User talk:Peter Alibaba

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello, Peter Alibaba, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made to RCFile seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! ♥ Melody ♥ 23:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Peter Alibaba, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to LIRS caching algorithm have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Translation. See also Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello, Peter Alibaba. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to research published by a small group of researchers.

Scientific articles should mainly reference review articles to ensure that the information added is trusted by the scientific community.

Editing in this way is also a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest in Wikipedia – please see WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDCOI. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be a form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM) and the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.

Finally, please be aware that the editing community highly values expert contributors – please see WP:EXPERT. I do hope you will consider contributing more broadly. If you wish to contribute, please first consider citing review articles written by other researchers in your field and which are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite your own research, please start a new thread on the article talk page and add requestedit to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added.

GermanJoe (talk) 08:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Please stop adding publications by this author and suggest further similar additions on article talk instead. It is pretty clear that you have some conflict of interest regarding these publications - Wikipedia is no venue to pad one's citation count or to advocate specific research projects. GermanJoe (talk) 09:44, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * While I agree there appears to be a COI here, I don't think 100% of this user's contributions need to be removed. Adding a citation for an algorithm that was already described ought to be nothing to complain about (unless your argument is that it's already cited from LIRS caching algorithm, in which case that point was not made clear). Adding another algorithm with citations showing that it's used in Linux, and which is already described (in less detail) on the related article Page replacement algorithm also ought not be a problem. I think we should keep any contributions that improve these articles; there's surely a balance between WP:SELFCITE which is "allowed within reason" and WP:REFSPAM which is not. --Bigpeteb (talk) 00:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't disagree with your sentiment in general. Of course such edits need to be evaluated case by case (and I did), but and which is already described (in less detail) on the related article ... is exactly the problem with such edits. The removed cases were either redundant, vague observations without substantial facts, added unnecessary "examples" (Wikipedia is not a textbook), or placed undue weight on these publications and research. If you believe in a specific case, that a citation is necessary in a given context please feel free to re-add such special instances - good-faith disagreements do happen, no problem. But the vast majority of these edits where drive-by additions which didn't add substantial content or source value. Also, several of the references seemed to be publications without apparent editorial oversight and should be avoided for verification of facts. GermanJoe (talk) 06:59, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of interest (II)
Hello Peter Alibaba, please stop adding references when you have a probable conflict of interest regarding these publications. You are welcome to suggest such additions on the article talkpage as edit request though. Also, Wikipedia is generally based on peer-reviewed secondary sources - please see WP:RS for more information. Thank you for your consideration. GermanJoe (talk) 08:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)