User talk:Jack1144

Welcome!

 * }

October 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page PLOS ONE has been reverted. Your edit here to PLOS ONE was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://poynder.blogspot.in/2012/02/oa-interviews-michael-eisen-co-founder.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. MrOllie (talk) 18:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at PLOS ONE shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. 18:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit war at Open Access
The addition of an unreferenced list of List of Open Access Publishers  many of which are red links is POV, wikipedia is not a directory there is no consensus to add the list and you are in danger of being blocked for edit warring (4 reverts in 24 hours) Please discuss on the article talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Article processing charges
Hello ,

It seems to me that an article you worked on, Article processing charges, may be copied from http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijmms/apc/. It's entirely possible that I made a mistake, but I wanted to let you know because Wikipedia is strict about copying from other sites.

It's important that you edit the article and rewrite it in your own words, unless you're absolutely certain nothing in it is copied. If you're not sure how to fix the problem or have any questions, there are people at the help desk who are happy to assist you.

Thank you for helping build a free encyclopedia! MadmanBot (talk) 14:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Article processing charges


The article Article processing charges has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * unsourced and no indication of WP:notability

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. noq (talk) 15:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Richard D.Smith
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Richard D.Smith, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.sysbio.org/resources/staff/smith.stm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Promotional edits
Hi, I see that you have created an article for Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics. However, it is incorrect to add to the biographies of all members of the editorial board the text: " Founding Editor and Editorial Board member for Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics by OMICS Publishing Group", with "references" to the homepages of the journal and the publisher. Who publishes the journal is information that belongs in the article on the journal, not in these bios. External links to the journal and the publisher's website are, in this context, regarded as promotional: they belong in the articles on the journal/publisher and, again, not in these bios. Finally, although you added some of this text to bios of people that are indeed listed as being on the editorial board, "founding editor" is generally a term reserved for the first editor-in-chief, not subordinate editors and certainly not mere editorial board members (like Richard J. Simpson). I would appreciate if you could clean up these edits and remove the links/adapt inappropriate text. Thanks. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:OMICS Publishing Group.png
Thanks for uploading File:OMICS Publishing Group.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "SciTechnol"
A page you created, SciTechnol, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is obvious advertising or promotional material.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Mdann52 (talk) 11:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at SciTechnol
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from SciTechnol. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps: Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willing to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 11:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says [ Click here to contest this speedy deletion].
 * 2) This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to SciTechnol, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. Mdann52 (talk) 12:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at SciTechnol with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Mdann52 (talk) 12:37, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Your edits (and those of others)
Hi Jack1144, Your pattern of edits is worrying me. Almost all of your edits seem to be related to the OMICS Publishing Group: creating articles on their divisions, journals, etc. In doing so, you are apparently trusting their website. This is not warranted: several of the claims they post do not stand up to scrutiny. In addition, they really seem to be a bunch of amateurs: their website claims that articles from their journals are deposited into "PubMed", apparently they don't know the difference between PubMed and PubMed Central (the first is an index, sometimes linking through to content, the latter is a repository). In addition, there are several other new editors popping up that are creating articles on journal editors, journals, or editorial board members. They all use similar edit summaries, have the very same editing style, and make the same grammatical mistakes. Let me ask you up front: are you related in some way to these other editors? Are you guys working for OMICS? In any case, please read WP:COI and WP:SOCKPUPPET for policies that are perhaps applicable here. Thanks. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Scitechnol.png
Thanks for uploading File:Scitechnol.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics


The article Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Journal of doubtful notability. Website claims it is listed in several databases, but on checking this is often incorrect (for instance, not listed in the Thomson Reuters Master Journal List http://science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/). 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. Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I have removed the content stating about indexing. So, i request you to go through the article once again.Jack1144 (talk) 14:16, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journal of Proteomics & Bioinformatics 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 Proteomics & Bioinformatics 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. Guillaume2303 (talk) 14:20, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:People
This category is a parent category for categories about people. An individual person should never be filed directly in this category; individuals belong in the appropriate national and/or occupational subcategories.--Mdy66 (talk) 15:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People

Nomination of Srinubabu Gedela for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Srinubabu Gedela 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/Srinubabu Gedela 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) 17:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Scitechnol.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scitechnol.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 23:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC)