User talk:Zutn
Welcome!
[edit]{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking 
or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.|
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
|
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous
|
Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 17:03, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Managing a conflict of interest
[edit]
Hello, Zutn. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:
- avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
- propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
- disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
- avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
- do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Reference spamming
[edit] Hello, Zutn. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to sources you may be affiliated with.
Editing in this way is a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be a form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM); the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.
If you wish to continue contributing, please first consider citing other reliable secondary sources such as review articles that were written by other researchers in your field and that are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite sources for which you may have a conflict of interest, please start a new section on the article's talk page and add {{Edit COI}} to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added. SmartSE (talk) 11:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hey SmartSE,
- sorry I was not aware that I am so strongly discouraged to cite papers that I was involved with. I added them because I thought they contributed something to the articles I changed, but feel free to remove them again if you disagree.
- How much self-citation is okay here? Because I would like to write more about food security after global catastrophes, but the field is not that big and if I should avoid people I am connected to in any way, I cannot really write anything, because this would exclude many important papers. Zutn (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are no definitive rules, but scientific articles should predominantly cite reviews rather than primary research: WP:SCIRS and if you follow that guidance then a lot of the potential issues will be avoided. For example cite the review that you use in the introduction and add whatever information is in that to relevant articles. It's generally better, especially when you don't have experience of the difference between contributing here compared to writing academically, to concentrate on the broader topics rather than your specific field of research. i.e. contribute to food security by adding a small section on the potential for catastrophic events to cause food insecurity. It's not that you can't cite any body who you know, but you should not only be citing your own papers as you have done so far. The other concept to bear in mind is WP:WEIGHT which is fundamental to how articles are written. In the entire body of all the research conducted on seaweed, is your paper about how it could be used as food if there is a global catastrophe really that important? The answer is probably not, and if you are in doubt, please ask on the talk pages. SmartSE (talk) 09:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for the explanation. Zutn (talk) 11:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are no definitive rules, but scientific articles should predominantly cite reviews rather than primary research: WP:SCIRS and if you follow that guidance then a lot of the potential issues will be avoided. For example cite the review that you use in the introduction and add whatever information is in that to relevant articles. It's generally better, especially when you don't have experience of the difference between contributing here compared to writing academically, to concentrate on the broader topics rather than your specific field of research. i.e. contribute to food security by adding a small section on the potential for catastrophic events to cause food insecurity. It's not that you can't cite any body who you know, but you should not only be citing your own papers as you have done so far. The other concept to bear in mind is WP:WEIGHT which is fundamental to how articles are written. In the entire body of all the research conducted on seaweed, is your paper about how it could be used as food if there is a global catastrophe really that important? The answer is probably not, and if you are in doubt, please ask on the talk pages. SmartSE (talk) 09:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)