User talk:Researcher Science Communications

Hello, Researcher Science Communications, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• How to avoid a conflict of interest

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Help is available: check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask your mentor via your user homepage, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! 331dot (talk) 20:11, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Researcher Science Communications", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, service, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are permitted to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you individually (not your role), such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, service, or website, regardless of your username. Please also read our paid editing policy and our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please request a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, choosing a username that complies with our username policy. Alternatively, you can just create a new account and use that for editing. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for flagging this, however I can confirm that this is not a company name nor is it intended to be. Instead it is intended to represent the type of editor I will be on Wikipedia as I am to focus on Science comms and research. Please do let me know if you do still require me to change it. Researcher Science Communications (talk) 20:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

If it's not the name of an organization, there is no issue. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RangersRus 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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Radhakanta Rana 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.

RangersRus (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi RangersRus,

Thank you for taking a look at my article and for your comments.

I am confused though as to why it has been rejected as the subject matter meets the following notability criteria:

-highly cited academic work

-some less significant academic honour and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige

-a fellow of major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor

-authored widely popular general audience books on academic subjects

-the person has been head or chief editor of a major well-establish academic journal

Given this, could you please advise further what needs to be done? Researcher Science Communications (talk) 17:17, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JesusisGreat7 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 it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Radhakanta Rana 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.

Jesus isGreat7 07:56, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @JesusisGreat7,

Thank you to the reviewing editor for taking the time to assess this submission.

I’m writing to request clarification on the rejection of this article. Based on Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for academics, I believe the subject meets multiple criteria for inclusion, and I would appreciate guidance on how to present the sourcing more effectively.

In particular, the subject appears to meet several of the

Wikipedia notability criteria for academics (WP:PROF)

, including:

• WP:PROF C1 – Significant impact in their scholarly field: The subject has produced research that is widely cited within their field, with several publications receiving significant scholarly attention.
• WP:PROF C3 – Prestigious academic awards or honours They have received academically recognised honours that, while not globally famous, are considered markers of high prestige within the discipline.
• WP:PROF C4 – Leadership of a major academic journal Serving as head or chief editor of a well‑established academic journal is a recognised indicator of standing within the field.
• WP:PROF C6 – Fellow of a major scholarly society Election as a fellow of a major, selective scholarly society indicates a high level of peer‑recognised distinction.
• WP:PROF C8 – Authorship of influential works for a general audience They have written widely read, general‑audience books on academic subjects, demonstrating notable impact beyond the academy

Given all of these details, I would really appreciate your further guidance on what can be done.

I look forward to hearing back from you. Researcher Science Communications (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

@Researcher Science Communications Did you read the first point given on Wikipedia:NACADEMIC? The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. Where are the independent sources in your draft? All of your cited sources are either primary ones or just passing mentions about the person. Per WP:BIO, the subject must be covered by reliable as well as secondary sources. At this point, I would like you to go through the guidelines. If you need help with editing, go on. Also, I hope this was you asking the question, not an AI, most probably. Jesus isGreat7 19:59, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Researcher Science Communications! 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! Jesus isGreat7 07:56, 6 March 2026 (UTC)