User talk:As701914

Welcome!
Hello, As701914, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please complete the student training, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ian! Nice to hear from you, and thank you for the warm welcome and handouts. As701914 (talk) 18:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

GeneLab
Hi! Just a note on the page Genelab. If you want your page to stick, the most important thing you can do is to add references. Pages without references like this one are very weak and could be deleted. This seems like a notable thing, so why not spend a few minutes and add some good references? Happy editing!HappyValleyEditor (talk) 02:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve Sarah Wyatt
Hi, I'm Nick Moyes. As701914, thanks for creating Sarah Wyatt!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Nick Moyes (talk) 10:22, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi - this is a follow-up, as a glitch in Wikipedia's page curation software tool which has caused a loss of my feedback and hyperlinks to you. Here is a second attempt. This is a great start article, but please read WP:ACADEMIC - this lists the criteria for notability, which I believe Wyatt meets, but which this article fails to demonstrate effectively. You need more inline references to support the stated facts, and I've split the education section to give clarity. There are far too many scientific publications listed and not enough third party references. remember, it's the job of every academic to publish - this doesn't prove notability as far as a Wikipedia article is concerned. Instead, look for media or news stories like this or this to show that here work impacts on a wider part of society on on NASA's work. Indeed, I suggest you create a separate section for the NASA/ISS experiments she has been leading on. You need to add categories to the bottom of the page to help other users find this and related articles. Is B.S. and M.S. the same as a BSc  and MSc (=B.Sc and M.Sc). If so, they seem odd abbreviations to use, and I suggest you use the more familiar ones. All in all a great start, and helping to redress the gender bias in Wikipedia articles (see WikiProject Women in Red). Finally, did you get permission to upload her photo from the University to Wikimedia? If not, it is likely to soon be deleted on copyright grounds. If you did,  you will need to read how to get an organisation to give formal permission for free commercial use of a photograph which can then be used on Wikipedia. This shouldn't be a problem if you have support as a student wikipedia editor, but the process can be a bit fiddly. Alternatively, if you know Wyatt, as her to supply a photo directly (using her academic email address) with full release to Wikimedia.  (This requires copying in a standard block of text which you can find by wading through the Wikimedia uploading help pages.  Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Nick! Thank you greatly for your comments and suggestions. I have created a few Wikipedia pages as a student editor, but this is one of my first WP:ACADEMIC. The photo I submitted originally belongs to Sarah Wyatt, who gave me permission to use it for this purpose. I will make sure to have her upload it as specified in your comments. Thanks again and all my best. As701914 (talk) 15:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

F-box protein
Why did you do this? I was restoring sourced information that was deleted by an IP editor. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 23:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about my ignorance, I didn't fully understand what you meant by "my student". But, after comparing the revisions, I got you now. Apologies about any confusion. Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 23:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

WP:MEAT policy
Please do not edit in WP:GANG fashion to protect your students' work. Please be aware of the WP:MEAT policy and the WP:GANG essay.

Students and instructors have no special privileges. Jytdog (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * While I appreciate your comments, I have a right to bring attention to someone that is deleting my student's work without just cause. The student did not bring me in to persuade your decision or make changes. As I was grading their assignments I noticed your reversions and disagreed with your reasoning. I would have done the same for anyone, regardless if they were a student of mine or not. As701914 (talk) 14:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Your initial revert was obviously MEAT behavior and your second was obvious edit warring.
 * If you cannot see the problems with the content, the correct thing to do is to open a talk page discussion.
 * If you continue to behave in ways that violate the behavioral policies you are going to end up with your editing privileges restricted. You are as obligated to follow the policies and guidelines as any other editor.
 * I fully understand your desire to protect and help your students but you need to be aware that your relationships with them (which are external to WP) create a conflict of interest and tendency toward GANG/MEAT behavior here in Wikipedia. This is just human. Please be aware of it and please be very cautious about whether you choose to "intervene" and if so, how you do so. Jytdog (talk) 14:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I think it might be helpful to take a step back and remember the underlying principle of editing Wikipedia: if someone add content to Wikipedia, and someone else removes it, the person who wants to re-insert the content has the responsibility of starting a discussion and building consensus for the change. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, anyone can add to Wikipedia, but whether a change stick or not must be determined by a consensus of interested editors. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Edit war warning
Your recent editing history at Tauopathy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 14:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)