User talk:Gklambauer

Welcome!
Hello, Gklambauer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Graph kernel. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

some more welcome
hi Gklambauer - I saw your edit to the Toxicology article, so came to say hi. We really need more expert toxicologists working in WP, so I wanted to come welcome you. Please do read WP:Expert which is a useful essay for folks like you, and please consider joining WikiProject Medicine (or at least starting to watch its talk page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.) Project Medicine also has a "toxicology task force" that may interest you, WikiProject Medicine/Toxicology task force.

This place can be somewhat bewildering for new users - feel free to ping me, or to write here (I am "watching" this page now), if you have any questions. Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 12:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Reply by Gklambauer Hello, thanks for noticing. The article Toxicology really need substantial revision and labour. I will look at your suggestions, thanks again!
 * Great! i saw you struggled a bit with how to reply.  let me explain how we talk to one another... it takes a while to get the hang of this place.  when you post a comment on a talk page, "sign" your comment by typing four tildas after it, like this ~ .  When you do that, the Wikipedia software converts that into a "signature" with your username and a datestamp, as you see appearing after my comment above and will see after this one.  Also, in Wikipedia we thread comments in a discussion by indenting them... see how mine is indented?  you create one indent by placing one colon : at the beginning of your comment, and the wikipedia software converts the colon into a tab.  One colon makes one tab, two colons make two tabs, etc, like this:
 * that has two colons
 * that has three colons.. and you can see how that threads a discussion. when there gets to be too many indents, you can "outdent" your comment by placing  in front of your comment, like this:

and it keeps the threading going. good luck! Jytdog (talk) 12:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I see it completely different - I am describing the articles before my edits:
 * * E.coli O104:H4: Method that identified Shiga-Toxin as the crucial gene and thereby saved many lives: MISSING!
 * * Article on copy number variation: Important method with 60 citations missing.
 * * Article on IBD: complete crap. Updated. The figure was displayed at ASHG2014 (American Society of Human Genetics meeting) in at least 3 presentations. Important methods missing.
 * * Kernel methods: needs substantial work.
 * * Toxicology: The article is a laughter and an insult to toxicology. Most important scientific publications are missing. Structure of the article is ridiculous.
 * * Toxicogenomics: Most important project with several hundreds of million of dollars volume missing. Best performing methods missing.
 * * Cytotoxicity: Most important papers missing. Best performing methods missing. Weak structure.
 * * Virtual Screening: Status as of 1996.

Just two more articles that are heavily biased towards certain groups:
 * * Feature selection
 * * Deep learning, reference [1] ^^

If I cite my work, then because it is a central scientific leap and there - of course - is a bias to scientific fields in which I have substantial knowledge. So I have noticed your comments, but I will neglect them and they still heavily insult me. Gklambauer (talk) 06:19, 28 April 2015 (UTC)