User talk:Biomedicinal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Biomedicinal, 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:

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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Tag2556 (talk) 13:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

Sign up for the WikiCup 2014 (sign up here, it will be fun. We can help each other. And would you like to review the Many-banded krait article, which I nominated for GA status. It is nowhere near GA status, but when I'm done with it, it'll be a much expanded article. By the way, Black mamba has become a GA article. I plan going for FA when I have more time. --DendroNaja (talk) 00:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks and congratulation! Your contribution is recognized! Biomedicinal

Thanks! If you want to review my nomination for GA status of the many-banded krait, just go [here. I think I saw it listed at #13. Click review this article. --DendroNaja (talk) 03:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Copyeditor Barnstar Hires.png The Copyeditor's Barnstar
Thanks for your great work on university articles. -download 05:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Signatures[edit]

Please sign your Talk page contributions and include (a) date and time and (b) a link to your User page. This can provide some help if you've modified your signature and need to edit it further to comply with our guidelines about signatures. ElKevbo (talk) 14:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Hello, Biomedicinal, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, try Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then type {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page.

Rod of Asclepius2.svg

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).


Again, welcome!  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia medical articles have a specific style as discussed at WP:MEDMOS Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
We also tend to present the lead in the same order as the body of the text. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania[edit]

Hey there, I saw that you edited Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and had removed "the" from the name. However, it's not just part of the name to be grammatically correct but also part of the official name. The official names are:

  • Raymond and Ruth Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania
  • Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania
  • Perelman School of Medicine

DMacks has since fixed the name for you. Thank you, The Haz talk 02:44, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

April 2015[edit]

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Engineering. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:10, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

McGill University Page[edit]

Hey! I've noticed you've been quite active on the McGill page. In particular you've been editing two things in the introduction of the article:

1. The per student endowment of McGill university. I find this to be an unnecessary and overly specific piece of detail to put in the introduction. Not to mention the statement is in fact present in two different parts of the article (it's also mentioned in the Finances sub-section). Also, the statement is actually a grammatical oddity as there is a general rule in English grammar that you always follow a comma with the subject being talked about. For instance "Strong and brave, everyone liked Michael" is a wrong construction because the subject of the sentence (Michael) does not follow the comma. Similarly in the sentence "Valued at $36,711 per student, the University maintains one of the largest endowments among Canadian universities on a per-student basis", the subject of the sentence (the university's endowment) does not follow the comma, hence is a grammatical mistake. I think this statement needs to be immediately removed from the introduction.

2. I've noticed you undid my addition of rankings and a note of McGill's reputation from the lead citing a lack of citations and verifiability. McGill has been ranked number 1 in Canada for the last 10 years by MacLean's rankings. It's also maintained a Top 25 and Top 40 position in QS and Times WU Rankings. It has also received high employer reputation and technology ratings from The Globe and Mail and it's business school has been ranked 11th among non-US B-schools. All these have been backed up by relevant citations in the Rankings and Reputations sub section of the article. I believe all this qualifies McGill as a fairly prestigious university both in Canada and the world and deserving at least a one-line mention in the intro. This one-line mention about McGill's reputation could be backed by one or two citations (preferably QS and MacLean's rankings). Anyone wishing to look into greater detail about McGill's reputation and the validity of the claim can always look through the rankings and reputation sub-section and its abundance of references and links

Regards

Upapilot (talk)


Hmm.. I agree with your point that "prestigious" and "reputable" are rather vague terms. Alternatively, how about including a line stating that McGill has been consistently ranked among the best univs in Canada (rank 1 to 3) and one of the top 70 colleges in the world by different ranking agencies. This gives a rough outline about McGill's position in the domestic and global stage without being overly-biased towards one particular rank or making grandiose claims. -In dialogue with Upapilot 09:04, 26 May 2015‎ (UTC)