 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 7 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,336 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
| Submission declined on 3 November 2024 by Thilsebatti (talk). 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.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
| Submission declined on 25 September 2024 by CNMall41 (talk). 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. Declined by CNMall41 2 months ago. | |
| Submission declined on 5 September 2024 by Utopes (talk). 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. This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject. Declined by Utopes 2 months ago. | |
| Submission declined on 3 September 2024 by Ldm1954 (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you. Declined by Ldm1954 2 months ago. | |
| Submission declined on 31 July 2024 by Jamiebuba (talk). 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. Declined by Jamiebuba 3 months ago. | |
Comment: Only one source was added and it is primary. There is still a large portion not supported by reliable sources. Information not supported by a reliable source needs removed or a source added to it. Please do not resubmit without making the required improvements or the draft will likely get rejected. CNMall41 (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Much of the article remains unsourced. It's unclear where the information in the Scientific career section is derived from, as only one source exists there. Material should only be included in the article if it can be attributed to a reliable publisher. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The article has vast amounts of unsourced material. Don't just add refs at the end, you have to validate every major statement.Please focus on notability, and don't write an extended CV. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Vladimir Dadali (born December 18, 1937, Mykolaiv, Mykolaiv Oblast, Ukrainian SSR, USSR) is a biochemist, Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Biological and General Chemistry of the North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov. He was involved in the development and implementation of natural medicinal products (raunatin, novoaekol). Currently, he is developing recipes for natural compositions related to dietary supplements[1].
- ^ "4Life: Partnering with Professor Dadali". YouTube. 28 August 2024. Retrieved 2024-09-01.