This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,846 pending submissions
waiting for review.
If the submission is accepted, then this page will be moved into the article space.
If the submission is declined, then the reason will be posted here.
In the meantime, you can continue to improve this submission by editing normally.
Where to get help
If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the
talk page of a
relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.
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.
Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted.
If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors.
Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.
Where to get help
If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews.
If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the
talk page of a
relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed.
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.
Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Comment: Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including
WP:GNG,
WP:ANYBIO,
WP:NPROF) but presently it is not clear that it does. As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple publishedsecondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles
‘Your First Article’,
‘Referencing for Beginners’ and
‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Please note that many of the references are not from sources that are considered reliable for establishing notability and should be removed (including articles by Pamaym as opposed to articles, from reliable sources, about him). Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which
Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a
conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the
draft's talk page, the
WP:THREE best sources that establish
notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:NPROF criteria #3, because XXXXX"). You may also wish to leave a note for me on
my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.
Cabrils (
talk) 04:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Please remove all inline external links from body text; convert to citations where relevant. There should be no links pointing to external resources until the footnotes in the 'References' section.
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 13:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment: The sources are insufficient for establishing notability per
WP:GNG. If
WP:NACADEMIC notability is being claimed instead, please make it clear which of the eight criteria is met, and what evidence supports this.In articles on living people, every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal details must be clearly supported by inline citations to reliable published sources, or else removed. Currently only the 'Research' section is referenced.
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 13:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Payam A. Gammage
Born
1987 (36 years old)
Exeter, United Kingdom
Alma mater
University College London (M.Sci.)
University of Cambridge (Ph.D.)
Known for
mitochondrial genome editing, mitochondrial genetics of cancer
Awards
European Research Council Starting Grant
National Cancer Institute R37 MERIT Award
European Molecular Biology Organistaion (EMBO) Young Investigator Award
Scientific career
Fields
Mitochondrial genome engineering, mitochondrial genetics, cancer metabolism, tumour biology
Gammage has pioneered the adaptation of
genome engineering tools to manipulate
mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in mammals. His inventions in this field are described in highly cited papers detailing the development of engineered genome editing tools capable of manipulating mtDNA across entire organs[2][3][4], with both clinical and experimental application[5][6][7]. Together with
Dr Eduard Reznik,
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, he discovered the recurrence and selective pressures operating on mtDNA mutations, found in approximately half of all cancers, and how these are associated with significantly improved patient outcomes in the context of colorectal cancer.[8][9][10][11] He further discovered the impact of recurrent mtDNA mutation in
melanoma, likely explaining a significant proportion of the
Warburg Effect and providing new insights into the
immunological response to cancer
immunotherapies.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18]
- meet any of the
eight academic-specific criteria
- or cite multiple
reliable,
secondary sources
independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth
Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.