User talk:Sebastiano venturi

Welcome!

Hello, Sebastiano venturi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that 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, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Antioxidants
HI there, thanks for adding to this article, could you provide some references for the section you added? Thanks. TimVickers 20:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again, don't wory about formatting the references, I can deal with that. Let's get that section's content fixed before we deal with formatting. I've put some comments on the Talk:antioxidant page. All my best. TimVickers 14:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sebastiano, I've proposed an outline for this section on the talk page. I would be grateful for your comments. TimVickers 15:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Sebastiano, it sounds good but I'm not really sure selenium is an antioxidant under the definition used on this page, have a look at the talk page and see what you think. TimVickers 20:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

10:07, 19 April 2007

Hi Tim,

Excuse me, but I don’t understand, what I was asked for to do now! Can you help me? '''

Yours Sebastiano

Two accounts?
Are you using this account now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Venturi47 ? Tyciol 11:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Evolution of dietary antioxidants
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Evolution of dietary antioxidants, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://onebrain.55-plus.com/Evolution_of_dietary_antioxidants.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Evolution of dietary antioxidants and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Evolution of dietary antioxidants with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Evolution of dietary antioxidants.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Evolution of dietary antioxidants/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Evolution of dietary antioxidants saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Kingturtle (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Iodine
Thank you for adding information to the articles Iodine and Stomach cancer. I have made invisible your text in Iodine (using tags) because of unclear references. The text is accessible if you press "edit". Could you please (i) check the http://web.tiscali.it/iodio/ site. My server simply blocks it because it detects adult content. Is that server hijacked? (ii) Please complete references (preferably for your every addition). Wikipedia is approaching peer-review journals in this regard. Every significant fact should be supported by reference(s) or it might be deleted. It is a nuisance to learn wikipedia formatting, but could you please add refs in some free-style format, such as. Other editors will clean up the formatting. Doi number is very much desirable for web access. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 00:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I would like to point out that you should state that you are in a conflict of interest when writing in the iodine article. Please have a look in Conflict of interest. To add your publications into wikipedia is not what should be done. If there is no review article or book this concept might not to well established to be in the iodine article.--Stone (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Let me expand a bit this comment: WP does welcome authors adding their published results, but, such addition should be very discrete - edits which show bias towards self-promotion might be deleted right away. In other words, wherever there are other appropriate references (books and reviews preferred) do use them instead. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You have to understand that another problem is we're short on space, particularly in a general article on iodine. We need subarticles on the evolution of iodine in an article on Iodine in biology which didn't exist, till today. Look for a lot of your stuff there. A lot of your stuff on the speculated evolution of iodine can go there (as speculation, like a lot of evolutionary stuff since we weren't there and don't have samples). I like your reasoning in all this, and the role selenium in deiodinases is more clear to me after reading it. A worse problem, however, is making epidemological conclusions based on post-hoc case-control studies. The Japanese have a dozen reason to have more or less stomach cancer, and you never tell a proxy variable from a real one, until you do a randomized prospective study (not done, yet for iodine). In any case, be patient. The Iodine in biology article needs fleshing out and references fixed (your references put into Wiki form), and some of the most speculative and hypothetical stuff removed completely (this is an encyclopedia, not the Journal of Medical Hypotheses). It may LOOK like you're not getting anywhere here, but you are: we just have to sort through the stuff you've bought and decide where it should stay, and where. So look at Iodine in biology. I'm goin go have to make some summary cuts even in what remains of the biology section of Iodine, in keeping with the policy of WP:SS, which you should go and read. S  B Harris 05:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you.  Sandstein  09:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thread concerning you
Hello, please see WP:FTN.  Sandstein  10:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Letters to the editor
Please note that letters to the editor, even of medical journals, are not considered reliable sources in most circumstances. Please do not cite them in articles. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 15:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

AAH
Hi,

What's with the odd edit at AAH? It makes no sense to me, yet keeps happening. — kwami (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Evolutionary history of life‎
See MOS:PAIC. Not a big deal, but definitely better to follow established standard/guideline. DMacks (talk) 18:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That set of edits is actually more problematic. Dr. Venturi, please stop repeatedly putting in citations to your own work when it has been removed.  For scientific articles, letters to the editor and newsletters are not considered reliable sources and should not be included.  Accordingly, I have removed them from the article.  If your edits have been reversed, you need to go to the appropriate talk page and discuss why - not wait a couple months and try again.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 11:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooh good catch, WLU (and others). Yes, Sebastiano, please stop. Several editors over many months have repeatedly told you this content/self-citing is not appropriate. You are the one who now needs to explicitly discuss why, despite the guidelines and ideas others have mentioned, it should still be happening. If the work is notable in the world of science, it will obviously have appeared in refereed articles that are cited by other refereed articles, and a brief mention can possibly be included. But WP:BRD and WP:RS are important guidelines for you to read (in addition to WP:COI). DMacks (talk) 12:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Iodine
Please examine WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:COI which explain why such edits are not appropriate. Materialscientist (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree: it is inappropriate to use Wikipedia to publicize one's research. Many journals exist for this purpose.--Smokefoot (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Please note discussion at WP:COIN
The activities of Sebastio Venturi are being discussed here. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 13:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)