User talk:Rthrelfall

Welcome to Wikipedia

Welcome, Rthrelfall!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
Wikipedia has a vibrant community of editors. The village pump is a great place to see the goings on.
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some pointers to learn more about this project:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun editing! ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ik

Thank you for the great and much needed expansion of Ik! Great work. — mark ✎ 20:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Thanks for adding the butterfly dream translation to Zhuangzi, but you forgot the publication reference. Would you please add it? Thanks. Keahapana 22:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've also added your unpublished translations into the Huangdi Neijing article. Since you're new to Wikipedia, you may not know about citing oneself. I'll replace your butterfly dream version with a published one. If you have any questions, you can reply by editing this page. Best wishes. Keahapana 19:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this time none of my translations are published. Eventually they will be part of a book I am writing. I question the rule of not citing oneself in this context as translations while original are not always original research in that some translations are straight forward and require no research, just technical knowledge. Also, Watson's translations of Zhuangzi are clearly copyrighted and thus likely are not permitted on Wikipedia, so I added my translation to avoid copyright infringement. I added my name, so that it was clear as to who did the translation. I don't really care if my name is removed, but I question the wisdom of quoting copyrighted works when the translation per se is not being discussed or written about, just its general meaning. I believe discussing a particular translation, such as its accuracy would fall into the category of fair use as it is scholarly activity about a specific translation. Analyzing a translation may be considered original research, but when a translation is clearly wrong as determined by an expert, it is not so much original research as simply a matter of reporting an error.

Given that original pictures can be uploaded why not original translations? Honestly, what is worse, violating copyright or bending the rule on citing oneself? Again, I do not believe a translation always implies "original research." A translation may be original, but not more so than any new piece of writing. Rthrelfall 08:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for noting the copyright violation. It was my mistake. I've fixed it and deleted the links.

You have some interesting views about translation. I don't make the Wikipedia guidelines; I just try to follow them. If you want to question the wisdom of the rules, you could start here.

There are obvious advantages for an encyclopedia quoting published translations. For instance, a reader can't find the original context in an unpublished source. I agree with you that is should be acceptable to analyze or compare translations. Best wishes. Keahapana 22:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High FSH

AfD nomination of High FSH

An article that you have been involved in editing, High FSH, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/High FSH. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Richard Cavell (talk) 09:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gonadatropin Preparations

A tag has been placed on Gonadatropin Preparations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Btilm 05:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]