User talk:Sot211p2

GG33

Welcome

Hello Sot211p2 and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to Rudolf Steiner, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a Help desk, or you can to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing?

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! tgeorgescu (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

It's ok. I just wanted to crop that part in the introduction because it immediately labels this man as prone to pseudo history and conspiracy theories. I think it's extremely wrong to just say it even more in the start of a wiki article. It basically makes the article look biased against him and disqualify this man's work and efforts while also labeling them as "pseudo" Sot211p2 (talk) 23:11, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Care to look at Talk:Anthroposophy#Edit warring? Meaning: Rudolf Steiner was a victim of mental disorders. He wasn't a prophet, he wasn't a scientific genius, but he had hallucinations. And, yes, he peddled pseudoscience and quackery

Have you read "Why Does Wikipedia Want to Destroy Deepak Chopra?" If Anthroposophists don't complain that Wikipedia wants to destroy Rudolf Steiner, we are doing a bad job. If anything can be said about the two men is that Chopra is considerably less fringe than Steiner. Chopra never belonged to Wagner clubs, and has never claimed to be a clairvoyant.

The narrative that he was an enlightened intellectual, a great scientist, and privy to God's mysteries is a WP:FRINGE narrative. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your time and effort in this topic. You can mention that he had a diagnosis and present his symptoms in details. You can add his diagnosis in detail and show data and sources that provide this data. Writing in the Introduction this line makes it appear biased and triggers conspiracy theorists even more Sot211p2 (talk) 18:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Garry Grinberg

Numerologist and astrologer, founder of GG33 Sot211p2 (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Garry Grinberg moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Garry Grinberg. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability, it has too many problems of language or grammar and Not suitable for inclusion!. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Garry Grinberg (May 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by HitroMilanese were: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Garry Grinberg and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hitro talk 04:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Sot211p2! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Hitro talk 04:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)