User talk:Jkxgao

July 2009
Hello, a significant portion of Johnson gao appears to have been copied from external sources. Another editor and I have removed content already, but you may wish to recheck the article and clean up any other non-free content. See this article for more information on copyrights. ZabMilenko How am I driving? 16:45, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Jkxgao! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Johnson Gao -

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Jkxgao. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Johnson K. Gao, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Dodi 8238 (talk) 22:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
Hello, I'm Dodi 8238. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to The Selfish Gene because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Dodi 8238 (talk) 23:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at The Selfish Gene shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Dodi 8238 (talk) 23:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Dodi8238: Your undo seems unfair. Why don't you read the book ISBN 9781462699933 to get some new knowledge about selfish gene and then you make a fair editing on what is the real meaning of selfish gene. Why you used many time of the words from one author (Richard Dawkins, which may be not perfect due to out of date and un-advanced science) and not let other people to say something more correctly than Dawkins with experiment? You seem like to use one person's forum. If what I quoted is not true, you can correct it. But, don't give no good reason and delete it. May I request a temporaly un-delete? Or, ask for an administer to judge? Jkxgao (talk) 04:34, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * The quote you added from page 11 is off topic, because it has nothing to do with Dawkins's book or the gene-centered view of evolution. As to the quote you added from page 8, see WP:PROFRINGE:
 * Wikipedia is neither a publisher of original thought nor a soapbox for self-promotion and advertising. The notability of a fringe theory must be judged by statements from verifiable and reliable sources, not the proclamations of its adherents. ... Efforts of fringe-theory inventors to shill on behalf of their theories, such as the offering of self-published material as references, are unacceptable: Wikipedia is not an advertising venue. (See also Links normally to be avoided, Conflict of interest, Autobiography guidelines.)


 * The neutral point of view policy requires that all majority and significant-minority positions be included in an article. However, it also requires that they not be given undue weight. A conjecture that has not received critical review from the scientific community or that has been rejected may be included in an article about a scientific subject only if other high-quality reliable sources discuss it as an alternative position. Ideas supported only by a tiny minority may be explained in articles devoted to those ideas if they are notable.
 * The article about The Selfish Gene may not be perfect, but that does not make it OK for you to push quotes from your self-published book into it, giving undue weight to your work. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 07:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

The Selfish Gene
I have again reverted your edit at The Selfish Gene because the material does not relate to the article which is about a book on evolution. Edits which are challenged must be discussed on the talk page of the article Talk:The Selfish Gene where reasons to justify new text should be explained. Johnuniq (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Johnson K. Gao


The article Johnson K. Gao has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Abysmal auto-hagiography. If an article is justified for this individual, it needs to be written from, scratch, according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines, as proper encyclopaedic content. There is nothing here worth saving.

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. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Object to deletion. It is not an Abysmal auto-hagiography. It is a real biography of a person with multi-talent, although there are not many people like him in recent years. And his scientic works, arts and song tracks are all true with documents and reference that can be opened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkxgao (talk • contribs) 22:31, 24 July 2015‎


 * A simple question: have you read Wikipedia's guidelines on notability - specifically Notability (academics), which seems to be the only relevant one in this case? If so, can you let us know which of the criteria listed you think Gao meets, and which third-party published reliable sources can be cited to demonstrate this.


 * And incidentally, you refer to Gao as 'him'. Can you clarify whether you are Gao or not - because if you aren't, your username would appear to be in violation of policy: "Do not edit under a name that is likely to imply that you are (or are related to) a specific, identifiable person, unless it is your real name". If you are Gao, you should of course familiarise yourself with the Conflict of interest guideline. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Remember to sign your posts
When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 23:14, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Johnson K. Gao for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Johnson K. Gao 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/Johnson K. Gao 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. Michig (talk) 16:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Dear Michig: when I read your note, I feel that you are an administor to help mediation I requested, because one person felt that Johnson K. Gao file was Abysmal auto-hagiography and must be deleted. The word "Abysmal" means terrible and the word "auto-hagiography" means an autobiography of a saint or an autobiography that flatters the subject, or, the that two words put together means that article is too good to be true. Unfortunately, all the materials in the article are based on real document. Since you are a specialist in music, you may know that to compose a piece of music is quite tedious, especially Johnson K. Gao is an retired professor in Cell Biology, at old age 78. And you can help to check the music part in that article. The listed songs are all realistic songs and can be opened. Such as in http://soundcloud.com/johnson-k-gao and http://cdbaby.com/all/huangying, and most of song tracks were set for free download. Johnson K. Gao is a scientist. To compose so many songs seems impossible or a "saint". But, the real meaning to list the article is not to flatter a person. It is to encourage young people to develop multi-talent through diligent work. I hope that to let the article not be deleted may good for wiki to induce more people to learn from great Renaissance man Da Vinci. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkxgao (talk • contribs) 23:04, 27 July 2015‎


 * Please do not write or add to an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add information to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 07:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Johnson K. Gao


A tag has been placed on Johnson K. Gao, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Captain Calm (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

You are the termite to damage the wikipedia. Your heart is as small as an ant. Your envy is as large as Himalayan Mountain. You did not specify which part of my article is related to promotional. You are very rude people, Every one like you to hate adding new items, the wikipedia will be dead. Please speedy delete your unreasonable wrong doing. And give me back of my editing right. Your knowledge is inferior to the primary school student. You had better forward my essay to your boss.
 * Let me note that you have been blocked because it appears you were trying to write about yourself and in a promotional manner. Wikipedia does not exist to promote or advertise our subjects, and we strongly discourage writing autobiographies. If you would like to edit again, simply follow the instructions in your block message that mention adding Template:Unblock. You will need to show that you understand Wikipedia is not about promoting yourself, which is the only thing you seem to have done here so far. Also, while you colorful invectives are creative, they are not likely to earn you favor, and I suggest you keep your language WP:CIVIL. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Captain Calm (talk) 15:24, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)