User talk:Mdbrownmsw
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
thanks for your edits to fruitarianism -- hunting out those weasle words is always important for maintaining npov. however in the future it would be great if you could fill in the edit summary on your edits. there has, in the past, been a lot of vandalism, pov-pushing and revert-ing on this article and edit summaries really help keep track of the article's history for those of us who have chosen to maintain it. thanks again! -- frymaster 16:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] ref tags
Remember when using inline <ref>, make sure the article itself contains <references/> otherwise they wont work. PS. Thanks for your work on [Vegetarianism], we need all the help we can get. --Mig77 12:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks and apologies
The Israeli salad - don't think I should have done this and was a bit over enthusiatic - sorry -- Nigel 19:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Food irradation
Hi, which areas of the page need attention. I can provide some sources on the subject of on site only accidents. Most of these happened in medical product irradation units but these are very similar to those used for food. Also some of the medical product irradators are used to treat spices.Cadmium
[edit] Adoption / Adopted Child Syndrome
Thanks for your work on the above articles - some good cleanup and NPOV amendments. Bastun 18:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] E. coli
You listed Escherichia coli O157:H7 as a potential copyright violation. While I never contributed to the article nor am I officially investigation could you describe (probably on the article's talk page or you listing) in more detail what exactly makes you think it's a copyvio? From a quick comparison, I couldn't really detect any blatant problems, especially with consideration that one of the sources of the wikipedia article as mention in the article is this US government (and therefore public domain) source [1] which shares similarities with the commercial link as well (it was likely one of their sources) Nil Einne 09:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Because...
Because it's quoting from the report. Otherwise that section is an attempt to deflect attention from the actual involvement of chiropractors in the rate of injuries. They are still the major players. That report just showed that there were a few cases where injuries caused by a non chiropractor had been attributed to chiropractors. This is an error of misattribution. Another more serious error is underreporting. I have collected much of the research on this subject here. The risks are small, but are catastrophic when they occur. The lucky ones die. There is no excuse, considering that most upper cervical manipulations/adjustments are unnecessary, and other -- less risky -- techniques are available. -- Fyslee 18:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I understand why the misattribution is of merit. However, the ethnicity of the barber is meaningless, unless it would have been better or worse if the barber were Brazilian, Icelandic, Pangean or whatever. If is actually quoting the report, it belongs in quotation marks. (I am copying this to the talk page for Chiropractic.)Mdbrownmsw 18:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- The mention of the Indian barber is the responsibility of the original author. The ethnicity isn't totally off-base, since Indian barbers, unlike modern American or British barbers, actually include treatments of various kinds among their services, including neck manipulation and tongue scraping. -- Fyslee 18:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vitamin D cite
Hey, please advise--the ref is from, "The China Study", which I added in the footnotes. I can ref it to the book but I've noticed all ref's are online, whereas books are noted below is that not sufficient? Thanks.--Scribner 18:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Cited to book, page, etc. Thanks.--Scribner 18:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] So... what's the hoax?
Per this edit, if it's not immediately obvious what the "suspected hoax" is, you should indicate it on the talk page so people can work on it. Otherwise, the tag will probably just sit there for ages untill someone decides to remove it. Thanx. 68.39.174.238 23:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:AIV
We don't generally block IPs unless they've vandalised recently after a final warning, to avoid collateral damage due to the frequency with which they change hands. As it says in the green AIV header, please do not simply repost reports if the IP is not blocked; either take it up with the admin on their talk page or post to WP:ANI. --Sam Blanning(talk) 21:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fruitarianism
The following sections were added by Wekee and an apparent sockpuppet based on the peculiar interpretation that I am a vandal
- Incorrect. Vandalism claims are well substantiated. Failing to uphold standards that one demands from others, while removing information relevant to the article and inserting questionable material that does not fit those standards, is being bias. Inserting personal comments is being not neutral. Just a few examples: Removing positive statements about fruitarianism on the basis that they cite self-published references or references failing under WP:OR and then inserting anti-fruitarianism claims that fail under the same conditions (self-published/failing under WP:OR). Claiming that "Paranthropus became extinct due to a limited diet or competition from further evolved pre-human ancestors" while citing a source that says no more than "'It COUDLD WELL HAVE BEEN direct competition with Homo" etc etc. Wekee 23:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
because I am contesting their submission of unrelated material to the Fruitarian article. Directly counter to WP:OR,
- Incorrect, there is no counter to WP:OR here at all. This article is about humans choosing to eat MOSTLY OR only fruit: "Fruitarians (FRUGIVORES or fructarians) eat MOSTLY OR only the fruit of plants." The mention of frugivorous diet of the human ancestors is interesting and highly relevant here. Wekee 23:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
they contend that sources saying "pre-human ancestors" were "primarily frugivorous" is a valid source for an article on humans choosing a fruitarian diet. Their vandalism
- This is not a vandalism, but an appropriate action. Wekee 23:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
of this page follows my signature: Mdbrownmsw 18:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
{Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Wekee 18 December 2006
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Wekee 19 December 2006
Please stop. If you continue to remove content from pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Owoce 08:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Wekee 22:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
