User talk:Librarian

Hello and Welcome! I hope you like the place. --mav

-I believe Anarchaos (the novelette) by Donald E. Westlake should be required reading for all people wishing to start wikipedias. the librarian

---

Never having read the Lewinsky scandal article in its previous form, all I can say is that it's looking pretty good at the moment. As someone who went out of her way to avoid reading about it or watching it on the news at the time, the article tells me everything I need to know, in a concise and logical manner. Congratulations on whatever bits are your work. (By the way, did you know you've spelled "accurate" wrongly on your user page?) Deb 22:00 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)

-Thanks! Speling corrected! That's a quote btw, but I assume completely my transcription typo.
-I was allegedly working on a novel during the Impeachment proceedings (and subsequent kosovo war), but in fact I watched 80% of the hearings and read most of the documents, and took notes. It was kind of appalling the way almost every single participant (except perhaps Rehnquist) came off looking bad. Even people who were adopting an arguably correct position would betray that they were doing it for partisan reasons.
-I am expecting it to be seriously vandalized by partisan entities in the future since Google.com seems to be the standard of research here and for every arguably impartial depiction of the topic there are several thousand of one partisan slant or another. Though the scholarly literature has a better ratio of bullshit to thought, partisan feelings run deep and non-scientific scholarship is usually POV (it's considered a virtue in most fields to argue a position).
-the librarian

In ref. to Religious persecution

The article you created lacks sources. Would you cite authoritative sources in the particular article? Regards, --Andy123(talk) 12:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Higher-order control

The article Higher-order control has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Original Research, a quick search for references yielded information about Higher-order languages and Higher-order motor control

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of First-order control

The article First-order control has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Original research, there is also a PROD on Higher-order Control

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:13, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Status and Advice

As reviewing administrator, I removed to proposed deletion tag from both articles. They do not sound aty all like original research, just standard concepts, that need to be expanded and documented. They do need considerable improvement to be acceptable articles. First, an article must be more than a definition--it needs to be an explanation. Then, the explanation must be accompanied and supported by references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases.

It seems however probable to me that this material is already covered in some of our more general articles on the subject. If it is covered adequately there, considering turning this article into a Redirect to the appropriate section--if you have problems with this, I can assist. If it could go in an existing article, but the treatment is not adequate, use this material--and references--to expand the material in the larger article, abd use the existing title as a redirect.

However you decide to handle it, I advise you to fix the problem, and do this very quickly, before the article gets nominated for deletion by a regular deletion process.

DGG ( talk ) 22:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

• Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
• Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
• If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)