User talk:Rathod Dharmarajsinh
Welcome to Wikipedia from the Medicine WikiProject!
[edit]Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Medicine (also known as WPMED).
We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of medical articles here on Wikipedia. I noticed that you are interested in editing medical articles, such as you made the article Chromosome theory of cancer; it's great to have a new editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing Wikipedia articles are:
- Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on our talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the WPMED talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
- Sourcing of medical and health-related content on Wikipedia is guided by our medical sourcing guidelines, commonly referred to as MEDRS. These guidelines typically require recent secondary sources to support information; their application is further explained here. Primary sources (case studies, case reports, research studies) are rarely used, especially if the primary sources are produced by the organisation or individual who is promoting a claim.
- The Wikipedia community includes a wide variety of editors with different interests, skills, and knowledge. We all manage to get along through a lot of discussion that happens under the scenes and through the bold, revert, discuss editing cycle. If you encounter any problems, you can discuss them on an article's talk page or post a message on the WPMED talk page.
Feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you have any questions. I wish you all the best on your wiki voyages! — Rathod Dharmarajsinh
Editing in Wikipedia style
[edit]On my talk page, you said: "In cardiac cycle page why did u removed those recent edits , they had proper reference added then what's the problem ?"
You haven't edited the cardiac cycle article, so I don't know why you are asking about this. Some recent edits there have not been constructive, as they are poorly written, poorly formatted, duplicate existing information, and ignore WP:MOS guidelines, as my edit summaries have described. Zefr (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Actually those editors are my friends and they are performing under a medical wikiproject so they had been given this topic to edit....so I asked you about it. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 02:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
March 2024
[edit]
Hello, I'm Belbury. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You should not describe another editor as "page griefing" and being a person "without reason", nor post fake ANI notifications to user talk pages. Belbury (talk) 08:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah BELBURY I understand what you say , but actually Zefr is editor who have been removing different edits from different wikipages those which are done by my batchmates under same medical wikiproject and he did it on repeat so rather I talk to him but he didn't reply that good , so I thought it necessary to stop him by this way if possible...... Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 09:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- If those edits include the ones to Cardiac cycle, I just had to delete about a dozen revisions from the page history because the edits included material that violated the copyright of another author. On Wikipedia, we just call that copyright violation; in my day job as an academic, the term we use for that is plagiarism.
- In other words, Zefr's removals are necessary, because your batchmates are violating core Wikipedia policies. If copyright violations continue, then at the least the individual editors will get blocked, and it's possible that all editors from your school will caught up in the block and lose their ability to edit. —C.Fred (talk) 11:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- ok sir I will tell them surely to take care about it. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 11:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'd also appreciate it if you reach out to your instructor about contacting WP:Education program before they assign another project like this, so that future classes don't have the same issues as they start editing. (And it's probably not too late for them to ask now for help with your group.) —C.Fred (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Surely Sir , I will talk to them. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 12:15, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'd also appreciate it if you reach out to your instructor about contacting WP:Education program before they assign another project like this, so that future classes don't have the same issues as they start editing. (And it's probably not too late for them to ask now for help with your group.) —C.Fred (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- ok sir I will tell them surely to take care about it. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 11:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from False awakening. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. You removed a copyedit-section template without making any changes to the text in the section. Belbury (talk) 12:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ohh , sorry I will take care.... Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 12:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. I’ve seen the communication between you and Belbury. I wanted to reassure you that I know you are trying your best and that you meant no disrespect to that person. We are all learners here. I’m wondering if you might have tried a couple of other strategies in this situation, for example: 1) making edits in your sandbox first, or 2) deleting / reverting your edits immediately after you demonstrated that it worked, or 3) any other ideas you have? I am glad you are engaging with the Wikipedia community, because sometimes students don’t ever hear from anyone throughout their entire course editing-experience! We can discuss more in class if you wish. AminMDMA (talk) 16:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ohh sir, surely that was very rude behaviour by me to that wikipedia editor(he was not Belbury) , but rather there was nothing that personal ,maybe I was angry just because he had removed my edit (it was I think first time that someone removed my edit) that's why I got in rage but after remaining in this field of editing in next couples of day I realised that we can't talk like that , so we need to rather coordinate to that person and '@Belbury' actually helped a lot in Perfecting our wikipage edit of False Awakening so now I got idea of how co-operate with other Wikipedia editors.
- But a problem that is troubling my batchmates is that there edits are removed by other Wikipedians even though they have proper citations and references added. Due to which they are not likely to show their interest in Wikipedia project,and for few of my friends I even tried to talk to those editors but they didn't guide that well.... Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 16:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- Did they say why they removed those edits? I wonder how many others are having troubles? Usually there isn't this much back and forth between my students and other Wikipedians. We can discuss in a forthcoming class and see what the Palestinian students did if/when this came up for them. Perhaps you can ask this question during our next session? Maybe all of us will brainstorm a good solution together! AminMDMA (talk) 01:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Most of them were removed by same editor and few by others, reasons they give were like unnecessary edits, unformatted reference, unconstructive and careless edit etc....and If you see the articles on dashboard of GMC then barely out of 31 currently 9-12 articles would show edits done by our college participants, for rest; edits are added and removed within hours.Recent example is present on Myocardial infarction wikipage, you may visit it's previous history. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 03:24, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- I did. I see: 1) addition of material without the addition of reliable sources, 2) lackluster grammar, and 3) atrocious formatting. I agree with the assessment that the addition was a net negative to the encyclopedia, and the removal of the text was in the best interest of Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 03:32, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Most of them were removed by same editor and few by others, reasons they give were like unnecessary edits, unformatted reference, unconstructive and careless edit etc....and If you see the articles on dashboard of GMC then barely out of 31 currently 9-12 articles would show edits done by our college participants, for rest; edits are added and removed within hours.Recent example is present on Myocardial infarction wikipage, you may visit it's previous history. Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 03:24, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Did they say why they removed those edits? I wonder how many others are having troubles? Usually there isn't this much back and forth between my students and other Wikipedians. We can discuss in a forthcoming class and see what the Palestinian students did if/when this came up for them. Perhaps you can ask this question during our next session? Maybe all of us will brainstorm a good solution together! AminMDMA (talk) 01:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. I’ve seen the communication between you and Belbury. I wanted to reassure you that I know you are trying your best and that you meant no disrespect to that person. We are all learners here. I’m wondering if you might have tried a couple of other strategies in this situation, for example: 1) making edits in your sandbox first, or 2) deleting / reverting your edits immediately after you demonstrated that it worked, or 3) any other ideas you have? I am glad you are engaging with the Wikipedia community, because sometimes students don’t ever hear from anyone throughout their entire course editing-experience! We can discuss more in class if you wish. AminMDMA (talk) 16:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
April 2024
[edit]Just talk!!! Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 10:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
GA and FA ratings on Chromosome theory of cancer
[edit]Hi -- I removed your addition of the "GA" and "FA" ratings to Talk:Chromosome theory of cancer -- to have those ratings, the article has to be reviewed by another user (for GA) or several other users (for FA). If you're interested in improving the article to GA level, you can find more information about the process here, but it would take quite a bit of work for this article to get to those levels. The criteria for GA are here, if you decide you are interested. Any questions, let me know. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ok Sir, I will try to improve the article, but seeing the views on this wikipage, I probably think that the wikipage is not reviewed, so on Google search, it is not seen directly, hence the viewers are very less, can you help about that.Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 02:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- By reviewed I mean you would need to submit it to a GA review. You can see the instructions here, but you should look at the criteria first -- at the moment the article would be failed immediately. As it's a medical article there are some additional requirements. If you want to improve the article I would recommend reading the criteria first. It sounds like you're doing this as part of a school or university project? If so your teacher should be able to help you identify shortcomings in the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- No, no I didn't mean reviewing for grading like C,B or GA
- Reviewing (by Page reviewers) means rather it is right now not publicly accessible that easily, so traffic on page is null that is what I mean..... Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Why would you care about that? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 07:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Because I made that whole page, so I will be glad to see and motivated to remained join with Wikipedia, if there is some fruitful outcome of these long works.... Rathod Dharmarajsinh (talk) 07:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Why would you care about that? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 07:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- By reviewed I mean you would need to submit it to a GA review. You can see the instructions here, but you should look at the criteria first -- at the moment the article would be failed immediately. As it's a medical article there are some additional requirements. If you want to improve the article I would recommend reading the criteria first. It sounds like you're doing this as part of a school or university project? If so your teacher should be able to help you identify shortcomings in the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Unhelpful page moves
[edit]Please don't move a page to a new title, then to another one, then another, etc, as you did with Metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease. Doing so can make it horrendously difficult to keep track of what has been happening. JBW (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Rigid spine syndrome
[edit]The article Rigid spine syndrome you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Rigid spine syndrome for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of C.Fred -- C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
[edit]Hi Rathod Dharmarajsinh. Thank you for your work on Chromosome theory of cancer. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:
Thanks for creating this new content. Following discussion, it was decided that this content was better incorporated (merged) with another page that covered the topic. That way, more readers will be able to learn from your content.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)