User talk:Mayoclinicproceedings


 * }

Mayo Clinic Proceedings
The bulk of the edits you made recently to this article and the following edits from an IP address (could have been you not logged in) were a copyright violation from the journal's web site. From your name, it seems that you have a conflict of interest editing this article. That does not prevent you editing it, but you have to take care. Note that even if you are the webmaster for the journal's web page, you still can not copy the material into wikipedia, because it says "Copyright © 2009 by Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research". It is not released under an open license compatible with the wikipedia license. I did some wikifying and I left information in the infobox which is supported by the journal's web site as a source. It is OK as a source but not to copy. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  23:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Greetings. Thank you for your comments on my talk page. I would normally reply there but you probably would not see it. Like a lot of things, getting the best outcomes from using wikipedia involves studying it, following the policies and guidelines, and understanding how it works. If you look at the history (click the history tag at the top of the page), you will see that I made only one edit as I have described above on this page. I removed the material because it was a copyright violation. Looks what it says at the bottom of the page when you are in the editor - "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0 and the GFDL". The material on your web site is not released under those licenses so it can not just be copied into wikipedia. You can use it as a source, but you must write it on wikipedia in your own words. You can add material, but it must be written from a neutral point of view, it must not be advertising (we do not care whether you want people to link to your site - we just care about giving people good reliable, verifiable information), and it must be referenced. For the impact factor it would be best if the information was from an independent site - some journal pages are known to inflate their impact factors. Just follow our policies nad guidelines and you will be fine. From the history it is clear that since my intervention, most of the edits have been by User:Crusio. He is very active in editing articles on journals and I suggest you seek his advice and help. He is very knowledgeable. I am about to take a break from editing wikipedia, at least as actively as I normally am, as I am taking a holiday overseas. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  22:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)