Chogg
Welcome!
Hello Chogg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.
At Wikipedia, new Users do not automatically receive a welcome; not even a machine-generated welcome. Welcome messages come from other Users. They are personal and genuine. They contain an offer of assistance if such assistance is ever desired.
I suggest to everyone I welcome that they may find some of the following helpful — there’s nothing personal in my suggestion and you may not need any of them:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Avoiding common mistakes
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Dolphin (t) 11:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Fluid dynamics taskforce edit
Hi Chogg. Welcome to the Fluid dynamics taskforce. You mentioned that you are at DAMTP, and CWR at UWA. What do these acronyms mean? Dolphin (t) 12:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Physics/Taskforces/Fluid_dynamics
Recent NWP edit edit
It is not advised to link an external link within a wikipedia article itself, unless it's part of a reference. If you want, add it to the external link sections at the bottom of the article, which would be a more proper location for such a link. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Krista Donaldson edit
The article Krista Donaldson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Doesn't pass WP:NPERSON
While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. shoy (reactions) 20:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Notice to help you become aware of the restrictions imposed on some articles edit
 | This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions - such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks - on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. |
Sourcing for medical articles is set at a higher standard than for most other topics. Medical topics have their own guidance on sourcing standards, which is laid out at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) ("MEDRS"). Academics often find it unintuitive that Wikipedia puts such great store on secondary sources, but Wikipedia has a policy of WP:no original research. That prohibits editors from doing their own analysis of sources and makes it difficult to determine which primary sources are sound and which are not. Peer review unfortunately does not solve that problem. As a result, Wikipedia relies on the best quality secondary sources that have conducted an analysis of the primary and secondary sources that they have reviewed and have done the work of sifting the wheat from the chaff for us. The guidance at MEDRS gives examples of what are considered the highest quality secondary sources for our purposes. I hope that helps. --RexxS (talk) 20:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Yep. Thanks.
Speedy deletion nomination of Mihaela van der Schaar edit
Hello Chogg,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mihaela van der Schaar for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
administrator comment= edit
As reviewing administrator, I did not delete your article. Not only is what was said in the article a clear indication of significance, and therefore enough to prevent speedy deletion A7, she holds a named chair at Cambridge University, and that, all by itself , is full and uncontestable proof that she is notable for Wikipedia purposes according to the relevant criterion, WP:PROF.
However, the article is very incomplete. Please add as soon as possible: An encyclopedia article on an academic should contain the full sequence of degrees and positions, with dates; a complete list of books published, with year, date, publisher, ISBN (referenced to WorldCat), and links to published reviews of them; and, (in the. sciences) the 5 most cited peer-reviewed articles, given in full with coauthors, full name of journals, and links, with the number of citations to each of them; any national level awards--(not junior awards or awards from their own university) Add major outside positions, such as president of major national organizations, and any positions of editor-in-chief ; Membership or minor offices in most societies, and service on editorial boards, do not count for much & are better omitted. Very sparse articles attract skepticism. as do those using vague DGG ( talk ) 01:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
If this was the first article that you 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.
The page Mihaela van der Schaar has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://www.vanderschaar-lab.com/icml-2020-automated-ml-and-its-transformative-impact-on-medicine-and-healthcare/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been 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 use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — Diannaa (talk) 21:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)