a minute or tow to do it. Up to you my friend and thank you very much for the heads up!"

Good enough? Carptrash (talk) 07:59, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely! I'll post to the talk page in case it comes up again. Nickknack00 (talk) 15:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. Are you 100% sure they are the same guy? I wanted to look into this more, but got busy with other things. The different birth/death dates and places of birth had me confused. According to the Smithsonian Institute website, Trowbridge is a native of Troy, New York. Other web sites list his place of birth as Troy Michigan. There were some other discrepancies that made me wonder if there were not two different Trowbridges. Anyway, I think you have it sorted out. --Gaff (talk) 22:50, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gaff: Very high confidence. The "Trowbridges" academic biograpies are identifcal (Michigan, Sheffield Scientific School at Yale, Columbia School of Mines), and military survey assignments on the Pacific coast also overlap. The Smithsonian's information about his specimen collection is also mentioned in a 1908 family biography book, which ties it with the facts mentioned in his academic remembrances. Regarding birth date and place: the NY Times obituary, National Academy of Sciences biography, the most careful and detailed sources, are in accord about birthplace: Oakland County (probably Troy), Michigan. NYT and the family history cite 1828 as his birth year. So I'll risk saying that the venerable Smithsonian is venerably wrong! But the information they have on his naturalist contributions is the best that's out there. Nickknack00 (talk) 16:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that he did a son of the same name, but he was born in 1861. More on him in the family biography, but he doesn't fit the descriptions elsewhere.

If you want to, please take a look at this weeks TAFI selected article, Marie Serneholt. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2015 (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 SwisterTwister was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Currently, still needs all additional major independent news.

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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Khazzanat al-Jahiz and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the .
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 18:09, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sterling Professor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vesicles. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Richard McGhee, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:14, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nickknack00. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alice K. Hartley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited George Henry Soule Jr., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stamford.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (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) 01:10, 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) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Great Sioux Reservation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Teton Sioux.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chang-Tai Hsieh, 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 03:24, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I apologize for being over zealous by over tagging the John G. Trump article with {{verify}} and {{citation needed}} tags since this article was full of lots of old cruft that predated your edits that I had to wade through.

Based on its table of contents, IEEE Electrical Engineering 80 (8) appears to be confusing designed for a person who does not have institutional access to either the printed journal nor the online copy since it appears that the issue has three separate articles concerning the awarding of the medal. At this point, you have answer most of my concerns and if I find any loose ends, I will added them to the article's talk page.

Now for the rest of the article. I have to congratulate you for working very hard these past two months to vastly improve this article!

The last time that this article was reviewed, the article earned a "start" class Wikipedia:Content assessment. At the moment, the article can easily achieve a "C" class content assessment. With a little more work, this article could potentially earn a "B" class rating. Would you be interested in helping me to improve the article enough so that the article could potentially earn a "GA" or "A" class rating? ("FA" might be too difficult to achieve.) To do that, we would need to get more independent citations since this article seems to be overly depended on 2 or 3 citations. We need to eliminate residual plagiarism from the early days since some of the existing sentences still appears to be direct copies of the 2 or 3 primary sources. Has the science been fully explained in the article that it would make sense to both a specialist (a physicist and/or a high voltage engineer) and to the common reader? I have finished checking out most of the citations, that I can get my hands on. I may need your help with the one or two citations that I was not able to access to see if those sources are still relevant.

I am having a hard time trying to locate all of his notable students. So far I found two of his master students but none of his doctoral students. I would assume that someone as brilliant as him would have a few more notable students, especially doctoral students.

I think it would be neat if we would be able to improve the article enough so that it can be mentioned on the WP main page. -- 96.82.59.129 (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC) -- 96.82.59.129 (talk) 05:59, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the indexing issue! Happy to send you the Lamme citation. It has some additional remarks from Trump that I haven't used.

Had the same thought about how to improve. I think the Vannevar Bush article is a good benchmark. Don't know much about getting it reviewed for GA status.

Here's my to-do list:

• Improve referencing and background info in "war years"
• Expand section on wastewater experiments, comb environmental engineering literature
• Find secondary sources on food sterilization experiments
• Find full list of students (Jay Forrester was a surprising find)
• Add more info on his board service, especially at Boston Museum of Science
• Finish adding photos for each major research activity

If you know more about Rad Lab or big science funding from the 1950s, would be great to add more context for readers.

And please do continue to check unverified statements. I've added more open-access sources, especially on radiotherapy. Unfortunately, a lot of the STS & EE literature is paywalled. Nickknack00 (talk) 12:12, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will give you a quick reply now and a more detailed reply later.

The Lamme article(s) are badly arranged and may need to brief note to explain what is in them for those persons (especially reviewers) who do not possess institutional library access.

The Vannevar Bush article (at the time the article was evaluated in June 2014) is a good example to emulate since it achieved a FA evaluation, the hardest one achieve since the article cannot have a single grammatical mistake, nor logical errors, fully explain concept that a non-specialist can understand (as an example, think about a journal article written for publication in Nature (journal) or Science (journal) and not a specialist journal like those that aim for cerebral neurosurgeons. I will introduce the various class assessments later. I like your style, aim for the best.

I will discuss your to-do list later and give you my suggestions at that time.

The things Trump and Van de Graaff did immediately before and after WWII seem like something out of a steampunk and/or dieselpunk science fiction novel. We need to *briefly* discuss how Trump's and Van de Graaff's revolutionary work both transform society and, at the same, also became the evolutionary dead end for some applications. It appears that Trump might have been Van de Graaff's main right hand for a large number of years since Trump never left MIT for a post doctoral appointment.

If possible, we need to use easily accessible references as the primary citation. If we need to mentioned items locked behind paywalls, we need to give just enough information that would satisfy reviewers (like really short excerpts to give the reader an idea what is behind the paywalls). We don't want to have readers waste their money to pay for the citation only to discover that the information contained in the journal article was not worth the expense.

Did Trump obtained NSF or NIH grants during his later years? Would those grant applications be available online? How extensive are MIT's yet to be digitized archives? At what point should the librarians at MIT should be privately be contacted so they can start to digitize key documents?

Each paragraph needs at least one citation that actually supports whatever is written in that paragraph.

When Trump earned his MS, who was his MS advisor? Did he submit a thesis? What was the thesis topic? More later. -- 96.82.59.129 (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pete Klenow, 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 .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 22:18, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nickknack00. Thank you for your work on Round Hill generator. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! Have a blessed day today!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 09:34, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Georges Doriot when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:05, 28 September 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) 00:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ethicon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gamma irradiation.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Denis M Robinson 1957.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:30, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Denis M Robinson c1958.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:04, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Denis M Robinson 1957.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:16, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Denis M Robinson c1958.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You recently edited the Nikola Tesla article, but the edit introduced a bit of ambiguity, as the article mentions another nephew, which doesn't seem to match that one. Can you address that please? --Joy (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited MIT Radiation Laboratory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bush, John Randall and Frank Jewett.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:MIT Radiation Laboratory alumni indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz Thanks for checking in. The category was made in error. (I created Category:MIT Radiation Laboratory people as a more general alternative. Nickknack00 (talk) 17:43, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clarance Henson (radio entrepreneur), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Loran.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Robert J. Van de Graaff at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:43, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Robert J. Van de Graaff, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Robert Van de Graaff, inventor of the Van de Graaff generator, turned to physics after injuries kept him from playing football at Alabama? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Robert J. Van de Graaff. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Robert J. Van de Graaff), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Defense Research Committee, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atomic Energy Commission was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]