Talk:Volcani Center

Discussion

There's been some recent discussion about this article so I am moving relevant parts here so everyone can contribute.

Hi Myrtle! I just wanted to touch bases on the above linked article. Firstly, thanks for working on the article. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If you have questions or don't understand the identified issue, please contact the editor who recognized the concern and placed the templates. More than happy to help or answer questions anytime. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 12:49 pm, 26 March 2014, last Wednesday (7 days ago) (UTC+10)

Hi Cindy, Thankyou for your note, very much. I didn't get back to finish resolving the problems as quickly as I would have liked to, so mea culpa++. Just so I am sure (and please note I know nothing about the topic of the article - I found this article on the copyedit needed list at GOCE), the templates say: 1. "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. (March 2014)." I think it probably does but I can fix this with better references? You can find the notability guidelines for organizations at WP:ORG, while the general notability guidelines can be found at WP:GNG 2. "This article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. (March 2014)" This too should be fixed with better references? Yes, we need significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. At this point, all we have is an indication that the subject exists. 3. "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: image formatting, captions, italics, embedded links; see WP:MOS. (March 2014)" I don't understand the concern with the image formatting or captions? I'm about half way through fixing the article's embedded links and I'll check the MOS for italics again. Essentially, the image layout, size, and captions did not meet the guidelines. 4. "The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. (March 2014)" and "This article's lead section may not adequately summarize key points of its contents. (March 2014)". Not sure about these. Too short? I agree it is concise. That would be easier to fix when the rest of the article is corrected. I usually do that last. The lead section needs to summarize the article content, while specifically stating why or how the subject is significant or important. 5. "This article may have too many links to other articles, and could require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (March 2014)." I agree there are a lot of links but I was making them for someone like me who has no knowledge of agricultural science. I agree more cleanup needs to be done and I was going to get back to it as soon as I could. I've removed the redundant and insignificant wikilinks. Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 21:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

And,

Hello (Cindamuse) - You made a lot of changes to the Volcani page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcani_Institute_of_Agricultural_Research). I understand that many changes were to try and improve the page according to Wikipedia standards, which is greatly appreciated, as I am a novice to Wikipedia and am trying my best to provide clear and correct information. As you saw, I made a serious response to your previous comments. Unfortunately, some of your latest changes do not accurately reflect Volcani or its history. Volcani is, first and foremost, a research organization which has been dedicated to agricultural research for more than 90 years. Its other activities, such as outreach, are secondary to Volcani's primary mission and contributions to the world over these years. I will change this back so that the emphasis is correct; I hope this is OK with you. It would not be good if Wikipedia was promoting mis-information. I would be happy if you would kindly explain why you removed all the information about the different Institutes and their research activities; this is for my edification. It seems to me that such material is fundamental information for someone who wants to learn about the Volcani Center. Was the problem lack of citations? I'd be glad if you could provide me with some specific ideas about what kinds of secondary sources you think are needed. I looked at the link you provided, but it was not very instructive for this type of subject matter. Thank you e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• This content was removed due to promotional content. In essence, Wikipedia is not the place to present every jot and tittle about your organization. This is better saved for the company's website. Remember, that this is not the place to manage the public image or representation of the company. Note that I've restored content to the lead, in accordance with the Manual of Style. If you have more questions, please feel free to contact me again, Cindy(talk) 07:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you, this was clear. I was wondering if you have a source for the assertion that the center was "previously known as "Agricultural Research Station of the Jewish Agency for Palestine". My source (Katz, Shaul; Ben-David, Joseph (1975-06-01). "Scientific research and agricultural innovation in Israel". Minerva (Kluwer Academic Publishers) 13 (2): 152–182. doi:10.1007/BF01097793. ) gives the original name as "Agricultural Experiment Station", changed in the 1950s to "Agricultural Research Station", and then later in the 1950s to Volcani Agricultural Research Institute, finally becoming the Agricultural Research Organization in 1971 (p.156, of the cited source). If you don't have a more reliable source, I'd like to correct the history according this source (and give the citation). All the best, e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I have two more questions regarding the issues you raised with the Volcani page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_Research_Organization,_Volcani_Center) 1. You suggested that: The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. (March 2014). My question is, how may notability be proven? I typed "Volcani" into the search engine of "Haaretz" (http://www.haaretz.com/), an Israeli newspaper that publishes an English version, and got 7 pages of results (10 articles per page). Is this sufficient proof of notability? If not, what more is needed? If yes, can this issue be deleted? 2. Would a reference to Web of Science be sufficient to demonstrate that scientists at Volcani have published more than 8000 papers in the last 30 years in the international reviewed literature? The Web of Science (http://wokinfo.com/) is the premier research platform for information in the sciences. The number of articles published by ARO scientists in journals reviewed on the Web of Science database can be estimated by searching the database according to address, which is what I did to get to that number. Thank you e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• Notability for organizations may be established through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. At this point, the article has none. You can also see the subject-specific guidelines at WP:ORG. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 07:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I understand from the guidelines that newspaper coverage from the national and international newspaper "Haaretz" is sufficient to prove notability; the question remains, how to show this on the wikipage? To add a number of direct citations to the newspaper articles? If yes, in which part of the article? If not, what is the correct procedure? Once this is done, I am permitted to remove the issue notification? All the best, e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 12:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC) e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

And,

Hi Myrtlegroggins! I see you have also been working on the Volcani page - thanks for the help! Not sure why cindamuse thought I was dis-respecting her - I removed content and replaced it according to her comments and issues, but she was right, I guess I did need to see an example. In any event, I did A LOT of work on the page today. I added about a billion references (OK, 30, but who's counting), the vast majority to outside sources - books, journal articles, newspaper articles, websites. I also tried to format the references correctly, but if you have a chance to check my work, that will be great, as I am still learning this stuff. It seems to me now that no one could question either Volcani's notability or the quality of the citations, so I removed these issue notes. Please, let me know what you think, e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 1:44 am, Today (UTC+10)

Hello Ergraber, I think as first step, we should put all the discussions about the article on the talk page. I'm going to do that now (and I should have done it before). Regards, Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 7:48 am, Today (UTC+10)

Hi Cindamuse - I added citations to outside sources (books, journal articles, websites, newspaper articles, OECD report, EC reports, and others) to support all statements and demonstrate notability. I endeavored to input all the citations correctly. Also, I updated the organization history in accordance with references I uncovered. Since I believe that all issues are now addressed, I removed the issue tags. Hope you will agree. Thanks again for all the work you did on this page; I learned a lot about Wikipdia from it :). e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 04:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• While you've sufficiently addressed notability, unfortunately, you've also introduced more issues. My general editing process would simply go ahead and clean up the issues, but the cleanup keeps getting reverted, so I've just gone ahead and placed the maintenance templates. Feel free to contact me again if you have questions. Cindy(talk) 06:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for review of progress on this article

Hello, I have made some small changes to help address some of the problems tagged. It would be great to know if they have helped. Please have a look and let me know. If they have not helped, please feel free to revert. Can we come to a consensus about a preferred uniform citation style? Regards, Myrtle G.Myrtlegroggins (talk) 10:52, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Lead

Hello. In the way of explanation, I wanted to say I have removed two elements from the lead. One is the concept of 'the largest organisation' and the other is 'providing education to students at all levels'. The reason is that both concepts sound promotional. Many organisations are 'the largest' so that is not something unique to the ARO and likewise, many organisations are widely educational, so, again, not a point of difference to be mentioned in the lead paragraph.

There were lots of nice references in the lead which I have left aside for the moment in order to declutter. However, as soon as I get a chance, I'll go back to include them in the article as appropriate.

Regards, Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 16:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agricultural Research Organization, Volcani Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140331100359/http://www.jewishtribune.ca/wp-content/uploads/PDF/jt061206.pdf to http://www.jewishtribune.ca/wp-content/uploads/PDF/jt061206.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140427193233/http://www.ppiseng.moag.gov.il/ppiseng to http://www.ppiseng.moag.gov.il/ppiseng

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Corrected Volcani name

Hi - I simply wanted to explain why I corrected the name to "Volcani Center". Someone had changed "Volcani Center" to "Volcani Agricultural Institute"; that change was incorrect. It seems to reflect an English translation of the common Hebrew usage for Volcani Center (מכון וולקני), but this is a colloquial and incorrect common usage. I confirmed this with the Spokeswoman of the Volcani Center before changing the name back to its correct form. (e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 16:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC))