User talk:Kshear04

AfC notification: Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D.. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 08:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. (December 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 Legacypac was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. 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:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D., click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• 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.

Legacypac (talk) 06:11, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Kshear04! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! Legacypac (talk) 06:11, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel K. Podolsky (January 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ShunDream was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Daniel K. Podolsky 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:Daniel K. Podolsky, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• 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.

ShunDream (talk) 12:25, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Kshear04, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel K. Podolsky (March 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SITH (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Query

Moved: was at Talk:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D.

You asked: "My apologies. I should have said 'I.' The content that is an alleged copyright violation is content that I wrote. It's very much not plagiarism. I've adjusted the language over and over again so that it meets Wikipedia guidelines. Can you please help?"

I am not in a position to see the deleted contents at Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky, formerly at Draft:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D.. Perhaps we could solicit help from DGG who commented on the draft back in December? Sam Sailor 03:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Some parts of the "Prior Career" section in the university press release was copied directly into the article. It could easily be rewritten. Some of the additional material read like a paraphrase, but it wasn;t close enough to be a copyvio. I might not have deleted the article on that basis, just removed the section, and deleted the versions that had the section. But I wouldn't say the delteing admin was in error--different admins do things a little differently.

The real problem remains promotionalism . It's not as bad as the university's own remarkable press releases, which seems to give him credit for Nobel prizes that were awarded to other people . But the draft as it is gives him credit for all the work that was done by everyone done by the institutions he headed. Press releases do that, but not encyclopedia articles. It lists alrge number of awards, but only some are significant. Dr. Podolsky was elected to the Institute of Medicine, which all by itself is proof of notability for WP's purposes. He was President of the national organization in his specialty. He held an endowed professorship at Harvard. He's President of one of the most important US medical comlexes, UT Southwestern. It doesn't really add to this that he was the member of an number of other societies, or even that he graduated summa for his bachelor's, or that he received university prizes as a student. The sq. ft of his endoscopy complex isn't encyclopedic content. nor is the number of procedures the unit did in a year. When someone is as very highly notable as he is, inclusion of minor material detracts from the article.

Encyclopedia articles don't use vague words of praise: "innovative". "prolificaly"," significant" And learn the difference between Nature Reviews, a first-rate review journal, and World Jourbal of Gasterenterology, which is eitther a predatory journal or just third rate. There is no need for a very notable person to use low quality references.

I don't restore articles that another admin has deleted for copyvio. I can email you text, but you first have to modify your user preferences page to enable your email. But you might do just as well to start over.

But there is something even more important. Considering you user contributions, where you have written only about UTSouthwestern and its faculty, and considering the clear promotional nature of some of these contributions, especially your first which is so promotionall as to amount to straightforward advertising, it is reasonable to think that youare likely to have some direct connection with the institution. If this is the case , you must declare it on your user page, and on the talk page of every affected article,. See WP:COI and WP:PAID for the exact requirements . This is not optional.

I shall deal separately with those of your additions to the med school article that are inappropriate.

And I need to warn you that if you submit promotional material again, you will be coming very close to the level for being blocked as a promotional-only editor. DGG ( talk ) 18:17, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. (February 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. 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:Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D., 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, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D. has been accepted

Daniel K. Podolsky, M.D., which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2020 (UTC)