User talk:Rb07
|
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page PCR do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 11:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Pipetting Valley[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Pipetting Valley, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Pipetting Valley. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 12:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Greetings[edit]
Hi Rb07, and once again, welcome to Wikipedia. You may notice I've reverted several of your edits and nominated an article you've created for deletion; hopefully the reasons for this will be clear if you follow some of the links above. Please do not feel offended by this: many contributors start off on the wrong foot, but later become valuable Wikipedians. You seem to have a good knowledge of biology. Since molecular biology coverage is (in my opinion) a weakness of Wikipedia, your knowledge could be valuable to this project. Have you thought about trying to improve some of our weaker articles? For example, Streaking (microbiology) has some problems I'm sure you could fix.
Anyway, if you have any questions about anything at all, please feel free to leave a message at my talk page.
Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 12:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Pipetting Valley deletion[edit]
Hi Rb07, and apologies for the delay – I haven't as much time as I'd like for Wikipedia lately.
Regarding the Pipetting Valley article, what's important is not just the number of search engine hits – apologies if I gave the impression this was the case. The criteria for whether a topic merits its own article in Wikipedia are described in WP:Notability (the more specific guideline WP:GROUP may also be helpful). Most crucially, a topic must have been described by multiple reliable sources that are independent of the topic. I wouldn't think mentions of the term by biotech companies would count for the purpose of determining notability, as they are trivial and are not independent of the topic. If someone were to publish a book chapter or a journal article describing Pipetting Valley or its history, then that would establish notability, as well as being an appropriate source on which to base the article. The Further reading and References sections of the Silicon Valley article give some examples of these kinds of sources. It is these sources that make Silicon Valley, but not Pipetting Valley, suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia at present in my opinion.
Having searched for "pipetting valley" in search engines again, I do find one reference which might come close to establishing notability here (you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader). I suspect that this source alone may not be enough to convince other editors - you would probably need at least one other source. I don't have the power to undelete a deleted article; only an administrator can do that. If you really want the article back, I would suggest asking the closing administrator (Jmlk17) to restore Pipetting Valley to your userspace, meaning it would be at User_talk:Rb07/Pipetting Valley. You could then work on it until it was ready for inclusion in the Wikipedia mainspace. My recommendation, though, would be to wait until someone else has written something about Pipetting Valley which you could use as a source for the article.
Regarding commercial links, I am only upholding the Wikipedia guideline Wikipedia:External links. Point 5 under links normally to be avoided is "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services", ie commercial links. I appreciate your point that companies play a major role in development of new technologies. But our readers can always use a search engine. In general, if it hasn't been reported by third parties, it doesn't need to be in an encyclopedia. If you really think a commercial site should be linked, it's normally best to mention it on the article talkpage and seek consensus. But many Wikipedians strongly resist commercial links. As an aside, it's normally preferable to deep link to an informative page than to link to a more general homepage.
Regards, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 21:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)