User talk:Onlyeko

Welcome!

Hello, Onlyeko, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 01:12, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Biografer: Thanks. --Onlyeko (talk) 01:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Giancarlo Stanton has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Giancarlo Stanton was changed by Onlyeko (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.948861 on 2017-09-20T03:11:19+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:11, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Check when adding citations

You made an edit to c-section. Thanks for that.

I see that you are a new user. When you added the citation, you formatted the text to read that two sources back the claims in one sentence. Did you intend to communicate that?

On Wikipedia, often it is easier to user shorter more simple sentences. Without me reviewing the original sources, it is not apparent to me that both citations back the claims in that sentence. What do you think? Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry: I didn’t intend it to mean that both sources support the allergy information I added. I lumped the two sources for the sake of a cleaner presentation. But if you read The Economist article it clearly lumps obesity, immunity and allergies together, derived from related studies (read: “Accumulating evidence suggests three things, in particular...). Therefore, I wouldn’t be surprised if the other source also mentions allergies; however, I can’t say that with any certainty because I haven’t read it. Would you prefer I separate the sources? --Onlyeko (talk) 23:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please. When anyone reviews Wikipedia the basic process is to check whether the information in a sentence matches the citation noted at the end of the sentence. This is a bit different from academic publishing, but then also, in academic publishing no one adds new or different information to sentences after the original sentence and citation get paired. If you have trouble separating the sources then ping me again and I will clean it up. Thanks for talking this through and if anything is unclear to you then let me know and we can talk it through further. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: GAFA (companies) (October 19)

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

Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not quite notable, and possible NPOV issues.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:GAFA (companies) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DavidWestT (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Onlyeko, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! DavidWestT (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Onlyeko. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:GAFA (companies) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:GAFA (companies), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:GAFA (companies)

Hello, Onlyeko. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "GAFA".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Onlyeko. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you only adding citations to The Economist?

I noticed that virtually every edit you have ever made is adding a citation to The Economist, usually with the same (fairly vague) edit summary of "expanding article." While it's a high-quality source in many contexts, I'm concerned that having an editor so laser-focused on a single source raises WP:UNDUE issues, especially since you're often adding it as a source for stuff that's outside of its main focus. Is there any particular reason why you're so focused on that source? Either way, I'd suggest using slightly more useful edit summaries - going into more detail on what you're adding and why. --Aquillion (talk) 05:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I use The Economist because i really enjoy their content. I add details to Wikipedia when I think it will be of benefit. You will find no ulterior motives here. My edit summaries are simply chosen from the options offered. Hope that puts your mind at ease. Onlyeko (talk) 05:37, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are very unpleasant

You have to learn to compromise. You do not own articles honey ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 04:08, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]