User talk:Msri20

Welcome!
Hello, Msri20, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:
 * 1) Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
 * 2) We do that, by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do.  Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources.  (for the difference between primary and secondary sources, see WP:MEDDEF)
 * 3) Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS). High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please be aware that predatory publishers exist - check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
 * 4) The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead, that is not in the body. Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
 * 5) More generally see WP:MEDHOW
 * 6) Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
 * 7) We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
 * 8) Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities.
 * 9) Do not use URLs from your university library's internal net: the rest of the world cannot see them.
 * 10) Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article.
 * 11) Please format citations consistently within an article and be sure to cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books; see WP:MEDHOW for how to format citations.
 * 12) Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
 * 13) Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us! Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team --Jytdog (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Curcumin. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Alexbrn (talk) 06:13, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi. I noticed that you ran into some problems with the curcumin article. I wanted to give you a bit more explanation of what was going on.


 * It's critically important that you pick your sources carefully, and don't go beyond what the sources say. In this case, the author (Heger) argues that curcumin warrants more study before it is dismissed. It's a opinion, expressed by Heger and supported by a number of colleagues, not a review article. It's a reliable source for their opinion, sure, but that doesn't answer the question of whether their opinion belongs in this article.

Generally speaking, if it's a biomedical topic, you should steer clear of the "possible" and stick to what's established.


 * When writing about biomedical topics, you should rely on recent review articles. This article is almost a decade old, so not only is it outside the guidelines, it's also too old to source a statement that begins with "currently".
 * You're writing about the chemistry and biochemistry of curcumin. Don't confuse what happens in vitro with what happens in whole organisms.
 * Even more importantly, you haven't discussed disease (despite the section title), and haven't used sources that could reasonably be used to speak about disease.

Again, you shouldn't be speculating

Here in particular, you're violating the central rule of the types of articles you can use for sources about biomedical content. These are experimental studies, not review articles. In addition, when you pick sources that support your point of view, without including those that don't, you are introducing bias into the article. Since it's almost impossible to review the literature in a systematic fashion as a non-expert, Wikipedia relies on review articles. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)