User talk:Gcherrits

Welcome!

Hello, Gcherrits, 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

March 2011

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to James O'Keefe. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Truthsort (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at James O'Keefe, you may be blocked from editing. TMCk (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

James O'Keefe

I've responded here.TMCk (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2011 (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 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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should intro be changed to reflect that her public persona is becoming defined by her notorious promotion of a fraudulent and discredited medical idea.

There's an overwheliming codemnation because her advocacy is causing harm and even death. All these ideas are in multiple highly respected souces.

McCarthy's advcacy began with research that the author had admitted is fraudulent. She wrote the foreword for the book and it sustains and faulty case. Almost countless responsible, respected scientists point out the completely bseless, discredited claims that McCarthy makes. She's becaoming more notable for her notorious vaccine advocacy then by all her previous work. This vaccine-autism issue should take more prominence and also be careful to avoid falling in the he said - she said, false objectivity trap that ends up giving any credence at all to McCarthy's vies. There is no contorversy. McCarthy's views are dscrdited, based on fraudulent researh and have no support from the scientific community. I propose we return to my first edit but sharpen andmake its case in a less strident manner. But we should shift tbe enphasisonto McCarthy's misguided promulgating of false science. Gcherrits (talk) 04:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited World Business Forum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Gilbert. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]