User talk:Mario Garcés

September 2019

Hello, Mario Garcés. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to research published by a small group of researchers.

Scientific articles should mainly reference review articles to ensure that the information added is trusted by the scientific community.

Editing in this way is also a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest in Wikipedia – please see WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDCOI. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM) and the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.

Finally, please be aware that the editing community highly values expert contributors – please see WP:EXPERT. I do hope you will consider contributing more broadly. If you wish to contribute, please first consider citing review articles written by other researchers in your field and which are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite your own research, please start a new thread on the article talk page and add {{requestedit}} to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added.

MrOllie (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

=

Dear MrOllie, thanks for your comments but I really don't agree with your remarks. As far as I know, Wikipedia is an open environment where information is published and curated by the community. In that sense, I understand the spirit of collaboration and self-depuration mechanisms are in the original heart of the organization, or at least that's the message I receive every year when the donation time arrives, and that's the spirit I look for here. When I look for a peer review, I send my work to an academic journal, as I already did with the reference you mention. Going on with this issue, I didn't know that knowledge had to be made by a "great group of researchers" or even validated through a "high citation process" to be susceptible to appear in wikipedia. If that's the case, maybe the great Marx (Groucho) was right and "I don’t want to belong to any club that will have me as a member"...

On the other side, it is in my spirit the will to actively collaborate with wikipedia in other topics, mainly on those directly affected by my research such as AI, self-esteem, cognition, decision-making and many others, but my first experience do not invite me much to do it.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mario Garcés (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an open environment, but it is not a venue for us to promote ourselves or our own work. - MrOllie (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Garcés, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mario Garcés! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mario Garcés. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Emotional theory of rationality, 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 organizations 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 {{request edit}} template);
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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Uncle Spock (talk) 19:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emotional theory of rationality moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Emotional theory of rationality. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. I dream of horses ^{(Contribs) (Talk)} 19:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]