User talk:WanderingJosh

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Hello, WanderingJosh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Quick introduction to Wikipedia
How to write a great article
Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia, an essay from PLOS Computational Biology
Identifying reliable sources for medicine-related articles (general advice)
Wikipedia's Manual of Style for medicine-related articles (general style guide)
A few tricks to help you format references are at WP:MEDHOW

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, try Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your own talk page.

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).

Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 14:11, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:BiondVax Pharmaceutical Logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:BiondVax Pharmaceutical Logo.png. 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) 17:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BiondVax Pharma Logo.pdf

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BiondVax Pharma Logo.pdf. 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) 02:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BiondVax Pharmaceutical Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BiondVax Pharmaceutical Logo.png. 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) 02:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BiondVax (March 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:BiondVax and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

333 -blue 13:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! WanderingJosh, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! 333 -blue 13:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BiondVax (March 31)

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

Not acceptable. Excessive detail and does not comply with WP:MEDRS.

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:BiondVax and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DGG ( talk ) 05:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of interest in Wikipedia

Hi WangeringJosh. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia along with my regular editing. Thanks very much for disclosing your relationship with Biondvax.

You are, what we call in Wikipedia, a "paid editor", which is a special class of conflict of interest here. In case you are not aware of it, I'm giving you notice of our COI guideline and the PAID editing policy.

Hello, WanderingJosh. 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. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or 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 familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. 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, and have you have nailed that. So, thanks for that!

I've added relevant tags to the talk pages of the articles you've worked on, so that editors working on those articles can easily see the disclosure. So the disclosure piece of this will be done.

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is what I call "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 viola 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.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI 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, disclose your COI on the Talk page using the appropriate template, and then submit the draft article through the WP:AFC process so it can be reviewed before it publishes (which is exactly what you have done, so thanks!); 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 propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at the vaccines article - there is a link at "click here" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.

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. (which I will say more about, if you want).

I hope that 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 a 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. (that is a very narrow range of stuff)

Will you please agree 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. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 14:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

copied from message left at my talk page here, to keep thread together Jytdog (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Hey Jytdog - thanks for the detailed info you left yesterday on my page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WanderingJosh).

Since I am biased with respect to the BiondVax draft article - what can be done to review and approve it? Do I basically have to wait and hope for someone else to come along and review? Is there some way I can ask someone in Wikipedia-land to review the article and (hopefully) approve it?

Despite my bias, I can't understand why this article isn't worthy of Wikipedia, when many similar small, publicly traded, pharma companies do have articles (e.g. Galena_Biopharma, Sarepta_Therapeutics, Repros_Therapeutics, Onepharm (private), CancerVax (not even a functioning company!).

Thanks! I think it's great people like you take time to review, and carefully explain, to new editors like myself. WanderingJosh (talk) 08:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note! I copied it here to keep the thread together - just easier that way. There is a lot of work that you could still do to improve the article. Above, I offered to kind of lay out how Wikipedia works, and I have some tips about how to write an article that are generally, and I think could really help you. Can I lay that stuff out for you? Jytdog (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]