User talk:MisterUnit

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Unsigned messages will likely be removed. For messages left here, I will usually respond here. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch for a response there.
Start a new talk topic.

I'm a D-bag

I wonder if your sphere of influence is so narrow that you don't understand the huge problem that this company has caused here in Canada. Multiple lawsuits have been launched that involved Truehope, and finally they appealed all the way to the Canadian Supreme Court and lost. They have spent a huge sum of money trying to convince the government that they have the right to market questionable, and potentially dangerous products.

I have scores of references about them, and have written a book about them.

The Truehope should stand and we should not be blocked when we want to post.

http://www.pigpills.com

http://empowerplus.blogspot.ca

http://healthwatcher.net/Quackerywatch/Synergy/

Terry Drtap4 (talk) 03:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Causing a bunch of problems doesn't make a company notable. If you have references you should be posting them on the AfD, not on my talk page. Also, what is a 'sphere of influence?' MisterUnit (talk) 11:08, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give short handed a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. No unique names 05:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Now that I've messed it up, should I cut and paste it back and then use the "Move" tab to move it over, or is this being done by somebody at the holding pen? Thanks. MisterUnit (talk) 14:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's in process already. --No unique names 16:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bat World Sanctuary

Your edits of BWS are not totally balanced. Any group can get a line of Benefit Wines. That's just fundraising. Please, include both sides of the litigation if you will be including it. The case is currently on appeal [1] I was told to contact the person making the edits which is what I'm doing. Thank you. Mary Cummins (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and in the article I wrote "In 2011 a Bat World Sanctuary line of wines was released by Benefit Wines." How is that inaccurate or "unbalanced?" I didn't say that nobody else could get a line of Benefit Wines.

As far as the link that you provided to show that the case is in appeals, I can't really decipher much from it since none of the events listed return any description of what actually happened. Thanks, MisterUnit (talk) 17:30, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The link shows every action in the appeal. I am appealing the case and have won the first round. I did not defame anyone.

A non-profit selling "Benefit Wines" is not news. It wasn't in the media. Plus, no one checked on the status of the old building at 115 N.E. 1st in Mineral Wells. They sold it January 2012 because of 18 years of complaints [2]. The Bat House project was a failure. The City told them they must remove the boxes because of all the feces that ended up on the streets [3]. They removed them in 2005. And, BWS is not the biggest bat sanctuary in the world. The Monfort Bat Sanctuary has 1.8 - 2.5 MILLION bats. They hold the Guinness World Record [4]. Mary Cummins (talk) 20:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you're personally involved in the case you shouldn't be editing information about the case on Wikipedia, or trying to alter the content by influencing other editors.

I'm aware that a non-profit selling benefit wines is not news. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. MisterUnit (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the links that you provided above do not support your claims that accompany them whatsoever. The fist one is an appraisal that has no mentions of any complaints or problems with the property, not to mention "18 years of complaints." The second is a complaint about bat droppings outside an unrelated building, which certainly does not classify an entire, years long, project as a "failure." The third is a link to a Wikipedia page, which was conveniently created 5 days ago. I'll be taking a look at that page now. MisterUnit (talk) 02:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I thought. MisterUnit (talk) 20:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Gary Michelson edits are incorrect, unverified, no citation or reference

You have changed my edits of Gary K. Michelson . Your edits are incorrect, unverified and unreferenced. They are not up to Wikipedia standards.

"Dr. Michelson is the sole inventor of the most widely used innovations in spinal surgery to date – affecting the lives of millions of patients. His inventions have made spinal surgery safer, faster, more effective and less expensive."

You provide no reference whatsoever. This is also not true. His inventions have made spinal surgery much more expensive. He and the owners of his patents have been sued for fault products.

The Michelson Prize is $25M, not $75M. I cited a verified reference. There is another $50M available in a grant program. On top of this the Foundation has only awarded 2-3 million.

(Dr Gary Michelson's wife) "holds degrees in journalism and business and was a former Kremlin correspondent."

This is unverified and unreferenced. No one even knows her real name. This is not up to Wikipedia standards. I will now revert them. Do not replace them until you can verify them. You cannot reference Gary's own website as a source. Mary Cummins (talk) 20:22, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... what are you talking about? I provided references for all of those points, you just deleted them.MisterUnit (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You referenced Gary's website which he wrote. You must reference an independent accredited media only in order to comply with Wikipedia rules. I will remove them again. Do not replace unless you can reference the LA Times, New York Times or another accredited independent media site. Please, see Wikipedia terms of service. Mary Cummins (talk) 22:12, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not reference "Gary's website," I referenced the Found Animals Foundation website, which contains a biography on Dr. Michelson. That is a perfectly good source, and even if this entire webpage was written by Dr. Michelson it would still be an acceptable WP:SELFSOURCE. The Wikipedia terms of service (assuming you mean "Terms of Use") does not contain any information about reliable sources.MisterUnit (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an independent source, as is shown by the inclusion of "about-us/meet-us" in the URL that you gave, and for claims that could be seen as promotional (whether you intended them to be or not) the independence of the source is vital. You should also look at the policy on edit warring, if you are not already acquainted with it. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:21, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into this. I'm well aware of the policy on edit warring, which is why I brought this dispute to your attention.

From WP:SELFSOURCE - "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: 1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim..." Although I can see the stuff about his inventions being regarded as "self-serving," I don't think the information about his wife is. I think that excerpt from WP:SELFSOURCE implies that the source does not need to be independent, as I don't see how a self-published source about oneself could possibly be independent. MisterUnit (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]