User talk:Raj6

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. --Bonadea (talk) 12:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Fans.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Fans.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drug Design[edit]

This article has received a number of edits from you and from an IP editor, 115.241.75.19, who may well be you also. The section on neural networks is badly written, contains an advert that is inappropriate and is difficult to follow. It also implies that this is the only approach to drug design, which is incorrect. It gives overdue weight to neural networks. Please try to understand the policies and guidelines of wikipedia and try to improve the article, rather than just revert good changes from other editors. --Bduke (Discussion) 00:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am moving the discussion here as it is best to keep discussion in one place. I have your talk here here on my watchlist, so I will notice if you reply here. You said on my talk page:-

Yes, I have made many edits to neural network based drug design.I appreciate that the material should be written in user friendly way, and I will definitely do that in my future edits. But please understand that if we can provide complete detail to reader, that is much more beneficial. Rather than just touching the subject and walk away. In computer designing, there are 3 ways only. I will try to add the context in all the three equally but more is the content, it is more better.

First, you describe the article as "neural network based drug design". It is not. It is a general article on drug design and neural networks are just part of that. They are not even the most important part. You are giving much too much undue weight to neural networks. Second, this is an encyclopedia. It is not necessary to add complete detail. Those new sections were not written in an encyclopedic way. Anyway much of this was badly written. I think English is not your first language. I am afraid you make many mistakes. For example, I corrected about 6 in you response above and several still remain. As I said above, please try to understand the wikipedia policies and guidelines. I know that is now quite a lot of work, but you will be a better editor if you do it. BTW, please sign your comments with ~~~~ as I will do now. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drug design part II[edit]

Hi Raj6. Concerning your recent edits I have reverted them for the reasons already discussed here. Just to review, the reasons I reverted your edits are:

They are not supported by reliable sources.
They appear to be original research in violation of a fundamental Wikipedia policy.

Statements like

"The artificial intelligence is the only possible way to eliminate all the deseases from the world."

is pure speculation. If want include statements like this, they must be supported by citations.

Furthermore another statement contains misleading information:

"target disesase is given to computer and the artificial intelligence program searches in the chemical and biological database, the molecules that can destroy disease causing microbes".

First of all, I seriously doubt a neural net can accomplish what you claim all by itself. It needs data and the available databases simply do not contain sufficient information to cure even a small fraction of known diseases. Second, not all diseases are caused by microbes. Third, the section is partially redundant. There is already material concerning virtual screening for searching chemical databases and the vast majority of these methods do not employ neural nets.

That being said, neural nets do play a supporting role in drug design. I encourage you to include more material on neural nets in the article, however the material must be supported by reliable sources and it must not overstate the importance of neural nets. Cheers. Boghog2 (talk) 05:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Immortality[edit]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Bearian (talk) 16:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Please do not place speculation or original research into Wikipedia. Consider yourself warned yet another time. Bearian (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, What is cycone phailin ?[edit]

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, What is cycone phailin ?. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Cyclone Phailin. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Cyclone Phailin – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. GILO A&E⇑ 18:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of How to avoid bypass surgery[edit]

The article How to avoid bypass surgery has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:OR, WP:NOTHOWTO

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kolbasz (talk) 19:03, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Avoid bye-pass surgery[edit]

Hello Raj6,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Avoid bye-pass surgery for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[:{{{article}}}]].

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, 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. Shadowjams (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Graduate Voter Card[edit]

The article Graduate Voter Card has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD 22:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Smell from penis[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Smell from penis, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. freshacconci talk to me 17:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015[edit]

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 article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. freshacconci talk to me 17:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Artificial intelligence in chemistry for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Artificial intelligence in chemistry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial intelligence in chemistry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DrStrauss talk 20:35, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual scientist moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Virtual scientist, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 09:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[edit]

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Tissue engineering. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Your edits are a reckless use of English; please practice using English in your sandbox and get help from the Teahouse. Zefr (talk) 16:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]