User talk:Zahira Cohen

Welcome!

Hello, Zahira Cohen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

License tagging for File:AvishaiHenik.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AvishaiHenik.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:AvishaiHenik.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AvishaiHenik.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ben Gurion University Formal Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ben Gurion University Formal Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Moti Hershkowitz Profile Picture.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Moti Hershkowitz Profile Picture.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Train2104 (t • c) 02:08, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Vered Slonim-Nevo

The article Vered Slonim-Nevo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Domdeparis (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Domdeparis!

I've added links information and references to the article. Prof. Slonim-Nevo is a notable person in Israel in the social welfare field. Zahira Cohen (talk) 13:30, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:GolanShaharProfilePic.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GolanShaharProfilePic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zahira Cohen. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.Deb (talk) 12:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deb! I declared my COI in the Hebrew user page, and was sure that it is the same user page as the English one... I changed it, and you can see now that I have a deceleration in the English user page.Zahira Cohen (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:StevenArosen.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:StevenArosen.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HI Marchjuly, I've added an explanation about the picture. ThanksZahira Cohen (talk) 09:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The template you added should not be added to the article; it should be added to the file's page. Moreover, Aronsen being a scientist or being unique has nothing to do with whether the file can be used per Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. In fact, he has pretty much no say at all as to what is added or removed, including images, to the article as explained in WP:OWN and WP:PROUD. To be blunt, it's not his article and Wikipedia kinda doesn't care what he wants except in some very specific cases as explained in WP:BLPSELF; he's still alive, so it is assumed that a freely licensed equivalent image can be created regardless of his personal opinion.

Now, if Aronsen holds the copyright on this image, then he can choose to release it under a free license of his choosing if he likes as explained in WP:CONSENT. The copyrights of photos are typically held by the photographer unless there has been some form of copyright transfer agreement. So, if Aronson is the copyright holder, he should email Wikipedia OTRS so that an OTRS can verify his claim;; otherwise, the file will be deleted since relevant Wikipedia policy does not allow its use as non-free content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask for a consent for a free licenseZahira Cohen (talk) 11:15, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some more info general about a free license:

Permission is needed from the copyright holder; permission of the subject of the photo is irrelevant unless they are also the copyright holder.
Permission basically has to be given to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the file and use for any purpose, including commercial purposes. Granting permission for only use on Wikipedia is not sufficient. Please see Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses for examples of the types of free licenses accepted by Wikipedia.
A free license cannot be cancelled after the fact. Even if the file is removed from Wikipedia, it can still be used under the terms of the free license it was released under pretty much forever.

If by chance the file is deleted before you obtain permission, there is no need to re-upload it. Deleted files are not really gone forever, but rather are just hidden from public view. Such files can be easily undeleted once their licensing has been verified. The person who sends in the permission email should include the url (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StevenArosen.jpg) for the file's page or the name of the file (File:StevenArosen.jpg) for reference. Once the licensing has been verified by an OTRS volunteer, the template {{OTRS permission}} will be added to the file's page. There are only so many volunteers and there tends to be a bit of a backlong, so the process may take some time. The person sending in the email will receive a reply containing an OTRS ticket number which can be used to ask for help at WP:OTRSN if necessary. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask here or at WP:MCQ and either I or someone else will try and answer them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zahira Cohen. 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]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Zahira Cohen. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. Your edits to date have been focused on Ben Gurion faculty. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Zahira Cohen. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. Here in Wikipedia such disclosures must be made explicitly. Would you please disclose any connection you have with people you have written about? After you respond (and you can just reply below), I can walk you through how the "peer review" part happens and then, if you like, I can provide you with some more general orientation as to how this place works. Please reply here, just below, to keep the discussion in one place. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I thought I was following the rules :)

I wrote about my paid contribution in my page and in the entry.

I will add now a request for editing on the paid entries.

If there is anything else, please let me know. Zahira Cohen (talk) 21:08, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow i totally missed your userpage. Don't know how I did that, sorry.

I checked the article talk pages. We generally put the conflict disclosure at the bottom of the beige box. Also, please don't make "edit requests" without making an actual request. These requests get listed at WP:COIN and people go through and address them.

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section, put the proposed content there, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) please the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that all makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss.

Also it appears that you may be a scientist yourself, and I hope you will consider using your expertise and Wikipedia skills to improve our articles on the general science topics! I will leave a welcome message about WP:MED below. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply here. Jytdog (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good I read it and I think I understand. So from now on I will follow waht you wrote here.. Are my contribution for now OK? Should I change anything?

Thanks Zahira Cohen (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Please do stop directly editing articles you have been paid to work on, and please put new articles through AfC, with disclosure of your conflict, as noted above. I have not started reviewing the content you created directly. Jytdog (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep editing the articles directly? dif, diff. Jytdog (talk) 07:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- As a paid editor you should be making suggestions on the talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me time to see all the messages.

I will not edit the articles directly from now. Is this guidance apply to even small grammar corrections or for adding a picture??

Notice that I see that some reviewers deleting neutral information from pages I work on like in the article of Abraham Zangen. What is the problem with adding the name in Hebrew in parenthesis? or the information about FDA approval. Sorry, I don't get it. Zahira Cohen (talk) 15:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is pointless to discuss specific content if you are not fully engaging with the "ground rules" for being here as a paid editor. In my view, based on the edits you have made, you have potential to be a good contributor but you are not responding appropriately in this discussion.

You don't seem to understand the context of paid editing in Wikipedia. Please know that it is a very big issue and the community will indefinitely block you if you keep giving only half-attention to this and continue behaving badly.

I recommend that you give this your full attention until you understand it. If you want to talk via skype or google hangouts I will be happy to walk you through the issues. But you need to take this seriously if you want to remain an editor in good standing. Jytdog (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll be happy to talk to you. Skype will be great. I am probably a slow learner for that I thought I was following the rules and now I understand that I'm not. None of my editings was done with awareness of "breaking the rules".

Anyway, I don't think I (or the subject of the article) should be punished by deleting neutral information. Let's go back on track. Tell me how to contact you so I will discuss everything and will do my work properly. Zahira Cohen (talk) 08:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The guidance I provided above could not be more clear. You were just ignoring it. I have emailed you to set up a time to talk. Jytdog (talk) 23:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Wikiproject Medicine!

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Welcome to Wikipedia from Wikiproject Medicine (also known as WPMED).

We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of content about health here on Wikipedia, pursuing the mission of Wikipedia to provide the public with articles that present accepted knowledge, created and maintained by a community of editors.

One of our members has noticed that you are interested in editing medical articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board!

First, some basics about editing Wikipedia, which is a strange place behind the scenes; you may find some of the ways we operate to be surprising. Please take your time and understand how this place works. Here are some useful links, which have information to help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Everything starts with the mission - the mission of Wikipedia is to provide the public with articles that summarize accepted knowledge, working in a community of editors. (see WP:NOT)
We find "accepted knowledge" for biomedical information in sources defined by WP:MEDRS -- we generally use literature reviews published in good journals or statements by major medical or scientific bodies and we generally avoid using research papers, editorials, and popular media as sources for such content. We read MEDRS sources and summarize them, giving the most space and emphasis (what we call WP:WEIGHT) to the most prevalent views found in MEDRS sources.
Please see WPMED's "how to" guide for editing content about health
More generally please see The five pillars of Wikipedia and please be aware of the "policies and guidelines" that govern what we do here; these have been generated by the community itself over the last fifteen years, and you will need to learn them (which is not too hard, it just takes some time). Documents about Wikipedia - the "back office" - reside in "Wikipedia space" where document titles are preceded by "Wikipedia:" (often abbreviated "WP:"). WP space is separate from "article space" (also called "mainspace") - the document at WP:CONSENSUS is different from, and serves as a different purpose than, the document at Consensus.

Every article and page in Wikipedia has an associated talk page, and these pages are essential because we editors use them to collaborate and work out disagreements. (This is your Talk page, associated with your user page.) When you use a Talk page, you should sign your name by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comment; the Wikipedia software will automatically convert that into links to your Userpage and this page and will add a datestamp. This is how we know who said what. We also "thread" comments in a way that you will learn with time. Please see the Talk Page Guidelines to learn how to use talk pages.

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. You can also just add our talk page to your watchlist and join in discussions that interest you. 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!
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, edit, discuss editing cycle. If you encounter any problems, you can discuss it on an article's talk page or post a message on the WPMED talk page.

Feel free to drop a note below if you have any questions or problems. I wish you all the best here in Wikipedia! --Jytdog (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Zahira Cohen. 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]

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) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Intraparietal sulcus.tif

Thanks for uploading File:Intraparietal sulcus.tif. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 16:30, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rachel Schiff (January 8)

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

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.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I am not convinced that the subject meets WP:NPROF quite yet. For the purposes of criteria C1 the rule of thumb is that the subject has multiple papers with 100+ citations, which isn't the case here. Chief editors of a major, well-established academic journal are considered notable but I'm not sure Script Journal from the Israel Association for Literacy and Language meets that definition. Language such as "Her research provides a knowledge foundation for researchers, educators and practitioners to fully grasp the struggles and challenges of individuals with learning disabilities", "esteemed and prestigious national and international conferences", "Schiff is a sought-after reviewer of articles submitted for publication in many prominent journals" is promotional and not appropriate for a neutral encyclopedia article.

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:Rachel Schiff 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:Rachel Schiff, 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 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.

Spicy (talk) 08:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zahira Cohen! Having an article 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! Spicy (talk) 08:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Rachel Schiff

Hello, Zahira Cohen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rachel Schiff, 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) 18:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rachel Schiff

Hello, Zahira Cohen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rachel Schiff".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:27, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rachel Schiff

Hello, Zahira Cohen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rachel Schiff".

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 deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Example of trials in a numerical stroop experiement.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Example of trials in a numerical stroop experiement.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 11:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]