User talk:David notMD/Archive 1
Page contents not supported in other languages.
You're doing a good job with that article, thank you. It's been on my watchlist for a while but I never got around to it! Tim Vickers (talk) 22:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Tim - Thanks for the complement, especially after I blew up the SAMe article due to my ignorance of editing skills. When I am not amateurishly meddling in Wikipedia articles I advise supplement and functional food companies on the science needed to support the health statements they wish to make.David notMD (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)So yes, nine years later I want to be clearer that my consulting clients are not paying me, or telling me, or asking me, or even aware, that I edit articles about dietary supplement ingredients. And that at least 300 individual edits have gone by since I had a hand in this. If I have anything to say I will do it in Talk, to avoid even an appearance of conflict of interest. David notMD (talk) 23:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
If Herb Greene is associated with Maynard, MA, there must be some documentation of that association. The best place for this is in Greene's Wikipeida article. Remember, the citation should be from an independent, reputable source. Books, magazines, and newspaper articles are great sources for these references. Thanks! Wkharrisjr (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi David notMD. Your comment here leads me to want to open a discussion with you about conflicts of interest in Wikipedia. Along with content about health and medicine, I spend a bunch of time here helping manage COI, which involves lots of one on one discussion, which I hope you will be open to. Please don't be offended - this is just kind of a routine inquiry. I'll start by giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.
Information icon Hello, David notMD. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:
avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles see the edit request template
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do). I hope that all seems reasonable to you, and I am guessing that based on your experience as a medical/scientific writer, it will not be strange.
Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia with regard to any of your work on dietary supplements? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Please reply here - I am watching this page. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
My opinion is that you have over edited in order to reach a conclusion not warranted by the clinical trials. While Lee correctly pointed out that the clinical trials failed to assess safety, all four reached statistical significance for reduction of menopause symptoms. Brooks and the last Meissner at P<0.05 and the other two Meissner trials at P<0.001. I agree with Lee's conclusion that the strength of the evidence is limited, but that is not the same as efficacy not known. Stojanovska is primary research. But its value is that it came after Lee and reported no benefit for menopause symptoms.We can discuss article content at the article if you like. Jytdog (talk) 04:20, 27 March 2016 (UTC)I'll add, that the question at the end of the day is "Can we generalize from this?" and the review is very clear that the answer to that is "no". Jytdog (talk) 04:21, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Your addition to the lead at dietary supplements didn't appear to add new information to the summary, rather it seemed to expound on information already contained within the lead. Also there are some style issues with the way you wrote a numbered list. Edaham (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
E - The lead as it was ignored the botanicals (which are also inadequately covered in the body of the article). I have no problem with style being changed to be more in accord with Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 00:34, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Could you give your thoughts about this, please? The editor is debating whether nutrition is governed by MEDRS. I looked through dozens of WT:MED archives and didn't find a specific discussion supporting nutrition as a MEDRS topic, although we all know it does. Issues I raised (or would raise) included:
the lede sentence mentions "maintenance, growth, reproduction, health and disease of an organism", which collectively imply MEDRSlast lede paragraph mentions numerous diseases which result if nutrition is poor or absent, implying MEDRSDRIs are based on diseases which develop if a specific nutrient is absent, demonstrating MEDRSthe other editor objected when I removed an opinion article which she wanted to use for a lede statement that the nutrition field is only "half-understood" by nutritionists and poorly understood by the public. I can agree to both assumptions, but the NYT article is a survey and opinion, not a MEDRS-quality review.Or do you feel there would be value in raising this with the community at WT:MED? Thanks.--Zefr (talk) 22:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I doubt WT:MED has enough nutrition science professionals to merit raising the question. As someone who has labored in the field of nutrition for nigh on 40 years, I am of opinion that nutrition science should meet MEDRS. That too much of the science is in vitro, or animal (misused to reach conclusions about the human condition), or too-small clinical trials - is all true, but this does not mean that Wikipedia has to bend to every gust of wind. As to the NYT article in particular, my opinion is that it does not belong in the lede, nor anywhere in the article. The 'expert' side of the survey went to a subset of people in the nutrition field (members of American Society of Nutrition (predominantly PhDs)), and of the 5,000 members, only 672 replied. This self-selected small group is not representative of the expertise on nutrition. A different take on nutrition not being understood by 'nutritionists' is that there is no legal definition of the profession. Anyone who wants to can self-proclaim themselves a nutritionist.
SusanLesch has been remarkably busy on Wikipedia - >500 entries since the start of April, - but only in the recent few days and posts, nutrition or medicine. She does not appear to have any school education in the field of nutrition. David notMD (talk) 01:35, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Glad to help improve the Maynard articles and nice to see your work too. Hopefully we can keep improving it and creating related articles about relevant Maynard subject matter that is noteworthy, and sync them all together appropriately. Not sure how to balance discussion of the history section of the Town Maynard article with the mill article and Amory's article and the Maynard family. Some of the material seems to warrant it's own article. Swampyank (talk) 04:48, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
In response to your comment about merging all of the articles with anything Maynard related (Amory Maynard, Maynard schools and library) into the Maynard town article, I understand that keeping everything in the Maynard article as a central site is a possibility and this seems preferable to you. However, I firmly believe the articles should remain separate and be allowed to grow separately; they'll be easier to find directly when Googled and for others to add information to them if they're separate, and by doing this, it won't cause the Maynard article to grow too large with minutiae that a general audience isn't interested in. Everyone that reads the Maynard article doesn't want to know every detail about Amory Maynard or the Maynard schools offerings, but most people are looking for a general idea about different aspects of the town, and can click on a further wikilink if they want more details about Amory or the schools, and they may want to add more specifics to those articles. There are articles on hundreds of Massachusetts schools, libraries, mills, and town founders that have grown very well with contributors interested in those niches. Wikipedia doesn't have an issue with space for more articles that I'm aware of, so I'd recommend keeping them separate and they'll all grow better and be cleaner in my opinion and experience. Swampyank (talk) 03:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Slogging away at improving content in Dietary recommendations (formerly Dietary reference intake). Intent is to get beyond USA-only for dietary recommendations. A much, much larger task would be to bring uniformity in format to the vitamins articles. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
B vitamins completed. Next, the others (A, C, D, E, K) and then the nutritionally essential minerals.David notMD (talk) 07:57, 2 September 2017 (UTC)All vitamins done. Starting on the minerals. David notMD (talk) 18:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)All minerals done. David notMD (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
This table appears in several articles, but it uses USDA Standard Release 24, which is several years out of date (now at SR 28 with different values in many cases). Do you know how to edit it? Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 15:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
The link actually goes to Standard Release 28 (Sept 2015), so the citation can be revised. At that USDA site it is possible to enter each oil individually and get the most recent (SR 28) values. For example, Avocado oil shows as 14.290% saturated, 71.430% monounsaturated and 14.290 polyunsaturated. It appears that the table cannot be edited in this article, but can be at Template:Vegetable oils, composition David notMD (talk) 17:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Once you're in the USDA database at 'Food Search', choose "Standard Reference" from the upper left pick list to limit 'all data sources' and particularly exclude "Branded Food Products". SR is what we should be using for the encyclopedia. But, I agree, there isn't an apparent solution for editing the oil composition table. I'll invite Primefac to evaluate after the successful revision of the nutrient table template. --Zefr (talk) 21:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't updating the table simply require editing
Type | Processing treatment[3] | Saturated fatty acids | Monounsaturated fatty acids | Polyunsaturated fatty acids | Smoke point | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total[1] | Oleic acid (Ï-9) | Total[1] | α-Linolenic acid (Ï-3) | Linoleic acid (Ï-6) | Ï-6:3 ratio | ||||
Avocado[4] | 11.6 | 70.6 | 52â66 [5] | 13.5 | 1 | 12.5 | 12.5:1 | 250 °C (482 °F)[6] | |
Brazil nut[7] | 24.8 | 32.7 | 31.3 | 42.0 | 0.1 | 41.9 | 419:1 | 208 °C (406 °F)[8] | |
Canola[9] | 7.4 | 63.3 | 61.8 | 28.1 | 9.1 | 18.6 | 2:1 | 204 °C (400 °F)[10] | |
Coconut[11] | 82.5 | 6.3 | 6 | 1.7 | 0.019 | 1.68 | 88:1 | 175 °C (347 °F)[8] | |
Corn[12] | 12.9 | 27.6 | 27.3 | 54.7 | 1 | 58 | 58:1 | 232 °C (450 °F)[10] | |
Cottonseed[13] | 25.9 | 17.8 | 19 | 51.9 | 1 | 54 | 54:1 | 216 °C (420 °F)[10] | |
Cottonseed[14] | hydrogenated | 93.6 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 1.5:1 | ||
Flaxseed/linseed[15] | 9.0 | 18.4 | 18 | 67.8 | 53 | 13 | 0.2:1 | 107 °C (225 °F) | |
Grape seed |  | 10.4 | 14.8 | 14.3  | 74.9 | 0.15 | 74.7 | very high | 216 °C (421 °F)[16] |
Hemp seed[17] | 7.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 82.0 | 22.0 | 54.0 | 2.5:1 | 166 °C (330 °F)[18] | |
High-oleic safflower oil[19] | 7.5 | 75.2 | 75.2 | 12.8 | 0 | 12.8 | very high | 212 °C (414 °F)[8] | |
Olive, Extra Virgin[20] | 13.8 | 73.0 | 71.3 | 10.5 | 0.7 | 9.8 | 14:1 | 193 °C (380 °F)[8] | |
Palm[21] | 49.3 | 37.0 | 40 | 9.3 | 0.2 | 9.1 | 45.5:1 | 235 °C (455 °F) | |
Palm[22] | hydrogenated | 88.2 | 5.7 | 0 | |||||
Peanut[23] | 16.2 | 57.1 | 55.4 | 19.9 | 0.318 | 19.6 | 61.6:1 | 232 °C (450 °F)[10] | |
Rice bran oil | 25 | 38.4 | 38.4 | 36.6 | 2.2 | 34.4[24] | 15.6:1 | 232 °C (450 °F)[25] | |
Sesame[26] | 14.2 | 39.7 | 39.3 | 41.7 | 0.3 | 41.3 | 138:1 | ||
Soybean[27] | 15.6 | 22.8 | 22.6 | 57.7 | 7 | 51 | 7.3:1 | 238 °C (460 °F)[10] | |
Soybean[28] | partially hydrogenated | 14.9 | 43.0 | 42.5 | 37.6 | 2.6 | 34.9 | 13.4:1 | |
Sunflower[29] | 8.99 | 63.4 | 62.9 | 20.7 | 0.16 | 20.5 | 128:1 | 227 °C (440 °F)[10] | |
Walnut oil[30] | unrefined | 9.1 | 22.8 | 22.2 | 63.3 | 10.4 | 52.9 | 5:1 | 160 °C (320 °F)[31] |
? It's not protected so anyone can change things. Primefac (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
ââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââââYes, thanks to Primefac for pointing out the obvious which I missed. While David is busy with edits on nutrient recommendations, I'll tackle the veg oil template in the near future. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 18:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Please do not removed refs such as you did here. Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
I do not see the benefit of having multiple referencing to the same reference within a paragraph when there are no other refs in the string of sentences, but I will cease. David notMD (talk) 14:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the contribution to fluoride. Here are some semi-random comments on some of the pages you have worked on.
Hi David, I have disclosed everything this morning. I didn't disclose it before as I didn't know I had to. This was the first time I was updating Wikipedia content and I didn't get familiar with the rules. Sorry about that --Wcn.content (talk) 13:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi David notMD,I am helping Heather with her class and noticed your messages related to the peanut allergy article.
The students have completed an assignment that consisted of a "critique" of the current Wikipedia article, however, this is not what they will be editing on Wikipedia.The Wikipedia editing portion of the class will be as follows:
Oct 31st- Each group (including the peanut allergy group) will compile a suggested list of approximately 6 new citations that will follow WP:MEDRS and will add to the evidence base of the article. These citations will either substantiate content that is already in the Wikipedia article or add new information (1-2 new sentences per citation added, as necessary). Once the groups have posted their suggestions on the talk pages of their articles, they will wait to gather community feedback/consensus. At this time Heather will post a short message on the talk page of WikiProject Medicine to let the editing community know that these suggestions have been made on the talk pages. If you have any suggestions on how to ensure that we work with the community in a positive and productive manner, we would greatly appreciate them!
Given that the students are not making major changes to the articles, I feel that we can work together to improve the Peanut Allergy article. The students will add the new evidence/citations around November 15th and will be finished by November 20th.If you have any further questions, comments, or feedback please do not hesitate to let me know.Thanks again,JennyJenOttawa (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
JenOttawa (talk) 21:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Working on revising and better referencing for common food allergies. I have no conflict of interest for any products or methods for preventing or treating allergies. David notMD (talk) 16:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Working on with intent to nominate this for Good Article. COI issue: As a science consultant to dietary supplement companies I have clients that sell vitamin C containing products. None of them have asked me to edit the vitamin C article, nor are aware that I am doing so. I will not be adding or modifying any content about any branded products. Refs I add will comply with MEDRS. David notMD (talk) 14:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
This is a reasonable option. It prevents people from adding a "citation needed" tag. And if text gets moved around prevents confusion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:39, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Food allergy into Protein (nutrient). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,
copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. â Diannaa đ (talk) 19:08, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Typically follows WP:MEDMOS.
Looking at food allergy if followed the prior order? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi David notMD,I just wanted to draw your attention to an edit that I noticed today.
This looks like the first edit from this IP address. I reverted it, is there anything else that needs to be done?Thanks,Jenny JenOttawa (talk) 22:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to be kind. You have no idea how deeply appreciated your kindness it. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Egg allergy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
On 5 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Egg allergy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than two-thirds of children with egg allergy will outgrow it by the time they are 16 years old? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Egg allergy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Egg allergy), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Vitamin C at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Siege of Chittorgarh (1567-1568), did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hagoromo's Susanoo (talk) 09:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I know your edits were in Wikipedia:Good faith, but I'm just telling that the wikilink is there for details. e.g if in one article another term is mentioned, it is not mentioned in details. If we add the 15 word explanation in every article, then whats the use of the wikilinks? If anyone is interested in knowing about the term, they can simply click and get all the details. Wikilinks are made in the first place for brevity and ease of use. Hagoromo's Susanoo (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I respect your contirbutions to wikipedia, but I am just pointing out that an article has to be concise and to the point. e.g if we are talking about George I, the Jacobites are mentioned in the article and it is "In reaction, Jacobites attempted to depose George and replace him with Anne's Catholic half-brother, James Francis Edward Stuart, but their attempts failed." not In reaction, Jacobites - political movement in Great Britain and Ireland that aimed to restore the Roman Catholic Stuart King James II of England and Ireland attempted to depose George and replace him with Anne's Catholic half-brother, James Francis Edward Stuart, but their attempts failed. Besides, thousands of people visit the English wikipedia from different countries and few are likely to know the term Jacobites, which is why the wikilink is there, it will take a simple click to navigate to Jacobites. I believe that if an article already exists, it should not be described in 15 words or detail. We can write self-immolation in brackets next to Jauhar but not a 15-word explanation. See H:L for more information. Hagoromo's Susanoo (talk) 14:09, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello again David. Would you humour me once more by having a think about this edit, please? I can see that you want to make the point that the referencing still needs improving, but when you change the date on a maintenance tag, you give the appearance that the concern has only been raised recently (whereas in this case it's been there for close on 10 years). Now you could argue that a maintenance tag (whose purpose is to attract editors to fix problems) that's been in place for 10 years has failed in its purpose, so we might as well not bother with it, but it remains one way of recording deficiencies in our article. Anyway, I'd always recommend leaving dates on maintenance tags alone, and making your point in a new section on the talk page. I know that probably takes longer, but if you eventually take an axe to the unreferenced sections, you at least have the evidence of a 10-year-old tag and a note on the talk page to justify your action. HTH. --RexxS (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
you are correct, instead of adding we should reduce examples of fruit and vegetable containing vitamin c , but the problem is Guava is much more important,( in terms of availability in large section of the world and vitamin c content) than wolf berry . I hope my edit will not be reverted this time. â Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooltunir (talk âą contribs) 19:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQÂ âą Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi David, I've replied to all your comments. I'm hoping to wrap up the review tomorrow before the holiday period, so if you could indicate that you're done that would be great. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:08, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi David. I've just reverted two of your edits to Factitious disorder imposed on self: [2], [3]. I know you're trying to improve the citations in that article, which are anything but consistent, but reducing the amount or granularity of information is not an improvement. It is easier for third-parties to scrape |first=
and |last=
than |vauthors=
, so when somebody has taken the time to separate first and last names, please don't undo their good work. Similar considerations go for reducing given names to initials and abbreviating the full name of a journal. This isn't a paper encyclopedia and we don't have to save space by throwing away information. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vitamin C you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
On a biosynthesis diagram, I'd have thought all we needed was a map of the reactants (could be shown as boxes or circles, say) with arrows over the enzymes (shown as triangles, so the arrow runs along the horizontal edge of the tool/enzyme) to connect'em. I can easily make one of those. Or, if there are chemical figures of the reactants, I can just paste them in, but it'd prob. look silly unless we have a complete set. What d'you think? Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:59, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Well this has surprised me by being a bit of a marathon (take home: get the discussions over before the GA next time). I've taken the liberty of looking up a ref on Tarsiers and striking the associated comments. I've also grouped the biology sections together as they just looked odd split up. Therefore, all that remains is for you to check you're happy with the lead as a summary, and if not to extend it (with citations, per the med. policy). Then let me know and I'll close things out. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi David,
Today, you commented on my rejected draft (Gilson (company)), saying that several of the sources are not suitable because they are not independent enough from the subject of the article. Thank you for your comments. Several of the pages I based the Gilson one on cite sources that come directly from those companies' websites. In your opinion, could you tell me what the following pages are doing right?
Eppendorf (company)Thermo Fisher ScientificMerck Millipore
Thank you! Cglife.bmarcus (talk) 20:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Just because an article exists does not make it a good model. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for descriptions of what counts as notability. For the examples you provided, none of the references for Eppendorf (company) are appropriate and the entire article should be revised. For Thermo Fisher, many of the citations are TFS press releases, and should be removed, and the content supported by those press releases, ditto. Merck - its own press releases, ditto. I shortened Merch Millipore by 20%, but really, all that Milestones crap should go, and editors not associated with Merch Millipore start afresh. David notMD (talk) 23:38, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Milk allergy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
On 10 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vitamin C, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1934 vitamin C was the first synthetic vitamin to be trademarked (as Redoxon) and marketed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vitamin C. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Vitamin C), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Valentine medicine
Thank you for quality articles on medical and nutritional topics such as vitamin C and egg allergy, based on scientific knowledge in Nutritional Biochemistry, for improving articles such as Valentine, for service from 2007, - David, you are an awesome Wikipedian!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi David,I added a few Cochrane Reviews to the Food allergy and Milk allergy articles from my list of Cochrane Reviews not yet cited in WP articles. Please feel free to edit as you see fit with the style of the articles. Good luck with your project. Thanks again for the note!JenOttawa (talk) 02:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations on your hard work on getting Milk allergy to GA status. I am very proud of your dedication to solving the edit war and the work you put into solving the issues. I strongly encourage FA status for this and the others I have reviewed. Please do not hesitate to ask for any more reviews or questions. See you around! AmericanAir88 (talk) 03:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
The article Milk allergy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Milk allergy for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AmericanAir88 -- AmericanAir88 (talk) 03:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
On 21 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1928 Charles Demuth painting I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold appeared on a US postage stamp in 2013? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I've opted out of this "discussion" and I hope you will too. It's a complete waste of time when we could be doing more useful things. Deb (talk) 09:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate the attention you gave to the article that isn't even mine yet hahaJames has found success in many areas and eventually I will capture all that in an appropriate wiki way - I am procuring permissions to put images of his artwork up and i want to chronicle his growth in a biographically interesting way - I will also flesh out the rum connection more, when I finally get a chance to actually add to the article - he brought a french perfume still to the us twenty two years ago and from that built what is now the oldest rum distillery in the country - his product is getting worldwide notoriety and is another chapter in a stellar career - his twenty year blend got the highest rating from two different neutral agencies and gingeroo has become a thing - so i respectfully propose that he is becoming a renowned rum-maker despite your judgements - he also started a food bank in boston that is still going thirty years later - these are remarkable - in other words, worthy of remark - but here is the thing -- i can't edit anything! Missvain (talk) has put some kind of thing on the page - and i dont know how to proceed - i addressed her questions on her talk page and i can't get an answer -- how can i stop talking ABOUT what i want to create and actually create it? thank you so much for your time and attention. Mikkopresents (talk) 23:56, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
On 14 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Milk allergy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Milk allergy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Milk allergy), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi David, I just noticed your edit to Arthur Godfrey on my watchlist, and the first thing I thought when I read your username was ... that reminds me of My name is not dave! Two usernames involving Davids and containing the word "not". That amused me greatly for some reason ... crazy, I know ... carry on. Graham87 14:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
ok i'm creating my own page from scratch - its in draft right now - is there a way you can look at it? or do i have to submit it for review first?thanks Mikkopresents (talk) 21:27, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
I dont have a problem with your reverting my edit on the Alzheimer part of vitamin E. You might be able to resolve the problem that I was attempting to repair, especially if you have a biomedical background. Some of the article strives to explain stuff to the reader (like what is Alzheimers). That kind of content is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Let me know if I can help. My main interest is that molecular basics be mentioned in a general way.--Smokefoot (talk) 21:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much for trusting me. I'll take a look as soon as I can.Best regards. --BallenaBlanca đł â (Talk) 19:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editingâVitamin B3âhas been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. SusanLesch (talk) 04:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
I just asked a very simple question and you are telling me to clamp down hmm that was not right so I hope we don't have argument over this thank you and good day.hello nice to meet you. 21:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC) â Preceding unsigned comment added by Adultcartoonlover56 (talk âą contribs)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brown-tail moth you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
1#First of all , I am a newbie for wikipedia editing. I just joined four days ago , still not familiar with a lot of technical aspects of editing , so , somewhat learning in the process , and also using Android not PC 2# Edit history shows a lot of amateur editors have edited this earlier and pro editing took place few years back with only filmography being pro edited now a days along with few important facts based edits and false edit reverts.3# I just came across a poorly written OUTDATED article on the wikipedia titled Manjari Fadnis , so , I thought that I could add a lot of fresh relevant material. Manjari is none of my relative nor I am being paid 4#As per your suggestion , certain unnecessary non factual introductory information I have removed that belongs to my own edits relative to her recent interview but I won't delete edits made by others which they lifted from media interviews if the celebrity concerned 5#I also referred to other wikipedia articles for catching the extra information, and also observed similar biographies for writing ways and few technical aspects alongwith the existing source code in the current article itself 6#I added a lot of missing information and corrected or slightly extended the existing ones and can still add a few 7#the page had reference issues , having only four references added 3 yrs back probably , so I added as many references as I could in a hurry which were relevant to the lines where they have been added 8#If I need to provide reference for each and every fact added , then please inform which could be tedious even , so adding in general , but all this information is fully correct as the subject is a public figure , so , information is easily available on the social media , news , web articles , YouTube etc 8#People have even written long essays in other living person biographies so this piece of information is very small comparatively9#I tried to add photos but wikimedia doesn't accept copyright material which could have a good pictorial reference 10# But yes , article needs to be rewritten by a pro content writer. Crispgatoglitz (talk) 17:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
The most important part of your statement is that you have no personal connection with Manhaji, nor are being paid. Those are serious conflict-of-interest matters that need to be transparent. When new editors show up and are editing almost exclusively one article, this is a common cause. Referencing is about quality, not quantity. Information from the person's own website, or interviews with, or social media, YouTube, NOT considered appropriate. What is true, i.e., "fully correct," does not matter. What matters is there being independent, published sources to cite. What I deleted were statements that had no citations and were unlikely to ever have citations. Wikipedia is not about pro writers. The vast majority are volunteers. David notMD (talk) 18:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I have no idea where that idea of plagiarism on MY part came from. It was suggested about the Goldberg article. In any case I assure you that there was no plagiarism and I am mystified. I removed my comments from the article's talk page since the article is now going through the AFD process. Nicodemus (talk) 12:29, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Not from me. My comment about possible copyright violation was reflecting what V had written about the article's author, not you. Also, and very important, editors are never supposed to remove content from article Talk. From your own Talk, yes. From article Talk, no. I reversed your deletion. David notMD (talk) 12:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Your GA nomination of Brown-tail mothThe article Brown-tail moth you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Brown-tail moth for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Actias luna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Moon moth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, David. You have posted the statement "SBDFB joined Wikipedia 31 July and has already been blocked for vandalism" on the talkpages of four new users. None of them are called SBDFB or joined on July 31 or have been blocked for vandalism, so perhaps you made some copypaste mistake (?). Please self-revert. Here's one of them â I expect you can find the others. Bishonen | talk 08:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC).
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Actias luna you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Luna moth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Echolocation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Resolved. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Regarding Rotman in Google, please enter "boris rotman -school -management." You should get about 49,700 answers. Thank you. Autoctono~enwiki 01:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but just looking at the first 100 or so, no articles ABOUT him. David notMD (talk) 01:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Updated DYK query.svgOn 21 August 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brown-tail moth, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that hairs shed by caterpillars of the brown-tail moth can be wind-blown and cause a rash similar in appearance and itchiness to poison ivy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brown-tail moth. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brown-tail moth), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Luna moth at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! JGHowes talk 23:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
( Ogmany (talk) 14:49, 29 August 2018 (UTC) ) Hello, Got the notability maintenance article template you put on my new article on Ellen Levy. Would appreciate any insights you have to offer. As far as I can tell there are a whole lot of very reliable news sources, most of the time with articles strictly on Ellen Levy and her work including from the NY Times, the Brooklyn Rail, and Scientific American. There are two things I have been wrestling with, one is the NASA art project and its citations. Since the subject's commission with them was very early on in their program, the 1980s, and there is not a lot of coverage of it. I put up footnotes 2 and 3 that refer to the early years of the art program NASA and the curator who created the program, there is no mention of Levy but I thought they were valid citations since there is very little on the early days of that program available anywhere. In fact I was going to check library news databases to see if I could find anything more direct.
On reviewing in light of your template I realize that I put the citation, #4, that directly covers Levy's participation in the program, a NY Times article on Levy that states " A catalogue photograph depicts Ms. Levy in the mid-1980's, working on a NASA commission and looking every inch the wholesome positivist in dungarees and a NASA cap." at the end of the next sentence and not directly after the NASA mention. The photo they refer to is on her website but I did not add it since there was no citation and on top of that, it was from her personal website. I was going to move that #4 citation to go immediately after #2, an article that covers the NASA art program and mentions the first curator, and #3, which is the exhibition catalogue that curator wrote that covers Levy's work, which the NYTimes quote refers too, so there was a direct quote from a reputable news source, not just a credit in Levy's bio that is used in many of the articles from reliable news source.
(In fact Levy is such a prescient pioneer I was considering adding a quote from that 1995 NY Times article "whose fascination with technology is not only tinged by skepticism but also rivaled by an interest in the acts of God that are sometimes visited on grand technological schemes -- witness the Challenger." but was trying to restrain from quotes because I thought Wiki did not care for them. Now I think it is even more valid to use the quote to illustrate how ahead of the curve she is. Also, frankly, there are so many reliable source quotations on Levy's exhibitions and work that I had a hard time figuring what to choose and decided not to add a whole lot more citations on individual exhibitions since there were so many reliable source citations already. I have a hard time not adding citations.) I will wait for your reply before making these changes and look forward to it. Thank you.
I left a comment at the Talk page for the Ellen Levy article. Better to have a discussion there. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Looked for your comment but could not find it. Another editor gave me some great insights though and I worked on the article, added more primary reliable sources too since I think it maps out the artist's career and notability more clearly. I removed the template, according to the instruction page, unfortunately I said removed a maintenance template in the edit comment but meant the notability template.Ogmany (talk) 02:43, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Updated DYK query.svgOn 13 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Luna moth, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the long tails on the hindwings of the Luna moth (pictured) are thought to interfere with echolocation detection used by predatory bats? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Luna moth. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Luna moth), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Dear David,
thank you for answering my quesions in the teahouse:
https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/en/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Copyright_violation
"A copyright checking program indicated that there is direct copying and close paraphrasing from this website. http://www.fz-juelich.de/pgi/pgi-3/EN/Forschung/Nanostructures/Multi_tip_STM_development/Multi_tipSTMdevelopment_node.html "
This is not a surprise as this is the website of the intsitute where I work. I have asked the copyright holder: Research Center JĂŒlich and they granted the permission to use the material from the website above in Wikipedia. Therefore, I think the copyright issue is resolved now.
However, since I am new in Wikipedia, I do not know how I can restore / move / redirect the page Multi-tip scanning tunneling microscopy to its original place? Can you (again) help with this?
Best regards
Bert Voigtlaender â Preceding unsigned comment added by Bert Voigtlaender (talk âą contribs) 18:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
At the bottom of the draft there is a box that states the draft is in the bin of articles to be reviewed before being either moved to Wikipedia or rejected. This could happen any time over the next weeks to months (it's not a queue). I am not a qualified reviewer. The copyright issue is not resolved, and could lead to not only rejection, but deletion of your draft. STRONGLY preferred that you find a way to write the content in your own words.What I did was go to https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/ and once there, entered the name of the article Draft:Multi-tip scanning tunneling microscopy. That creates side-by-side columns showing what texts were copied or only lightly paraphrased.Another problem is that there are HUGE sections of text with no citations at all. This is grounds for rejection.I did some copyediting. David notMD (talk) 21:05, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Have been reviewing articles I have written in light of editors suggestions about my writing style. In fact you were one of the editors I interacted with. Why did you remove a list of well known judges of a well known poetry contest, that had a reliable source citation in an article that was already reviewed? Those judges are heavy hitters in the poetry world and the contest is well know. I could of put in more citations about the contest in fact. (29 August 2018â David notMD (talk | contribs)â . . (7,881 bytes) (-518)â . . (ââAwards and manuscript selection: deleted list of contest judges) And then you put a notability maintenance template on the article, which had already been reviewed. Why? (Ogmany (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2018 (UTC))
Vis-a-vis Marsh Hawk Press, my opinion is that listing contest judges does not add to the notability of the press. Note that I did leave intact the artistic board of writers, as that more directly confers notability. If any of those are Wikipedia editors and wish to remove the notability template I will not contest. David notMD (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maynardville, Tennessee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carl Smith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).Fixed David notMD (talk) 12:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
David, Thank you! I am learning all this now... I promise to act by the rules from now on..
LiamTheFirst (talk) 15:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)