User talk:AlexanderPico

This is AlexanderPico's talk page. Start a new conversation at the top of the list with the topic title surrounded by header tags (e.g., ==), or reply to an existing topic. Type ~~~~ to automatically generate your signature and timestamp.

Signaling Help

Hello AlexanderPico. I am currently working on the mTORC1 pathway for a project for a graduate level class regarding signal transductions. I have the words that correspond to the signalling written on the page, but do not have the pathway. I have heard that one can be made via powerpoint, but you seem to be an expert on making signaling pathways in Wikipedia. If there a source you can provide for me, or any help regarding this, that would be great. I would preferably make this pathway on my own, considering that my contributions to the page go towards my grade in the project and for the class. Flemingrjf (talk) 03:49, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the mTORC1 article! I'm glad you found the interactive pathway maps as an alternative to powerpoint. These are made using the WikiPathways tool. It's a free, open source tool and all content is creative commons. And we've built the template infrastructure to embed selected pathways into wikipedia articles. It's not automatic, but the steps are straightforward from the curator perspective:

go to WikiPathways and create an account
create a new pathway for mTORC1 signaling or modify/clone existing mTORC1 pathways (see Help for tutorials)
contact me or the wikipathways-discuss google group when you're done to process the pathway for inclusion in wikipedia

Myself and other pathway curators are available at !WikiPathways to help with pathway curation. AlexanderPico (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Example discussion topic

Just trying out the test page format. AlexanderPico (talk) 21:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the MCB WikiProject!

Hello, AlexanderPico, welcome to the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject!

I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Here are some ideas on how you can help::

Read our Manual of Style, guide to citing sources and try this citation tool

Join in editing our collaboration of the month

Have a look at some related projects and resources

Improve articles on our worklist

If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, don't hesitate to post on the project talk page, or please drop me a note on my talk page.

Again, welcome!

Tim Vickers (talk) 22:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiPathways

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of WikiPathways, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://wikipathways.org/index.php/WikiPathways:About. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:StatinPathway WP430

Is transcluded into many articles, but unfortunately it is transcluded below the reference list and therefore produces red warning (missing refs tag) if it contains in-lined references. Yesterday, one editor has removed this template from all linked articles only because of that red warning (which I reverted and quickfixed the template), and another editor added second reflist below the template into some articles, which is not a good solution either. Thus, if you wish to change this. Please (i) think about a structural solution, given that templates are used by multiple articles and going around, changing them all is counterproductive (ii) implement it (iii) and only then revert me as you did here [1], preferably explaining your revert, as good editing rules imply. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I ended up explaining the edit in the Talk page since I missed the opportunity explain in the edit and couldn't add it later. Sorry about that! Regarding the template, turns out someone added the template to the Lipoprotein metabolism template which is itself commonly transcluded below References. This is not the proper use of our template. Most well documented templates have usage guidelines. I've updated ours to clearly exclude this usage. As a show of good faith, I'll hold off on reverting until we resolve this discussion. So far, the template has only been misused once out of dozens of times. The one offense was in a template so it affected many pages, true, but it was easy to fix. I only had to change one article. That offending usage was wrong for many reasons and was even removed by other editors but then replaced after the most offending aspect (the red warning) was removed. Now that this one usage has been fixed, now the only effect of removing the in-lined ref is to decrease the effectiveness of the template in all other articles. Please view links to the template to see how it's most commonly used. I hope you'll take into consideration the value added to these articles. Again, the template construction was a community-driven process and wikipedians most vested in the gene-related articles have requested this feature. It would be a shame to lose it. Thank you. AlexanderPico (talk) 21:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put I don't understand why an in-text link instead of in-lined reference diminishes any quality of that template (its actually more direct and its not that there are many references in there) and how can we stop editors from putting templates below reflist (common practice with other templates). Much ado about nothing, I would say. Materialscientist (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There I would agree with you. In fact, in the initial drafts of the template I had in-text links. These were jumped on by another editor, claiming potential violation of WP:EL. That editor suggested the in-lined reference strategy. I'm relatively new to the wikipedia community and am doing my best to accommodate those with more experience. Overall, I've found the process educational, at times even inspirational, but also sometimes frustrating :) Following your recommendations above, I've followed up with the editor that wanted to use the template in the Lipoprotein metabolism template and have offered to implement a collapsable template that would work better in that usage and in all other uses below references. The collapsable approach would also be more neutral w.r.t. WP:UNDUE as well, when being applied via a secondary template. The croppable template, however, I think still serves its own purpose best. Sound like a reasonable compromise? AlexanderPico (talk) 22:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiPathways has been nominated for discussion

Category:WikiPathways, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Document the WikiPathways export pipeline

{{Interactive pathway maps}} currently mentions a "custom export process", but does not elaborate on what it is. Would you mind disclosing your tools for doing so? I believe having the process public would help pathways remain up-to-date as well as encourage improvements to the process. --Artoria 2e5 🌉 15:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a link to the docs providing more details. Thanks for the suggestion! AlexanderPico (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]