User talk:CSC 42

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, CSC 42, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! II | (t - c) 07:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's best that you discuss the orthomolecular medicine article before doing any editing. I've opened up a discussion thread at Talk:Orthomolecular_medicine#Orthomolecular_Medicine_News_Service_notes_Wikipedia_article_April_26. II | (t - c) 07:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can link to another article or a userpage with two brackets, so [[bracket]] becomes bracket. To wikilink your signature, o to your preferences and put those brackets around your username in your signature. Good luck and feel free to ask questions. II | (t - c) 06:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 22:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Orthomolecular medicine, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Orthomolecular medicine was changed by CSC 42 (u) (t) deleting 8659 characters on 2010-04-29T04:25:37+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The edits made are necessary, however despite following suggestions on the Orthomolecular Medicine talk page it appears the person nullifying my efforts is going to continue replacing my edits with outdated, biased and inappropriate commentary and citations. There is a lot that needs to be reworked. Today I attempted working on one small section at the beginning, but that has yet again been restored to the original state and this time without commentary explaining why. Please help, or direct me to the appropriate source for help with this matter? Thank you again. CSC_42 ~ trust but verify ~ (talk) 00:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page guidelines

Please review the talk page guidelines, particularly the point on threaded discussion. Conversation threading makes it easier to see who said what, when. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 12:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on orthomolecular medicine. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. MastCell ^Talk 18:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as talk:orthomolecular medicine are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. You need to get away from trying to convince other editors that OM has merit. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia based on reliable sources that verify text in a neutral fashion that gives due weight to the mainstream opinion. No editor may use original research (defined as personal definitions, experience, the synthesis of primary studies and other statements that do not represent the direct and unambiguous conclusion of a source) to "defend" or "prove" anything about a topic. If it can't be sourced, it should not be on wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the place to soapbox or advocate for a perspective or topic and talk pages are not web fora. If you wish to address any points about the main page, please present sources for review and comment. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 18:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources? What about these four?

^ Barrett, SJ (2001-05-05). "The dark side of Linus Pauling's legacy". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2008-04-04.

^ a b c Barrett, Stephen (2000-07-12). "Orthomolecular therapy". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2008-01-02.

^ Lipton M, et al. (1973). Task force report on megavitamin and orthomolecular therapy in psychiatry. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.; as cited in Barrett, Stephen (2000-07-12). "Orthomolecular Therapy". Quackwatch. Retrieved 2008-01-02.

Barrett Stephen (1980). The health robbers : how to protect your money and your life (Second ed.). Philadelphia: G. F. Stickley. pp. 52. ISBN 0893130230. OCLC 6994138.

It became public knowledge via court proceedings that this individual is not and never was licensed or board certified. CSC_42 ~ trust but verify ~ (talk) 22:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on the talk page. Barrett and Quackwatch are both reliable sources regarding quackery, and the claims about Barrett's status are...less than accurate. For instance, he is active-retired, not delicensed. So, he held a license, and never had it pulled. If that link doesn't work directly, plug in his license number (MD005361E) into the Penn state license search engine [1]. It's there.

Note that our policy on biographies of living people also applies to talk pages, making your claim potentially libellous. I would suggest removing it outright. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 22:36, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]