User talk:Ennegma

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For editing your first template :-) Wittylama 07:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Draft:Solaris SBSP

Hi, I've looked over your draft, and am pretty close to accepting it. I was just wondering about the title. It seems you've spelled the name in all-caps, as SOLARIS. Is this an acronym or some sort, or are the all-caps used just as a stylistic device, do you know? If it's the latter, then I'm proposing to title this article as 'Solaris SBSP' – any thoughts? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @DoubleGrazing, and thank you for your rapid reviewing of this article! I was expecting to have to wait much longer.

For the name:

As far as I can tell, it is not an acronym, but all-capitals is simply the styling that ESA has chosen for the project. Is is written "SOLARIS" (not "Solaris") in ESA's own documents as well as other news/academic publications which I used as references in the article (for example in The Oxford Scientist, and in Scientific American).

Therefore I suggest that the title of the article be SOLARIS (all capitals) and a little notification at the top should be added that says "for other meanings of Solaris, see Solaris (disambiguation), and that this article should be added as yet another option in that disambiguation page. I think the title "Solaris SBSP" is not very obvious to a reader what they are about to read, so, if my preference "SOLARIS" is not technically possible, then as a second alternative what about "SOLARIS (Solar power)"? Ennegma (talk) 13:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I thought maybe it was one of these awkward non-acronym acronyms, standing for something like SOurcing pLentiful And Renewable energy In Space. :)

I believe Wikipedia doesn't allow all-caps names for anything other than acronyms, regardless of how the subject may wish to render its name. See eg. Hugo Boss. In any case, the search function is case-agnostic, so this shouldn't be too much of a problem.

I've already accepted the draft, as you probably saw, and it is now at Solaris SBSP. If it is decided that it should be moved elsewhere, than can always be done later. You way also wish to create redirects from some alternative names/renderings, which can be easily done using the redir wizard at WP:WIZR. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I would absolutely not be surprised if it is a bacronym, many science project names are, but I can't find anything to prove it. Given there is a policy against non-acronym capitalisation, could you please move the article to Solaris (Solar power) or Solaris (Space-based solar power) please? Ennegma (talk) 14:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I couldn't find anything to suggest this, either. Interestingly, I did notice that the ESA on their website spell it alternately as SOLARIS or solaris.

I considered publishing it with 'space-based solar power' as the disambiguator, as 'SBSP' may not mean much to most readers, but I thought it would be too long. The rule of thumb is to use the shortest and simplest dab that does the job. I guess 'solar power' would be a suitable compromise, so I can certainly move it to that. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please do. Thank you. Ennegma (talk) 15:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Actually @DoubleGrazing I think I worked out how to do it myself! Thanks for your help. Ennegma (talk) 15:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay great. :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Solaris SBSP has been accepted

Solaris SBSP, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

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

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Kerissa Khan has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Kerissa Khan. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

hello user:Theroadislong. I have replied to your comment on my draft article and removed the links you suggested. Can the draft be moved to become an article now? Ennegma (talk) 15:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kerissa Khan has been accepted

Kerissa Khan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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 commonplace 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.

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

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Paul W (talk) 14:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)