User talk:Cpp02jeh

Aerobic

Greetings!
Thanks for your contributions to Microbial enhanced oil recovery. One of your recent edits included a link to aerobic, a disambiguation page. The use of these links is discouraged on Wikipedia as they are unhelpful to readers. In the future, please check your links to make sure they point to articles. Thanks!

twirligig_T to^the C 15:44, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm Velella. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Microbial enhanced oil recovery because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. In particular please take care not to promote yourself or your University department as this is also a potential conflict of interest. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:39, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Cpp02jeh. That' s fine. I just tried to put a link to all non-profit labs doing MEOR research -All- that includes me. So, now that I am excluded, Should I write more articles here or better doing in my group page? Should I bring my article to my page? Should I say these labs are doing MEOR but mine cant appear? Thank you.

Promoting a particular point of view or a particular institution or a particular person, is never a good place to start editing on Wikipedia because of the very real risk of conflict of interest. The usually accepted rule is that if a laboratory or company is sufficiently notable, then somebody not associated with the University or company will , in due course, provide a suitable entry. Another approach is to post information on the talk page together with a declaration of your own interest in the matter and let other editors decide whether or not to include it. As a general rule, including external links to universities or companies just because they are involved in a particular area of work is severely deprecated. If it was allowed most science based articles would have a list of thousands of links to University departments and that would be patently unacceptable. Similarly posting links to your own blog (as in Prebiotic is also deprecated - it added no encyclopaedic value to the article at all. However, please do continue editing and improving articles but I guess it might be prudent to stay away from the addition of external links for the time being. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   15:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

1."Promoting a particular point of view or a particular institution or a particular person", The only thing I put was a link to my page, which only contains a brief text on the topic (no need to repeat what I already put in wikipedia) 2. "The usually accepted rule is that if a laboratory or company is sufficiently notable, then somebody not associated with the University or company will , in due course, provide a suitable entry". I put the external links based on the question "who is doing this in the plannet that isnt a business?" and voi la! 3. "As a general rule, including external links to universities or companies just because they are involved in a particular area of work is severely deprecated" this is clear and now understandable, and being congruent with this I proceed to delete the external links. Kind Regards  Cpp02jeh  ^{Cpp02jeh Talk}  

Thanks

Speedy deletion nomination of Microbial enhanced oil recovery

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Microbial enhanced oil recovery requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://sphinxsai.com/2013/vol_5_3/pdf/CT=15(1205-1212)IPACT.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed 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 modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines 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 removed 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. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:59, 6 September 2015 (UTC)