User talk:Giancarlobasile

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Giancarlobasile, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

The
Adventure
The Wikipedia Adventure guide

Hi Giancarlobasile!! You're invited to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game to become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey--learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there!

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

Hi ! 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.

-- 02:10, Sunday, May 26, 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Molecular Biotechnology (journal) was accepted[edit]

Molecular Biotechnology (journal), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 08:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To improve the article, consider checking the advice at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Writing_guide. Thanks for your contribution! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 08:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not mass-add the link to Molecular Biotechnology (journal) in biology articles, as that page is rather uniformative. Select a few highly relevant articles instead. Materialscientist (talk) 07:47, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Current Research In Drug Discovery (Journal) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable new journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 09:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Current Research In Drug Discovery (Journal) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Current Research In Drug Discovery (Journal) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 10:15, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, Giancarlobasile. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Current Research In Drug Discovery (Journal), you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

  • Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
  • Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
  • Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Randykitty (talk) 10:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

quick note[edit]

hi, and welcome to Wikipedia!

You seem to be new here, and biologically savvy, and possibly connected to some biomedical journals. So - some notes, to help you be happy and productive here (as opposed to unhappy, and constantly getting your edits reverted). First of all, the mission of Wikipedia is to create an encyclopedia that provides reliable, verifiable, neutral information for the public. All of those terms have technical meanings at Wikipedia that go beyond their common sense meanings. (see WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:VERIFY). And I really mean it, that we are an encyclopedia - there are many things that we are not, and one of them is a vehicle for anybody to promote their business or ideas or anything. Please see WP:NOT. We are not a newspaper, either - we don't provide content on cutting edge science, especially not in the biomedical field. Instead, as described in our sourcing guideline for that kind of content, WP:MEDRS, we rely on reviews published in the literature, and statements of major medical and scientific bodies.

More generally, if you really want to get involved (and we are always looking for more editors to help!), it turns out that Wikipedia is a pretty complex place. Being an "encyclopedia that anyone can edit" means that over the years, Wikipedia has developed lots of policies and guidelines (PAG) to help provide a "body of law" as it were, that form a foundation for rational discussion. Without that foundation, this place would be a wild west - a truly ugly place. But with the foundation, there are ways to rationally work things out - if, and only if, all the parties involved accept that foundation and work within it. One of the hardest things for new people, is to understand not only that this foundation exists, but what its letter and spirit is. (I emphasize the spirit, because too often people fall prey to what we call "wikilawyering") The more I have learned about how things are set up here - not just the letter of PAG and the various drama boards and administrative tools, but their spirit - the more impressed I have become at how, well ... beautiful this place is. It takes time to learn both the spirit and the letter of PAG, and to really get aligned with Wikipedia's mission to crowdsource a reliable, NPOV source of information for the public (as "reliable" and "NPOV" are defined in PAG!).

Also, people come edit for many reasons, but one of the main ones is that they are passionate about something. That passion is a double-edged sword. It drives people to contribute which has the potential for productive construction, but it can also lead to WP:TENDENTIOUS editing, which is really destructive. WP:ADVOCACY is one of our biggest bedevilments. And one of the hardest things that happens, is when simple disagreements over content and different understandings of policy, turn into accusations of bad faith editing (e.g. accusations of COI). There are many ways to go wrong, and a narrow path to go right. the wrong paths lead to misery for those who take them, and misery for those around them too. Much depends on how you carry yourself here and how clear you are in mind, that when you edit here, you are here to build an encyclopedia as per our mission, and not for some other reasons. Anyway, good luck! Jytdog (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Yes I am new to wikipedia therefore apologize for any mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giancarlobasile (talkcontribs) 14:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for talking - there is lots to learn here, no foul for making mistakes early on! Jytdog (talk) 14:49, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]