User talk:Danielchemik

Welcome on Danielchemik talk page – feel free to leave a message.

Please note that my english level is intermediate. Thanks for forbearance :) --Danielchemik (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My welcome and advice

Wikipedia needs good chemists, so I hope that you continue to contribute! Since you seem to be a little new, my advice is that it is simplest if you contribute on general information using general citations (WP:SECONDARY: textbooks, broad reviews). Writing articles about or citing colleagues can get very tricky, so be careful. By contributing to articles on general topics, you address needs of our readers, without complications. In any case, the main thing is to wish you best wishes. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I disagree with your comments though.

1) Approximately 80,000 papers/year appear according to Chemical Abstracts. Very few of these primary publications should be mentioned in Wikipedia. As explained in WP:SECONDARY, most citations should be secondary. You are citing primary literature.
2. "... many specialists write articles in areas in which they are experts... they need add a sources/citations of their own papers/articles." This view is also quite mistaken (and often WP:COI). Wikipedia chemistry needs general information as found in textbooks and reviews. This emphasis on overviews is the basis for WP:SECONDARY, which you do not seem to comprehend.

So I encourage you to stop citing articles by your colleagues and aim for general sources. Readers do not need to know that your colleague has published crystal structure of the rubidium derivative of monensin (in a very specialized journal). That kind of contribution is inappropriate for Wikipedia. --Smokefoot (talk) 22:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]