User talk:Wvdpanhuysen

Welcome!

Hello, Wvdpanhuysen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 00:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Julius Senegal (talk) 12:12, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with your quick reversion of my added text. I posted my contribution to the article on 29 April 2023 at 1.32 pm and at 2.12 pm that same day you sent me your message that my contribution would not be “constructive”. So in less than 40 minutes, you could not have consulted the book I mentioned as a source to support my added sentences: “He is a critic of shoddily tested drugs. In several publications he meticulously exposed the undisguised corrupt merger of private corporations and government regulatory agencies.” An article about a living person that does not reflect that person's views on medical applications - but does reflect the opinions of some main stream media about that person - is not a neutral article. If you take the time to read Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, you will understand that my contribution reflects the notion that the author of that book used a several thousands of different sources (peer reviewed scientific papers, official reports of institutions, main stream and social media, interviews with many scientists, et cetera). Reading his book you will also notice that the author is a critic of drugs that are shoddily tested. This means he is not against drugs when these drugs have gone through all the necessary procedures and lengthy tests to arrive at a quality product worthy of application in health care.

I am bold in editing in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, just-the-facts style. This is in line with the pillars of Wikipedia. Also, remember, perfection is not required as Wikipedia is a work in progress.Wvdpanhuysen (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Julius Senegal (talk) 07:55, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]