Teflawn

3 Leaf Audio moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to 3 Leaf Audio. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey Josh, I agree it is not quite ready for public view. I appreciate you moving this to a draft, I did not realize that was an option!

I imagine by the time I am done setting up the page with initial info it should have 10-15 total sources at least, would that be sufficient? Teflawn (talk) 20:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:3 Leaf Audio

Hello, Teflawn. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:3 Leaf Audio, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 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) 02:07, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Genetic studies of Jews

Hello, can you give examples of primary sources used in this article? I didn't find any. It based on many academic articles. 2A06:C701:4387:900:5690:F794:805F:349B (talk) 20:41, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

A source can be both primary research and an academic article. For genetic research this is the norm. A primary source doesn't need to physically collect its own samples to qualify as a primary source. Reanalysis of existing datasets and the use of reference panels are very common in population genetics.

By contrast, secondary sources synthesize and interpret the findings of multiple primary studies to draw broader conclusions.

Examples of primary research cited in this article include:

Moorjani et al. (2011), "The history of African gene flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews"

Behar et al. (2013), "No Evidence from Genome-Wide Data of a Khazar Origin for the Ashkenazi Jews"

Shai Carmi et al. (2014), "Sequencing an Ashkenazi reference panel supports population-targeted personal genomics and illuminates Jewish and European origins" Teflawn (talk) 21:48, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

These are absolutely not Primary sources and citing them is absolutely not primary research. You are changing the meaning of those well defined terms. Meta-analysis doesn't always exist. Currently the template makes the article look unreliable while this is not the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:14F:48B:6D4:455A:4401:8813:79B9 (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your appreciation

Thanks for your appreciation on my contribution to the genetic history of the Middle East article, but it' been vandalised by the same user who sometimes likes to follow me and harass me. You are free to give your input on the article talk page or anywhere else. Persian Lad (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello Persian Lad! I do believe that the lead would be fine either way, but personally think Anatolia is preferable due to it being listed alongside regions such as "the Levant" and "Mesopotamia" etc. Considering the sentence ends with "and other areas" I think that sufficiently accounts for the relatively small areas of East Thrace and the Caucasoid region that lies east of Anatolia proper, if one were to use Anatolia instead of Turkey.

I suppose Egypt being in that list kind of throws a wrench into the scheme a little bit, but unavoidable.

If you are able to find and add some studies on ancient Anatolian populations specifically to help bolster this stance that would be helpful, and I would be more than glad to voice support on any talk page discussions or edit disputes. Teflawn (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Ness and Stilla

Hello, Teflawn. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ness and Stilla, 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) 00:08, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sargassum fluitans has been accepted

Sargassum fluitans, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been accepted!

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is common for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

• See the quality assessment scheme to find out how to improve the article.

Future articles

• Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without submitting a draft for review. However, you may continue submitting drafts to Articles for creation if you prefer.

• Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Next steps

• Find other Wikipedia articles related to your topic and add links pointing to the new article. This helps readers find it.
• Group the article with similar subjects by adding relevant categories.
• You may consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's Did you know section.
• Wikipedia is a work in progress. You can continue to expand and improve the new article.
• The new article will become eligible to be indexed on search engines once patrolled or after 90 days; search engines may take time to reflect this.
• For friendly peer support regarding editing, sourcing, or policies, visit the Teahouse, a question and answer hub for new editors.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

kline / talk / contribs 02:36, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Teflawn, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! ~ŤheŴubṂachine-840≈ 10:27, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

You have removed the Category:Palestinian inventions from multiple pages using a rationale not applied to other nations or states.Tiamut (talk) 17:17, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Teflawn! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

-- 01:37, 9 June 2026 (UTC)