User talk:Doctor Columbia

August 2018
Hello, I'm Abelmoschus Esculentus. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Landiolol, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus  (talk to me) 08:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Why do we need to provide reliable sources?

 * All content in Wikipedia must be verifiable. Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and will not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.
 * Citing non-reliable sources such as fan pages or self-published pages which may be biased violates our neutral point of view policy.
 * Unsourced or poorly sourced material may damage the reputation of living people or existing groups.
 * Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it.

For information on referencing citations in Wikipedia articles, see Help:Footnotes, Inline citation, and Help:Referencing for beginners.

~ Abelmoschus Esculentus  (talk to me) 08:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Need for secondary sources
Thanks for your additions to Landiolol and Vasopressin. Unfortunately it appears that you are using exclusively primary and not secondary sources. This is a big problem, especially for biomedical research because of the replication crisis (many scientific studies simply cannot be repeated). This is why Wikipedia prefers secondary sources (critical reviews) that weigh the available evidence to arrive at a conclusion (and often the conclusion is that no conclusion can be made). In short, cite reviews, don't write them. Boghog (talk) 20:20, 11 September 2018 (UTC)