This page is within the scope ofWikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofScience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience
Hi, is there a newsletter about this project, with recently expanded or added pages, or pages that need more attention. How do I subscribe. I would like to know also what software is used to generate it and to subscribe me to it. If it is not there, then do you need such a feature? Thanks.Gryllida10:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Redrose64, what software is used for delivering these? They only come into Wiki page? And are not posted to social media right? I was thinking this could help with exposure.Gryllida23:38, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Taxonomy (biology) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to thereassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Z1720 (talk)00:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I’ve recently submitted a draft article on Maria Czajkowska-Majewska, a Polish neurobiologist and professor of medical sciences, whose research includes neurochemistry, neuropharmacology, and developmental disorders. The draft is currently in my sandbox and awaiting AfC review. I’d appreciate any feedback or suggestions from editors familiar with scientific biographies. Here’s the draft:User:Walerus/sandbox Thank you!Walerus (talk)01:52, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are my quick comments, I'm not checking the citations, just an overview. Trim the lede a bit, it's overly wordy. Just sum her up, everything else should be in the body. We don't need years she graduated in the lede. She was born in Poland and then academics. Do you know who her parents are? Motivations to go into science? Anything more? I know you might not have more, but take an extra look and see if you can find something. You need a lot of hyperlinking. She is in Poland, then USA, then back to Poland ... any idea why?
Okay, I ignored her science work and went to the citations to take a look. Where are the citations? I see two. Every bit of the body of the article needs to be backed up with a citation. I'm not seeing that at all which is a very red flag. You need to find more. Look for an interview with her, maybe she mentions something personal and interesting about her life, it just reads as a resume and not about her as a human. Also the external links are just numbers, you need to tell us what we are looking at. And there is something wrong with your first citation.
Seriously Walerus you need citations to prove she is notable. The first one you use is from her. You need secondary independent quality sources. Remember not everyone can have a Wikipedia article. She might be the brightest bulb in the box, but if there aren't citations proving that she is recognized as Wikipedia notable, then she isn't going to pass the high standards for a BLP.
Now I'm looking at your edit history and your talk page. Ohhhh boy. So pretend I am holding your hand as I tell you this, I don't want to chase you away from editing Wikipedia.
You are what we call a single purpose account SPA, and that is NOT a good thing. You appear to have one goal here on Wikipedia and that is to write this Wikipedia article. You do NOT appear to be here to create an encyclopedia outside of just this one article. Possibly you edit on Polish Wikipedia, I don't know, but here on English Wikipedia you are going about this the wrong way.
My advice is to put this aside for a few months and learn the culture of Wikipedia editing. You start with small edits (possibly other Polish scientists, there are quite a few that need attention). Do not start out your "career" here on Wikipedia by trying to write a BLP, you build up to it over time. A strong edit history is GOLD here on Wikipedia. Start with small changes then move onto other changes. Don't focus on one article, spread it out over a variety of articles.
When you are trying to create a BLP from the beginning, you START with the citations. Don't even add it to your sandbox if you don't have the necessary citations. I suggest you build up your edit history with other Wikipedia articles and then move toCategory:Polish scientist stubs, there are over 160 articles to choose from. They already have their notability established, but just need some work to make them shine. While you are doing that you will find all kinds of tips and sharpen your skills. Then you can come back to the article you seem so concerned with.
Overall, you have all the body with her accomplishments in the world of science. But you are completely lacking her humanity and personality and that just makes the article boring to read for anyone who is not in her field of study. That might be all you have but there must be something somewhere. Have you checked for articles in Polish? What about Newspapers.com? Ancestry.com might give you her parents names?
You have received some great advice from an editor jimfbleak and you have taken some of their advice, but you have continued with only editing this one article and now you have a COI on your talk page. This won't end well Walerus. You have done a lot of work, you clearly understand the science, but all this work you have done for months might be deleted because you are starting out wrong. Don't be "that person", if you are truly here to build a better encyclopedia, then prove it, put this on hold and move on. Then come back to it when you have learned how to do it correctly. I wish you good luck, and I'm sorry I'm so long-winded. You can look at my edit history for ideas on rewriting scientist stubs.Sgerbic (talk)03:22, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
