User talk:Olitek
|
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Oligo Primer Analysis Software, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.oligo.net. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Copyright problems
[edit]
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Oligo Primer Analysis Software, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.oligo.net/. As a copyright violation, Oligo Primer Analysis Software appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Oligo Primer Analysis Software has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.
If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Oligo Primer Analysis Software and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Oligo Primer Analysis Software with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Oligo Primer Analysis Software.
However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. – Sadalmelik ☎ 18:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Conflict of interest note
[edit]By your user name, it appears that you represent a company or organization. Please read our conflict of interest guidelines as well as our FAQ for businesses. We welcome your contributions here, but please refrain from writing about your own company's services and personnel. Thanks, and happy editing! AKRadeckiSpeaketh 02:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Oligo Primer Analysis Software
[edit]I have nominated Oligo Primer Analysis Software, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oligo Primer Analysis Software. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 20:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC) Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 20:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
[edit]It has become apparent that you have chosen to ignore the Conflict of Interest and advertising warnings posted above, and it is clear that the sole purpose of this account is to promote your company and its products. Therefore, this account is being indefinitely blocked as a spam-only account. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 20:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Mr. Radecki,
I'm not a spammer and followed only the Primer Premier scheme. Instead of blocking my account you should advice me what should I do to accomplish what primer biosoft did.
If I can't make an entry of this sort, just say so. By the way, I couldn't find an option how to delete the entire article.
Thanks!
- A spammer is a representative from a company writing about your own company and/or products. As for advice, I already did so...please see the above section under "Conflict of Interest Note". If you'll look at Premier Biosoft's article, it wasn't written by someone connected with that company. As for whether the Premier article is notable and spammish? Good question. I don't think it meets our notability criteria, and I've nommed it for AfD. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 23:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for reading my reply. I would have deleted this article by myself. I had only option to edit it. Thanks for deleting then. However, I don't think you banned me justly from Wiki. I was going to enter something completely irrelevant to my work (when I learn how write those articles: I've signed in just today). Speaking of Primer Premier, if I wouldn't find it on Wikipedia it wouldn't occur to me that I can write a similar article about Oligo. By the way, OIigo is the FIRST software of this kind on the market and therefore deserves higher recognition than Primer Premier. Don't you think that I can't find someone outside who can't write to Wiki about Oligo??? (I'm not going to do this if it's not appropriate) The point is whether this kind of info should be there or not rather than who writes about it. Judging from Primer Premier case - you guys are OK when someone writes about a particular software. Oligo is trademarked, and you have an "Oligo" hit on Wiki, all irrelevant to the actual registered trademarked product, so why not an article explaining what is this?
- Ok, I'll give you one more chance. Feel free to edit article unrelated to your company or products, otherwise the block will be reinstated. The only thing you can do about an article is list a request that someone else write one at Wikipedia:Requested articles. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 05:19, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Window violation, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://pikespeakphoto.com/grid.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Oligo disambiguation page
[edit]Just made oligo a disambiguation page. Hope that solves the problem. If more meanings or uses exist simply add them there with a link (if an article exists). This is a reply to your email - it's usually best simply to ask on an article or user talk page for article discussion. You may reply here as I've watchlisted your talk page. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 01:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Vsmith: very good move. Thank you. Wojtek.
alright, I'll bite. Let's see how long we spend on just the first sentence. "OLIGO Primer Analysis Software was the first publicly-available software for DNA primer design." You have a citation after this statement, the article is written by yourself. Ignoring conflict of interest (not a "third-party" citation) where is it in the article that this statement is referenced? Just cut and paste it for me here. Thanks. Tstrobaugh (talk) 18:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
It did not occur to me that it would be a disputable issue. There was no software that dealt with PCR before 1989. I've found the statement that you probably asked for in the introduction to a competitor's software article: "Shortly after the discovery of PCR, software for designing oligonucleotides was devleloped (Rychlik & Rhoads, 1989)." from John SantaLucia, Jr. (2007) Basic Principles and Software for PCR Primer Design: Physical Principles and Visual-OMP Software for Optimal PCR Design, in Methods in Molecular Biology Vol. 402: PCR Primer Design; Ed. A. Yuryev; Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ. pp. 3-33. There are probably several others written earlier, but this one is relatively new, and therefore it has more historical merit. So, is this all you need or you want the Oligo article in Wiki to be changed? Please note that the Wiki article is not written and maintained by me. --Olitek (talk) 16:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not "disputing" anything. This is editing. Statements in Wikipedia must be verifiable. The lead sentence makes a claim, it has a reference listed, in the reference I can find nothing about the claim. If you want to fix the reference go ahead, I'll check it. I found this: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/methods/1993-July/006459.html a list of early programs which does not include Oligo and this: http://www.molecularstation.com/pcr/history-of-pcr/ which mentions "Olga" as one of the first programs. I think a better source would be citing papers that used the program for their research, if everyone was using it first there must be many papers citing it. Tstrobaugh (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The reference about Olga is from 1990(29. Bridges CG. Olga--oligonucleotide primer design program for the Atari ST. Comput Appl Biosci. 1990 Apr;6(2):124-5.), one year after article about Oligo has been published. It was an obscure program very little used by scientific community. The article that you pointed is on a commercial site with no author listed, so it's even hard to discuss it. I agree, that a proper reference from a peer-reviewed publication should be mentioned. I'll correspond to the author of Wiki entry. --Olitek (talk) 18:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The page that you mentioned, http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/methods/1993-July/006459.html, is an internal message from 1993 introducing a freeware:OSP (Oligonucleotide Selection Program) that never had any significance. The second link about Olga, that you mentioned, looks more serious, but it's been written by a person who was not aware of Oligo, so he (or she, as we don't know the author) has been ignorant about the PCR software matter as by 2005 (the article was written about that time) my 1989 Oligo paper has been cited several hundreds times by various researchers, not even mentioning that Biotechnology Software & Internet Journal (not existing currently) gave Oligo the Best of the Year award: Oligo 6.0 reviewed by Tony Cass, Ph.D. (1998) in Biotechnology Software & Internet Journal, pp. 3,4 (article available upon request). Wiki's article about Oligo mentions all competition that counts these days. If you think that something was omitted, please mention. I've been in PCR business since mid 1980's (a freeware of Oligo has been released in 1986 by University of Kentucky) so I would be happy to answer questions that you might have regarding the priority of PCR primer selection software. Please note, that 1989 is the date to beat. I regard John SantaLucia as a high authority in this field and my strongest competitor. If he admitted that Oligo was the first software on the market (see ref. 1 in Wiki's Oligo) that counts a lot. Please reconsider removing the "like an advertisement" comment as I hope I've explained sufficiently that this has not been the case. --Olitek (talk) 00:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have to tell you, I truly think this article reads like an advertisement. You even have "and distributed through the Internet" with a link to the website (http://www.oligo.net/) where you yourself sell the software in question. Do you think it is realistically possible for you to have an objective opinion about this article? You are obviously here to hawk the program, why do you have a problem with the template labeling this article as reading like an advertisement? You are obviously not interested in improving all of the bioinformatics articles here, Primer3 does not even have an entry, if you were concerned about the encyclopedic nature of the article in question then you would also be concerned about all articles in this section.Tstrobaugh (talk) 17:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
The sentence about the internet distribution has been deleted. Thanks for pointing this out. I understand your point, but to be consistent you'd need to label all the commercial software packages descriptions that appear on Wiki, such as Primer Premier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_Premier), DNASTAR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNASTAR), and others as advertisements or delete this label from Oligo of which description has been cleaned out as much as we could find. If you still find the advertisement contents difference between the descriptions of the software packages mentioned above and Oligo, I'm willing to work on it. --Olitek (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
- You are correct, I've added the tag to DNASTAR and Primer Premier. Just because an article doesn't have the tag doesn't mean it does not mean it is not eligible for the advert tag, it just mean no one has added it yet.Tstrobaugh (talk) 18:39, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing the inconsistencies in labeling. I just mentioned those two above names as an example. I didn't realize that you'd rather choose this way. Oligo entry has some other software listed that requires the advertising-like note. To help you out, here are the missed 3 entries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacVector, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netprimer, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_NTI. I would like to point out that there are lots of other commercial software packages that 'deserve' the same labeling. There are really big items, such as extensively described Adobe Photoshop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoshop), Microsoft Word (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Word), Apple iWork (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iwork) to name a few, none of which have this label. Please just search Wiki for any major commercial software package that you think of, and you won't see this "like adv." note. I could recommend you to start a task fixing this problem. However, there is also an alternative: consider re-defining your meaning what "like an advertisement" is. I sense that your current definition is "description in Wiki of any commercial software package manufactured today (or even any currently manufactured brand name items?)". IMHO, none of the software packages mentioned above are written like advertisement. Quite a contrary, they objectively list facts about given software in an encyclopedic style. I think the general public is grateful to see objective descriptions of commercial software on Wiki. This is the prime source of non-skewed information everybody should be checking first, before engaging in further search for information on a given item. I think you have greatly helped in wiping out all advertisement-like phrases from Oligo software description, for which I am grateful to you. --Olitek (talk) 20:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)