User talk:Chimeric Link

Hello, Chimeric Link, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Chimeric Link, good luck, and have fun. PamD 07:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PamD 07:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VEXAS

Hallo and thanks for expanding the article on VEXAS, which I started a while back after my consultant (for another rare autoinflammatory disorder) mentioned it as an interesting new disease. There are a few points to note:

Date formats: Firstly, the publication date must not be in an all-numeric format. The choice between "July 18, 2022" and "18 July 2022" is set by the first major edits to an article, unless it has strong national ties (but I don't think being discovered by US scientists counts), so the dates here should be consistent. "Access-date", or "Retrieved" can be in either of those formats or all-numeric, but again consistency is called for. So I've changed all the dates you added to the existing "dmy" format. See MOS:DATE and WP:CITEVAR etc
References go after punctuation, not before - again, I've fixed
The reference should show the source, so the "Vexing VEXAS" needs to show that it's from "ASH Clinical News"; in fact I found that it had an author to credit as well, right at the bottom.
Never use "currently": this encyclopedia will last forever (well, for quite a while) and articles need to be future-proof. There is always a way to word things to stop them going out of date, and the {{as of}} template can be useful too.
People's degrees and "Dr" etc are not included in the text of the article: doing so looks like self-promotion.
- Important question: are you yourself one of the researchers involved, or a colleague, friend, family member? Please read WP:COI on "Conflict of Interest" and make any necessary declarations.
Related point: neither of the refs for the last sentence actually seem to mention both Beck and the Relapsing Polychondritis Foundation. His web page "Research" section doesn't mention VEXAS, and the foundation's announcement of the research only talks about "partnering with the researchers at NYU Langone Health and the NIH". I considered removing the sentence, but perhaps you can add a further source which connects them? (Again, your knowledge that they are connected suggests that you are yourself connected: please clarify).

Welcome to editing. It can be a fascinating time-sink: rather like an infinite jigsaaw-puzzle, always something new to fit in and fix. (Somehow yesterday I ended up creating an article about a Canadian First Nation's museum, starting from stub-sorting an actor from that nation. All good useful stuff.) PamD 08:22, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts I've removed the mention of Beck's lab and link to his page, as this does not seem supported by the information provided. I might also mention that medical articles in Wikipedia are subject to even closer scrutiny than most, with a team of editors who watch them carefully and a stricter requirement on sourcing than for everyday articles - see WP:MEDRS. I don't see any problems here (apart from that, possibly promotional/COI, Beck Lab mention), but just a heads-up. 08:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello Pam. Thank you for the follow-up.

Please allow me to address your points in order.

-Thank you very much for correctly formatting the dates and citations.

-Thank you for correcting the placement of references.

-Thank you for removing the use of the present-tense term "currently". To address your question, no I am not one of the researcher's involved, colleague, friend, or family member. I am however acquaintances with an individual who had been diagnosed with VEXAS. I found the wikipedia entry on the disease somewhat lacking compared to other data sources (e.g. the NIH website) and thought it could use some updating.

-I did not know about the inclusion of degrees! I am new to this fun little world of editing.

-It would you appear you are correct that the news release from the Relapsing Polychondritis Foundation does not explicitly make reference of David Beck. I mistakenly drew the connection drawn on inference that it appears he is the only researcher at NYU Grossman School of Medicine and NYU Langone Heath directly researching the disease (given his primary role in its discovery this also follows). I will however note that David Beck's lab website Research section does indeed note that he is studying VEXAS (please see here: https://davidbecklab.org/research/ as well as this press release: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/renowned-clinicianscientist-joins-division-of-rheumatology-at-nyu-langone-health-301401782.html). In addition this recent review from Nature is first-authored by David Beck (and notes both his study of Ubiquitin-based diseases such as VEXAS and NYU affiliation: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35523963/). I also found a more recent release from the RP Foundation (June 21, 2022 where the earlier cited article was from March 31, 2022) (here: https://polychondritis.org/2022/06/the-relapsing-polychondritis-foundation-invests-in-potentially-groundbreaking-collaborative-research-at-md-anderson-cancer-center-and-the-nyu-grossman-school-of-medicine/) that directly states: "Dr. Kanagal-Shamanna’s research will be conducted in close collaboration with Dr. David B. Beck, M.D., Ph.D., New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, who, with the financial support of the RP Foundation, partnered with the NIH to discover a new autoimmune disease named VEXAS Syndrome in 2020." Of note in this article, Kanagal-Shamanna is studying Relapsing Polychondritis and not VEXAS. Based on the above citations do you think it makes sense for us to add the information back in? The impetus here is not to promote the David Beck lab but, rather, to shed light on the ongoing research to better treat this disease and inform patients/family of ongoing investigations. And based on the publication history it would suggest that his group as well as the group credited at the NIH are the primary sources for ongoing study. Given it is a newly identified and understudied rare disease this information feels relevant (as opposed to say, a malady such as breast cancer where there are many hundreds of dedicated research groups).

Let me know what you think! And thank you for your input! Chimeric Link (talk) 22:01, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply: no time right now to go into the sources, will look later, but the explanation of why you worked on the article is just my sort of thing - you can see on my user page the random reasons I've created a random collection of articles over the years, and "Someone I know has got this rare thing" is just the sort of reason. Enjoy your editing! PamD 08:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David B. Beck (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gusfriend was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines for academics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Note clear that they meet WP:NPROF. Also some WP:OVERCITE needing fixing.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:David B. Beck and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:David B. Beck, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gusfriend (talk) 07:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chimeric Link! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Gusfriend (talk) 07:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Hallo, I see you've started Draft:David B. Beck (I wondered about it when I began the VEXAS article). You uploaded a photo and described it as " Press-release photo of Dr. David B. Beck after joining the faculty at NYU School of Medicine (circa 2021)" and also as "Own work". If so, then you appear to have a COI with Beck: as the photographer who took the photo in the official press release. If this is not the case, perhaps you misunderstood what "own work" means here (it does not mean "I copied it off the internet"). Please clarify. Thanks. PamD 08:09, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David B. Beck (January 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Raydann was:

Notability is met. Please fix WP:OVERCITE and you'll be good to go.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:David B. Beck and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

❯❯❯ Raydann ^(Talk) 04:18, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed WP:OVERCITE and resubmitted. Chimeric Link (talk) 00:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David B. Beck has been accepted

David B. Beck, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 10:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]