User talk:Dubbin/Archive 1

regarding cleanup tags on Locations of Half-Life
To point out specifically: Refimprove's instructions under "Differences from Unreferenced and Citation needed": ''However if an article has sufficient inline citations, but the article lacks citations to cover specific information (such as no citation on a quotation) then use the inline citation template citation needed to indicate more precisely where additional citations are needed. Unlike citation needed, refimprove places a very conspicuous banner in the article.'' You have identified two places where cites are needed (that's not in doubt), and there's already 3 or more cites in that section, so you don't need to use the general section banner since you have specific locations in mind. --M ASEM (t) 15:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to write an explanation; I'm convinced that both were not needed in this instance. More generally, I think there are cases where they might both apply, within the guidance above - for instance, in a section requiring many additional citations where only the highest priority are deserving of an inline tag. But now I'm intrigued: would you mind telling me what 'tl' does when added to a template tag? Dubbin (talk) 15:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Journal of Huntington&#39;s disease cover.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Journal of Huntington&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Journal of Huntington's Disease


The article Journal of Huntington's Disease has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable new journal. Indexed in PubMed, but not in MEDLINE (OA-or hybrid OA- journals get into PubMed through PubMed Central, which is not very selective in its inclusion criteria). Not indexed in any selective database. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all 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 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 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) 14:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Journal of Huntington's Disease for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journal of Huntington's Disease 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 Articles for deletion/Journal of Huntington's Disease 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 template from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 16:35, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

easy peasy
Thanks for rewording Eric Stonestreet. Way better than getting into a edit war. Of course, I'm sure you rep the west side. 71.57.11.10 (talk) 19:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited UK Biobank, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medical Research Council. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Net present value
I saw your comments on the talk page about simplifying the article, and particularly, the introduction. I have made some additions attempting to further explain the concept. Let me know if it helps. Cheers, I eat BC Fish (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Dementia Research Centre for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dementia Research Centre 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 Articles for deletion/Dementia Research Centre& 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. North America1000 03:02, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited EBioMedicine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lancet. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 10 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Gillian Bates page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=724647126 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F724647126%7CGillian Bates%5D%5D Ask for help])

Voskhod
Hi, Dubbin! I know that as an author of Voskhod, Russia I am not, strictly speaking, in a position to decline a prod, but I just wanted to bring to your attention that this is not a "list", but a set index article (one of many), which is not required to be notable on its own merit (not unlike a disambiguation page). Entries are supposed to be verifiable, so I'll be happy to add references upon request (or whenever this particular article comes up in my to-do flow). Let me know if you still have concerns. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 5, 2016 ; 13:15 (UTC)


 * "Fundamentally, a set index article is a type of list article" (from WP:SIA). I don't see the point of such an article listing dozens of items that don't have pages. If none of its subjects are notable, then what is the point of the page?


 * If you can direct me to a specific guideline or AFD discussion on a similar page that is full of red links, I will be content to leave it. Otherwise, the PROD having been removed, I will AfD. Dubbin u &#124; t &#124; c 15:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

DHMIS
Hey, I saw your post on ANI and though I'm not a prolific editor by any means, I have watchlisted the article to help revert unhelpful IP edits for what it's worth. Valeince (talk) 18:10, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Dubbin u &#124; t &#124; c 19:27, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
I notice that you used the proposed deletion process for |William_Henry_Lyttelton William Henry Lyttelton. This process should not be used in such cases as it says "Please note that this process is only to be used for uncontroversial deletion. PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected." This is important because there is no discussion in such cases and we don't want plausible topics being silently deleted. You yourself favour medical topics, which is fine, and you might suppose that no-one would be so crass as to try to delete those. But see the recent Articles for deletion/Barostat. Such casual deletion nominations are quite a threat to our integrity because they are poorly patrolled now. I do what I can but don't have time to look at the hundreds of daily cases. Andrew D. (talk) 05:46, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of HDBuzz


The article HDBuzz has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Not notable website. No evidence of in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources.

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 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 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. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of HDBuzz for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HDBuzz 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 Articles for deletion/HDBuzz 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. Jytdog (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry

 * am so sorry to see this, Dubbin. Really. Jytdog (talk) 00:08, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change
 * : Dubbin u &#124; t &#124; c

to
 * : Dubbinu &#124; t &#124; c

—Anomalocaris (talk) 21:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Hdbuzzlogo.png


The file File:Hdbuzzlogo.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope."

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willy1018 (talk) 06:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

External academic review and publication of Wikipedia pages
Hi. I notice you've done a lot or work on neuroscience articles. Would you be interested in submitting any for external, academic peer review to improve their accuracy and generate a citable publication?

The WikiJournal of Medicine (www.wikijmed.org) and WikiJournal of Science (www.wikijsci.org) aim to couple the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. For existing Wikipedia articles, it's a great way to get additional feedback from external experts. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as having changes integrated back into Wikipedia. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards authors with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing.

The WP:WikiJournal article nominations page should allow simple submission of existing Wikipedia pages for external review. T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 06:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:European Huntington&#39;s Disease Network (logo).png
Thanks for uploading File:European Huntington&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of Nature Reviews DIsease Primers.png
Thanks for uploading File:Logo of Nature Reviews DIsease Primers.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 13 August 2022 (UTC)