User talk:C.bonsin

Image copyright problem with Image:La tendresse cover page.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:La tendresse cover page.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shinerunner (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008

Hi. Just a suggestion- try to avoid overuse of internal links (eg: [[linked word]]) as in the page Physician writer. General words and years etc. don't need links because they don't add anything useful to the page. Excessive linking simply clutters up a page and makes future editing more difficult. Check out WP:MOS for more info. Cheers. -- Taroaldo (talk) 07:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Taroaldo,

I'll take them off the general words and years in Physician writer next time I edit. I've already done so there from Keats onwards.

By the way, on the Ken Strauss entry I got a message: Inappropriate tone, don't know if it was from you or not, but there were no more details in talk. Any suggestions? Thanks.

Hi. I had not seen the page Ken Strauss until you mentioned it here. I checked it out: the tag regarding tone was placed by Biruitorul. I assume you removed it because Biruitorul did not explain his/her reasoning in the talk page. Biruitorul should have elaborated on the reasons in Talk. When I looked over the page Ken Strauss, it does seem that Biruitorul may have a valid point. There may be WP:COI issues as the article is written in a style indicating great personal familiarity with the subject, though there is an apparent lack of secondary sources. (After a quick search, the main things I found were the subject's own website and blog.) You could ask Biruitorul to explain his/her reasoning. You could also let it slide if you prefer, because Biruitorul didn't bother to outline the concerns in Talk. Hope this helps. Cheers. -- Taroaldo (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Taroaldo, I see what you mean. I've now revised it rather extensively to take out any elements suggestive of personal familiarity or promotion. Cheers, Bonsin

Image copyright problem with Image:Daddy and nany.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Daddy and nany.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Chateau du jardin.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Chateau du jardin.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Physician writer

The article Physician writer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Arbitrary collection of names and organisations which has been summed up on talks as "nonsense, BS that is".

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Matthead Discuß 13:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Insulin injection

Your draft article on insulin injection overwrote part of the Article wizard. I have restored that page so that other contributors can use the Wizard. If you don't have another copy of your text, I can retrieve it for you from the History log for that page. If you'd like me to do that, leave a message on this page and I will be watching. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John, thanks. I'd very much like for you to retrieve it for me as it was deleted by mistake.

Speedy deletion nomination of Insulin Injections

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 Insulin Injections requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. 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 as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — 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 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Travelbird (talk) 12:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. John of Reading (talk) 12:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to copyright query about Insulin Injections

I am an endocrinologist with international expertise in Insulin Injection Technique.

I am the senior author of the paper which is alleged to be infringed by my entry. The copyright of that article is owned by the medical journal (Diabetes & Metabolism) and is exported via the Science Direct portal.

This is the reference:

Frid A, et al. New injection recommendations for patients with diabetes. Diabetes & Metabolism 2010;36:S3-S18.

This seminal and encyclopedic paper, published in Sept. 2010, is written in medical jargon inappropriate for Wikipedia.

In my entry I have rewritten its main ideas (recommendations for best practice in insulin injections) in layman’s terms and couched it in a Q&A format.

Approximately 95% of the Wikipedia content is ‘in my own words’. Unfortunately I cut and pasted about 5% directly from the article, which is probably what triggered the copyright concerns.

I should emphasize that the Wikipedia content is not just a ‘rehash’ of a medical article. It draws from 161 other publications (see reference list) and is completely original in content and tone and is directed to the general public.

I believe it’s entirely appropriate for Wikipedia. No other entry in Wikipedia currently addresses this issue directly. 2-3% of the world's population has diabetes and injects insulin, yet there is no practical advice to them on Wikipedia of how to inject properly. The Insulin entry is focused on the pharmaceutical molecule itself and the Subcutaneous Injection entry is dedicated to all medications injected subcutaneously. Hence, the crying need for an entry entitled [Insulin Injections].

My plea is for time to relook at the 5% and re-write it ‘in my own words’.

Since I don't have a "Science Direct" subscription I can't see the copyrighted text, and am therefore unable to comment on how closely it matches the Insulin Injections article (which I can no longer see), or the version of it that is still publicly visible in the history of the Wikipedia:Article wizard/Subject page.

But even without the copyright issue, I'm not sure that this text is suitable for Wikipedia. Please have a look at What Wikipedia is not, and especially this section. If, having read that guideline, you still feel that the article belongs here, then your next steps are outlined in this help page. You will need to contact the deleting admin, Gimme danger (talk · contribs), on their talk page, explaining why the copyright deletion was incorrect and why the article belongs at Wikipedia. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman (May 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Iwaqarhashmi was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Waqar💬 16:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, C.bonsin! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Waqar💬 16:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman (May 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Qcne was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

You haven't followed the advice of the previous reviewer. Please see the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE].

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Qcne (talk) 14:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, C.bonsin! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! jlwoodwa (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks jlwoodwa

Yummy cookies!! C.bonsin (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman (September 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by S0091 were:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Also citing things like this, which is almost 100 pages and contains copies of various sources is not helpful. You need to cite the exact source (author (if any), title of article, date published, name of publication, page number of the original source, etc.).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kidnapping and Assassination of Chester Bitterman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]