User talk:153.96.84.2

Geron Corporation

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Nouse4aname (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia

Please leave your personal bias at the door. Regards Nouse4aname (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Please do not remove citations, and then ask for citations.

The article in Nature volume 320, pages 63-65, is where Steen Willadesn's work on cloning is sheep was originally described. The 2005 Pioneer Award is a review of his work, it is true that this article is one of those cited in the references, but I thought it important to include a direct reference as this does put a date of publication, and hence priority, on view.

I removed the content because it was written in a highly point-of-view style, which is not at all appropriate for an encyclopedia. In future, please ensure all of your edits conform to the strict standards required for biographical articles (see here for useful information MOS:BIO), else they will be reverted upon sight. Regards Nouse4aname (talk) 19:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you read the Deja vu website about Braunwald? The New York Times articles get to the facts of the matter.

How is a direct quote from the Pionnerr Award 2005 about Willadsen a point-of-view? It is reporting what others have decided.

I think you have a problem with not reading primary papers.

But you present such statements as fact. For inclusion, you must give them sufficient context and ensure that they are a representative view, not one person's opinion. Nouse4aname (talk) 08:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The International Embryo Transfer Society is more than one person.

True, but you are mis-presenting the facts and provide no context for what you have written. I have made a start on cleaning it up... Nouse4aname (talk) 15:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks much better. There are a whole range of references. The abstract to the 1986 Nature paper is the most important, followed by the International Embryo Transfer Society 2005 Pioneer Award, followed by the article in the New York Times. The other references are for the most part some kind of blogs, or list of what some teenager thinks are impotant people.

The amazing thing is that all the editors of Wikipedia did not even recognise that Willadsen is in fact the pioneer, even though it has been out there in the scientific press since 1986, and in the New York Times, a prominent newspaper, since 1997.

Please do not take this personally, but the rules of wikpedia do squeeze out reality and prop up a parallel universe determined by how much media attention you can get.

The world is full of controversies, sometimes involving living people, from arguments to all out war, and the wikipedia rules, modelled after schoolmarms or both sexes, does concentrate too much on neat handwriting, which bears no relationship I know of to artistic or scientific ability.

Again, plese do not take this personally. You have make the article look much better.