User talk:Zarasyn

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent 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:

All inline links should be removed, please, and turned into references if appropriate, Wikilinks, or external links in a section so named. See Wikipedia:External links. There should be no links pointing to external sources until those in the 'References' section (with the exception of one optional link in any infobox).

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:John Henderson Reid 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.

🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 13:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Zarasyn! 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! 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 13:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Timtrent,

Thank you so much for taking the time to review my article submission. I received your Comment regarding removing all inline links and making them into references and I have completed those changes. I will resubmit for your review (and/or other wikipedia reviewers) and I welcome any other feedback you may have for me. This is my first article and while I have read the wiki pages on writing articles and referencing, it is still a steep learning curve. Thank you once again.

All the best,

Zarasyn Zarasyn (talk) 20:38, 3 July 2025 (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 Gheus 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:

Found this but I don't think it is enough.

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:John Reid (medical doctor) 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.

Gheus (talk) 18:18, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Dear Gheus

Fist of all, thank you so much for taking the time to review the article draft on Dr John Henderson Reid and for your message. I have reviewed and edited the article for neutral tone, consistency, grammar and added a few references. I would like to respectfully appeal the decision regarding notability, as the subject clearly meets the criteria under both ANYBIO and Academics through nationally recognised awards, impactful publications, major media coverage, and sustained contributions to medical and archaeological research. Please see the evidence as follows -which include the article you found which was already cited in the article-.

1. Major Public and Professional Honors

• Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE) in the 2023 Birthday Honours of King Charles III’s, awarded for services to heritage and culture. This is a high-profile national honor directly published in The London Gazette
• Viscount Crookshank Medal (2012) from the Royal College of Radiologists – a prestigious professional award within medical imaging.

These recognitions fulfil the ANYBIO criterion of receiving well-known, significant awards from independent bodies.

2.  Academic and Medical Leadership

• Specialist UN leadership role: He led a specialist UN/IAEA group on pulmonary embolism diagnosis —demonstrating academic and medical eminence.
• Held prominent national roles including:
  • President of Scottish Radiological Society (2012–2014)
  • Radiology Adviser to the Chief Medical Officer for Scotland (1997–2003)
  • Featured Crookshank Lecturer, Royal College of Radiologists (2012)

Dr Reid was also senior consultant at Edinburgh Royal Infirmary and an Honorary Clinical Senior Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh. These roles reflect sustained, cited academic distinction and professional influence at the national and international level.

3. Archaeological Contributions with Long-Term Impact and Public Recognition

• Co-director of the Burnswark Project (2015–17): which reshaped understanding of Roman siege warfare in Scotland.
• Co-authored peer-reviewed research identifying the world’s first known whistling sling bullets, experimentally verified.
• BBC News (2024) featured his team’s pioneering use of forensic ballistics and 3D modelling to reconstruct the Roman assault on Burnswark – described as one of the most advanced reconstructions of ancient conflict attempted in Britain to date.

These contributions are widely covered in secondary sources, including BBC, Live Science, National Geographic and Current Archaeology, demonstrating enduring scholarly and public impact.

These publications attest that his contributions are “widely recognized and enduring”, per ANYBIO.

4. Published Works and Media Engagement

• Author of The Eagle and the Bear: A New History of Roman Scotland (Birlinn, 2023)—a substantial scholarly monograph on Roman-era Scotland.
• Numerous peer-reviewed journal articles in The Lancet, Heart, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Current Archaeology, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Live Science, and others
• Featured on numerous TV and radio programs including: BBC’s Digging for Britain, Channel 5’s Walking Roman Roads, National Geographic, BBC Radio 4.

This satisfies the Academics guideline for scholarly output, significant media attention and public scholarship.

5. Leadership & Institutional Influence

• Chairman of Trimontium Trust since 1996, overseeing the redevelopment and 2021 opening of the Trimontium Museum and its HALO extension.
• Under his leadership, the museum has received: Regional and National Thistle Awards (South of Scotland Thistle Awards for Best Visitor Attraction -2023- and Inclusion in Tourism-2024- ; National Thistle Award for Inclusion in Tourism – 2024) and Youth Borders Awards.

These activities demonstrate regional and national influence on public heritage education and inclusion in tourism.

In conclusion, Dr John Reid clearly satisfies notability guidelines:

• Awarded national and professional honours
• Published respected scholarly work: peer-reviewed academic publications and a commercial monograph.
• Leadership in notable archaeological research with media coverage
• Institutional and cultural influence in both sciences and heritage sectors.
• Featured extensively in independent secondary sources

I would kindly appreciate if you could re-review the article and respectfully request a reconsideration of the article’s notability based on the above evidence. Or, I can also resubmit the new and improved version for reconsideration if that is a best practice. I deeply appreciate your insight.

Thank you so much Gheus for your time and consideration.

Warm regards,

Zarasyn Zarasyn (talk) 23:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Zarasyn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, which will be reviewed by other editors. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Best practices for editors with close associations
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style
• The Teahouse, our help forum for new editors

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Gheus (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2025 (UTC)