User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed)/Archive 2

Thanks
Hi Ian, Thanks I really appreciate that! This is my first time making a Wikipedia page and to be honest I'm a little nervous. I'll keep your offer in mind when I'm writing my article. AvatarAang94 (talk) 02:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Student Orientation
Hi, I have a question: I completed the student orientation, but still the dashboard says I didn't do so. Did I miss something? I was logged in and I even was able to give feedback. Thanks for your help Vogel ant789 (talk) 21:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Medical class in New York
Hello Ian. Would you please support this class with me? Education Program:Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai/Wikiproject Medicine (Winter 2015). I will do what I can to keep the medical classes coming especially in New York.

Message me if you ever want to talk, and please let me know if you find anyone interested in medicine in my region.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  20:23, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Shenendoah
Hi, Ian! I see you listed at Education Program:Shenandoah University/History and Systems of Psychology (Spring 2015), and hope we can avoid having this course become one of those typical psych course problems. My first encounter with the course was at Talk:Eating disorder not otherwise specified (I eventually found the course page), which is not a good start, and may indicate more guidance on MEDMOS, MEDRS, and what Wikipedia is and is not may be needed there. Bst regards, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 05:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Become a Wikipedian @ New College
Hi Ian - Thank you for taking the time to review the student pages. I'm going to ping my students here because there are others who are enrolled on my course page who are at other schools. These three students do have articles they are editing in the live space. In addition, Paul has a new proposed article in his sandbox that he would like to submit for review. I would also like to be included in your feedback threads if you don't mind. Thanks again for your help! Tburress (talk) 14:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I gave Pvilafl and HunterTharp feedback on their drafts. Lehession had already posted to mainspace, and gotten feedback from other editors (I see they have added some more since yesterday). Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

checking student assignments
Hi Ian. Thanks of the help. How do i check to see if my students are completing the assignments i have given them? e.g have they done the online training or have they edited an article? Mmdriskell (talk) 16:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Replied on your talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

A cookie for you!


Lixxx235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

''Thanks for all the work you do for the Education Program.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--L235 (talk) Ping when replying 21:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Help welcome in Boston
Please look through my edits related to the course on environmental problems with various chemicals. Students forced to contribute to chemistry articles have not always been very helpful. It appears that the teacher is tasking the students to re-re-edit articles that this course has hit several times before (they need new topics), A lot of their edits are not very good (understandably, these are kids), and it appears that the students are (understandably) just trying to satisfy the expectations of the teacher in terms of length of their contributions and the number of (often flimsy) references. Another problem is that these students are approaching these chemicals with an attitude the chemicals are evil with only dire effects. Many of these chemicals have problematic effects, but NPOV requires that editors approach topics with a more neutral perspective. Any intervention or help that you can offer them would really help the students and the instructor. One problem is that the instructor barely edits at Wikipedia, so this is a situation where Wikipedia is asked to do the babysitting. --Smokefoot (talk) 01:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pinging me on this . I was aware of this class, which has seems to have run successfully a couple times in the past (2014, 2011). I actually dropped reminders of MEDRS on all the students talk pages, and I was hoping that if we can pay enough attention to what they're up to, we can head off problems before they occur. (By the way, you can see what student editors are up to in mainspace (and whether they're taken the new editor training) here. (The interface has been acting weird on my PC for the last couple days - they're working on the problem - but works fine on a Mac. Hopefully it will be sorted out in a couple days.) We're also requiring instructors we support to put together more detailed course pages.
 * I'm really glad that you pinged me because, to be perfectly honest, I have never paid enough attention to the Chemistry WikiProject. I've always been a biology editor myself, and though I have a deep affection for chemistry and once thought I wanted to be a biochemist (resulting in an undergrad major I've never used) I've never paid attention to the article guidelines for chemistry. I saw this class through a biological lens and thought a lot about getting the point of MEDRS compliance across. Ironic, since I get annoyed when MEDRS is sometimes applied in a heavy-handed way to ethnobotanical and chemical information in plant articles (which is where my real interests in Wikipedia have always been).
 * The point of student assignments should be the contribution of good content, just another step on the path toward "the sum total of human knowledge". In some areas it works really well. If it's not working in chemistry, I'd like to figure out what it would take to make student edits (mostly) worthwhile. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Not to be too negative, but I dont see much basis for "[this course's contributions to Wikipedia] seems to have run successfully a couple times." Editor training is fine, but the real issue is the quality of the content and supporting references.  To make matters worse, as I mentioned, these articles have been the focus of this course previously, which limits the student's ability to contribute (the searches get more difficult). I am afraid that the students will put in a lot of (unsupervised) effort, they will then encounter a lot of flack from Wiki editors, and then everyone will be disappointed.  This conflict could be averted with more planning and involvement up front from the instructor. I dont know about the situation Wikipedia-Biology but it would be very challenging for unsupervised non-chemistry majors to contribute meaningfully to a Wiki-Chem article. In any case, thanks for the note.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

thanks for the shout out
hi Ian thanks in advance for the help because I seem to be fumbling through right and I probably will have my share questions in the future...and thanks for the pages..Yobandaik 18:26, 6 February 2015 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yobandaik (talk • contribs)

Thanks a lot Ian
From Toronto, Canada Lozmeister (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Patrolled Userpage
Hi Ian, I have a question: I just received a notification saying my userpage is "patrolled." What does that mean? Thank you! Wilzzw (talk) 20:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Not a whole lot Wilzzw. Basically it's a way of saying that pages created by relatively new editors have been checked my more established users to make sure that they're appropriate for Wikipedia. See Help:Patrolled edit and New pages patrol/patrolled pages if you want to know more. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Trinidad
Hi Ian! Thanks for the Welcome. I am from Trinidad! Abmax05 (talk) 22:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Curious
It has long been curious to me that, while students have access to superior sources via databases full of journals, they rarely use those kinds of sources. Considering that the grammatical content of most of the recent student edits are on about a sixth or seventh grade level (that is, mid-teens), it occurs to me that students may prefer accessing the popular press and dumbed down websites because they may not be able to comprehend content at the level of writing used by most journals. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:27, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Could be. I've often found my students to be intimidated by peer-reviewed journals. There's probably also the fact that if you're off campus, you need to log in to {something} to use your university's resources. And there's habit - Google tells you everything you need to know about everything. Generally via Wikipedia. Joking aside, I think this is actually an important point, and one that I should stress in my notes to students. "High quality reliable sources" may not be clear, "review articles" even less so. Use Google Scholar instead of Google might be useful (though I remember having a student complain that using the sources Google Scholar turned up would cost them $35 an article. At which point I discovered that they had no idea of the journal subscriptions that they had access to.) On the other hand, we also have students linking to university proxy servers instead of journal websites - which is especially frustrating when they just drop a bare url... Anyway, it may well be that we're assuming more knowledge of journals than many undergrads have. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm more and more convinced that today's undergrads (or at least those that are forced to edit Wikipedia by their prof) simply don't have either the research or the writing skills to be able to effectively add anything to an encyclopedia. Profs are simply asking too much of them, across the board, and leaving us to do the work.  The writing skill level I have seen this week has been quite an eye opener -- one that has made me appreciate the education my children had (they knew how to write in high school).  Either the students don't much care about what they plop in, or their writing skills truly are on a middle school level.   I can't imagine them being able to digest a scholarly journal article.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:53, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I feel the same way about most of the writing on Wikipedia, even the stuff that gets past FAC, or gets submitted to journals. The hardest part of doing either FAC reviews or real peer reviews is not getting side-tracked by the quality of the writing. Undergrads, it seems to me, write no worse than the average Wikipedia contributor - and a lot better than many I've encountered. There's no logical way we should have ever managed to create the encyclopaedia we created. But somehow we did. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * We walked uphill, both ways, through the snow. :) But seriously - as an undergrad (and before, that, for A Levels) we had three-hour essay exams, where you answered two or three essays questions. And wrote, flat out, for the full three hours. And before that, we wrote essay exams for O Levels. We spent three years learning to answer O Level essay questions, and two more learning to write A Level essays. To write well, you need to write a lot. We did three subjects at A Level, and even me, a total slacker, put five hours a night into homework. The American high school system, with its emphasis on extracurriculars, would never have time for that, nor would undergrads with their jobs and internships. And who would have the time to grad that stuff? Not faculty who are expected to have their exams graded in days (we had a month to grade, if memory serves me - and needed it!) I can't fault people for not being able to do what they never learned to do. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 05:14, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * yes to all of that (including the routine distraction of pedestrian prose at FAC) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 13:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * There ought to be, as one of the early steps in the tutorials, an exercise of accessing a recent issue of a commonly-available academic journal (say, Nature or Phys Rev A), identifying a secondary source in that journal, and citing it, at least providing a DOI or PMID, if not a full citation. To ensure they've accessed the article, and not just an abstract, it should require a quotation not found in the abstract. Bonus marks could be given for a fully-formed citation and for a correctly rewritten, not close-paraphrased statement conveying an understanding of the concept to a topic-naive reader. LeadSongDog come howl!  16:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not a bad idea. I don't write tutorials, but I'll bring it up. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Seriously, in some cases, even that won't help.  Have a look at any contrib, anywhere, so far from Education Program:Shenandoah University/History and Systems of Psychology (Spring 2015), and you will see that we do not seem to have core competence in either writing or research abilities from that class, so teaching them to cite will not likely be a productive use of time.  (Not that I haven't been trying.)  I'd love to have more feedback on the long threads happening on my talk (eg !).  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:47, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the warm welcome
Hi Ian, I am in Environmental_Disruptors_of_Development and would like to thank you greatly for the warm welcome and cookies (they were virtually delicious)! I am new to Wiki but am greatly excited to partake in this massive collaboration of human brainpower! Looking forward to reading and taking note of your edits, comments and suggestions - please keep them coming, it's super helpful and it's people like you that make Wiki the powerhouse that it is! Great job! Again thank you!

Mantareina (talk) 20:45, 21 February 2015 (UTC)mantareina




 * Thanks you! Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank You for the Welcome!
Ian,

I sincerely appreciate the kind welcome I received from you! I can bet I will probably need help at some point this semester, so it's nice to know I already have someone to help me! :)

Mdr87 (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Help with some wikiEtiquette
Ian, thanks for your warm welcomes for my class! We are unfortunately experiencing some extremely not-so-warm comments from Smokefoot on many of my students pages. For example: "When you say "different chemicals that are polymerized" you sound chemically illiterate. It will be difficult for someone with such a weak grasp of our language to contribute useful content? Maybe there are less technical articles worth considering for your class? --Smokefoot (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)" on this page Talk:Plastic pollution, and many comments such as this: "Those are not very good sources. Please talk to your teacher about how grown-ups do bibliographic searches in the sciences. --Smokefoot (talk) 14:31, 16 February 2015 (UTC)" on the Talk:Endrin page. I've communicated with smokefoot several times, and he believes that this is the the only way he can get their attention (he characterizes his comments as 'semi-shrill'). My students, and myself, are feeling bullied by his crass, insulting comments, and he could 'get their attention' much more effectively, and constructively (inspiring action instead of outrage) by being more courteous. Would you mind looking into what he's saying to my students? Here's some of my interaction with him. User:Smokefoot in the "Thanks for help, Smokefoot and welcome to my new semester". Hakeleh (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder
Thank you for reminding me to put in my final article! I won't forget.

Wilzzw (talk) 00:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Free Work Vs Fair Use
Dear Ian, I'm currently editing the Wikipedia page on carbonic anhydrase, and I had a quick question for you. I want to upload a couple of pictures to the article. The first is from a website called the Protein Data Bank (PDB). PDB is a databank containing many protein crystal structures as well as articles about different kinds of proteins, and its free for anyone to use. I've downloaded an image from one of these articles using a software known as Swiss PDB Viewer, which allows you to edit the picture yourself to show certain aspects of the protein that you wish to point out. The source of the picture is from a freely available journal article, but I've edited the picture to suit my purposes, so would that picture be considered a "free work" or a "fair use?" The second picture I'll be uploading is from a chemistry tool known as ChemDraw. This tool allows you to draw molecules yourself and turn them into picture files. I've drawn the metal ion in the active site of the protein that I'm studying, as well as the ligands that surround it. The idea of the picture that I've drawn is from a research article that is NOT freely available to all users, but the picture itself is original since I've drawn it myself. Would this picture be ok to use in my article, and if so, would it be free work or fair use?

Thanks! AvatarAang94 (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments
Hello Ian! Thank you for the comments about linking more to other articles and about spelling out abbreviations that haven't been introduced. It didn't occur to me that people may not be able to access some information (behind a pay wall due to limited access to academic journals).

Harris.qureshi (talk) 01:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Headings disappeared when I add references
Hi Ian,

I am experiencing technical problems in my Sandbox: when I start to add in text references to my article, my headings and even my contents start to disappear... I don't know why this happened. Would you please help me with this?

Thank you and sincerely,

Wilzzw (talk) 01:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I resolved the problem! Although I still don't know what errors I made the first place. I just got rid off all the previous citations and it worked.

Wilzzw (talk) 02:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey Ian! Thanks for the warm welcome!
Hey Ian! My name is Arjun and I am in the Comm 375 Class at UMass Amherst! I was hoping you could take a look at my sandbox and see my first article and let me know what your thoughts are! I am most concerned about bias, I want to ensure that this article is informative not biased in any manner. Please let me know! Also how do you reference (cite) tables?

Thanks! Arjun Chawla — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArjunChawla175 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

found an error, but don't know how to deal with it
Hi Ian. I found a mistake in Disturbance_(ecology) under the section for criteria. I cannot figure out what the author did. How do us and our students deal with this kind of issues? Shall we edit the page, post on the talk page of the article or try to find in the history who made the mistake? Please advise. Thank you. Sensitivsci (talk) 16:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * - you should always feel free to fix mistakes. Just use the edit summary, briefly, what you fixed. If it needs a longer explanation, use the talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

RE: Feedback
Thank you for your feedback, I will implement your suggestions shortly. As far as where I was thinking of going with the article, I was thinking of it as a stand alone article. Do you think that this is advisable?

ArjunChawla175 (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Question regarding copy right
Hi, I Could use your help in making my wikipage, I got an image from wikimedia common regarding a photo I uploaded over there. I took a snapshot of couple images from this study. then I used adope illustrator to reorganize the pictures and put new captions on them. And now I got this message https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AmmarBanafea

I really want to use this figure. Tell me how I can pull this off?

Thank you Ian, — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmmarBanafea (talk • contribs) 17:03, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Saying hello
Hi Ian!

Harkjoon (talk) 03:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for help, re: images and copyright
Ian, This is Jami in a workshop with a student at NDSU. She had some great questions about images and copyright. Do you know/have advice about how to find the information on when this image (or one like it) was created? We're checking to see if it's in the public domain or if she will need to create a similar image herself. Advice? Meganrose99 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Jami/Meganrose99 - the first thing I could think of was a reverse image search. Couldn't find any other copies of that image using TinEye or Google image search. That's a pretty good suggestion that this version of the image is an original creation for the web site that uses it (and is thus copyright). The information, on the other hand, is unlikely to be copyright (after all, it looks like Spearman's original paper was from 1904). Whether the level of originality in that image (e.g., the colour selection, the degree of overlap between the circles) was enough to create a new copyright is beyond my knowledge. I would play it safe and not copy that particular image. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:01, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ian, Going live
Hi Ian,

I want to go live with my wikipedia article I have been working on as part of my CHM437S Bioinorganic Chemistry course I am taking. My current draft is found in my sandbox. If you have a chance, could you take a look and give me some feedback?

Thanks! LacMJ (talk) 14:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Creating a new article
Hi Ian, I'm enrolled in the Education Program "Environmental Disruptors of Development," and am currently working on the dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate page with two partners, and we are in the process of researching and discussing the toxicology and degradation of the chemical. Most of the toxicology, however, is a result of these degradates, and we believe it would be a good idea to create separate pages to discuss these degradates in order to maintain fluidity and cohesion in our article (we are having trouble finding where to put that information in our current article). There are only two degradates, monomethyl tetrachloroterephthalic acid and tetrachloroterephthalic acid, and we are currently researching those as well as researching our topic chemical. Would we be allowed to create new pages for these two chemicals? Thank you in advance for your help. Ctpen15 (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Question for BioClocks editing
Thank you Ian for the welcome! I am part of the group responsible for editing the Casein kinase 1 epsilon page on Wikipedia for WashU's Biological Clocks course, and I was wondering if you could help me with two questions:

1. I was wondering about the Wikipedia policy for gene and protein names. I looked on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology/Style Guide (gene and protein articles), but I'm not sure it has what I'm looking for. Specifically, I have tried to look through my draft of the new page in my Sandbox to remain consistent with gene and protein nomenclature for the different model organisms that I talk about, but I'm worried that I am making my description too complicated. For example, when I name a gene or protein, I tried to provide abbreviations for that protein or gene, but the gene and protein nomenclature requires that I present that information in differing formats. I might write about Period protein (PER) one sentence, and then need to write about period gene and want to refer to it as "per" in another. Is it better to simply write out the full name of the gene or protein each time and explicitly write either "protein" or "gene" afterwards?

2. I have tried asking my student wiki editors (put in place by my professor), and looking on wikipedia (on the redirect page), and I'm not sure that I can do what I want to do. Anyway, I thought I'd ask. Specifically, casein kinase 1 epsilon has many alternative abbreviations (likely due to differing model organisms). Is there a way that I can redirect an abbreviation, specifically "CK1e" TO my wikipedia page, as there is currently only one casein kinase 1 epsilon page (and one for the family)? (I am under the impression that the redirect page concerns redirects FROM a page--the other way around.)

Thank you for any help that you can provide! Linnecou (talk) 01:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)Courtney

Thank you for your help and suggestions! You have answered all of my questions! Linnecou (talk) 18:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)Courtney

Students will be going live
Hi Ian,

The students in my Cornell University class are going to move their articles from the sandbox into the live space. They have been instructed on the correct way to move an article, so should go smoothly. In addition, we will be conducting peer evaluation and feedback of each article this Friday. We (the instructors) have gone through the articles and approved them to be moved and we are aware of some minor adjustments that will need to be made to the tone and structure of each article, but we were overall very pleased with how they turned out. We anticipate the students will be providing great feedback to help improve the article and changes will be made in the coming two weeks. Let me know if you have any concerns!

Thanks so much! Saguaromelee (talk) 15:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I will take a look at them. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Going live with my CHM437 Assignment
Dear Ian,

I wonder if I could have your permission and advice before posting my page for Eosinophil peroxidase live. Is the style of my Sandbox article quite alright?

Be boldRfwh (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Richmond Nature Park - Help
Hi Ian,

So when we changed the title of our sandbox2 page to 'Richmond Nature Park', a heading came up stating the following just above our intro: "This sandbox is in the User talk namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the User sandbox template". Any suggestions for what to do about this? were not sure. Let me know when you can!Laurasweil (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richmond Nature Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Urban. 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) 09:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Biological Clocks message
Hello -

We're students in the Biological Clocks class at Wash U. Two of my classmates and I created a Wiki page for the White Collar-1 gene/protein two weeks ago called "White Collar-1." We made significant edits and updates to the page between 1900 CST and 0200 CST last night after doing more research. However, we double checked this morning and saw that all of those edits have been removed. Is there any way to recover those edits?? The page is published online currently.

Please let me know!!

AYRhodes (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks from NDSU!
Thanks Ian, for the great feedback you are giving my students. I will try to cut your work down a bit by passing along comments that apply to other groups. J.R. Council (talk) 03:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your feedback on the Metapsychology article. J.R. Council (talk) 03:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * and thanks again for your work on the SPSSI article. I'm wondering whether they'll be able to make all these changes in time. J.R. Council (talk) 18:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow, you're quick. Just saw the feedback to 2-factor group. I'm sure they'll be proud to get such positive comments. Again, please send me some information on fast-tracking new articles. Thanks! J.R. Council (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Details in the email. Let me know if that's not what you were asking. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

My Side Bar isn't cooperating
Hey Ian! I am trying to change the wording on the side bar for the article I started called Racial Bias in Criminal News but it is always resetting to what was previously on there. How can I change this? Thanks! ArjunChawla175 (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)


 * You were editing the wrong template. I'll try to sort this out. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!!! ArjunChawla175 (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Question on image use
Hello Ian,

I am student from the Psy 327 class at Miami University. I was hoping you could help us out with explaining some of the copyright info about pictures.

We would like to upload a chart from a psychology article, published in a psychological journal and scanned online. We took a screen capture of the image we needed and wanted to be sure it is allowable to upload. The article is available online on Google scholar, but is copyrighted by the Association for Psychological Science. In searching, we could not find an image of the graph already, which is why we took our own. We have the article and are able to cite to it. We just would want to be sure it is allowable to use before we upload it. Englecp (talk) 16:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi . Images on wikipedia must (almost always) be freely licensed, in this case the APS owns the copyright to that image so we cannot upload a copy of it. Depending on the available data it may be possible to recreate the graph, but in most cases that is often a lot more work. What is the specific article? It might be possible to find something similar. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Final Questions
Hey Ian thank you for all your help this past semester, I am in a communication class at University of Massachusetts Amherst and you have really been helpful navigating Wikipedia! I have one final favor to ask, I am trying to make sure that my article Racial Bias in Criminal News doesn't sound essayish could you take a look and let me know and also let me know if you have any final pieces of advice for the article. Thank you! ArjunChawla175 (talk) 03:24, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi . One thing you may want to consider is the habit of placing statistics before the reader (e.g. the two tables) and then suggesting a conclusion in the voice of the encyclopedia ("This suggests that African Americans are treated less humanely and in a less individualistic way than Caucasians"). In this case we're citing papers where the researchers presented those statistics to make their case and we want to summarize the academic conversation. We want to be especially careful about this when sections rely on a single source (Entman). We can present tables and we can obviously present the work of individual researchers but offering both and suggesting to the reader a conclusion means we risk importing too much of the view of one source in our article. Does that make sense? Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Question
Hi, Ian, I am a student in the CHM437 class and wanted to go live with my article on siderocalin. I have made some changes, and was wondering how to proceed. Thanks, Anavimadumim15 (talk) 12:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Anavimadumim15 I replied on the talk page of your draft article. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Now I see what you meant about tags
Looked at JG's talk page after checking nomophobie. I agree - citations seemed fine to me. J.R. Council (talk) 21:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ian, I need help with making my pic larger
Hi Ian,

I am a student from Education Program:University of Toronto/CHM437S Bioinorganic Chemistry (Winter 2015). My article is ATP7A. Before moving it live, I would like to make my picture larger (please see my sandbox: the picture titled "Proposed structure of copper-transporting protein ATP7A"). It seems too small so could you help me make it larger?

Thank you. Daamoy (talk) 18:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

About Carbonic Anhydrase
Hey Ian, I noticed you added my sandbox article on the Carbonic anhydrase article to the actual Wikipedia article. However, the article wasn't completely finished and still contains some errors. Is it possible to reverse the page back to what it was before? Or is it fine in your opinion? Thanks, AvatarAang94 (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eosinophil peroxidase, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cofactor. 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) 08:59, 18 July 2015 (UTC)