User talk:Bnobleman

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Technobiology

A tag has been placed on Technobiology requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. MuffledThud (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

James M. Tien, copyright issues?

Sorry for the trouble. Wikipedia, and especially Wikicommons, is very strict about taking info from copyrighted sites. Usually, some sort of proof is in order. I have asked for help in this matter, as it really does appear to be your work. Please understand that we get a lot of people simply cutting and pasting, which exposes Wikipedia to copyright-related legal problems. Please be patient. We will work this out. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I wrote the material you claim is copyrighted!It comes from publications at the College of Engineering at the University of Miami where I serve as the Director of Communications--not a copyright infringement--please do not delete--this is a legitimate article with original text released for fair use, Bnobleman (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC), Blythe Nobleman.

Hi Blythe, Just to explain: while it may certainly be true that you yourself wrote the text about James Tien and took the photo of him that appear on the University of Miami website here [1] that does not automatically mean that you yourself own the copyright to these things. It appears that the copyright is owned by the University of Miami. The copyright to not only that photo, but the other photos in the same series, may also belong to the University of Miami, as they were taken as part of your work there. This is something that the legal department of your University would know the details of. In general Wikipedia prefers images and prose that were created specifically for Wikipedia. Don't feel badly that your new article has attracted all of this critical attention. We have to be very careful on WIkipedia, especially with biographies. Thank you for your patience. Invertzoo (talk) 16:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I removed the image and will take another orig with no usage conflict. None of the text that appears is used elsewhere. I wrote directly in the wiki window--didn't paraphrase the UM bio--removed that text yesterday. Thanks.--Bnobleman (talk) 16:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

Stick the reference at the end of the sentence. It will then automatically appear in the References section list. Find a random article, click edit, and see how it's done. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit summaries

When you make an edit, before you hit "save page", please remember to write something in the edit summary slot at the bottom of the edit page, so we can see at a glance what you did. Thank you. Invertzoo (talk) 16:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

James M. Tien, notability issues

Hi again Blythe,

I also wanted to explain that the notability guidelines on Wikipedia are quite strict, especially for biographies of living persons. Here are some extracts from the guideline page, which is here [2].

"there must be verifiable objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention by the world at large, to support a claim of notability."

"The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it – without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter."

Hope this helps you understand why we take such care with this kind of thing. Invertzoo (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I totally understand--I read the guidelines. He's quite notable or I wouldn't bother. I appreciate your patience with me. First article, though I'm experienced with wikis. He has--with 187 peer-reviewed (refereed) publications, including several books and major awards for educational service, etc. I just have to wikify the summary and then post. Sorry for tying you up with newbie problems. He's probably the world's foremost leader in his area, but I have to get that across in wiki without losing neutrality.Sorry for the trouble.--Bnobleman (talk) 17:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Blythe, for your efforts and for your patience. It's a tricky thing to work out what proportion of all the academics out there are "notable enough" in the Wikipedia sense of the words to deserve a place in encyclopedia. There are so many thousands of distinguished academics who have long careers and publications in the hundreds, but only those academics whose lives have been written up in external publications such as books, newspapers, etc, are really considered notable by Wikipedia's standards. If an outsider has said (in a reputable print or online source which you can quote and cite) that this scientist is "the world's foremost leader in his area" and if "his area" of research is large enough for that sentence to have real meaning, then you would be in good shape. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 17:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Technobiology

The article Technobiology has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable neologism

While all 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. Hairhorn (talk) 16:45, 6 February 2012 (UTC)