User talk:DMacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Erich Clar page[edit]

I want to include a synthetic reaction that is known as Clar's reaction. It is of a certain class of cyclic ketones that condense with themselves when heated to 400 C in a mixture of zinc dust and zinc chloride.

I will add references and a description of what it is used for in synthesizing new polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Orphaned non-free image File:WEZJ Logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WEZJ Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 18:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-20[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: April 2024[edit]

Tech News: 2024-21[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question to your comment on my draft article Draft:RG Qluck Wise[edit]

Hi @DMacks,

Do you mean if an article has been deleted on Wikipedia without meeting the criteria: notable, does it mean one shouldn't have an article again.

Secondly, what if the subject have a reliable sources, Independent News|independent news sources or secondary sources to support the article?

Best regards, Abigailka (talk) 07:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article can sometimes be created even if it had previously been deleted. It depends on the reason it was deleted. But having been deleted once, it usually means many eyes have looked at the topic and available references and found that it was not viable at that time. The new attempt must not suffer from whatever problems identified in the previous attempt. Reliable sources are always important. Without them, no article can ever be written. A previous AFD might be useful to see what sources were available at that time and why they were not sufficient. So the new attempt needs sources that are newer and stronger than those. DMacks (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So tell whether News Ghana, GhanaWeb, MENAFN, and Africa Publicity are not reliable sources or they are Abigailka (talk) 11:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know about them in particular. The fact that two of them do not have Wikipedia articles is concerning. DMacks (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking more closely, MENAFN is not notable and therefore not likely to be a good source. AfricaPublicity is definitely not acceptable, as it identifies itself as a "public relations and media agency promoting businesses, organizations, entertainers, and individuals across Africa." DMacks (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Opinion accepted, can verify here MENAFN, same applies to Africa Publicity, but I can suggest that GhanaWeb and News Ghana are a good sources so check on this two. Abigailka (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]