User talk:Mokotillon

Please read WP:ELNO

Thanks --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know that Wikipedia has a lot of rules but with respect to references review articles or major textbooks are strongly prefered per WP:MEDRS --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am just saying that if you are spending time making improvements using good sources will be more positive... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:58, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

but i think more accessible content (powerpoints, knols...), when accurate, can supplement peer-reviewed work.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biologic meshes

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Biologic meshes, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.sageswiki.org/index.php?title=Biologic_Mesh.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I've blanked this article to allow us time to discuss the copyright status of this website.

I'm afraid that under the U.S. law that governs Wikipedia, content is copyrighted unless it is for some reason ineligible (see Wikipedia:Public domain) and cannot be used unless it is compatibly licensed. I cannot find any licensing statement on that website. This contrasts, for example, with the licensing statement at the bottom of Wikipedia's website. Our license allows reuse, as long as the license requirements are met.

Unless we are able to verify that the website has a compatible license, we will not be able to retain the content, I'm afraid. It can be rewritten; there is more information and where and how to do this under Can you help resolve this issue? on the front of the article.

For more information about Wikipedia's copyright policies, please see Wikipedia:Copy-paste and the documents to which it links. If you have any questions, please feel free to come by my talk page. I will try to watch yours, but am traveling over the holidays and fear that I may lose track. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:22, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no. I'm sorry, but I've had to delete the article. I looked a little more about the website and found the license at their Terms of Service: "All text content on this wiki (including but not limited to articles, textbooks, study guides, reviews, image descriptions) are the property of SAGES, and unless otherwise stated licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported licence." I'm afraid it's incompatible; we do require commercial reuse. See WP:COMPLIC for a list of licenses that we can use. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:27, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.sageswiki.org/index.php?title=Laparoscopic_inguinal_hernia_repair.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Inguinal hernia surgery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Sterilization and Lucrative

Post herniorraphy pain syndrom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to TEP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

Please use high quality references per WP:MEDRS such as review articles or major textbooks. Thanks and once again welcome to Wikipedia.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please use reliable secondary sources. Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Continually adding poorly refed content is disruptive. Have started a discussion of the issue here [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:52, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mokotillon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]