Jump to content

User talk:Ronavni

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good evening! I noticed you made some changes to Bailey Willis. I thought they were very interesting. I made some stylistic and grammar changes to make it read slightly better. Thank you for the contribution!

Thank you RedBeardBandit, I really need this kind of correction in English. Thanks again.

November 2020

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Ronavni. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Ronavni. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ronavni|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Praxidicae (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae this is a preliminary response to Your message, until I'll read all this carefully and will consult with other editors. I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits - Absolutely not!!! This is my first new article in the English WikipediA, as you can read in my personal User page. Till this last edit, I only added chapters or other additional significant texts to exist articles in the English WikipediA. I mainly edit in the Hebrew WikipediA and only from last April. Maybe I was not aware of several rules here, but to blame me with a so .... charge, makes me incredibly sad. Yes, I know Michel Platnic personaly and his work from a very close sight, and follow his career, but as I already declared I have got nothing for my edit. I'll try to follow the instructions that was written here by you and other, and hope to revive this important article soon. Thanks! Ronavni (talk) 22:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Great, then what is your connection to Platnic? Praxidicae (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Praxidicae I am away for a few days and use only my cellular. I'm using now a laptop of a friend to give a speed response and later, as I mentioned above, I'll learn all your comments in aim to clear the fog. In brief, a friend of mine, Moti Dariel who is an artist by himself, met Platnic in Gordon gallery in Tel Aviv and was impressed very much from his art. He told me about this and showed me part of his works. I was impressed too. As Dariel knew that I am active as an editor in the Hebrew WikipediA, he realized that there is no article about him in the Hebrew WikipediA, and he asked me if it possible to write an article in the Hebrew Wikipedia. I agreed with enthusiasm and after I finished, We both thought that it worth also an article in the English Wikipedia. We made together a research with a little help of Platnic himself, and I enjoied every minute during the research and the edit. As I already declared, no compensation was involved during all this and after. It was and is a pure interest in art and writing Wikipedia articles. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 16:09, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Praxidicae In anticipation of your response and mine, I provide some verifiable facts that may make it easier for you to correct your impression: I am a retired scientist (Ph.D in Phisic Geography, from BGU) and formerly Chief Internal Auditor of Ben Gurion University (1997-2018) and subsist comfortably on my and my wife’s pensions. In my 50 years’ career I have never had need or time or inclination to seek additional financial remuneration from other sources, (in general but of course especially in the years in my sensitive position as the CIA of BGU - that's the reason why I taught more than 20 years voluntarily to avoid conflict of interest). I still teach at the university voluntarily without getting any direct or indirect compensation, only satisfaction. I'm going to do a deep revision of the article, taking into account all of your comments. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Michel Platnic

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Michel Platnic, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Praxidicae (talk) 16:04, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Ronavni

Thank you for creating Michel Platnic.

User:Vexations, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

please check the Shpilman Prize, I think there's an error.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Vexations}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Vexations (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vexations: thank you for your comment, I will work on this very soon, and for all other coments inside the article. I must say that I hardly accept the comment:"non-primry source needed" because I think that most of the sources under this comment are secondary, but I am going to be advised by others. Thank you again, Ronavni (talk) 22:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ronavni, what we call a primary versus a secondary source varies a bit, and I sometimes see it conflated with independent source. I try to use it in the sense of WP:SECONDARY: primary sources lack analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. Vexations (talk) 13:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)ץ[reply]
@Vexations: Yes, you are right. Most of the references that are under the comment "non-primary source needed" are in fact secondaries. They are not a manuscript of the person of the article, but a manuscript of another one, that had heard him, and wrote in his own words a secondary impression or testimony. I analyzed during my research works at the university many historical documents, and I have a close understanding about this matter. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amplification

[edit]

Please note that disambiguation pages like Amplification are meant to help readers find a specific existing article quickly and easily. For that reason, they have guidelines that are different from articles. From the Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts you should:

  • Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
  • Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
  • Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry that mentions the title being disambiguated
  • Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
  • Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
  • Do not insert external links or references - Wikipedia is not a business directory

I edited your entry by removing all wikilinks except earthquake and I added an anchor to the specific section. Please consider adding the reference to the earthquake article, if it seems appropriate.

Thank you. Leschnei (talk) 11:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK Leschnei, now I understood, and made the correct extension - I hope. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! I removed the link to Earthquake to fit the 'one blue link' thing above. Leschnei (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Leschnei, I usually work at the Hebrew Wikipedia, and there the rules are a little different, so every time that I try to edit in the English Wikipedia, I learn more. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 10:03, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it would be very hard to work on two different Wikipedias - the guidelines vary so much. I have enough trouble just getting it right in one language! Leschnei (talk) 14:46, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Leschnei I appreciate your attitude, Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 14:52, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

]]

Vanessa Lapa moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Vanessa Lapa, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) In addition, you appear to have a WP:UPE or WP:COI conflict. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, and have addressed the UPE/COI issue, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Do not move the page into mainspace yourself. Onel5969 TT me 19:18, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you one15969 Just now saw this message. I will take care of this. Thanks Ronavni (talk) 11:05, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
one15969 I read your remarks carefully. My immediate comment is that I haven't got any payment or any benefit for writing the article. I've just read an article in an Israeli newspaper about Vanessa Lapa and her films, and I was so impressed that I decided to write an article in the Hebrew Wikipedia, and then I translated it to the English one. I had no acquaintance with her before and even after writing the article in Hebrew. So, it is clear that I have no conflict of interest in this case or in any other article that I wrote in the Hebrew nor in the English Wikipedia. I will consider changes in the references. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it is clear that you have a COI/UPE issue. The fact that you are not admitting to it, makes it even more clear that it is likely UPE. Until you address that issue as per the instructions at WP:UPE, you should not submit the article for review. And you should not move the article into mainspace yourself. Onel5969 TT me 11:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
with all the respect one15969 It is impertinence. How it is clear? Just because you say this? I served my last 21 years before retiring as the Chief Internal Auditor of the Ben Gurion University of the Negev. I teach at this university till today and nobody ever tried to blame me with such Accusations. it is a shame! Ronavni (talk) 16:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, not because I say it's so, but there are clear irrefutable indications. Onel5969 TT me 16:43, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
one15969 such as??? And who will review the article when it will be ready? You? with your bias attitude? Ronavni (talk) 17:12, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
one15969 Well, you haven't given any example of what you called "clear irrefutable indications". I have very little experience in the English Wikipedia. Can you submit our Disagreements to any neutral arbitrary? Can you behave with such integrity? Don't be at the same time the prosecutor and the judge. Ronavni (talk) 12:47, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, not going to give away the tell-tale clues that UPE/COI do so that those editors can game the system. If you would like you could post a comment over at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers asking other reviewers to take a look. You obviously know this person, and refuse to divulge how you know them. That's not going to win you many points in any discussion. Onel5969 TT me 13:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
one15969 I didn't say that I don't know her today! I clearly wrote above: I quote: "I had no acquaintance with her before and even after writing the article in Hebrew". Yes, I know her today, because after her nomination to the Israeli Academia prize (that she won), I introduce myself to her in an accidental meeting and suggested her that I will translate the Hebrew article to English. I repeat I had no acquaintance with her before and even after writing the article in Hebrew. Yes, I met her a bit later, after the nomination, and the English article is more or less a translation from the Hebrew version. So I had no conflict of interest when I wrote the Hebrew version because I didn't know her at that time, and as the English version is a translation, so in principle there is no conflict of interest here. Ronavni (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so you have a clear COI. Thank you. Onel5969 TT me 17:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
one15969 Be happy! the English Wikipedia doesn't! Ronavni (talk) 18:47, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Vanessa Lapa

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Ronavni. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Vanessa Lapa, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Vanessa Lapa has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Vanessa Lapa. Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 17:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve 1975 Oroville Earthquake

[edit]

Hello, Ronavni,

Thank you for creating 1975 Oroville Earthquake.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

There is an almost 50% match between some of the content in this article and the Berkeley source. Please review that material and consider reworking some of the content

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Paul W}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Paul W (talk) 15:44, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Paul W, I'll work on this very soon, Ronavni (talk) 16:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Paul W, I made the rewritting and removed the tag. I hope It's ok now. There are probably some wording problems in the text, hope that you or others can fix it. It was very surprising that such an important earthquake doesn't have an article in the English Wikipedia. That's the only reason why I tried to write an article concerning this despite my poor English. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 12:14, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did some minor edits to reduce some overlinking and improve the English in places. Seems better now. Paul W (talk) 22:10, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Paul W, I appreciate this, Ronavni (talk) 15:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

[edit]

Copyright problem icon Your edit to Spatial distribution has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Diannaa , I can't see what you have erased from the article. Can you explain which content hasn't respected the copyrights of anybody? I have no problem to leave the article as it was before I started to add value to. Good luck with your supervision. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 15:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your addition was flagged as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. — Diannaa (talk) 16:03, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Diannaa. I did my best to add value to this relatively poor article, without vaiolating copyrights. Most of the text I add is a translation from the Hebrew WikipedIa which I wrote most of the text. I'm sure that there is much to improve the wording, which I hope you or somebody elese wil make. Thanks again, Ronavni (talk) 18:13, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bluff Fort moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Bluff Fort, is not suitable as written to remain published. Aside from the tone issues which still exist in the article, it needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, and currently does not have any. All the sourcing is from primary or non-reliable sources. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 TT me 13:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad onel5969! You could place a tag that calls on the editors to improve the article. There are quite several articles, if not many, with no reference at all. This is "your" piece of history, and this article will probably be lost, because I no longer intend to work on it. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And there was a tag placed. With no improvements. Onel5969 TT me 15:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes onel5969 but not a tag that calls for improvements, just one that says about the wrong tone and the primary sources, Ronavni (talk) 08:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those tags tell you what needs improving. Onel5969 TT me 11:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bluff Fort has been accepted

[edit]
Bluff Fort, 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!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, Ronavni (talk) 21:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Ronavni. Thank you for your work on Luai Ahmed. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 14:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You so much, Ronavni (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of הפאליסיידס של נהר ההדסון

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that הפאליסיידס של נהר ההדסון, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. EnIRtpf09b (talk) 11:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That was a totaly mistake. the Intention was to create an article in the Hebrew Wikipedia. I don't have any idea how it developed to a such mostake. Sorry Ronavni (talk) 10:54, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Draft:Amir Sagi

[edit]

Sorry, but I have no standing so cannot delete the page. You could put in a request for it to be deleted, but you also may have no standing. However, the simplest thing to do is to generate a new version in your Sandbox, then when it is ready remove everything about the old version except the deletion history and replace it. Add what you are doing to the talk page when you replace everything. I think this is the cleanest approach. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ldm1954, I will try ro do this. Ronavni (talk) 13:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Avni: what this draft needs is secondary sources that verify the information and prove notability. Please see WP:GNG or, more specifically, WP:NPROF. A resume (list of articles, of patents) will not help the notability issue. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Drmies and Ldm1954, I worked on the article, and except for the basic academic biographical details, all the sources are secondary. I refer to reference #3 as a secondary source, because the university presents Sagi's academic status and title. In addition, and more than necessary in my opinion, in all the sources for the "research and career" chapter that are modified, I have listed where these sources quote Segi. I believe that now the article is more suitable for a review and for publishing at the articles space, thank you Ronavni (talk) 15:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ronavni, I just looked at it and I think it is fine; Drmies should also give his opinion. I normally don't review a second time, but considering what happened and if Drmies agrees we can move it to AfC then approve. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ldm1954. will wait. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking at the first three references--the first two are by the subject; the first one certainly doesn't verify that it "marked the start" of something. It may have been his first publication, but that's a different matter. Likewise with the second--it's an article and doesn't say "this is what his PhD was about". The third one is from his university, and it's hard to call that secondary; it's certainly not independent of the source. It's similar with ref 4, and ref 5--The Fish Site is not an independent reliable source, and the cited page looks more like a press release. Ref 6, with all its notes, is I suppose an article that cites the subject's work? Well that's something, and I suppose that the "IAG sexual switch" is verified on page 3? That's not great for the reader, but that's indeed something. But that ref 10 (I looked through it) would prove that the subject is responsible for "Crustacean monosex technologies are widely applied", I don't see that at all, and ref 11 also doesn't make the connection between Sagi's group's research and Malaysian freshwater prawn. Drmies (talk) 16:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies Here reference 10 is referring to their study (in the article clearly mentioned reference 50) on the use of RNAi by the Sagi group with respect to sex reversal. Ref 11 refers to monosex culture of the prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Other common names of this prawn are: the ‘Giant freshwater prawn’ or ‘the Malaysian freshwater prawn’ and the Sagi group is definitely working on this prawn which is the Malaysian freshwater prawn (see Viki page “It is also known as the Malaysian prawn” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macrobrachium_rosenbergii). Ref 11 refers to early Sagi work “The observation that the all-male culture was the most productive system, followed by the all-female and mixed-sex cultures is consistent with previous studies, as well (Sagi et al., 1986; Nair et al., 2006).”. Ronavni (talk) 15:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Drmies, I am not fully in agreement with you. I added a link for his thesis on Google scholar as a new 2, the numbering I have adjusted slightly to match the current version. @Ronavni, please correct the link, it is only a placeholder. In fact all the refs need conversion to proper Wikipedia sources.
  • Ref 1 & 3 were not the best, but with his thesis in 2 I think its OK.
  • Ref 4 I will disagree about. This is a legal statement by his employer about his status. I know that in the US a university can get into big trouble (fines etc) for misinformation. It would be better if the University attached copyright to it, rather than leaving it to Elsevier (who get these things wrong).
  • Ref 5 is fine, the society is independent so I call this a secondary source
  • Ref 6 is weak, it is independent but is a company site
  • Refs 7-17 are his work. The NSF standard in the US is 10 refs, so that is OK. (Some people would prefer only 5.) There is a bit of peacock in the statements which should probably be toned down.
  • The most important ones are 18-22 which are his awards, particularly the Landau Prize which is givan annually to 9 academics, see https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/culture/winners-announced-for-2020-landau-awards-despite-coronavirus-pandemic-647727. Those seem to be secondary.
Maybe then correct my PhD placeholder, remove the peacock and resubmit via AfC. I will let someone else decide. To me his h-factor is good, albeit not by itself justification, but the awards combine to satisfy WP:NPROF. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ldm1954, I am not disputing the idea that this person is notable. But "legal statement by his employer"--meh. Note that I am not disputing that he got promoted etc.--I'm just saying that it's not a secondary or independent source. I'm not sure what you mean with "his thesis in 2". It's an Elsevier publication so I can't see the whole thing, but I doubt that an article like that would say "Sagi wrote his thesis on ...", and at any rate that also wouldn't be an independent source, since he is a co-author on the article. I'm looking at ref 8, this article, and it's supposed to verify that his group was "investigating multigenic functions through multigene function in crustacean reproduction and growth and the establishment of genome editing in prawns using application of CRISPR"--what I see in the text is that it verifies " So far, the IAG gene has been identified in dozens of decapod crustaceans, including prawns, shrimp, crayfish, lobsters, and crabs" and a variety of other statements but not that. What I have a problem with is that a claim about the research is presented and the proof of that is a citation of an article that cites the subject's research but in statements that do not seem to correspond to the claims in the article. I also don't really understand what you mean with "refs 7-17 are his work"--because refs 7 and 8 are not his work, though they cite his work. And you can say that Fish Site is reliable, but it doesn't take away from the fact that the page doesn't have a byline and reads like a press release. Drmies (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies Reference 8 sites articles of Sagi referring to different genes in the system. See reference 6, 8, and 15. Reference 9 is citing most important studies of Sagi group on the male to female and female to male manipulations of the IAG sexual switch (out 53 citations in this wide list of references, 14 are related to Sagi lab work). Article 9 is also referring to the use of CRISPR with respect to the IAG so we use it as secondary reference, and attach to it here a very recent reference of the Sagi group on the first application of CRISPR in Macrobrachium rosenbergii.

Molcho, J., Manor, R., Shamsian, M., Sudarshan, G., Ofir, R., Weil, S., Wattad, H., Hayun, E., Levy, T., Aflalo, E. D., Hendel, A., and Sagi, A. 2022. On genome editing in embryos and cells of the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aquaculture. 558: 738391. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0044848622005075. Ronavni (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another thing. I'm looking at the paragraph starting "Crustaceans are experts", which is a claim about crustaceans, not about the subject, and is verified--but certainly in an article like this it should say something like "Sagi's group established that...", otherwise this approaches synthesis (or essay writing). The next claim, "The studies of the Sagi group..." is supposedly verified by this--but I can't find any statement saying that (and that article should have been copyedited; it's full of grammatical errors and malformed sentences...), and "reference in p. 170"--it ends at p. 169. All these citations that are supposed to show the importance of his work are at once too detailed and too indirect, and unnecessarily so. I'm sure there are other ways to verify it rather than citing the ones that cite him in the way these articles do. Drmies (talk) 19:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies The paragraph that refers to crustacean biomineralization, although cites achievements important to this field with the unique use of functional genomics and discovery of important components, is not as central to the Sagi group compared to the major issues of sexual plasticity and monosex. Since it is not his claim to fame, we decided to omit this part from this Viki draft. Ronavni (talk) 15:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's let @Ronavni make some edits, I think it is night where he is. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will indeed do so. I'm not that well familiar in English Wikipedia terminology. Can you explain to me what does it mean "to remove the peacock and resubmit via AfC"? of course, after the editing we are required to do. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 17:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PEACOCK, i.e. bragging. For instance in the sentence "His group established novel monosex" the term "novel" might be challenged. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your quick responses. Ronavni (talk) 18:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ronavni, I think you may be missing the points made by Drmies. I just had a more detailed look and for certain the phrasing is too strong. I have not checked everything, but as a start:
  • You use the word "discovered" and cite [7], but I do not see the word "discover" in that reference.
  • For [8] the word discover is also used. While the actual source does give credit for discovery, Sagi is in the middle of the author list so crediting him with it is very marginal.
  • For [9] I also do not see the word "discover" in the reference.
  • For [10], the text states "established" but I see no such statement in the reference.
Words matter! Ldm1954 (talk) 15:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I'll check with the group. Ronavni (talk) 16:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good evening Ldm1954 & Drmies. I would like to bring here my comments to the comments above, after checking with Amir Sagi's research group. In addition, an extensive review article on the relevant field was published this month, which is a very strong reference in three different points to the achievements of Sagi's research group, but I will place it as a reference later, so as not to change the order of the references to which I refer below.
The Article details:

"Crustacean endocrinology: Sexual differentiation and potential application for aquaculture", And I attach the link to it here. your comment: "You use the word "discovered" and cite [7], but I do not see the word "discover" in that reference." the response is: The first mention ever of the IAG in the literature is found in an article by the Sagi group from 2007*. This article is describing the discovery of the molecule and the fact that the term IAG was coined by the Sagi group. It is indeed a discovery since it was a result of the research at the Sagi Laboratory, not known before and not mentioned in any scientific publication before this article. The article*, among others of the Sagi team, is cited by [7].

  • Manor, R., Weil, S., Oren, S., Glazer, L., Aflalo, E.D., Ventura, T., Chalifa-Caspi, V., Lapidot, M., and Sagi A. 2007. Insulin and gender: an insulin-like gene expressed exclusively in the androgenic gland of the male crayfish. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol., 150(2):326-336.

your comment: "For [8] the word discover is also used. While the actual source does give credit for discovery, Sagi is in the middle of the author list so crediting him with it is very marginal." the response is: Article [8] refers to the part of the sentence: “associated gene expression” and not to the discovery of the IAG. The authors of [8] are ZHOU Huan , CHEN Hong-Lin , LIU Feng, OUYANG Miao-Feng, LOU Bao, GU Zhi-Min. Sagi is not among them, so he is not in the middle and there are mentions of other genes related to the process by other groups as well as references of the Sagi group. Among others, the following relevant articles of the Sagi group are cited in [8]: Rosen O, Manor R, Weil S, et al. A sexual shift induced by silencing of a single insulin-like gene in crayfish: ovarian upregulation and testicular degeneration [J]. PLoS One, 2010, 5(12): e15281. Rosen O, Weil S, Manor R, et al. A crayfish insulin-like-binding protein: another piece in the androgenic gland insulin-like hormone puzzle is revealed [J]. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2013, 288(31): 22289-22298. Ventura T, Manor R, Aflalo E D, et al. Temporal silencing of an androgenic gland-specific insulin-like gene affecting phenotypical gender differences and spermatogenesis [J]. Endocrinology, 2009, 150(3): 1278-1286. your comment: "For [9] I also do not see the word "discover" in the reference." the response is: Article [8] refers to the part of the sentence: “associated gene expression” and not to the discovery of the IAG. there are mentions of other genes related to the process by other groups as well as references of the Sagi group. Among others, the following relevant articles of the Sagi group are cited in [9]: Amterat Abu Abayed F, Manor R, Aflalo ED, Sagi A. Screening for Dmrt genes from embryo to mature Macrobrachium rosenbergii prawns. Gen Comp Endocrinol (2019) 282:113205. Ventura T, Manor R, Aflalo ED, Weil S, Rosen O, Sagi A. Timing sexual differentiation: full functional sex reversal achieved through silencing of a single insulin-like gene in the prawn, macrobrachium rosenbergii. Biol Reprod (2012) 86(3):90. Ventura T, Sagi A. The insulin-like androgenic gland hormone in crustaceans: from a single gene silencing to a wide array of sexual manipulation-based biotechnologies. Biotechnol Adv (2012) 30(6):1543–50. On genome editing in the Sagi group: Molcho J, Manor R, Shamsian M, Sudarshan G, Ofir R, Parker D, et al. On genome editing in embryos and cells of the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aquaculture (2022) 558):738391. On the IAG=sexual switch: Levy T, Sagi A. The “IAG-switch”-A key controlling element in decapod crustacean sex differentiation. Front Endocrinol (2020) 11:651.

For the comment about reference 10 - to be continued (it's long) thanks, Ronavni (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954 & Drmies. your comment:"For [10], the text states "established" but I see no such statement in the reference." the response is:

The establishment of the monosex biotechnologies took almost three decades. Article [10] cites several studies of Prof. Sagi and his group that together describe this wide scientific process which ended with the establishment of such technologies at the Sagi Laboratory. The following relevant studies are cited in [10]: Sagi A, Aflalo E. The androgenic gland and monosex culture of freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii (DeMan): a biotechnological perspective. Aquacult Res. 2005; 36: 231-237. Ventura T, Sagi A. The insulin-like androgenic gland hormone in crustaceans: from a single gene silencing to a wide array of sexual manipulation-based biotechnologies. Biotechnol Adv. 2012; 30: 1543-1550. Sagi A, Raanan Z, Cohen D, Wax Y. Production of Macrobrachium rosenbergii in monosex populations-yield characteristics under intensive monoculture conditions in cages. Aquaculture. 1986; 51: 265-275. Ventura T, Manor R, Aflalo E, Weil S, Rosen O, Sagi A. Timing sexual differentiation: full functional sex reversal achieved through silencing of a single insulin-like gene in the prawn, Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Biol Reprod. 2012; 86(3): 90. Ventura T, Manor R, Aflalo E, et al. Temporal silencing of an androgenic gland-specific insulin-like gene affecting phenotypical gender differences and spermatogenesis. Endocrinology. 2009; 150: 1278-1286. Lezer Y, Aflalo E, Manor R, Sharabi O, Abilevich L, Sagi A. On the safety of RNAi usage in aquaculture: the case of all-male prawn stocks generated through manipulation of the insulin-like androgenic gland hormone. Aquaculture. 2015; 435: 157-166. Aflalo E, Hoang T, Nguyen V, et al. A novel two-step procedure for mass production of all-male populations of the giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aquaculture. 2006; 256: 468-478. Levy T, Sagi A. The “IAG-switch”—A key controlling element in decapod crustacean sex differentiation. Front Endocrinol. 2020; 11: 651. Levy T, Rosen O, Manor R, et al. Production of WW males lacking the masculine Z chromosome and mining the Macrobrachium rosenbergii genome for sex-chromosomes. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1): 12408.

Article [10] also cites the following studies of the androgenic gland, IAG and sexual differentiation. These created scientific understanding of the AG, IAG, sexual differentiation phenomena that were published by the Sagi team. Following are such articles that were cited in [10]: Manor R, Weil S, Oren S, et al. Insulin and gender: an insulin-like gene expressed exclusively in the androgenic gland of the male crayfish. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2007; 150: 326-336. Sharabi O, Manor R, Weil S, et al. Identification and characterization of an insulin-like receptor involved in crustacean reproduction. Endocrinology. 2016; 157: 928-941. Khalaila I, Manor R, Weil S, Granot Y, Keller R, Sagi A. The eyestalk-androgen gland-testis endocrine axis in the crayfish Cherax quadricarinatus. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2002; 127: 147-156. Barki A, Karplus I, Manor R, Sagi A. Intersexuality and behavior in crayfish: the de-masculinization effects of androgenic gland ablation. Horm Behav. 2006; 50: 322-331. Levy T, Tamone S, Manor R, et al. The IAG-switch and further transcriptomic insights into sexual differentiation of a protandric shrimp. Front Mar Sci. 2020; 7: 927. Rosen O, Manor R, Weil S, et al. A sexual shift induced by silencing of a single insulin-like gene in crayfish: ovarian upregulation and testicular degeneration. PLoS One. 2010; 5:e15281. Ventura T, Manor R, Aflalo E, et al. Expression of an androgenic gland-specific insulin-like peptide during the course of prawn sexual and morphotypic differentiation. Int Sch Res Notices. 2011; 2011:476283. Parnes S, Khalaila I, Hulata G. Sagi a sex determination in crayfish: are intersex Cherax quadricarinatus (Decapoda, Parastacidae) genetically females? Genet Res. 2003; 82: 107-116.

I really hope this is sutisfy. yours, Ronavni (talk) 19:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954 & Drmies Last minute update: I humbly request to copy here an e-mail announcing a special award that will be given to Sagi at a conference in Malaysia:

"From: team@triple-e-awards.com <team@triple-e-awards.com> Sent: Monday, 15 July 2024 20:49 To: Amir Sagi <sagia@bgu.ac.il> Subject: 2024 ACEEU Asia-Pacific Triple E Awards: Evaluation Results Dear Amir, 

We are pleased to inform you that your entry “Amir Sagi Ben Gurion University, Monosex biotechnologies in prawn aquaculture - university and field” has been selected as one of only two to receive the Lifetime Achievement Award in University Transformation - Special Recognition Award. Congratulations!!

The Triple E Awards are part of 2024 ACEEU Asia-Pacific Forum “Education, Research and Innovation for Sustainable Development: Amplifying societal impact through entrepreneurship, community engagement and new technologies" hosted by Management and Science University at the campus located in Shah Alam, just 20 kilometers away from the city centre of Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. This event brings together around 150 front-runners in entrepreneurship and engagement from the Asia-Pacific region. We believe that achievements of this caliber are meant to be celebrated with those who have supported and collaborated with you along the way. We encourage you to bring along university leaders and managers, academics and professionals from your institution, or even project partners with whom you work to shape the future. We look forward to seeing you in Malaysia! With best wishes Your Triple E Awards Team"

Thank you again, Ronavni (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not really sure what all is going on in this section. I think you were citing footnotes that cited your subject--that doesn't establish much. Can you not find text, words, that discuss the subject's scholarship? As for this last thing--my answer is NO, and in part that's because secondary sources also help establish the worth of this or that award. And we don't take emails as evidence. BTW I find it odd that you would be posting emails sent to the subject. Drmies (talk) 21:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I did not think to bring the e-mail message (which I published with the permission of the subject) as evidence, but to bring another aspect to notability.

All footnotes that cite the subject are a secondary source, that's what we have. In the "Awards and honor" chapter we have secondary sources of the type you are referring to. thank you, Ronavni (talk) 06:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954 & Drmies, Gentlemen, I am about to insert the very new article into our entry/article, therefore the references numbers above will be changed in the latest edition of the entry. You can of course use "history" if necessary. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hope it's worth it. Drmies (talk) 13:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ldm1954 & Drmies Well, it's done. The new article is reference #8 now. I want to emphasize that The article refers to the fact that the IAG in decapods was discovered by the Sagi group and actually that the term IAG was coined by the Sagi group (all the references are from the Sagi group): “Owing to its structural characteristics similar to those of the insulin-like family, this hormone was designated as IAG (Manor et al., 2007). Knockdown of the IAG gene in M. rosenbergii induced feminization (male-to-female sex reversal), highlighting the hormonal function of IAG in decapods (Ventura et al., 2009, Ventura et al., 2012, Ventura and Sagi, 2012).”
The article is referring also to the establishment of monosex biotechnologies with references exclusively from the Sagi laboratory: “Sex control technology in decapods has reached commercial levels in a few species, such as M. rosenbergii (Ventura et al., 2009, Ventura et al., 2012, Ventura and Sagi, 2012), through male-to-female/female-to-male sex reversals via IAG manipulation”.
The article refers to the unique case of this achievement and stating that the only commercial success was done by the Sagi group: “To date, the implantation of AG and manipulation of IAG have been central to the development of sex control technologies in decapods' aquaculture. However, commercial success has been achieved only in M. rosenbergii.”
Regarding biological control the article again refers to studies of the Sagi group: “the several studies have demonstrated that monosex decapod culture using M. rosenbergii and red claw crayfish Cherax quadricarinatus is very effective against snail eradication (Savaya et al., 2020, Shaked et al., 2024). In fact, snails are known to act as secondary hosts to disease-causing parasites in aquaculture”.
After all this, I ask for your consent to resubmit the article for review or even for publication. Thank you, Ronavni (talk) 14:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need anyone's consent. Drmies (talk) 14:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Drmies, Ronavni (talk) 14:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing the indent as I want to make a few different points.
First, key, Ronavni please be careful of the "trap" that I call improve not debate. Your purpose should not be to convince Drmies and I on this talk page, it needs to be to restructure the article such that it impresses readers who have not seen it before, and also other reviewers.
Second, things like "discover" are very hard to prove in Wikipedia. What you need is a review article which clearly states this, with words that you can quote. A strong approach would be a short quote from DOI:10.1163/1937240X-00002491. The statements in that article in a reputable journal are exactly what is looked for. It is a true secondary source, strong.
Other secondary sources (not all so strong) from a quick search are (there may be more):
Third, wearing my hat as an academic I agree with referencing to within journal articles about the importance of work. However, not everyone on Wikipedia is an academic and/or cares about the details. Hence the importance needs to be cleanly spelt out in simple sentences.
Last, but not least, his awards and honors are what make him notable. I strongly suggest toning down the research description, British understatement versus aggressive American type approach. People who are interested will dig into the papers; the casual reader won't.
Just my suggestions. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ldm1954, I appreciate it so much, and I will see how I can improve the article by writing in an understatement approach. Ronavni (talk) 15:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ronavni&oldid=1258296286"