Hi WooNour! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC) |
You added content to Charles River without supporting references. Wikipedia requires truth and verifiability. Going forward, you are likely to find your additions reverted unless adequately referenced. David notMD ( talk) 18:45, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Time crunch, but not impossible. Strongly suggest you create an adequately referenced draft as quickly as possible and submit it. That way, the draft is in the to-be-reviewed pile. While waiting for a reviewer to look at it, continue to work on the article. Be aware it could be reviewed shortly after submitted, so make sure whatever content is there is referenced. If declined (it happens), address the reviewer's reasons and resubmit. Most often, a new reviewer will look at it - and may have entirely different reasons to decline. Once an article is accepted it appears in Wikipedia searches, but there is a delay for showing up in Google searches (that's a Google thing, not a Wikipedia thing). New articles can be submitted to the Did You Know section on Wikipedia's main page, which results in thousands of article views. Guessing here, but are you either at Tufts Nutrition Science & Policy or Harvard School Public Health? And how was the conference? David notMD ( talk) 19:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Thank you very much! I am fixing the Charles River links and citations now. And very good guess! My co-author and I are both Tufts Friedman students. The Tufts/Harvard White House Conference was excellent, drawing guests from the 1969 conference as well as important contributors to the field of nutrition from the last 50 years. Best regards, WooNour ( talk) 00:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Hopefully the Charles River Recreation section is much better now. Thanks, WooNour ( talk) 00:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Talk about an intersection of interests! Wow. Thanks again for your help. WooNour
Mayer wrote several articles about the conference back in 1969:
Also see:
Good luck. David notMD ( talk) 14:21, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD thanks so much!
Maybe you could clarify a step in going from the draft created with the Article Wizard to a document that is open to being edited by my co-author. The Article Wizard mentioned adding a submit code at the top of the draft but then it seems as though as soon as it is published out of the initial draft it is meant to be eligible for publishing...that there is no intermediate phase of publishing that has a hold on review...Is this clear as the Charles? (i.e., not very.) WooNour ( talk) 15:17, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Perfect. Thanks again. Best, WooNour ( talk) 17:07, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Your draft has content - the conference program - copied verbatim from the 1969 Nutrition Today article. I believe this is copyright infringement, and have brought it to the attention of a copyrightvio expert. If she agrees, it will all be deleted. You can write about the conference, even describing in your own words what the sections/sessions covered, but not be copying content from a citation. David notMD ( talk) 22:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
WooNour ( talk) 00:39, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi WooNour! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Hi WooNour! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC) |
You added content to Charles River without supporting references. Wikipedia requires truth and verifiability. Going forward, you are likely to find your additions reverted unless adequately referenced. David notMD ( talk) 18:45, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Time crunch, but not impossible. Strongly suggest you create an adequately referenced draft as quickly as possible and submit it. That way, the draft is in the to-be-reviewed pile. While waiting for a reviewer to look at it, continue to work on the article. Be aware it could be reviewed shortly after submitted, so make sure whatever content is there is referenced. If declined (it happens), address the reviewer's reasons and resubmit. Most often, a new reviewer will look at it - and may have entirely different reasons to decline. Once an article is accepted it appears in Wikipedia searches, but there is a delay for showing up in Google searches (that's a Google thing, not a Wikipedia thing). New articles can be submitted to the Did You Know section on Wikipedia's main page, which results in thousands of article views. Guessing here, but are you either at Tufts Nutrition Science & Policy or Harvard School Public Health? And how was the conference? David notMD ( talk) 19:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Thank you very much! I am fixing the Charles River links and citations now. And very good guess! My co-author and I are both Tufts Friedman students. The Tufts/Harvard White House Conference was excellent, drawing guests from the 1969 conference as well as important contributors to the field of nutrition from the last 50 years. Best regards, WooNour ( talk) 00:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Hopefully the Charles River Recreation section is much better now. Thanks, WooNour ( talk) 00:37, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Talk about an intersection of interests! Wow. Thanks again for your help. WooNour
Mayer wrote several articles about the conference back in 1969:
Also see:
Good luck. David notMD ( talk) 14:21, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD thanks so much!
Maybe you could clarify a step in going from the draft created with the Article Wizard to a document that is open to being edited by my co-author. The Article Wizard mentioned adding a submit code at the top of the draft but then it seems as though as soon as it is published out of the initial draft it is meant to be eligible for publishing...that there is no intermediate phase of publishing that has a hold on review...Is this clear as the Charles? (i.e., not very.) WooNour ( talk) 15:17, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
David notMD, Perfect. Thanks again. Best, WooNour ( talk) 17:07, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Your draft has content - the conference program - copied verbatim from the 1969 Nutrition Today article. I believe this is copyright infringement, and have brought it to the attention of a copyrightvio expert. If she agrees, it will all be deleted. You can write about the conference, even describing in your own words what the sections/sessions covered, but not be copying content from a citation. David notMD ( talk) 22:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
WooNour ( talk) 00:39, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Hi WooNour! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|