User talk:Porcelina81

Welcome!

Hello, Porcelina81, 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:

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! WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam

Porcelina81, in addition to deleting properly sourced information and pushing your personal anti-surgery point of view on Hyperhidrosis beyond what actually seems supported by the mainstream experts, you seem to continually add links to internet chat groups to that page. The issues of bias are complicated (we need to have both sides fairly represented in the article), but the issue of the chat board and blogs is simple: The relevant Wikipedia rule clearly and specifically prohibits external links to:

10. Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), USENET newsgroups or e-mail lists."
11. Links to blogs and personal web pages.

Please do not add those links, or anything similar to them, to any Wikipedia article. Thank you for your cooperation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:17, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not be so vague, it irritates me when scientists start the weasel talk. This kind of generalization always covers lack of knowledge/evidence. The same applies to the youknowwho's site. "Properly sourced information"...it is not! It is marketing and not acceptable on wiki, or anywhere else if you ask me. The fact that you add a link to it does not make it more valid...or "proper". It still remains the personal OPINION of the surgeon - who is blinded by self-interest and delusions of grandeur. There is no science behind it. If there is, then let me know. I am really curious to see INDEPENDENT FACTS, TRIALS, EVIDENCE, and not advertising campaigns and slogans. And what the hell is "mainstream experts"??? The people who agree with you?? Well, they do not have the evidence either they are just in the same camp as you. Go and as someone who actually investigated the effects of sympathectomy. Try Prof. Goldstein at NIH, or Prof. Esler at the baker Institute. Or read the published material - extensive material - on the effects of sympathectomy, - altough I do not think you are really interested to see and to confront the facts.

I am glad that you follow the internet chat groups and the trail of the blog:-). Then you must know that many people suffer as the result of your surgery. Also you must be very desperate for patients if you need to scour the internet like that. Did you happen to have a look at the blog??? Did it send a shudder down your spine? Do you know how many people responded to that blog? Do you know why? Sympathectomy is a modern day lobotomy. Just go and research the effects of lobotomy on the ANS. Then compare with the effects of ETS on the ANS. Greed never looked this bad.Porcelina81 (talk) 01:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be quite mistaken about a number of things. Let's start here: I'm not a medical professional (never have been, never will be). I don't have hyperhidrosis and have no particular interest in the surgery. I haven't read the blogs and I don't have any reason to.

I do have an interest in compliance with Wikipedia's policies. Linking to internet chat boards and blogs is generally prohibited. Therefore, please stop doing that. If you insist on adding these banned links in the future, then I'll ask to have your account blocked so that you can't edit anything.

Do you have any questions about what I have said? WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you insist putting in the link and mention of Reisfeld? How can you know that he is in any way above the rest or better in any way? It is a strange statement from someone who has no knowledge of the procedure. Porcelina81 (talk) 11:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I consider Reisfeld weak (actually, I hadn't even noticed it this last round). What I meant to restore was the peer-reviewed Surgical Endoscopy article.

BTW, are you familiar with this very cool ref formatting tool? You give it the PMID (PubMed id #), and it looks up the name, journal, date, title, and everything else for you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

G'day. Could I make a request? It would be really helpful if you could add edit summaries to all the changes you make to articles. Thanks! Basie (talk) 05:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diberris tool

It would be great if you could use Diberris's tool to insert any refs with pubmed number, since the format is right now the standard in medical articles across wikipedia. The other day a formatted all I could only to find today that you had inserted many new ones in an odd format. The link is: [1] and you only have to paste the pubmed number in the box and tik the "add ref tag", click submit and paste the result in the article. (Additionally I prefer also the fill vertically option). It would also be great if you could reformat the refs you added during the weekend. Bests. --Garrondo (talk) 08:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to contact Porcelina81

I have had ETS performed on me and believe I can contribute to your understanding. Handoftheenemy (talk) 04:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]