User talk:LeRoboticien

Welcome!

Hi LeRoboticien! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Jay8g [V•T•E] 20:55, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2025

Hi there, and thank you for your recent additions to Francesco Mondada - it looks like good, well-sourced content, which I appreciate. However, it did require a bit of cleanup. Please make sure you've read the Manual of Style, which I'll link below in an automated message. In particular,

citations go after punctuation, not before (.<ref>citation</ref>, not <ref>citation</ref>.)
generally use sentence case in headers, not all caps (Early life, not Early Life)
works like magazines need to go in italics (Wired magazine)
please don't use the nowiki tag until you really understand how - it can easily wreck formatting

If I can help with anything, just let me know. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the very constructive feedback. I would love to do that (as I spent a lot of time on this article until now and would like to have it in proper shape), but it seems that this article has no chances to get online due to some basic problems, her being associate professor and having "only" solid scientific citations, which seems not sufficient, which is an argument I do not understand. Therefore I would need more info: if this article has changes to get accepted (otherwise I am wasting hours of work) and how I can improve it in addition to the set of tips you gave me (thank you!!!) LeRoboticien (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Josie Hughes (July 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to

meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria
or cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth

Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Any claims of importance cannot be cited to her publications and it is rare an associate professor can meet the notability criteria. S0091 (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's very hard to get the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society’s Early Academic Career Award... and having publications in highly ranked journals show the importance of her publications, and citing them shows how important they are. Therefore I would like to understand what can demonstrate the importance more than that, I really ask, not understanding the basic motivation here. Should I use external news or citations to show her importance? Any suggestions? LeRoboticien (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:Josie Hughes 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.

S0091 (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LeRoboticien! 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! S0091 (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello, I'm S0091. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia.

Read also WP:Yes, it is promotion. S0091 (talk) 18:22, 30 July 2025 (UTC) S0091 (talk) 18:22, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help and the editions, this really helps. I added several external reference for the "better sources needed", but I do not know how sources are evaluated. Is this better now? LeRoboticien (talk) 12:52, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]