User:Garrondo/Comments to students

==Collapsin unuseful text

Not directed to improving article. Collapsed.--Garrondo (talk) 09:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Content not directed to improving the article Text to collpase

Refs

 * There should not be spaces between two sequential references (e.g:semantic errors during reading and the impairment of nonword reading.[2] [3] should become semantic errors during reading and the impairment of nonword reading.[2][3])
 * There should not be spaces after the full stop and the reference. (e.g: more precise mechanisms used in normal reading. [16] should be more precise mechanisms used in normal reading.[16])
 * References should be after the sentence and not before the full stop (e.g forcing reading to proceed through the semantic route [2]. should be changed to forcing reading to proceed through the semantic route.[2]), and same occurs with other punctuation marks such as commas (e.g change be a more severe form of phonological dyslexia[8][9][10] to  be a more severe form of phonological dyslexia;[8][9][10])


 * Regarding refs in the middle of sentence: this is usually avoided in wikipedia per Citing_sources. Instead of including them in the middle of a sentence (or at the very beginning in your case) try to move them after the full stop or the next punctuation mark if it only applies to part of a sentence. For example:




 * should be
 * if the reference specifically states the last part of the sentence or
 * if it does not.
 * if it does not.
 * if it does not.

Other

 * Bolding: there is a specific style wikipedia guideline (See WP:MOS) which is overly specific and detailed and boring for recent editors. It has a section on bolding (See WP:MOSBOLD). In summary, bolding is only occassionally used in Wikipedia. All in-text bolding should be removed.
 * Capital letters: I do not think that the models are names by themselves. I do not think they merit the use of title case. In text I would change them to lower case (and unbolded as proposed above): e.g. I would change The Morton and Patterson (Dual Route) Model is based upon the to The Morton and Patterson (dual route) model is based upon the. Similarly titles should be changed to sentence case (e.g:Dual Route Model would be Dual route model).
 * Internal links to technical or important concepts are very interesting and the article at the moment is probably underlinked. I would recommend the addition of many more internal links. I would say as a hint that any concept that 14 years old may not know should be linked. On the other hand: concepts should be only linked in the first appearance of the article.


 * Automatic citations: You might not know that you can automatically create references from scientific journals by inserting the pubmed number (pmid) or digital object identifier (doi): go to the editing toolbar, click cite, click templates, click cite journal and insert either of the two identifiers in its appropiate place, and voila!: you have your citation. It has the advantage that it reduces errors (although it is better checking since sometimes it makes some mistakes) and also gives a link to the article abstract direcly when you go with the mouse over the inline citation or at the reference at the end of an article. For example in the case of Jones-1985- article Deep dyslexia, imageability, and ease of predication just by inserting its doi (10.1016/0093-934X(85)90094-X), obtained from either pubmed (pmid:3971130 see or the publishing house abstract to the article (See ) I get (in this case using doi):  . You might notice that gives an error in the year that you can easily fix and have:  . I am not sure if I have explained myself adequately but these kind of things make editing muuuuuuuuuuuch easier, so if you did not really understood my explanation please ask.


 * Sources in each section (talkpages): You have to add   after them to create a list


 * The lead should be a summary of the full article. Right now it does not cover the info from all sections. It would be great if you could do a brief summary of these sections to enhance the lead. See: WP:lead


 * Citations are not needed in the lead. See: WP:lead


 * The article appears to be linked in very few articles. Maybe you could think of other articles that could point to this article and insert a link in them either in-text (preferred option), in the "see also" section, or at the beginning of specific sections (for this one there is an specific template that has to be used). The more links the article has the more probable it is to attract traffic, which will lead to further improvements in the future.

Wikietiquette
While in articles modification of previous editions is how wikipedia improves in talk pages is not really common to modify comments since then people are unable to follow what has happened. Whenever you write in a talk page do not change what you find: instead write a new comment below so the talk page has chronological flow.

'''Interact, interact, interact.... and interact!!!''' When somebody posts a message for you, answer to it directly in the article page or in the user talk page, say thank you as much as you can, and if in doubt it is always better to ask.--Garrondo (talk) 20:02, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Images
Diagrams like the one you created are not usually appropiate due to several reasons: 1-They are considered not encyclopedic, and more typical of student books, since they summarize and simplify an issue most commonly to make it easier to learn 2-They usually are very close to original research (See WP:NOR) since the creator has to make several decisions on what and how to include which does not directly come in the sources used. 3-If they are not OR they are usually only copied from a book and in that case there would be copyright issues.

License tags:you can choose between many licenses, depending on whether it is your work or not. The most common one in this case (created by yourself) should be added using the text  on the image description page.

Copyright from images from a journal: Question from the student:''We want to upload a fMRI showing the differences in facial processing in typically developing brains and ASD brains. Are we not allowed to post a fMRI scan from journal article even if we cite it? The picture in question is http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/124/10/2059/F3.large.jpg.''


 * Short answer. NO YOU CAN NOT, you will be infringing the copyright. It will be similar to posting a full chapter of book in the internet . Independently of whether your cite were you took it from you will be breaking copyright.
 * Long answer: NO YOU CAN NOT IN MOST CASES. However there have been several publishing houses created in the last years such as PLOS that permit the use of some or all of its content with certain restrictions such as citing the origin of the work. Other traditional publishers now release specific articles without total copyright (See open-access journal. In order to upload an image to wikipedia it will have to come from an article with a compatible copyright license (the one you were thinking of using does not have a compatible license, but a traditional copyright).