User talk:Schilthuizen

October 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=687240741 your edit] to Asymmetry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * trait, having evolved numerous times in many organisms and at many levels of organisation ranging from individual cells, through organs, to entire body-shapes. Benefits of asymmetry
 * There are no a and b such that a b and b  a. Introduction to Set Theory, Third Edition, Revised and Expanded: Hrbacek, Jech.{{

Nomination of Taxon expedition for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Taxon expedition 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/Taxon expedition 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. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

A word
Hallo, that's the formal notice above, but perhaps a more personal word would be helpful. Two things to note: firstly, Wikipedia doesn't really allow articles about words (it's not a dictionary), especially when these are newly-coined, so I'm sorry but I think the article will have to go. Secondly, it seems that you have a conflict of interest on the article, and indeed on the article about yourself. Wikipedia does not absolutely forbid editing of topics on which editors have an interest in the world outside, but the practice is strongly discouraged. The reasons are obvious enough: it is hard to be objective when editing articles about oneself and one's projects. Please familiarise yourself with the policy and take extra care to ensure that everything is reliably cited to independent third-party sources, i.e. authorities to which you are not connected.

A scientist (not me) has written File:Wikipedia editing for scientists Workshop.pdf a description of some of the challenges facing scientists on Wikipedia. Editing here differs markedly from writing a scientific report, not least because secondary sources are preferred to primary, and original research is not allowed, so everything may seem upside-down.

I hope these notes and suggestions may be of some help. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)