User talk:GalactosemiaAtaxia

Hi GalactosemiaAtaxia! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for adding sources to articles. I'm always happy to run across someone who sounds interested in rare diseases.

For medicine-related content, whenever possible, we usually prefer textbooks and peer-reviewed review articles, instead of websites. IMO any source is better than no source, but you know how it is – anyone can make a website saying anything, and occasionally they do. We've had better luck overall with more "formal" sources. Adding and improving sources is really helpful, and I hope you will keep doing it.

If you'd like to meet some other editors who are also interested in Wikipedia's medicine-related articles, please feel free to drop by Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine and say hello on the 'talk' page. and say hello on the 'talk' page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing:, thank you for the encouragement. I really dislike seeing that Citation Needed tag on informative articles. I try the best I can to provide relevant citations, as I also believe that any source is better than no source. I hope to do this for as long as I can, especially now that I know I have people who care about these little contributions of mine. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep this up, you'll be a popular editor.  :-D

What you're doing now is obviously working, so I don't want to interfere, but have you ever tried Wikipedia:Citation Hunt? It specifically searches for paragraphs that contain the citation needed tag. You can click the 'Customize' button and search for a common word (e.g., "chronic"). Then click all the articles that interest you, which gives you a list that looks like this: https://citationhunt.toolforge.org/en?custom=c91b58ff. Another approach is to put in a list of articles, which for key medical articles will give you these: https://citationhunt.toolforge.org/en?custom=23366627. (If you don't customize the list, it'll give you a Special:Random article with a citation needed tag.) Some people like it; if you happen to, then now you know it exists. If you don't, then I'd be happy to have you stick with what you're doing. It's really helpful. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing: Wow, I didn't know there was such a helpful tool. While I try to get acquainted with the citation hunt tool, I will continue with this analog way of doing this. I am tracking down articles that need citations from this list: Articles requiring reliable medical sources and related articles to each one that is not originally on the list. Gaining access to the full page affords me the opportunity to learn the various content formating and to brush on my medical terminologies too. It's a symbiotic affair. Meanwhile, thank you for the links, I am most grateful for the kind words too. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 00:58, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the

for assistance. Thank you. - Sumanuil (talk) 01:34, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumanuil: Thank you very much for the tip. I will adjust accordingly. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 02:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your work on adding sources to articles. As discussed under

, but the best resources are review articles from peer-reviewed journals or often recent textbooks (e.g. Harrisson's, which I sometimes use if review articles are not useful). Pubmed is a good start; I tend to select the relevant MeSH heading with [MAJR] and restricted to reviews.

Let me know if I can help. I totally agree that {{citation needed}} tags are suboptimal. JFW | T@lk 20:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jfdwolff: Thank you for the suggestions. I do believe that any source is better than no source at all. I like the lecturio website because like you rightly said, it is comprehensive and concise and contrary to what you said, it is well referenced, except for a few articles there. I will limit my usage to only referenced content on the website and add to sources from other public websites. The problem I have, personally with some of the public websites is that researches are not up to date. Thank you again. I am glad my little bits are recognized. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 21:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I happened to come across your

WP:REFSPAM. Spicy (talk) 17:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

IP block exempt

I have marked your account as

when you are logged in.

If you have any questions, please read the page

WP:UTRS. ST47 (talk) 14:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

@ST47: Thank you. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 02:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and Referencing

repeated references to the same source. Thanks. Arllaw (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

October 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. Arllaw (talk) 16:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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 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 NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

December 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  GeneralNotability (talk) 17:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Appeal

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

GalactosemiaAtaxia (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

First of all, I do admit my fault and going forward I promise to desist from any form of editing that may by any means appear promotional. I was still trying to get conversant with all the community rules. My intention was to add as more links to articles needing citations as possible. I found the Lecturio platform to be comprehensive, hence my decision to use links from there. I am fully aware that links from Wikipedia are no-follow links and I couldn't possibly have done so for any gains. Notwithstanding, since this contravenes the community rules and goes against Wikipedia policies, I duly admit the fault and promise to only edit in a manner that meets all policies. I humbly appeal reconsideration and subsequent unblocking of my account if you may. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Decline as unresponsive. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

What do you want to edit about if unblocked? You won't be unblocked to, in the short term, make any edits related to your conflict of interest. If you work for Lecturio GmbH, you must make the stricter

paid editing declaration. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• My interest lies more in sorting out articles with citation needed tags and all other citations related issues. I am connected to Lecturio, does that interprets as paid editing? I thought paid editing is when an editor is contracted and actually given money to edit an article. I have publicly declared COI on the article in question. I am open to understanding the community rules even more. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 21:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are considered to be a paid editor if you have any paid relationship with a subject; you don't have to be specifically paid to edit. You have added citations related to Lecturio; do you intend to contribute in any areas unrelated to Lecturio or its field? 331dot (talk) 00:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, and not limited to areas related to the medical field alone. Though, I am at my best in medical or health-related articles.GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 09:00, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pending what GeneralNotability thinks about this, I would consider unblocking you if you declared as a paid editor, agreed to refrain from making contributions related to your conflict of interest(your company and field) for six months or 250 edits(whichever is longer) and after that agreed to pursue COI related edits through

edit requests. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I just want to understand this part in your message above ..agreed to refrain from making contributions related to your conflict of interest(your company and field) for six months.. Does that mean I cannot edit medical or health-related(my field) articles for the duration of this probation? I agree to all other conditions and will do same when I understand what you mean in the quoted phrase. GalactosemiaAtaxia (talk) 14:26, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How broadly are you involved in the medical field? I don't think the entire medicine field is off limits, but anything related to your work at the company is. I stress this is not permanent, just until you get a history built up, after which you may make indirect contributions as I stated. 331dot (talk) 15:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, I'm not particularly pleased with their conduct to date (if COIBot's quick report is to be believed, they've added 500+ citations to Lecturio, which I'd normally call "covert spam"), but if you think they'd be a benefit to the 'pedia, I trust your judgment. I do want to point out this particular diff, which reads to me as the sort of "oh, I'm just interested in <company/person>" statement that we see so often from obvious paid editors. Maybe I'm just being overly negative today. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:45, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lecturio GmbH (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject

independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). 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.

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:Lecturio GmbH 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:Lecturio GmbH, 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.

S0091 (talk) 22:16, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Lecturio GmbH

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.

talk) 23:01, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Your draft article, Draft:Lecturio GmbH

Hello, GalactosemiaAtaxia. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Lecturio GmbH

".

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!} 22:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]