User talk:Shireeshapte

January 2019
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Yogurt, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Zefr (talk) 17:47, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Cancer immunotherapy, you may be blocked from editing. Zefr (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

The material was copied directly from a copyright journal article, and thus was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:11, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

I did add a reference. The Journal of Excipients and Food Chemicals is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No DerivativeWorks 4.0 International License. A v/ SPARC Europe Certified Journal. All the content I added was peer reviewed. Perhaps it would be beneficial to start a new page entitled "Bioengineered Yogurt" ? The edit at Cancer immunotherapy has also been published in the same peer reviewed Journal. Best, Shireesh Apte
 * Sorry but Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No DerivativeWorks 4.0 International is not a compatible license, because it does not allow commercial use or derivative works, and our license does. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will add acceptable license information going forward. Best, Shireesh Apte

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Prakash Madhusudan Apte


A tag has been placed on Draft:Prakash Madhusudan Apte requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://prakashmapte.webnode.in/resume. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

I thought I had 6 months to edit this. The material was meant to be a template to be edited during that time. It was also not public on wikipedia. Best, Shireesh Apte

Copying licensed material requires attribution
Hi. I see in a recent addition to Joseph Needham you included material from a webpage that is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) license. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for including this. That was referenced to a manuscript that I wrote myself and retain the copyright to. So I was not copying prose. I will follow the licensing requirement in the future. Best, Shireesh Apte

File permission problem with File:Prakash M Apte.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Prakash M Apte.jpg, which you've attributed to http://www.angelfire.com/indie/pmapte/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ron h jones (Talk) 00:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

WP:COI
You appear to be here just to promote yourself :-( Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The article I cited is published in a peer reviewed Journal (happens to my contribution) and represents a new approach to the control of malaria. Wikipedia is -or should be - an encyclopedia of peer reviewed, public domain, knowledge, not a petty insular turf fight. Once it becomes the latter, it loses its claim to be a corpus of knowledge. Best wishes, Shireesh Apte