Talk:Stanley Zlotkin

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

National Institutes of Health

This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Institutes of Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the National Institutes of Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Institutes of HealthWikipedia:WikiProject National Institutes of HealthTemplate:WikiProject National Institutes of HealthNational Institutes of Health articles

Dietary Supplements Low‑importance

	Stanley Zlotkin is part of WikiProject Dietary Supplements, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to dietary supplements. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Dietary SupplementsWikipedia:WikiProject Dietary SupplementsTemplate:WikiProject Dietary SupplementsDietary supplement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Arbitrary section title

Hello, this is my first article! Ffanin (talk) 10:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note from editor: the article I created is 100% verifiable from more than one valid source, info has been gathered from PUBLIC DOMAIN (I did not add any "personal point of view") and I believe this person is notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article.Ffanin (talk) 03:04, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copying and pasting of more than short quotations is generally frowned upon and unless the material is licensed under a free license (see WP:COPYVIO) or meets the very narrow criteria outlined in WP:NFCC, longer quotes cannot be used at all. I rewrote large sections of this to meet the rules. Also, sections which seem promotional (such as the "Sprinkles" section), which are not encyclopedic (most of his resume), or which are just "too much" (such as his publication history) should be removed. I have removed some of these sections. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC) The words "PUBLIC DOMAIN" were added to the "parent" comment after I replied. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:42, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Updated comment regarding the public domain: I found no evidence that the sources of the copied-from text had been released into the public domain, but then again, I wasn't looking for such evidence. With few exceptions, such as works of the United States government, anything first published after 1989 in the United States is automatically protected by copyright and is not in the public domain unless the copyright owner releases it into the public domain. For things first published before 1989 the rules vary. Wikipedia editors are encouraged to assume anything published after January 1, 1923 is NOT in the public domain until proven otherwise. In any case, it's best to just rewrite things in your own words unless they are set off as direct quotations and properly attributed. The use of large amounts of direct quotations, even from public domain materials, is discouraged in Wikipedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "Sprinkles" section is not intended to promote anything, it is not intended for "marketing" purposes because it is not a product that you sell and/or buy, it just describes briefly and objectively Zlotkin's idea/invention/contribution to solve malnutrition.Ffanin (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When the referenced web site starts off "Sprinkes are an innovation ... This unique delivery system provides ..." and they have a picture of packages of what looks like a product available for purchases, well, there is the appearance that the topic has a high risk of being considered promotional. Unless he won one of his awards specifically for this product rather than the related research, this can be safely removed from the article. By the way, "promotional" doesn't have to be commercial promotion, it can also be promoting non-commercial things or even ideas. While every Wikipedia article has a certain amount of inherent promotion of the article's subject, promotion is something that should be downplayed or eliminated if it is possible to do so without removing the essential content of the article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:40, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of publications

There was a long list of publications. This is not necessary. If publications are restored, please restore only the ones he is most well-known for and/or the ones which were considered major contributions in their field in their own right. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup template discussion

@Balablitz: Do you still think the cleanup templates are needed? I asked because I removed them after doing some major surgery on the article, then you restored them. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:57, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidwr: Cleanup is required regarding references only. Earlier too i tagged such maintenance tags. All tags were removed, but removal of copypaste only seems to be justified, as some changes happened. Regarding reference, i tagged for primary sources and ref improve, while i was converting all the bare references to correct and present format. As still there is no change regarding section, other than primary sources are required like journals and books. This article needs third party sources as of now. --βα£α(ᶀᶅᶖᵵᵶ) 23:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]