User talk:Computinghpc
March 2023[edit]
Hello, Computinghpc. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to research published by a small group of researchers.
Editing in this way is a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest in Wikipedia – please see WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDCOI. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be a form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM); the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.
Scientific articles should prefer secondary sources to ensure that the information added is trusted by the scientific community.
The editing community highly values expert contributors, so I do hope you will consider contributing more broadly. If you wish to contribute, please first consider citing review articles written by other researchers in your field and which are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite your own research, please start a new section on the article's talk page and add {{request edit}} to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added.
MrOllie (talk) 15:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Dear MrOlie, I have added some contributions to give an added value to existing content. Can be verified by specialists that the contributions are appropriate and there are cited valuable papers, at the same citing new content in a description that is very old. We can discuss even taking punctually on the added content on appropriateness of each of them. Kind regards Computinghpc (talk) 16:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- All your edits have been to add mentions of one particular person and their work. That isn't how we do things here, Wikipedia is not a venue for self promotion. MrOllie (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hello. It is relatively difficult to say self-promotion based on some rules. The plagiarism detector systems make complex analysis and give some measure of similarity, but no matter how large or how low it is the similarity value a human evaluator should evaluate it as human. What say the software is just a suggestion in further decisions taking. No problem can be taken any decision considered good to Wikipedia. I just mention that my purpose was to contribute and give some added value to Wikipedia. For instance, in case of Exploratory Factor Analysis I have included a review type of publication that also has a scientific result proposal in the field included. The publication was very recent from 2019 in a journal with Impact Factor is 7.558. Have a pleasant day! Computinghpc (talk) 12:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- All your edits have been to add mentions of one particular person and their work. That isn't how we do things here, Wikipedia is not a venue for self promotion. MrOllie (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)