User talk:OA Chemist

Hello, OA Chemist, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place " " on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. --TeaDrinker (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

WikiProject Chemistry
The above message is more or less boilerplate, so let me extend a personal welcome. With your interests, you might find WikiProject Chemistry something to take a look at. Wikiprojects often collaborate to improve articles or identify deficiencies. It looks like you're off to a great start editing. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns (just write a note on the bottom of my talk page, User talk:TeaDrinker. Best wishes and great to have you here! --TeaDrinker (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Up to date info
Thanks for the note. You were asking why I deleted your recent publication from the general article on SeO2. You inserted the same citation in about four articles on the same session. I removed probably two.
 * Here is a list of my reasoning


 * Wikipedia is not the place for authors to try to draw attention to their work. Especially since, according to Chemical Abstracts, 250 publications appear daily in chemical literature - we do not aspire to record them and your paper did not appear near the top of that long list.
 * WP:RECENTISM and WP:SECONDARY the goal of an encyclopedia is not to record the most current literature, but the stature of a field as reflected by secondary sources (books and reviews). If you can find books and reviews, please bring them to Wikipedia, our most important need.
 * Breadth. Most newer editors are just learning to acquire some breadth of perspective as scientists, i.e. that their understanding of their area of expertise is somewhat narrow. Citing secondary sources is also more difficult, which of course is a barrier often because new editors want the fun of inserting information without spending the energy to supply good information.  The pattern is quite clear. Feel free to ask questions.  And of course, these are the opinions of one editor, others have different views.  Having said those negative themes, it would be wonderful to have you edit in this project, because we need experts.  But most of all, we want experts with a sense of perspective, and this project is one way to gain such perspective.--Smokefoot (talk) 13:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)