User talk:Samsona

Speedy deletion nomination of Abraham O. Samson

Hello Samsona,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Abraham O. Samson for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 00:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Abraham O. Samson

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 Abraham O. Samson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. PK T(alk) 00:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not write about yourself

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but it appears you have written or added to an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 02:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But if you write about yourself, do it better. One unreferenced line doesn't make a page.Xx236 (talk) 08:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:34, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Diabetes mellitus type 2, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. This edit added speculation using primary research, which is inadequate for medical topics - see WP:MEDRS. Zefr (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions

It looks like you've had some template messages here about our rules over the years, but not yet a welcome message or a human explanation. So, much-belated welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed your edits related to nicotinic acetylcholine receptors on a few different pages and wanted to give you a few suggestions, and the earlier posts on this page added a couple more.

About the deletion posts above from 2017: it's totally OK to write a bit about yourself on your user page (yours is at User:Samsona). In fact it's encouraged to help others understand more about your background and editing interests. What's discouraged is writing about yourself in main space, as an actual encyclopedia article.
Self-citations or repeated citations to the work of the same research group are generally discouraged and can be seen as citation "spamming" or a sign of a conflict of interest. It's better to post on an article's talk page with suggested material or updates, or make a edit request so someone else can review.
We have specific and stringent rules for writing about human health and medicine, including information about the underlying biology of human disease. You'll want to have a close read of WP:MEDRS. In brief, we try to write from secondary sources (review articles, books, etc), stick to expert consensus views rather than research hypotheses, and cite the primary literature only very, very selectively.
There are groups of editors with shared interests in biomedicine at WT:MED and in molecular biology at WT:MOLBIO. These are good places to ask for advice and second opinions from people with experience writing on these topics.
Personally, I find it more enjoyable to write on Wikipedia about topics that aren't directly related to my area of real-world research interest. Even if I avoid citing my own work, I still have strong opinions on my research areas that are hard to neutralize. On the other hand, Wikipedia articles can be great ways to finally read those papers that caught my interest but are sitting around in open tabs or saved somewhere to read later.

Hope that helps! Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]