James.au

.

DYK for Cadell Fault

On 13 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cadell Fault, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that local aboriginal folklore claims they helped shape the current course of the Murray River after its route was modified by the uplift of the Cadell Fault? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cadell Fault. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cadell Fault), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sydney Electric Train Society (September 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Sydney Electric Train Society and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 13:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Jamesbushell.au, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 13:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

New Challenge for Oceania and Australia

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Contesting the deletion of the "NCBI C++ Toolkit" page

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NCBI_C%2B%2B_Toolkit&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cxx-toolkit-editor (talk • contribs) 17:05, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

This page should not be speedily deleted because...

I don't see how it's any different from any other bioinformatic toolkits' Wikipedia pages, see e.g. those mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_bioinformatics_software

Saying that it's "Commercial by nature"... it's in fact an absolutely free biotech software toolkit with 2 million lines of source code. There are publicly consumed (and also free) multi-platform GUI and command-line tools built upon it, as well as literally hundreds of Web resources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cxx-toolkit-editor (talk • contribs) 17:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)