User talk:Ukalik0

Welcome!

Hello, Ukalik0, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Hop Mania, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 03:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Hop Mania

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Hop Mania, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 03:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hop Mania (August 10)

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

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 draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Hop Mania 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.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:41, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Ukalik0! 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! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:41, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Dowsing in popular culture

You added this paragraph to Wikipedia . It can work in the article, but it is missing reliable sources: we don't cite websites like Bulbapedia or tvtropes on Wikipedia. You're welcome to make some improvements and add the paragraph back. Drew Stanley (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Will do! I'll make sure to read up on what i can and can't source- i admit, it felt a little dubious adding them. Good to know! Ukalik0 (talk) 04:47, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Dowsing

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Dowsing, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:20, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Hop Mania

Hello, Ukalik0. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hop Mania, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:12, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Hop Mania

Hello, Ukalik0. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Hop Mania".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 06:23, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Minor edit on Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted

Hi Ukalik0! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Plants vs. Zombies: Replanted and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. To clarify, the edit itself is fine (appreciated, even), but please be careful what you're marking as minor. Thanks! Squitor!!! (say hi, i won't bite) 17:07, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Ah, thank you! I'll keep that in mind. I'm still new here. Sorry and thank you! Ukalik0 (talk) 17:12, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

No need to apologise at all! Just thought I'd let you know. Thank you again for the edit, especially with providing the citation. :) Squitor!!! (say hi, i won't bite) 17:18, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Metallic bonding

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Metallic bonding, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Possible collaboration on metallic bonding?

Hello,

As of May 15 2026, I am the most recent editor on the metallic bonding article. I have added a citation, but most of my editing on the article (and in general) has been primarily textual, as I am not terribly experienced with finding sources, especially since I am still unsure as to what is considered reliable and what isn't, and how to even check reliability of sources (the source I added seems relatively reliable in terms of informational content). I was hoping that maybe the both of us could work together on the article, considering you feed the article's editing to your to-do list, and when I create my own user page sooner or later, I may also end up becoming a major contributor to the article's reworking. Perhaps we could both work on sources for right now, although we (or at least, I) could try to make the article more encyclopedic, as that is also a major concern about the article (I simultaneously get and don't get how it is seen that way, but nevertheless, I will try my best to fix what is obvious to me).

I am a huge chemistry nerd, and I very much enjoy physics as well (I love radioactivity, and radioactive elements are my favorite ones). My favorite element is uranium, which is a metal, and that makes the metallic bonding article's subpar quality hurt somewhat. I love Wikipedia and I want every article to be the best quality it can be, and the fact that this article has had a warning on it since October 2009 makes me very much want to improve the quality of this article. I don't know if I alone could fix this article, and when I found that you were also a recent editor of the article, and that your to-do list included finding sources for it, I thought that maybe you would want help from someone else, even if I am somehow less experienced than you are, it appears. If you refuse an active collaboration, that is fine. I had other things I was wanting to focus on as well, and either way, I will be editing the article again at some point.

Anyway, time to go back to reading Big Bang nucleosynthesis, as I am also a fan of the elements hydrogen and helium (particularly the latter, because alpha decay! yippee!). Just reply to my message whether you are interested in the offer or not. I prefer clear communication, as I happen to be neurodivergent.

-GracefulFern3145 GracefulFern3145 (talk) 22:25, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@GracefulFern3145 Hi! That sounds incredible, I would love to collaborate! I admit I'm not as much of a chemistry nerd as you are, but I dabble, and I do really want to improve this article! I'm currently taking a "cautious" approach to the sources, so I'm adding sources for facts I can verify and assuming the ones I can't are just not often written about on the internet, so having someone who actually knows about the nicher details about metallic bonding would be SUPER appreciated!

So yeah, I would love the help and I'd love to help you out too! Thank you so much! :D Ukalik0 (talk) 22:38, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome! I'm not exactly an expert in metallic bonding or anything, but I at least learned something about it in school (seriously, how can a Wikipedia article about something that is taught in schools be this quality?), and of course I can relate it to other chemical bonding I know about. The overall concept is simple, I think we just need some citations. I believe working on the history section of the article would be a good place to start, as there is a lot of text and only the first paragraph has any sources. The physics it talks about in that section is some stuff I don't understand, but I'm always willing to learn more or at least fake it until I make it. My experience with text re-writing should help the section be written with information that matches whatever sources we find, too.

Maybe I don't know a lot, but there's no better way to learn than just throwing yourself right into it and/or going down a Wikipedia rabbit hole! GracefulFern3145 (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@Ukalik0 GracefulFern3145 (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Looking good!

nice job on the new citations for metallic bonding! I saw that you added a lot, and it looks great! admittedly, I've been working on creating the tellurocyanate article. I'll get back to working on the metallic bonding article soon, I just got unexpectedly caught up GracefulFern3145 (talk) 18:59, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

@GracefulFern3145 No problem! Any help is better than no help at all. I also have AuDHD so I get it completely haha (also I finally figured out what I was doing wrong with sourcing authors so now the sources won't have big red errors on them anymore!!) Ukalik (She/Her) (talk) 19:51, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

that's great! I also had to fix my sources when making my article too lol, so I understand GracefulFern3145 (talk) 20:02, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

the last 4 *needed* sources

Hello! I've been busier recently, but also I've just generally not been on wikipedia much (at least, on the editing side). There's still 4 suggestions that say that a citation needs to be added, and I was going to try working on that for right now. By the way, I looked at the editing history, what is a predatory journal? Just wondering! GracefulFern3145 (talk) 16:03, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

update: I added a few sources, but there are some troubles I have been having here that I have had my whole time on wikipedia. You see, I use a computer when I edit Wikipedia articles, and the only computer I own is a Chromebook given to me by my school...yes there's some filters, and yes that prevents me from accessing some sources. Could you help me by grabbing source 33 from the amalgam article, and putting it in the part in the one paragraph that needs a source where it talks about gold and mercury amalgams? You could also help me by finding something that explicitly states that pure metals do not dissolve in water unless they react (everything that talks about solubility just mentions compounds) GracefulFern3145 (talk) 16:32, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

@GracefulFern3145 Thank you so much for finding those sources, this is much-needed help! After testing source 33 on my computer, I have discovered that the link no longer exists at all, regardless of your firewall. I'll work on finding a new source for both articles (and the pure metals section!) Also, to answer your previous question, predatory journals are journals that are created to spread propaganda or conspiracy theories by publishing mostly well-intentioned papers but occasionally publishing things with entirely no basis, like making blows at a rival political party or claiming the government is lying to everyone or anything like that.

Again, thank you so much for your help on this project! I would have barely begun right now without it! Ukalik <small>(She/Her)</small> (talk) 18:09, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

you're welcome! it's always nice to work with a fellow person to achieve the same common goal. I love information that is accurate and available to everyone, and Wikipedia is very good for that so it's nice to work with someone to make sure the information is truly accurate. hopefully, this article is noticed by higher ups and maybe adjusted more or even bumped up a quality rating or two. i'll definitely check in on the article from time to time, there's still some stuff wrong with it even if there's sources now. it was great to have your help throughout this! if there's anything else you need help with, let me know. I'll certainly be up to help you make or edit a list article or something GracefulFern3145 (talk) 02:08, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

we meet again

https://www.snsbi.org.uk/exploring-names/interpreting-place-names/

I wanted to try helping with one of your projects, the place names article. is this a reliable source? probably not, but it's worth a shot GracefulFern3145 (talk) 12:00, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

@GracefulFern3145 Hello again! I'll have to do more research, but this source actually seems fantastic- a lot of the exanples in the current article are in the british isles as well! Thank you so much for this, and It's great to be able to work with you again! Ukalik <small>(She/Her)</small> (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2026 (UTC)