User talk:Djkoutdoors

Your submission at Articles for creation: Transient Reflux Hypothesis (October 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 97198 was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Transient Reflux Hypothesis and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Transient_Reflux_Hypothesis Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:97198&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Transient_Reflux_Hypothesis reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

97198 (talk) 11:18, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Baby colic. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

Perhaps try WP:BRD ? Alexbrn (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, quick note about paid/conflicted editing
Hi Djkoutdoors.

I work on advocacy and conflict of interest issues in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing which is mostly about health and medicine.

Just wanted to make you aware, in case you are not, of Wikipedia's policy on paid editing WP:PAID) and its conflict of interest guideline (WP:COI). Each is explained its respective link but briefly:

If you have an external connection to a topic about what you are writing (which could be anything from working for a company and writing about that company/its products/its perspectives etc here in WP; working for a PR agency or as a freelancer that has a company or person as a client and writing about that company/person/etc here in WP, or writing about yourself or people you know - those sorts of things -- we ask that you:
 * Disclose the external relationship (and if you are paid to edit or are editing as part of your job, you must disclose  that)
 * Put edits where you have a conflict of interest through prior review.

If you have anything to disclose, you can do so just by replying here, below, and we can then go over the details of how the disclosure and peer review work in more detail. But I just wanted to make sure you were aware of PAID and COI. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 19:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes thank you I am very aware and at this time I have no conflicts to declare, although its kind of a moot point because everything I wrote has been deleted. Don't worry, I won't be participating in wiki anymore. I have 25 years of experience in life sciences/biotechnology which I thought might be helpful as an editor/contributor but it seems that people are quite protective of the content they write, making up rules as they go (I was told we could only submit references from review papers or books, which is not actually true). Thank you for staying on top of things as I know COI is probably a big issue on wiki. Warm regards, Djkoutdoors (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note! There is a learning curve here and things are sometimes like herding cats, but once you get grounded on the fundamentals you can see that everything coheres.  It takes time.  Happy to help if you decide you don't want to throw in the towel (but you will need to be open to some larnin', as they say in the midwest) Jytdog (talk) 07:35, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Don't bite the newbies...
...is a Wikipedia dictum, but the inverse - the newbies should not bite - also applies. You are not the first nor the last person with letters after their name (MD, PhD, RD, DDS, whatever) to not know the referencing guidelines and resist abiding by same. If you can agree to use reviews, systemic reviews and meta-analyses from peer-reviewed journals, then stay and lend a hand. Yes, that means Wikipedia will be behind the knowledge frontier. So be it. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Transient Reflux Hypothesis concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Transient Reflux Hypothesis, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Transient Reflux Hypothesis


Hello, Djkoutdoors. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Transient Reflux Hypothesis".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 20:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)